All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > This jobs logic is just complete bullsh
9/4/2013 7:28 PM
I don't understand why the game would get harder with a big 6.  Sure I can get better recruits and I play the same DIV I competition.  I have more money to spend on recruits, more prestige to get recruits and the knowledge of those with other DIV I contenders who "poach" or challengen for recruits much less.  Right now, I spend 40k getting a guy that is the 25th best in my area in a position and would imagine that many of the guys ranked 1-24 are going for much cheaper than that.  I don't want to start a fight, just saying I would like to hear the reasoning behind what you stated.  
   Ask almost anyone who prefers D2 or D3 and the reasoning isn't that it is harder at the BIG 6 level.  A truer sentiment is that it is near impossible to compete as anything but a big 6 (exceptions understood) and the pathway to get there is fraught with inconsistencies and disadvantages that frustrate the hell out of all but the most patient.
   I don't think the top guys are necessarily afraid but I think they are comparing apples to oranges.  As someone who played the game in the past, the current system is much harder relative to advancement and the gaps between the haves and have nots have grown considerably.  The cause or the solution we can all argue about, but I think we all need to admit that "making newbies go through what I went through" mentality is not appropriate as the route upwards to being a competitive team is much different now.  My fear comment comes from that fact that if a person truly wants competition they would be pushing for WIS to allow more upward mobility rather than suggesting the issue resides with the end-user.
9/4/2013 9:04 PM
Posted by tbird9423 on 9/4/2013 7:28:00 PM (view original):
I don't understand why the game would get harder with a big 6.  Sure I can get better recruits and I play the same DIV I competition.  I have more money to spend on recruits, more prestige to get recruits and the knowledge of those with other DIV I contenders who "poach" or challengen for recruits much less.  Right now, I spend 40k getting a guy that is the 25th best in my area in a position and would imagine that many of the guys ranked 1-24 are going for much cheaper than that.  I don't want to start a fight, just saying I would like to hear the reasoning behind what you stated.  
   Ask almost anyone who prefers D2 or D3 and the reasoning isn't that it is harder at the BIG 6 level.  A truer sentiment is that it is near impossible to compete as anything but a big 6 (exceptions understood) and the pathway to get there is fraught with inconsistencies and disadvantages that frustrate the hell out of all but the most patient.
   I don't think the top guys are necessarily afraid but I think they are comparing apples to oranges.  As someone who played the game in the past, the current system is much harder relative to advancement and the gaps between the haves and have nots have grown considerably.  The cause or the solution we can all argue about, but I think we all need to admit that "making newbies go through what I went through" mentality is not appropriate as the route upwards to being a competitive team is much different now.  My fear comment comes from that fact that if a person truly wants competition they would be pushing for WIS to allow more upward mobility rather than suggesting the issue resides with the end-user.
I agree with basically all of this. I've started being able to get better and better recruits at Campbell over my seasons there, but just to get a guy that's Top 20 at his position is BRUTAL, even when he's <100 miles from my campus. A lot of that has to do with UNC/Duke/etc. stocking their benches, but even when it's a team like UConn or similar, it's almost impossible to sway them. No way a recruit like Stephon Curry goes to Davidson in a WIS world, that's for sure.
9/4/2013 9:35 PM
the only way a Curry to Davidson is if an entire mid major conference makes progress - as seen in a few worlds
9/4/2013 9:45 PM
Posted by wildcat98 on 9/2/2013 10:57:00 AM (view original):
Posted by colonels19 on 9/2/2013 10:49:00 AM (view original):
You guys know how I push for more leniency as far as D1 jobs go (at least as far as getting to D1 from D2, and lower level jobs), but I don't think wildcat98 has a good enough resume at Campbell to go to a Big East or a Big Ten school.  The human v. sim argument is always an intriguing one.  I think a lot of seasoned D1 guys are too headstrong (yes I said it lol...irony) about what it takes to get to or move up in D1, because they "earned their way", and the worthiness of potential coaches that want to move up.

D1 is overrated, IMO...it's just not as fun.

