9/16/2012 9:52 PM (edited)
Posted by llamanunts on 9/16/2012 6:33:00 PM (view original):
Reads like seble.  Not sayin' it's him, just that it reads like him.  That'd be cool, and smart.

I think Robot Devil is my favorite Futurama character.
I've already got a couple of guesses as to the identity of the coach in question (based on writing style/verbiage also).  Seble isn't amongst those guesses, but I obviously could be mistaken.

After you conclude your experiment (however long that may take), will you reveal your "true" identity to the class?

9/16/2012 10:02 PM
PLEASE do not run a triangle. That's not even a real college offense. It only requires a stud guard a big with offensive skills & some passing both getting huge distro,  and a PG who can pass and hit the open 3. Once the ball goes to the stud guard you have 3 players standing around watching. It's a slowdown offense by design. It is a "star" offense and does not utilize a team concept. It is an offense that has never been consistely long term successful at any level. The only coachs who have ever been successful with it  consistently are Phil Jackson and his assistant. And it required 2 of  the greaatest guards of all time.
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
9/16/2012 10:21 PM
Posted by emy1013 on 9/16/2012 9:52:00 PM (view original):
Posted by llamanunts on 9/16/2012 6:33:00 PM (view original):
Reads like seble.  Not sayin' it's him, just that it reads like him.  That'd be cool, and smart.

I think Robot Devil is my favorite Futurama character.
I've already got a couple of guesses as to the identity of the coach in question (based on writing style/verbiage also).  Seble isn't amongst those guesses, but I obviously could be mistaken.

After you conclude your experiment (however long that may take), will you reveal your "true" identity to the class?

lol, i definitely agree its not seble :) have my guesses too.
9/16/2012 10:54 PM (edited)
Posted by emy1013 on 9/16/2012 9:52:00 PM (view original):
Posted by llamanunts on 9/16/2012 6:33:00 PM (view original):
Reads like seble.  Not sayin' it's him, just that it reads like him.  That'd be cool, and smart.

I think Robot Devil is my favorite Futurama character.
I've already got a couple of guesses as to the identity of the coach in question (based on writing style/verbiage also).  Seble isn't amongst those guesses, but I obviously could be mistaken.

After you conclude your experiment (however long that may take), will you reveal your "true" identity to the class?

Haha, you guys. There are no plans to.
9/16/2012 10:27 PM
Posted by coachvegas44 on 9/16/2012 10:02:00 PM (view original):
PLEASE do not run a triangle. That's not even a real college offense. It only requires a stud guard a big with offensive skills & some passing both getting huge distro,  and a PG who can pass and hit the open 3. Once the ball goes to the stud guard you have 3 players standing around watching. It's a slowdown offense by design. It is a "star" offense and does not utilize a team concept. It is an offense that has never been consistely long term successful at any level. The only coachs who have ever been successful with it  consistently are Phil Jackson and his assistant. And it required 2 of  the greaatest guards of all time.
I will either be running the motion/m2m or motion/press. I have decided against starting out in the zone. It will hurt the win column early because of depth, but I currently have 3 SRs on the roster with A in zone. So instead of running a zone with 6 D- and 3 A players, which would render the first season a waste we will go right into either the man or press from the get go.
9/16/2012 10:39 PM
Posted by emy1013 on 9/16/2012 9:47:00 PM (view original):
Posted by robotdevil on 9/16/2012 6:47:00 PM (view original):
Posted by gillispie1 on 9/16/2012 6:29:00 PM (view original):
Posted by kmasonbx on 9/16/2012 3:02:00 PM (view original):
Agree with Emy, simply being a veteran coach doesn't mean you're a successful veteran coach. 
i agree, too. maybe you could give us just a rough idea? i mean, there are SO many coaches here, if you said something like:
well at my favorite program, which is in d2, i feel the last 10 seasons are pretty indicative of how my teams will do if i am focused on them. there, my last 10 resume is roughly 8 NT appearances and 14 NT wins, with 2 final fours.

if you said that, im pretty sure we would have no idea who you were. or you could list out the result of the last 10 seasons, in random order, and maybe with a few tweaks here and there (tweak a couple seasons up, a couple down, if you are really concerned it could lead to someone guessing who you are). or you could just tell us what would be a "good run" for you in d3, it doesnt even have to be linked to anything that actually happened (i mean, id give values in range with what you'd expect, but not necessarily the actual run you had at any point in time)

i think its important to have a baseline, like emy was alluding to. if "a good run" for you means consistently making the NT and a few sweet 16s here or there, then the standard for "success" with this low iq team is lower. if "a good run" for you means winning a championship or two, then the standard for success with this low iq team is higher. the only way to gauge the value of iq here is if we have some idea what you'd accomplish without the iq restriction.
I have played at all levels and have multiple national titles. I am a consistent Final Four coach who rarely misses the tournament, however I only want this to be about the study itself. I am not on the (OR, lostmyth, BillyG) level, but I consider myself very capable.
Assuming of course that this is true (and we have no reason at this point to think that it's not), I think that resume is certainly sufficient to be considered a successful veteran coach whether we know the specific ID or not.  I actually think that this experiment was done many, many seasons ago (possibly even pre-potential), but the coach was not as open about it as you are.  Don't seem to remember him ever publishing the results either.  Regardless, looks like it should be interesting.  Best of luck to you and I hope you don't end up getting too discouraged!

