I always have a minimum WE that I will not recruit below.  However I was once told if you see a LOW WE guy with ratings you already like, take him.  I just did that.

My question is, does WE ever rise in these guys?

How low? The rate of WE growth is very slow at the low & high ends, but fast in the middle. You can improve it by starts and PT. However, I've taken guys with 1 WE that never got above 4 after starting for 2 or 3 seasons and 7 that started 4 years that did not improve higher than the teens.

I have a guy I just recruited at PF with a WE of 7 whose DEF is already 66 with ATH of 76 with SPD of 20. Running the press he fits what I'm looking for. He won't be an offensive guy, but should be a nice defensive player in the press. We will see how he progresses since I plan on starting him most of the season.

Wonder why a WE of 1 doesn't improve at the same rate as a WE of 50. I think there would be more incentive to take lower WE guys.

This actually goes for other skills as well. I can see a players rate of improvement slowing down once he gets into the 90s, but with single digit
ratings, there is all that room for growth.

I followed Trentonjoe experimental WE disaster course and took a 16 WE with upside. So far, after a redshirt, he has grown in three season as much as 76 points. But I doubt he'll be able to reach his potential.

He still has three stats in blues and seven stats in black going into his junior season next year. I think when I decided not to go Under 30 WE and sometimes 25 (pull-downs), I was right. We'll see.

I try not to go below 30, and even then that's kinda pushing it #insideinformation

I'm a big fan of low work ethic guys, because you usually don't have to battle for them and if you can start them right away they can be very helpful.  Obviously they have to have good starting ratings, becuase it's likely they won't meet their potential.  And I wouldn't have more than 1 or 2 on my roster at a time because you really need to give them playing time.

Here's 2 examples of guys who worked out really well.  

1st a DIII pg started at 13 work ethic, his senior year ended up as my starting pg on a championship team- http://www.whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerHistory/Ratings.aspx?tid=8620&pid=2726087

and here's a current senior on a DII team that started with a 14 work ethic-http://www.whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=13186&pid=2992935

But with most players id like to start above 30.

Posted by thewizard17 on 6/30/2015 8:27:00 PM (view original):
Wonder why a WE of 1 doesn't improve at the same rate as a WE of 50. I think there would be more incentive to take lower WE guys.

This actually goes for other skills as well. I can see a players rate of improvement slowing down once he gets into the 90s, but with single digit
ratings, there is all that room for growth.

Not that I played the game pre-potential, but the answer must related back to the original improvement engine design. Without potential, all that you could do to limit improvement would be to install a bell curve improvement rate. The closer you get to either end the more effort it takes to improve. The closer to the middle, the faster the improvement occurs.

I take it that it would be a big deal to fix and get right, so the simple patch would be to install a lower and upper bound to freshman recruit generation. Something like WE between 10 - 90. They might drop from there and transfer as a 1, but that would improve matters without compelling a change to the improvement logic.

I forget the exact points but if you start a guy all 26 points their WE will grow 5 points at 17, 4 points at 12, 3 points at 7.....it could be one +/- 1.......You can definitely finds some quality players with low WE but you have to know what you are looking for and how to manipulate the practice plan.

I am a Mid-Major D1 Program with a D.  The top talent in this area all go Big Ten or ACC.  Found a PG with a 1WE, but great cores with no improvement at all.  Do you pile on the minutes in his strengths to keep him from going "backwards"?

Posted by wvufan76 on 7/2/2015 7:38:00 PM (view original):
I am a Mid-Major D1 Program with a D.  The top talent in this area all go Big Ten or ACC.  Found a PG with a 1WE, but great cores with no improvement at all.  Do you pile on the minutes in his strengths to keep him from going "backwards"?

7 in all  blacks, 1 in red and the rest in the blues you care about

I try not to go under 25 WE if they aren't going to start more than 2 seasons without a RS.  If I can give a rs and start 2+ seasons I'm willing to go down to about 13 as cutoff.

I'd grab a buy from 5-13 if he has good GPA and great cores, if it was a rebuild

Will a player always reach their full potential before they graduate? Some just faster than others?

Posted by KVegas on 7/3/2015 2:26:00 AM (view original):
Will a player always reach their full potential before they graduate? Some just faster than others?

no players will not always reach their full potential.  Some may be maxed out by junior year, some may even lose points over the course of their career.

I think something like this is semi-accurate off a quick guess of my past rosters.
40+ WE and 1/2 years starting will max most, if not all the time
25-40 WE should max most of the time with 1/2 years starter and either a 3rd year of significant playtime or a rs.
15-25 will usually need 3/4 starting seasons and probably a rs, to be getting to their max potentials.
10-15 very low chance they reac max potential in everything, but you can probably get near if not fully max 1/2 attributes with 3ish years of good pt or a rs as well
under 10 will not max and not come close even starting

low WE can in my experience be useful - but two things need to be remembered

1. assume roughly no overall improvement on guys in single digits and little improvement for guys with other very low WE
2. low WE will hurt IQ growth also.  So, it can help if they coach says he already plays your offense and/or defense.

I have had okay results with low WE guys who I could redshirt so that they had more time to get their IQ to a useful level.