Keeping it sim is what angers me. To me, that just doesn't make sense. In real life, that seems like that would be the equivalent of giving it to some dude in the phys ed department of the college or something. And it's not like I've just puttered along at Campbell, compiling 10-6/11-5 conference records, and 100+ RPIs. Until this season, I'd basically improved my RPI every season, peaking in the mid-to-low 40s. And even in this last season, when I lost a couple of games I should have won, the RPI was STILL in the 70s. And Campbell was just complete s--t when I got there. A total dumpster fire.

As for D1 being not as fun, I don't know about that. I like the challenge of it--or at least I did until it started feeling like I was "frozen" in this Campbell job.
Re: your phys ed analogy ... you have the right to look at it however you want, but that's not how HD looks at it. They want to see some basic minimum requirements to hit the BCS, and I think that makes sense. Getting a BCS should be meaningful, and that shouldn't be tossed out the window because a team has gone sim for a couple seasons.

Someone pointed out early on that you are shooting yourself in the foot by (a) scheduling a relatively poor non-con and (b) losing to conference sims.

The first is a 100% preventable thing on your part, a strategic flaw that is not acceptable in a low-end, sim-dominated conference. The second is also mostly preventable with a roster as strong as yours, and does speak to some strategic deficiencies. To be perfectly blunt, these two things tell me that you're probably not quite ready for high BCS competition. (Sorry, not to be a jerk, just being honest.)

9/4/2013 9:48 PM
And your Steph Curry to Davidson analogy is just totally off base ... the only way it would be valid is if he'd chosen Davidson over the big boys; in reality, the big boys simply didn't want him.

Also, you should understand that you should not be going after the same players as Duke and UNC, so that's a silly thing to complain about. You should be going after the guys that are one level below that. Again, seems to be a strategic piece that hasn't quite clicked yet.

9/4/2013 11:15 PM
I would say that you are right nyfd in regards to the conference that are full being more competitive, but that is outside the control (for the most part) of those of us stuck in that scenario.   I could win the 4 x 100 relay if I have the three fastest guys in the world on my team but WIS never said, build a dynasty once you market our program, find good coaches and then stick together (all the while not cheating).

As for strategic deficiencies, I totally agree.  We could all improve on scheduling and recruiting.  But you are missing the point.  You could schedule better and recruit better as well, especially considering your situation (talking of a big 6 not you personally).  Even more pertinent, Big 6 sims could schedule and recruit better also.  If you want to compare that, it is fine, but don't compare it to some ideal recruit/scheduling scenario, as we are not suggesting we are the best at the game -- only that we are better than the sims that are in the Big 6.  

My frustration is not only with the system itself, but with some failing to recognize that the system now is different than the one they "grew" on and with the assertion that new players should have to be perfect in recruiting and perfect in scheduling for multiple seasons to even earn an opportunity.  I would be happy to turn over my DIV I team to anyone who can turn them into a dynasty without collusion.  I would be happy to pay for the guy who said (a few threads ago) that he could have a low DIV I school in the NT every year after (4-6?) years.   Both of those are 100% impossible now.

