I tried the superclass on a team, it works really well. You are a lock for NT once your first class reach junior status and you might be able to win one or two NT once you have peaked. Some even manage to get to the NT once in a while with their freshmen and sophomores classes, especially at DIII.

But I am growing tired of this. You try to get to the NT every year and then, you face one of these teams. Six seniors, six juniors. Except for D1, I would make sure people cannot get more than five seniors, five juniors and so on or even four.

What do you guys think?

I have no problem with it, personally, and I've even considered trying it out in the past. But I get the sense that a lot of coaches feel it is a "cheap" tactic; I don't feel that way. It is almost certainly not something I'll ever try out, as I like to have flexibility in my recruiting and I like to go after JUCOs sometimes. I would not be in favor of limiting class sizes to 5 or 4. If a coach wants to play 6 seniors and 6 juniors, more power to them, and I hope I don't run into them in the NT (if I do and I lose, oh well).

What I have more of an issue with is Sim AI teams being allowed to have 7, 8, 9, etc. players in one class. Their class sizes should be limited to 6 also.

I think 6 class limit is fine.  Just because people make superclasses doesn't mean they are doing anything wrong, it just means they don't know how to really get good players consistently.  But 4 is way too small a limit per class because you have to give teams abilities to mean their needs in recruiting.  So if there was a limit of 4 per class, there would be some seasons that you may not be able to recruit a juco you need to fill a team need.  Also, by limiting it even more, it would make teams have very similar class distribution, meaning the exact same coaches who have the most talented players would win every single year.  And finally it would make rebuild harder, and much harder to bring up prestige with limits on upperclassmen. 

Although I am the one at fault for beating you in the NT with my 6 Seniors and 6 juniors, I am not a fan of them. I do find them frustrating to play against, and they don't show how good a coach really is. The reason I am using it with my SCSU team is so hopefully I could make a deep run this season and quickly move up to D1 for the first time. 

your question didn't really specify level - but my thoughts - at div 3 I am having trouble getting excited about any of the recruits from my scouted states, god help me if I had to find six . .

Obviously an even class dist gives you consistent quality, but i have been tempted to try 0-4-4-4 or even 0-0-6-6 . . the problem is it's tough to recruit six quality players at once.   In a sense you are trading the best three you could have gotten this year for the 4th - 6th best the following year.   bad deal.  tempting but not worth it.   I agree with Dan, I want the flexability to take the best available recruit, even if it happens to be a player with less than 4 years eligibility.

plus anytime I fail to use my one redshirt per season I feel like I am wasting a resource.

I do not blame you Carson. It's part of the game. Everyone can use that tactic. Just asking what people think of it.

It seems like very few of the great HD coaches use superclasses. I think that helps, because an ace recruiter armed with that money would make terrifying teams. It would get old if the great coaches did that, but I haven't seen too many super class teams that I thought were really great. I'm limited in that I only coach D2 Iba though, so this may only apply to that specific world.

Can't remember the last superclass team to take home the title in D2 Iba.

Heh, just be glad you weren't around when there were super teams comprised of nothing but 12 seniors.  Talk about easy.  One season at Post, I beat one of those 12 senior teams in the Elite Eight, only to see that the remaining three Final Four teams besides my own were all of the super class (12 Seniors) variety.  Damn near pulled out the Final Four game anyway, and I think I would have had a legit shot at knocking off my third opponent in a row who was running that tactic in the final game.

As is, I think 6-6-0-0 is a bit cheesy, but I wouldn't want it reduced any more than that.  Besides, it's all that much more gratifying when you knock one of those teams out of the tourney.

I started using it a couple 4 year cycles ago. It's about the only way to combat the BCS teams in DI. If WIS makes some changes, I'll slide back to a normal rotation, but don't expect me to apologize for trying to beat teams that get an extra 20K in cash to recruit with than I do.

It's not about not knowing how to recruit. It's about not having the money to recruit. Give me some recruits with high potential in relevant categories, like actually exist in real life, and I'd be happy to make the NT every year, not 3 of 4 years.

It's a perfectly fine strategy, but if it's the only way you can win then it's simply not a way of earning respect. I have no problem with the current 6 per class rule and don't think it needs to be strengthened to make the class limit even less.

Posted by ekswimmer on 7/8/2015 12:10:00 PM (view original):
I started using it a couple 4 year cycles ago. It's about the only way to combat the BCS teams in DI. If WIS makes some changes, I'll slide back to a normal rotation, but don't expect me to apologize for trying to beat teams that get an extra 20K in cash to recruit with than I do.

It's not about not knowing how to recruit. It's about not having the money to recruit. Give me some recruits with high potential in relevant categories, like actually exist in real life, and I'd be happy to make the NT every year, not 3 of 4 years.

Yeah D1 is a totally different animal. The vast majority of my experience is in D2, so I was speaking mostly about D2. At D1 I can totally understand non-BCS teams using that strategy.

I don't have a problem with teams having 6 SRs and 6 JRs, but I don't think they should receive the extra bonus of carrying over 2 seasons of post season cash. In the central in knight DII we consistently bring in 8k or more per team in post season cash (I think I'm being conservative in that number) so that team that makes a deep run when they are SRs and JRs has an A+ prestige and roughly 46k to recruit with. Plus they can have a **** ton of carryover for the following season because nobody but a DI team is going to battle them for a recruit so they only have to spend a tiny portion of their budget on recruiting.

These teams can often just pick and choose which recruits they want.

I don't advocate changing the rules, but it's definitely annoying, especially at D2. I feel like I've had some seasons where everyone is just playing for second behind the superclass team (and, frustratingly, I've had a few of my best teams in those seasons where there was a dominant superclass). 

and milwood, if it's 8k per year, they would have 54k to recruit with

i think super clases are fine, possibly lower the effect IQ has, making underclassmen more able to contribute and lower the effect of a super class by a tad.

I'm not sure if people count me as a "super-class" coach or not. 

My teams do tend to have a lot (4-6) of a certain class, maybe two, at a time, especially in D3 and D2, but not because I necessarily set out to create a "superclass" team. 

When I take over somewhere I almost always cut everyone, and then have tons of openings to fill, which I try to fill with pulldowns generally...this naturally sets up some "super-class" situation I suppose. 
But then I redshirt, and I will find jucos or transfers, or whatever, and I never go into a season thinking, ok, must recruit 2 juniors and a freshman to avoid superclasses or anything...

I do sort of think its bullshit that folks have something against it. Its like the whining about "poaching" in my eyes. The rules of the game are clearly laid out. If you don't break them and you win, you won, and good for you, whatever legal strategy you chose.