EA’s ratings for Oklahoma Sooners in CFB26 sparked controversy and surprise, revealing unexpected insights into the team’s condition and prospects for 2025.

The release of EA Sports’ college football video game series, particularly in its latest edition CFB26, always garners significant attention from fans, analysts, and the college football community. These ratings serve as a reflection—albeit a simulated one—of how the sport perceives team strengths, weaknesses, and future potential. However, this year’s ratings for the Oklahoma Sooners have sparked a whirlwind of controversy and surprise, raising questions about the current state of the program and its trajectory heading into 2025.

This analysis delves into the details of these ratings, the reactions they incited, the reasoning behind them, and what they ultimately reveal about Oklahoma’s position in college football’s evolving landscape.

The Context: Oklahoma Sooners and Their 2025 Outlook
Recent Performance and Expectations
Oklahoma, a storied program with a rich football history, has experienced a rollercoaster of success and rebuilding phases over the past few seasons. Under head coach Brent Venables, the team has been working to restore its dominance after transitioning from the Big 12 to the SEC, a move that has raised expectations and heightened scrutiny.

Leading up to the release of CFB26, many analysts predicted that Oklahoma would be a rising power in the SEC, with a talented roster and a strong recruiting pipeline. The program’s future was viewed with cautious optimism, with fans eager to see how quickly they could compete with the conference’s elite teams like Alabama, Georgia, and LSU.

The Significance of EA Ratings
EA Sports’ ratings are based on a combination of real-world data, expert input, and in-game assessment algorithms. While they are not official rankings, they hold considerable influence among gaming communities, and often shape perceptions of team strength long before the actual season unfolds.

The ratings include attributes like overall team rating, individual player ratings, coaching ability, and team chemistry. They are also subject to debate, especially when they diverge sharply from conventional wisdom or recent performance.

The Ratings That Sparked Controversy: An Overview
The Disparity Between Expectations and Ratings
In CFB26, the Oklahoma Sooners’ overall team rating was surprisingly low—somewhere around the mid-70s or low-80s—depending on the specific version of the game. This was contrary to many preseason rankings, which projected the Sooners as a top-tier or at least a solid contender in 2025.

What made these ratings controversial was not just that they were low but that they seemingly underestimated Oklahoma’s talent, coaching, and potential growth. This stark difference between the perceived reality and the ratings ignited debates across social media platforms, gaming forums, and college football analysis channels.

Specific Attributes That Raised Eyebrows
Overall Team Rating: The overall rating placed Oklahoma well below traditional powerhouses and even some programs considered to be in rebuilding phases.
Player Ratings: Key players, including quarterbacks, receivers, and defensive standouts, received lower-than-expected ratings.
Coaching and Strategy: The coaching attributes, which significantly influence team chemistry and game plan effectiveness, were rated modestly, implying skepticism about Brent Venables’ ability to quickly turn the program around.
The Reaction: Fans and Analysts Respond
The reactions ranged from disbelief to outright outrage. Longtime fans argued that the ratings failed to account for Oklahoma’s recent recruiting classes, player development, and the momentum the program was building. Critics questioned the methodology behind the ratings, suggesting bias or misjudgment by the developers.

Some analysts pointed out that EA’s ratings often favor established powerhouses or teams with recent success, and Oklahoma’s current trajectory might not yet be reflected in the game.

The Underlying Reasons Behind the Ratings
Data-Driven Limitations and Developmental Uncertainty
One reason for the low ratings could be EA’s reliance on recent performance data, which may not fully capture Oklahoma’s potential for growth. With a new coaching staff and a focus on recruiting, the team’s true strength in 2025 might not be fully visible yet in the ratings.

Additionally, player ratings are based on individual stats and perceived talent levels, which might not have been updated to reflect offseason improvements or emerging stars. If key players are underrated, the overall team rating naturally suffers.

The Impact of Transition and Rebuilding
Oklahoma’s move to the SEC has been a double-edged sword. While it promises higher competition and visibility, it also involves a period of adjustment. The team’s roster might be younger, less experienced, or still integrating new schemes—factors that could be unfairly penalized in the simulation ratings.

Moreover, the game’s developers may have weighted recent results more heavily, and if Oklahoma experienced struggles or close games in recent seasons, those could have negatively influenced the ratings.

Bias Toward Established Powerhouses
EA Sports’ ratings have historically favored teams with a recent history of success, such as Alabama, Georgia, Ohio State, and LSU. This bias, whether conscious or subconscious, could contribute to Oklahoma’s lower ratings despite their potential.

What Do These Ratings Actually Reveal About Oklahoma’s 2025 Future?
A Possible Underestimation of Talent and Growth
Despite the controversy, the ratings might hint at an underdog narrative, suggesting that Oklahoma is currently underrated but has the potential to surpass expectations. The low ratings could be a reflection of the current developmental phase rather than their ultimate ceiling.

Rebuilding and Transition Period
The ratings seem to acknowledge that Oklahoma is still in a rebuilding phase. The lower team ratings imply that the program needs time to mature, integrate new players, and adapt to the SEC’s competitive environment. For fans, this may serve as a wake-up call that patience is required, but optimism remains if the coaching staff can capitalize on recruiting and player development.

Defensive and Offensive Concerns
Lower ratings in key skill positions and coaching attributes suggest that the game perceives Oklahoma’s offense and defense as still developing. This aligns with the narrative that the team’s identity and consistency are in flux but also points to areas where improvement could significantly boost their future prospects.

The Importance of Player Development and Recruiting
The ratings underscore the importance of player development and recruiting in the team’s future success. If Oklahoma’s coaching staff can accelerate player growth and attract top recruits, these ratings could rise sharply by the next iteration, reflecting a more optimistic outlook for 2025.

The Broader College Football Landscape and Oklahoma’s Position
Transition to SEC and Competitive Challenges
Oklahoma’s move to the SEC is a pivotal factor. The conference’s strength means that even a team with high ratings can struggle initially, and the ratings may be capturing that transitional uncertainty.

Emerging Competitors and Power Dynamics
The ratings also highlight the increasing competitiveness of the SEC. Teams like Georgia, Alabama, and LSU are consistently rated highly, setting a benchmark that Oklahoma may need time to reach.

The Role of Recruiting and Talent Acquisition
Oklahoma’s recruiting classes in recent years have been promising, but translating that into game-day performance takes time. The ratings might be reflecting a cautious outlook until those recruits mature and gel with the team.

The Implications for Fans, Coaches, and the Program
Managing Expectations
The ratings serve as a reminder that perceptions—whether in a game or real life—can lag behind reality. Oklahoma fans should temper expectations but remain optimistic about the program’s future.

Motivating the Team
Low ratings can serve as motivation for the team and coaching staff, emphasizing areas for improvement and fueling the drive to outperform expectations.

Long-Term Outlook
While the current ratings might seem discouraging, they are not definitive. College football is dynamic, and teams often rise quickly with the right development, coaching, and recruiting.

A Controversial but Insightful Reflection of Oklahoma’s 2025 Trajectory
The controversy and surprise surrounding EA’s ratings for the Oklahoma Sooners in CFB26 reveal more than just numbers—they expose perceptions, hopes, and uncertainties about one of college football’s most storied programs. While the ratings may undervalue Oklahoma’s current strength and potential, they also highlight the transitional phase the team is undergoing as it adapts to the SEC and rebuilds for sustained success.

For fans and analysts alike, these ratings serve as a snapshot—perhaps imperfect—that underscores the importance of patience, development, and belief in the program’s long-term trajectory. Oklahoma’s true strength lies not solely in simulated scores but in the resilience and talent that will define their 2025 season and beyond.