Girt, you also proved our point for us.  Not only can we not get the heavily recruited top guys right now, but we also can't even get the guys that might turn into a surprise stud.  In WIS, those guys sit on benches or play few minutes rather than be a star at one of our schools.  Steph could have walked on at a higher level program but took the sure thing at Davidson...  so I think you just misunderstood the point.  Again, I think our perspectives are very different but I am also apt to take the word of someone living the situation rather than the person who thinks they understand it.  Usually, like tonight, its pretty easy to prove that those outside of the situation rarely have a true understanding of the dimensions invovled.
9/4/2013 11:41 PM
tbird, you don't really know what you're talking about. Honestly, a lot of your post was semi-incoherent, but I'll do my best to pick it apart regardless.
  • "I would say that you are right nyfd in regards to the conference that are full being more competitive, but that is outside the control (for the most part) of those of us stuck in that scenario. Well, not really ... you could, you know, pick a conference with more human coaches. But you missed the point, which isn't that it's your fault that they're in a sim-filled conference, but rather that if that's the case, you need to do other things better (like not schedule crappy non-con teams, and gameplanning.)  I could win the 4 x 100 relay if I have the three fastest guys in the world on my team but WIS never said, build a dynasty once you market our program, find good coaches and then stick together (all the while not cheating)." Kind of a bizarre tangent. I think you're attempting to say that you shouldn't have to be in a conference with great teams/coaches in order to be successful? If so ... you're right. But it's a complete straw man, because no one is suggesting that. If that's not what you're saying, well ... I'm at a loss.
  • As for strategic deficiencies, I totally agree.  We could all improve on scheduling and recruiting.  But you are missing the point.  You could schedule better and recruit better as well, especially considering your situation (talking of a big 6 not you personally).  Even more pertinent, Big 6 sims could schedule and recruit better also. Huh? How is that pertinent at all to the actual conversation we're having (let alone even more pertinent)?  If you want to compare that, it is fine, but don't compare it to some ideal recruit/scheduling scenario, as we are not suggesting we are the best at the game -- only that we are better than the sims that are in the Big 6.  No one is saying it has to be an ideal or perfect scheduling and recruiting. What was said is that he scheduled poorly. If he had just scheduled reasonably well -- not perfectly, just reasonably well -- it would make a significant difference.
  • My frustration is not only with the system itself, but with some failing to recognize that the system now is different than the one they "grew" on and with the assertion that new players should have to be perfect in recruiting and perfect in scheduling for multiple seasons to even earn an opportunity.  Again, no one is suggesting that. This is (a) a total straw man and (b) a little asinine to think that the very experienced coaches commenting in this thread don't understand differences between the game now and the game in previous incarnations. I would be happy to turn over my DIV I team to anyone who can turn them into a dynasty without collusion. Who said anything about turning them into a dynasty? Again, straw man. I would be happy to pay for the guy who said (a few threads ago) that he could have a low DIV I school in the NT every year after (4-6?) years.   Both of those are 100% impossible now. Not even close to impossible. The upper echelon of coaches could pretty much all do that. And still, no one is saying you have to do things "perfectly" to accomplish this. But you don't even seem open to the simple notion that a good coach could come in and do better.
  • Girt, you also proved our point for us.  Not only can we not get the heavily recruited top guys right now, but we also can't even get the guys that might turn into a surprise stud. First, that's not what I said at all. I said he (a C+ program) shouldn't be targeting the studs that go to UNC or Duke, that he should be looking to nab the next echelon down. Second, that's not true. Non-BCS teams are littered with BCS-caliber players. Hell, wildcat's Campbell team has a couple (most notably Grotberg) and Fuller on your Siena squad.  In WIS, those guys sit on benches or play few minutes rather than be a star at one of our schools.  Steph could have walked on at a higher level program but took the sure thing at Davidson...  so I think you just misunderstood the point. I'm not misunderstanding a damn thing. Again, I think our perspectives are very different but I am also apt to take the word of someone living the situation rather than the person who thinks they understand it. Please. Not only have I lived the situation (taken D+ Marshall and turned them into an A+, albeit with a very strong conference), but I talk to others in my conference and other worlds/conferences trying to do it. And I understand HD, what it takes to win, and what is/isn't feasible a lot better than you or wildcat. This part will sound self serving ... but it's not even close. Usually, like tonight, its pretty easy to prove that those outside of the situation rarely have a true understanding of the dimensions invovled. Sorry, but you're misguided/misinformed, and have drawn conclusions that are not reflective of reality. 
9/5/2013 2:26 AM (edited)
I'm the guy that said I could take any D 1 scrub to the NT in 6 years. I'll be happy to take your money and prove it. Tell me what team and conference you want it done in and send me a GC. I 100% guarantee it. Double your money back if I fail.


9/5/2013 2:04 AM
Posted by girt25 on 9/4/2013 9:48:00 PM (view original):
And your Steph Curry to Davidson analogy is just totally off base ... the only way it would be valid is if he'd chosen Davidson over the big boys; in reality, the big boys simply didn't want him.

