I've been at D1 in Knight for eight seasons. Hoping one of these days to move up to a Big Six job. I'm not qualified for one right now, and honestly that doesn't bother me much. A real D1 power conference school probably wouldn't hire someone with my resume, so fair play to WIS. I think maybe if I could win an NT game next season that I would get a look at a power conference school, but I don't even know if I'll have that kind of season. Or if I do, whether it will matter. 

Anyways, that's not what bothers me. What bothers me is that the job logic makes it nearly impossible to get good small conference jobs. 

I took over ETSU eight seasons ago. They were at D- prestige. After no postseason in my first four seasons there (I had no scholarship openings in year one, which is why the rebuild took longer), we have made 1 PIT and 2 NTs in the last four seasons, with an NT record of 1-2. Prestige is C+, and we're coming off a 25-5 season where we finished top 30 in RPI and lost in the first round of the NT. 

There's another small conference D1 school that is a B- prestige, has been sim coached for two seasons, and hasn't won an NT game in 60 seasons. They won't hire me. There's a small conference D1 school with B- prestige that has also been to two NTs in the last four seasons, is also 1-2, and has been shut out of the postseason for the last two seasons (both sim-coached). They won't hire me. There's a D1 school in my own conference that was sim coached last season, finished three games behind me, and hasn't won an NT game in 50 seasons. They won't hire me. 

I would certainly understand if these jobs were listed as lateral moves and that jumping into them might hurt my loyalty. That would make total sense. What I don't understand is not being qualified for any of these B- sim jobs in small conferences. I took over a 6-21 team and have turned them into a perennial contender to win the conference crown. I've made two NTs in the last four seasons and have an NT win. What more at the Elons and the T&AMCCs and UCRs of the world looking for? 

The way the job logic is right now, good small conference jobs are basically unattainable after their coaches jump to the power conferences. So they get B- prestige, and then they go Sim for season after season after season until their prestige is low enough that they can hire again. It's absurd. I know it's not the only absurd thing about D1 hiring logic (. . . or D1 firing logic), but it's absurd. 

Preach.  I'm not looking to move, but I've coached New Orleans for 12 seasons...7 or 8 NT appearances, 2 NT wins...and I'm either over-qualified or not qualified for all jobs.  The "stuck with your job" premise at D1 is pretty asinine...you pretty well can't move once you've gotten there.

Posted by colonels19 on 12/22/2014 11:23:00 PM (view original):
Preach.  I'm not looking to move, but I've coached New Orleans for 12 seasons...7 or 8 NT appearances, 2 NT wins...and I'm either over-qualified or not qualified for all jobs.  The "stuck with your job" premise at D1 is pretty asinine...you pretty well can't move once you've gotten there.

Wait- you're going to have to help me out here.  Why couldn't you move to an over-qualified job if you wanted the job?

I don't think anything is listed as "lateral" if you're already in D1. You get step backwards (you get it if no one else applies), not qualified (no chance), keep looking (no chance) and longshot (no chance).

You can obtain a keep looking/longshot job, but it's rare.

And yet here's a resume that just took over C- Washington St in Wooden.  (I don't mean any disrespect to the coach, but I definitely didn't think the resume matched getting a Big 6 job).  

i completely agree. almost every job outside of the big 6 pretty much has to decay for many horrific sim seasons back down to C- or worse before anyone who would want the job can get it. it doesn't make sense to me. if you have modest success improving a D- low major job but not making deep tourney runs, certainly those B-/C+ midmajor jobs should still want you. there are plenty of good reasons people might want to move in that direction (better/fuller conference, better recruiting location, etc) but the game appears to not take this into consideration.

case in point, I'm at Winthrop in Tark, and the conference has lost several human coaches over the 4 seasons i've been there. it's boring. there's no one to chat with and 95% of the conference games are not competitive. i want to move to another conference. i have a very thin resume, but still with 3 postseason appearances and 3 20+ win seasons, i ought to be able to get a comparable job in a more active small conference. yet all i qualify for are absolute dumpster fires. so i slog on...for now.

in one of these other threads, i proposed applying the 'drop down' logic to jobs, wherein those B- midmajor jobs would open up to 'lesser' coaches on day 2 or 3 of the jobs process. i think this would really help.

