All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > Time for a significant overhaul of recruiting
4/18/2013 5:04 PM (edited)
Let me start this by saying most people (myself included) don't really care much for change.  We get comfortable with things the way they are and we don't want them to be different.  I get that, BUT, in this particular case, I think we can all agree that the current recruiting system has some flaws and a major overhaul to recruiting might be in order.  A lot of the "cheating" that has been discussed over the past few days (that horse has been beaten to freaking death) is tied to recruiting, and at least the discussion of aliases has revealed that a lot of coaches see flaws in the current system that can be exploited.  seble has talked in the past (as recently as last year, maybe 6 months ago) about looking into a significant overhaul of the recruiting system.  I think it is time he undertake that task.  A few suggestions (and please add to or alter these as you all see fit):

1. Make significant changes to FSS.  Either make it free for everyone (not optimal), or limit the data a coach gets by buying FSS to the players at their own level (D1, D2, D3...whatever it is) AND all players that potentially could be pulled down or drop down to that team.  This solves a lot of the FSS cheating people are worried about.

2. OR...change the way potential is learned.  Why not set up a system where you can see all of the players and you can buy FSS, but that doesn't reveal all of the potentials for all players?  In order to fill in the blanks you have to individually scout players you want to know more about.  In this case, changes would need to be made to the scouting system so that a coach can select the exact attributes he wants his "assistant coach" to scout when he goes out on evals.  You could set up a system where scouting each individual attribute has a certain price (depending on distance), and in one scouting trip you can scout as many or as few attributes as you want, with a discount based on how many different attributes you scout (your assistant doesn't have to fly back or drive back to the recruit's school to scout each attribute, so only one plane ticket or tank of gas is needed).  This would make the decision of whether or not to buy FSS more fluid as well and it would add another layer to recruiting strategy.  Some coaches might decide not to buy FSS, but rather to scout only certain players.  The biggest difficulty with this system would be determining the right amount of cash to allow for recruiting at each level to make sure enough cash is available to properly scout.

3. Make it to where Sims are smarter recruiters, but they have to live by the same recruiting budgets and distance factors as human coaches.  This would make Sim teams more attractive to potential new coaches, and it would also make beating Sims a bit more challenging (assuming they have better players.

4. Make SIGNIFICANT changes to the amount of money dished out to conferences for postseason success.  This is one of the least "real life" aspects of HD.  Superconferences exist in real basketball, but not because they got more money for postseason success.  It is virtually impossible to compete at D1 in recruiting if you are trying to do it against a highly successful Big 6 conference.  This is not good for the game and it gives those conference far too many advantages in recruiting.  I would propose that rather than giving money to whole conferences for postseason success that it be given (in much smaller increments) to the specific teams who have that success.  This gives successful teams a small advantage in recruiting (something that exists in real life) rather than whole conferences (crappy teams in strong RL conferences don't benefit in recruiting by the exact same amount as their successful peers).  Prestige takes care of what I'm proposing here to a degree, so I'm not totally sold on the idea, but I definitely would like to see far less money dished out to teams based on the postseason success of their conference.

5.  Increase the amount of considering credit substantially.  The idea here is simple: a lot of HD coaches don't particularly like it when another coach "poaches" recruits late in the game.  I completely get that recruits aren't yours until they sign and I totally agree that recruits are fair game until they sign, but I do think that teams who identify and recruit players early should get a little more of a boost in that regard.  This change would cut back on the number of complaints we all see about poaching and it would likely also result in far more battles for top players (something that should happen), since being on them early in the process would be key.  Think of considering credit as amother multiplier to recruiting efforts, much like prestige is.  The early you recruit a kid, the better.

6.  Allow for recruiting during the season as long as the coach has another season remaining at his/her school.  We all (well, most of us anyway) lead busy lives.  Sometimes the exact dates our worlds are in recruiting aren't ideal for our real life schedules.  Why not spread out recruiting a bit more?  In order to account for my considering credit proposal, have considering credit not kick in until the seasons rolls over and coaching changes occur (so that new coaches aren't trailing in recruiting due to getting a start on considering credit after returning coaches), but allow for recruiting budgets to be spent earlier in the season.  Allow for scouting to happen during the season.  Maybe the right way to do it would be to only allow scouting of players using your recruiting budget during the season (you can't do HVs or CVs or promise starts or playing time until after the rollover), but at least that way coaches can get a head start on the most time consuming part of recruiting, which if you are doing it right should be scouting.

That's a lot to digest for now, but I'd love to see what ideas others have on this topic.  Please try not to douche up this thread with more arguing (we've had enough of that here over the past couple of days), but please do share your ideas at how to make recruiting better.
4/18/2013 5:17 PM
Very detailed post mduncan, with a lot of thoughts.