Also, you should understand that you should not be going after the same players as Duke and UNC, so that's a silly thing to complain about. You should be going after the guys that are one level below that. Again, seems to be a strategic piece that hasn't quite clicked yet.

I don't chase UNC/Duke recruits. I specifically said I wasn't talking about recruits they were on in my post about that issue. I may suck at game planning, but recruiting is one area where I've improved a ton. I tend to be able to identify the kind of recruits I'll be able to get, and when to battle against a "sniper" from out of the region, who's trying to swoop in on a guy I've identified. While I'm not the BEST recruiter, I don't view that as one of my numerous weaknesses as a coach. I'd give myself a solid B+ on the recruiting side of things. I just can't figure out how to game plan such that the seeming "randomness" doesn't bite me at the worst possible times.
9/5/2013 2:12 AM
But on the game-planning front? I candidly admit, I don't know how the hell I manage to lose 2-3 inexplicable games every season--often, seemingly, with an NT bid hanging in the balance. I'm more than willing to learn about what the hell I'm doing wrong in those type of games.

Scheduling-wise? Next cycle I'll try scheduling a bunch more humans. With my iffy game-planning, though, it's possible I could go 4-6/5-5 through a 7 or 8 human-coached team schedule. Really, I need to get the game-planning thing figured out before I work on improving my scheduling habits.
9/5/2013 2:15 AM
Also, on taking any D-1 scrub team to the NT in 6 seasons, it's really not that hard. I managed to do it at Campbell, which was a D- prestige when I got there, and had a roster much worse than the D-2 Lynn team I left to coach there. Got to the NT in my 6th season, and now have Campbell at a C+ from that D- start, after 9 seasons.
9/5/2013 7:42 AM
Wildcat, your posts seem reasonable to me. It's tbird who I think is off base, sometimes grossly so.

I would pick the brains of some other successful coaches re: gameplanning. And I would get that and scheduling down before you move into a BCS conference.

9/5/2013 11:53 AM
Posted by girt25 on 9/5/2013 7:42:00 AM (view original):
Wildcat, your posts seem reasonable to me. It's tbird who I think is off base, sometimes grossly so.

I would pick the brains of some other successful coaches re: gameplanning. And I would get that and scheduling down before you move into a BCS conference.

I honestly think that if I can get my game planning crappiness fixed, the scheduling thing wouldn't be such an issue. I've been on the bubble for an NT berth nearly every season for the last 5 or so seasons. A couple more Ls turned into Ws would move me from the bubble to the NT, I think.
9/5/2013 12:29 PM
Posted by tbird9423 on 9/4/2013 7:28:00 PM (view original):
I don't understand why the game would get harder with a big 6.  Sure I can get better recruits and I play the same DIV I competition.  I have more money to spend on recruits, more prestige to get recruits and the knowledge of those with other DIV I contenders who "poach" or challengen for recruits much less.  Right now, I spend 40k getting a guy that is the 25th best in my area in a position and would imagine that many of the guys ranked 1-24 are going for much cheaper than that.  I don't want to start a fight, just saying I would like to hear the reasoning behind what you stated.  
   Ask almost anyone who prefers D2 or D3 and the reasoning isn't that it is harder at the BIG 6 level.  A truer sentiment is that it is near impossible to compete as anything but a big 6 (exceptions understood) and the pathway to get there is fraught with inconsistencies and disadvantages that frustrate the hell out of all but the most patient.
   I don't think the top guys are necessarily afraid but I think they are comparing apples to oranges.  As someone who played the game in the past, the current system is much harder relative to advancement and the gaps between the haves and have nots have grown considerably.  The cause or the solution we can all argue about, but I think we all need to admit that "making newbies go through what I went through" mentality is not appropriate as the route upwards to being a competitive team is much different now.  My fear comment comes from that fact that if a person truly wants competition they would be pushing for WIS to allow more upward mobility rather than suggesting the issue resides with the end-user.
First, have you ever coached at a big 6 school? Yes you have more money to spend and that would put you ahead of some midmajors who have a modest prestige advantage on you if you take a low end big 6 school and use your money properly - You'd still be competing in a big 6 conference with midmajor players and you have to claw and fight your way to just go .500 in conference play... which depending on how you schedule and who else has a good record or whoever wins their CT could still land you outside the NT. There are teams I STILL haven't beaten in my big 6 conference after 7 or 8 seasons which is not the case in my midmajor conference that is completely full.