Darnoc: there are no power conference jobs below a C+ right now in Knight, so I might qualify for a a job like Wazzu if it were available. And that would make more sense. Your power conference job has decayed that far, maybe you get desperate and hire a coach with my resume. But it's those B- jobs in smaller conferences that baffle and irritate me. I'm with hippo. I joined a conference with ten humans and am one of only two left. I would love to leave, but any B- jobs, even in little conferences, give me "not qualified" and there are C jobs in mid-major conferences that have me as keep looking, which doesn't really make much sense from the perspective of those schools.

Was just thinking about real life for a second, and look at Donnie Tyndall's resume when he took over Southern Miss. Two NTs and one CBI in six years. One NT win. That's basically identical to mine. But he got a high-level mid-major job in real life. In this game he would've had no chance.

I really love the drop down logic idea. Some schools just straight up won't talk to you, but others that don't like you at first might become more interested as time passes without other applications.

yes, fixes to hiring - and also firing - would help a lot

colleges should get less fussy late in the hiring period - a la dropdowns.  I don't mean that anyone can get the job, but the criteria should loosen a notch or two

AND, firings need to be ramped up, especially at BCS schools.

Agree with all of that, fd. Hiring obviously needs fixing, and it seems like there's a lot of support for the drop down model, but it's hard to fix in isolation. Because if you make it easier to get Big Six jobs, the problem of them never coming open might get worse. You need to fix hiring and firing at the same time.

they aren't going to fix firing due to potential lost revenue. i really think that's a loser issue to hang your hat on (even though it would improve the overall game experience). that's why i think the best to hope for is a hiring fix that doesn't effect the big six jobs. at least then it wouldn't make that game element worse, and it would be a marked improvement to the conferences where the bulk of openings exist.

The problem is that I'm not sure what kind of hiring fix would affect just small jobs and not big six jobs. It's not like there are two different job logics. You're right, it does have to be addressed. 

You're probably right about the firing logic too, although I think WIS is being extremely short-sighted in thinking as you say. You're not going to lose many people who have played the game long enough to get to Big Six jobs just because they get fired, unless the firing logic is unfairly strict, which just isn't going to happen. You are likely to gain new players at that level though. Honestly, you could make pretty minor changes to the firing logic to balance out the relatively minor dropdown model of hiring and not affect many people at all but still improve the game. 

I quit HD because the D-1 lateral job logic is just terrible, for all the reasons stated above in this thread.

I'm constantly tempted to jump back in, because I did enjoy most of HD, and there would be one particular low-level D-1 job I'd be interested in having and holding. But I have no confidence that I'd ever be able to lateral into that job if it wasn't available to me upon my entry / re-entry into D-1.

This has been a problem with HD for years, and I'm sure it will never be fixed. Too bad, because this one's a biggie.

So if I understand your discussion guys, once you hit D1, you are stuck in the job you choose?

Fair warning, I don't have a team in DI and I have no plans on moving up either. What I do have are a lot of bad ideas, so here is one of them.

I've read people saying that they need so many seasons to turn a program around....why not incorporate that into the hiring process and make it an actual interview. Your resume is one part of it but how about a small questionnaire that the applicant fills out. Now written answers just drop down menus. For instance, one question could be how long will it take you to turn this program around/make an NT/win x amount of NT games.

Obviously different schools would have different expectations, but if your cocky enough to say you could take a c+ or b- school to the NT in 2-3 seasons maybe that improves your chance of getting the job. However, if you do not live up to the expectations that you suggested, well then you're fired.

This would work well at the big six schools as well, for instance if you agree going in (which you would need to just
to be considered) that you will make the NT every season with at least a sweet 16 run x amount of times y seasons and you don't fulfill your obligations you will be fired. That way you know going in you know your expectations..

Again, just throwing my own bad Idea out there

Zorzii: you're not stuck. You can always make a sub-lateral move if you want, although it will hurt your loyalty. It's just difficult to advance, even to jobs that are not very far above your level.

Milwood: haven't thought through all the implications, but I kinda like the idea. It'd be a major change though.