#1 - Making FSS free, I don't think is the way to go. It would basically remove strategy away from recruiting as everyone would know the best players to recruit, and it would come down to who had more recruiting money (superclasses, "big" conferences). Limiting it to players that could be pulled down or dropdowns is intriguing, but probably ultimately impossible. Especially with tales of D3 schools pulling down low-level D1 recruits. Too many variables.
#2 - This idea is interesting, but then would FSS still be useful at all? Plus, as you somewhat alluded to, it would be a significant cash drain on schools, so again schools with the most money would have a bigger advantage than they do now.
#3 - On board with making SIMS recruit from a distance comparable with human coaches, vs. the generic 200 miles or whatever it is now. That would eliminate stupid east coast sims recruiting west coast players, without the human being able to knock them off very easily.
#4 - This seems like it would make the rich teams richer.  Example: Team A makes postseason, gets extra money, gets better recruits, makes postseason again, gets extra money...etc.  Whereas teams that miss postseason would lose out, not be able to recruit as well, keep losing out due to subpar recruits, and so on.
#5 - A good idea in theory, but I don't think its very realistic. I don't think schools get credit in RL based on timing of recruiting efforts (if they do, its probably very small), but a Syracuse is going to have prestige over Stony Brook. I don't think it should be easier for Stony Brook to hang onto said recruit if Syracuse comes calling later on in the process.
#6 - Totally agree, but what would be the point of early recruiting if you don't get any considering credit for actions during the season? Unless I am misinterpreting your point.
4/18/2013 5:33 PM
Posted by jkumpulanian on 4/18/2013 5:17:00 PM (view original):
Very detailed post mduncan, with a lot of thoughts.

#1 - Making FSS free, I don't think is the way to go. It would basically remove strategy away from recruiting as everyone would know the best players to recruit, and it would come down to who had more recruiting money (superclasses, "big" conferences). Limiting it to players that could be pulled down or dropdowns is intriguing, but probably ultimately impossible. Especially with tales of D3 schools pulling down low-level D1 recruits. Too many variables.
#2 - This idea is interesting, but then would FSS still be useful at all? Plus, as you somewhat alluded to, it would be a significant cash drain on schools, so again schools with the most money would have a bigger advantage than they do now.
#3 - On board with making SIMS recruit from a distance comparable with human coaches, vs. the generic 200 miles or whatever it is now. That would eliminate stupid east coast sims recruiting west coast players, without the human being able to knock them off very easily.
#4 - This seems like it would make the rich teams richer.  Example: Team A makes postseason, gets extra money, gets better recruits, makes postseason again, gets extra money...etc.  Whereas teams that miss postseason would lose out, not be able to recruit as well, keep losing out due to subpar recruits, and so on.
#5 - A good idea in theory, but I don't think its very realistic. I don't think schools get credit in RL based on timing of recruiting efforts (if they do, its probably very small), but a Syracuse is going to have prestige over Stony Brook. I don't think it should be easier for Stony Brook to hang onto said recruit if Syracuse comes calling later on in the process.
#6 - Totally agree, but what would be the point of early recruiting if you don't get any considering credit for actions during the season? Unless I am misinterpreting your point.

Thanks for the response.  On point 6, the primary reason for allowing recruiting during the season (especially scouting trips, etc) would be to help spread out the time we all spend on recruiting rather than cramming it into a couple of days.  For example, if you are going to have 4 players graduate you could get your 4 players worth of scholarship money immediately after the rollover to spend how you see fit throughout the season (as long as you have at least 1 additional season remaining for your team).