I have D1 and D2 teams and it is hard to compete as a midmajor - but my level of success at a midmajor or low D1 also allows me to dominate my conference mates because if I can get and maintain a B or B+ prestige - I can snag a decent 5 star guy every now and again and once that happens all the other B- or C+ and lower schools would have less opportunity to win the CT and get that bid to the NT(not saying it's impossible here). If you're talking winning a national title as a midmajor then yes I'll agree it's harder obviously but I've seen too many guys leave Big 6 schools because of the difficulty - one bad recruiting cycle could destroy your team for the next 4 seasons. It's not easier at all in my opinion having coached both midmajors and big6 because of the level of competition alone.

The fact of the matter is if you can't get there - (to a big 6 school) then you're probably not ready outside of other circumstances like competing in full midmajor and low D1 conferences... If you are in a low D1 or midmajor conference where sims outnumber humans and you still can't qualify for a big 6 after you've had time to develop numerous players then you probably aren't ready for a big 6 school because it will definitely be harder as big 6 conferences are normally full with accomplished coaches.
9/5/2013 4:26 PM (edited)
some of you guys are going WAY out there on tangents and taking things the wrong way. this, to me, is not that complex.

whoever said its impossible to take a mid major to the NT each season, no, thats not impossible. nor is building a mid major dynasty. both are perfectly possible. but heres the thing - you dont have to accomplish *either* of those to make the big 6. so why are we talking about it?? you just have to have a couple strong seasons, maybe a NT1 and NT2 together, and you are eligible for low end big 6 jobs. i do think the jobs change seble made a while ago makes it a *little* bit too difficult to get into the big6, but not much. and frankly, saying you are better than the sim, is roughly the worst argument ive heard in my life. if you arent better than the sim after playing long enough to make the NT at a d1 team somewhere, you should just kill yourself now, seriously. the simple fact is this - big 6 spots are coveted by coaches. if you let ANYONE better than a sim (which is literally almost anyone) take the jobs, there are no spots for those who earn them. its valuable to have minimum bars and that bar is not that you are simply not mentally retarded (which is the standard being suggested). maybe its a bit too high - thats debatable. but leave it at that, dont turn it into something more than that.

the other side of this is that it IS easier to make the NT at a mid major with decent prestige (such as the C+ of the OP) than it is to make it at a big 6 conference. this is of course an opinion not fact but its pretty widely held, and virtually anyone who has played in the big 6 conferences understand where people are coming from on this, even if they dont agree. the simple reality is, take the team you barely made the NT with in a mid major, and you are NOT making the NT in a big 6 conference. thats obvious - you often won't even make .500. all those CT win based NTs? yeah, that will never happen - big 6 CT winners 99% of the time are already guaranteed at large bids.

of course, you can build a better team in a big 6 conference with the money. sometimes prestige is a little lower than in mid major and that can offset things. its hard to get started in the big 6 conferences for most coaches because you start with low prestige and simply building a team as good as you build in a mid major, that just doesn't cut it. you need to do better than you did. the bar is raised, significantly. to help you with that, you get bonus money. but to those on the outside looking in, i can assure you, if you are struggling to make the big 6, getting there does NOT make things a cakewalk. most likely you will struggle more than you did at the last job. BCS PIT teams will usually routinely beat all but the best NT mid major teams - the bottom end NT mid major teams simply arent as good.

that said, i do feel job requirements are a tad high for the lower end big 6 schools, so i do feel for the OP here a little. but i also think its pretty close, hell of a lot of things around here off by a lot more than that. until you can make the NT regularly at a mid major, you probably aren't going to survive a big 6 conference, so why let guys move up before they are ready?
of 7
All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > This jobs logic is just complete bullsh

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.