How often do you anticipate updating the thread with your results?  Every season?  Half a season?  Every game?  Just wondering.
"How often do you anticipate updating the thread with your results?  Every season?  Half a season?  Every game?  Just wondering."

Fairly often. After recruiting I will post the roster and player projected growth, current IQs, predictions (feel free to post your own as well) and any other relevant information. From there roughly every 8-10 games or so I will post updates. I will also post the link to the team page in the first post that way anyone can just click on it if they want to see the current progress.

9/16/2012 11:07 PM
Very interesting.

I'd suggest motion/m2m just so if the constant threat of press going away as a base defense comes to pass, the valuable information about m2m would still be useful.
9/16/2012 11:14 PM
I am now hosting a $5 pool on who this guy is. Winner gets 70%, robot gets the rest (just to encourage him to accept).

Hell, robot, you can even guess. Could rake in the cash.
9/16/2012 11:56 PM
As some of you know, I LOVE, LOVE, LOVE press. But in this case I agree with zbrent. I think the result of the study would be more relevant to more coaches, if conducted in mo/mm. There are a huge amount of people playing the game who just don't understand press or are scared of press. I think far more will be able to get value from mo/mm results. You are certainly getting alot of people excited about your project. Good luck. I'm very eager to see each season's result. I'd like to thank you in advance for your effort on this project.
9/17/2012 2:02 AM
at the same time though, everyone always says that IQ is very important in the press. I'd love to see if that is really true...
9/17/2012 2:24 AM
Posted by dacj501 on 9/17/2012 2:02:00 AM (view original):
at the same time though, everyone always says that IQ is very important in the press. I'd love to see if that is really true...
it is.

i do think there is some variation in the value of IQ from set to set, but its really not that significant. i don't think there is much benefit to incorporate an understanding of the differences into your way of thinking, either. so to me, it really doesn't matter what set he picks. and whatever the findings are, they are going to inherently have a bigger margin of error than the differences in the value of IQ from set to set.
9/17/2012 5:45 PM
Meta-comment alert: How amazing is it that this whole, wonderful little endeavor was proposed, discussed, improved, and implemented among a bunch of strangers who don't even know each others' real names and who are ostensibly in competition with each other?

I wish that real life worked as well as this board does.
9/17/2012 6:40 PM (edited)
This all seems very odd.  I mean honestly, why not tell us who you are?  How could that possibly hurt?  Who could you possibly be that has honestly won titles (ie not in the colonels, bistiza mold) that revealing your "standard" game identity would undermine the results of the study in the minds of the observers?  I could understand some coaches not wanting to have the record go onto their records and using an alternate ID.  Personally I'm not all that concerned with my cumulative stats, but some guys are.  But why would telling us who you are devalue your results in our minds?

Could it be lostmyth not wanting everyone to know he's back around and try to talk him into taking over some D1 teams?  Outside of that I just don't know who it could be.  If there's something this wrong with you personally, I would probably consider that a big confounding issue.
9/17/2012 7:27 PM
well, there is probably only a 2% chance my guess is right, but if it is, the poster is a pretty good guy. slightly misguided in a couple areas (laughing), but still a good guy.

dahs - if there is something wrong with him, or he is not honestly a national championship coach, i think that would out itself pretty quickly.

i too do not know why hed want to hide his identity, but who knows, could be anything. maybe hes stated opinions about the subject previously and doesn't want those comments in play. maybe he has a team in d3 knight and its within a 1000 miles and he doesn't want to listen to people ***** or have CS make him move. or maybe he just has a team in every 2 a day world in general, and doesn't want to possibly cross any boundaries. im not even sure if the fair play rules said its 1000 miles in the same division. i mean, if not, that would be crazy... but i really dont remember it saying 1000 miles was limited to the same division. hopefully CS doesnt go enforcing that now because a lot of coaches would be ********, there are quite a few offenders, many of them well respected. but anyway, i digress. there are plenty of reasons he might not want to share, and not all of them include him being a serial killer :)
of 11

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 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.