"Five Player Rule" Topic

I came across this in a previous thread and i had NO IDEA what it meant.  Can someone explain it to me?  Is it new?  Did I completely miss an update or something?
4/28/2012 11:22 AM
You can only have five players on the court at once. Pretty standard basketball rule.
4/28/2012 11:23 AM
In real life, you couldn't have more than five scholarship players in any year and any more than eight in any two-year period.  The rule lasted from 2001-04, I think.
4/28/2012 11:36 AM
Posted by teamrc on 4/19/2012 4:37:00 PM (view original):
Posted by jslotman on 4/19/2012 11:12:00 AM (view original):

A question I've never seen answered is whether the EE per team cap change was made in conjunction with a change in overall EE"s per world per season.  I believe the answer to be "no," meaning when the system goes through the BCS teams and figures out EE's and there are gaps between the cap number and the overall number of EE's, lesser teams are almost automatically going to lose more players.  Ergo, B+, not particularly highly-rated, first round NT loser Gonzaga loses two in Allen and C+, not highly rated at all, first round NT loser Marist loses one.  

Seriously, Marist lost as many early entries as one final four team (Texas - capped) and more than runner-up Arizona (wait for it...also capped).  Just doesn't make any sense. 

as coach of the Zags, I have lost 7 in the last 6-7 seasons.
The C who left was a 734 overall rated junior, let me repeat that for those who missed it........That's seven hundred and thirty friggin four. 
A 734 rated junior leaving a Big-6 team would be a joke... there are tons of better players to lose than him.
For us to lose him was a deal breaker.
Not here to rant.
It's just time to do something less frustrating.
This is what confused me:
Quote post by girt25 on 4/19/2012 11:30:00 PM:
Most of the guys you've lost have been legit. The other guy who left this year was taken #1 overall. And I know the center didn't have a great overall, but I'm pretty sure he did have great cores. The overall doesn't really matter. 

That said, I'm not really defending the EE process. It needs to be improved.

I encourage you (and others) to badger seble about the "5 maximum" rule specifically, which is awful, and EE's in general.

4/28/2012 11:41 AM
There's a new HD rule in place saying that EEs won't happen if you're already losing five or more players to graduation/walkons leaving/transfers.
4/28/2012 11:52 AM
walkons are not counted in the 5 players.  it is graduation and e/e's only i think
4/28/2012 12:14 PM
SRs + EE cannot exceed 5; or a team with 5 SRs cannot have EE, team with 4 SRs cannot have more than 1 EE, etc.

I think this is a big problem. Best D1 teams are going to be SR heavy. They go to F4 and better runs while suffering 0 EE; meanwhile, other teams who go to S16 get decimated by EE. 
4/28/2012 12:53 PM
Posted by cornfused on 4/28/2012 11:52:00 AM (view original):
There's a new HD rule in place saying that EEs won't happen if you're already losing five or more players to graduation/walkons leaving/transfers.
why is it 5?  You could lose 6 to graduation just by recruiting the maximum # in a class.  Are you sure it includes transfers?  Wouldn't this allow gaming with promises?  If a coach has 5 seniors could they promise 30 min and a guaranteed start just to land a recruit, and then blow it off?
4/28/2012 2:25 PM
It's a bad rule, it does allow itself to be gamed and helps the elite teams while hurting others.

Please let seble know if you don't like it.
4/28/2012 2:29 PM
how the heck do these elite teams even get 4-5 SRs? mine just EE before i ever have 4-5 SRs even being a problem
4/28/2012 2:33 PM
Posted by dwoelflin07 on 4/28/2012 2:33:00 PM (view original):
how the heck do these elite teams even get 4-5 SRs? mine just EE before i ever have 4-5 SRs even being a problem
They recruit transfers. There are quite a few teams out there with 3-4 900-1000 rated SRs, then 1-2 600 rated SRs. SRs used to be recruited by teams who want to keep their carryover, now they serve both as carryover and EE preserver. 
4/28/2012 2:44 PM
Right tianyi, but even then isn't that just one season? Those '3-4 900-1000 rated SRs'...are there top notch teams that have 3-4 of those year in and out? In other words I can see this being a situaltional solution to preserve some EEs with highly skilled underclassmen AND 3-4 upperclassmen, but personally I don't see how teams can repeatedly have guys make it all the way to their SR year...
4/28/2012 8:28 PM
dwolf, they can do it by graduating their "real seniors", signing a couple 5 star studs and then filling the senior class to 5 with transfers. That way their regularly scheduled seniors leave, and their useless placeholder transfers leave and the 5 star studs stay because they are capped and don't go EE. Of course, SR transfers are like gold, and only the rich (high prestige teams) can get them, and they are the only ones who get all the 5 star studs too, so the rich stay richer.
4/28/2012 10:56 PM
Posted by girt25 on 4/28/2012 2:29:00 PM (view original):
It's a bad rule, it does allow itself to be gamed and helps the elite teams while hurting others.

Please let seble know if you don't like it.
I try sending tickets on **** like this Dan, I really do, but after so many "thanks for your comment we look at suggestions every month" bs responses I just give up usually. Like you've said, I believe seble does care about the game and wants to make it better, but A. doesn't really know how because B. he is busy doing work for other Fox stuff and has no real time for HD since no one at Fox gives a ****.
4/28/2012 10:59 PM
It's interesting, I find the new rule to be fun.  I find myself recruiting a wide variety of ways.  In the past, I always followed a set pattern, lather, rinse, repeat, and then hope EE's did not bite me in the you know what.  Now, I look at the whole picture and make new choices, jr''s, frosh, sr's, lower talent guys to make a future pattern work, etc.  I don't know if it is helping me at all, but I don't mind trying.

But, if the game was changed and the best players went early, not 100% predictable but something that remotely passed some reasonableness test, then I'd rather see the five player rule get junked too. 

Overall, the game has been the victim of poor choices topped upon poor choices, it is a multiplicative effect.  EE's being a lousy system is made worse by recruit gen being a lousy system.  In the past, the equalness of the recruits at the high end of d1, made mistakes or flaws in prestige, distance based auction drafting, recruit vs human coach distro making pockets of unfairness, top end human coaches ganging up and creating super conferences getting too much post season money, EE's, etc go away.  Now, the flaws in the game show up because recruits and quality players are at such a premium.  This 5 player rule is silly, I know, and shouldn't be, but it is what you get when someone who is not intimate with the game details and the short cuts that are taken on a day to day basis is making the choices.

4/29/2012 11:29 AM
12 Next ▸
"Five Player Rule" Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.