4/18/2013 5:35 PM
One problem with #6 is just because someone has another season in the bank, doesn't mean they are returning to that particular school...say a coach recruits during the season, strikes out completely, and now has no money to recruit during "regular" recruiting...what's to stop them from just getting a job at another school and screwing a potential new coach to that school?
4/18/2013 5:37 PM
Posted by scthallfan on 4/18/2013 5:35:00 PM (view original):
One problem with #6 is just because someone has another season in the bank, doesn't mean they are returning to that particular school...say a coach recruits during the season, strikes out completely, and now has no money to recruit during "regular" recruiting...what's to stop them from just getting a job at another school and screwing a potential new coach to that school?
Good point.  You would obviously have to stay at your school if you spend recruiting money.
4/18/2013 5:40 PM
I would say if they could have a limit on how much you can spend and still change schools...like 10% and have a pop up or something that says "you are about to go over your limit for money spent and being able to apply for another job" or something similar
4/18/2013 5:43 PM
Why not just make people pay for the game instead of all the credits.  Would cut down on all the multiple users
4/18/2013 7:17 PM
I like the first 4.  For #5, the only issue I have with considering credit is that some people can't be on HD the moment or day recruiting starts, so it's unfair to penalize them for that (regardless how slightly - sometimes every dollar counts).  With #6, isn't FFS available during the season?  It's not scouting trips, but it's something, which is probably fair given the possibility of job changers.
4/18/2013 7:46 PM
Posted by alazer on 4/18/2013 7:17:00 PM (view original):
I like the first 4.  For #5, the only issue I have with considering credit is that some people can't be on HD the moment or day recruiting starts, so it's unfair to penalize them for that (regardless how slightly - sometimes every dollar counts).  With #6, isn't FFS available during the season?  It's not scouting trips, but it's something, which is probably fair given the possibility of job changers.
FSS is available, but you don't get your recruiting cash until after the season rolls over a day and a half before recruiting starts. Only way you can buy FSS during the season is if you carry enough over.
4/18/2013 11:34 PM
One big one - Allow more than 2 hours from the time recruiting starts to the time of the first cycle. Why not go 24 hours. No one will get an advantage, but people who have busy lives won't miss the first cycle, which, to me, is crucial. I like a lot of these other ideas too.
4/18/2013 11:55 PM
Posted by chapelhillne on 4/18/2013 11:34:00 PM (view original):
One big one - Allow more than 2 hours from the time recruiting starts to the time of the first cycle. Why not go 24 hours. No one will get an advantage, but people who have busy lives won't miss the first cycle, which, to me, is crucial. I like a lot of these other ideas too.
This is needed, extremely simple, and, dare I say, uncontroversial. This can be implemented so easily and won't be met with any objection.
4/19/2013 7:48 AM
Posted by chapelhillne on 4/18/2013 11:34:00 PM (view original):
One big one - Allow more than 2 hours from the time recruiting starts to the time of the first cycle. Why not go 24 hours. No one will get an advantage, but people who have busy lives won't miss the first cycle, which, to me, is crucial. I like a lot of these other ideas too.
I agree with this 100%.  That should be extremely easy to change too.
4/19/2013 11:19 AM
I agree with #5. If you are considering a school for a long time, wouldn't you get excited for that opportunity? At times you see recruits switch in real life last minute, especially in football, but that typically has to do with starts/playing time/recruiter moving to that school.

The amount of effort to poach that recruit should be more as you get closer to signing.
4/19/2013 11:42 AM
I'm not sure I like the idea of increasing considering credit, or at the very least I'm against increasing it by more than a little bit.

I have a couple of reasons:

1. Not all of us can always find time to recruit in the first few cycles. I don't think someone should have an edge on me for a recruit I would have gone after right away, but I couldn't find time or internet access until a day later.

2. I'm as anti-poaching as anyone, but a recruit isn't yours until he's signed. If you increase considering credit too much, you might as well say the first guy to get him considering is the guy who will land him, and that isn't recruiting but a race to get a guy to consider you. That wouldn't be much fun at all as far as I'm concerned.

I also agree the first cycle should be more than two hours - many times I've had an evening event to go to the night recruiting begins and I miss the first cycle because of it. It's not a huge deal because I can usually hit the next cycle or the one after that, but a three hour window there like every other cycle might be good - just bump it back to begin at 5 p.m. EST.

4/19/2013 12:56 PM (edited)
I actually disagree with most of these, and not just because of being change-averse. I think most are bad for the game, at least from my perspective. Not trying to cause any arguments, just respectfully disagreeing.

1.  Making FSS free is a bad idea, IMO. That removes too much strategy, especially at D2 and D3, but even at D1.

2. Good idea in theory, but this would substantially increase the amount of time required to do recruiting. It would become very painstaking and time consuming.

3. Depends how it's implemented. How would this work? If we're getting rid of the constant-distance advantage that Sims currently have, what mechanisms would be put in place to prevent the Sim teams from getting steamrolled in recruiting just like they are now, when they *have* that distance advantage in place.

4. The money dished out to conferences is actually based on a real-life principle. In real life, conferences really do receive a payout based on how many and how far teams advance in the tournament. The disconnect is that in real-life, that money isn't directly tied in to recruiting budgets, but really nothing about recruiting in HD is analogous to real-life.

5. Strongly disagree with this one. Part of the recruiting strategy is not only who to recruit, but when to recruit and to have the opportunity to see how the recruiting landscape develops and changes. Giving someone substantially more considering credit just because they called first dibs on a player seems unwarranted to me. It's forcing people to recruit early, and would reduce/limit recruiting options as the recruiting period plays out. As a general principle, I think anything that reduces or limits options and/or strategic decisions is a move in the wrong direction. This idea is basically forcing a cookie-cutter approach to recruiting... you better recruit early, or else you're pretty much screwed. You're already at a significant disadvantage if you miss the first cycle. This would idea would only compound that.

6. Strongly disagree with allowing recruiting that actually counts for considering credit during the season, especially if we're also giving a bigger boost to teams that get on a player first. I'd be open to the possibility of scouting if it didn't count towards considering credit. Game-planning for games during the season is enough;  having to also check on recruiting every day during the season as well would just be too much, IMO. I'd rather not mix the two.

I do completely agree with those who have advocated increasing the window of the first cycle beyond 2 hours. That window is ridiculously small proportional to the importance that cycle plays in recruiting. At a bare minimum, it should be the same 3-hour window as any other recruiting cycle, and preferably a full 12 or 24 hours.

of 2
All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > Time for a significant overhaul of recruiting

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.