"Todays" game.  Remember.  In 10 years the landscape of real CBB will have changed--just like the last 10 years of real basketball have.  Whatever the design, it needs to be fluid and adaptable to what will occur.  No doubt that if HD were designed and invented today, conf allignment would be different than it is in hd.  Change will always be a part of the rl game.  How flexible can hd be and how much can it adapt without it becoming old is the great challenge.  I think it's common that businesses change tech platforms frequently.  HD needs to be able to change. Having another set of baseline numbers will be obsolete in 10 rl years.  

Posted by davis on 9/30/2015 12:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 9/30/2015 12:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by iwanturmind2 on 9/30/2015 8:57:00 AM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 9/30/2015 7:33:00 AM (view original):
How about we eliminate baseline prestige completely.  Dumbest concept implemented for HD.  This is not What if Sports, this is Recreate Real-life Power and Prestige Sports.  I guess RRPPS did not sound as good from a marketing standpoint as did WIS.

There has to be a check and balance and I feel the baseline put that in order. In any college division NCAA, NAIA, WIS there is have and have nots.  There needs to be a reason for people to move up and having Divisions and Major conferences in each makes it realistic.  If everybody is the same there would not be schools getting Nike contracts lol.  I like the baseline I just feel there should be some schools with higher baselines and a new Major Conference.  To make it more like todays CBB.

No, there does not.  The goal for WIS should be to have every DI school occupied by a paying customer.  From a business standpoint, WIS should be looking to make ALL DI schools attractive enough to pay money for.  Favoring 70-80 schools and completely destroying the playability of the other 250 equates to massive lost revenue.  This game is not about realism.  If it was, then the conference champion would be guaranteed a PIT berth among a host of other things.  This is a fantasy dynasty game...fantasy...ideas that are improbable if not impossible...

Definitely agree with Miami on this one.  I took over a couple of D1 mid-majors in relatively empty conferences for long periods of time just to experiment.  I pulled Loyola Chicago (don't remember which world) up to a B or B+ prestige but could get no higher; had a similar experience with another D1 school as well.  It was a vicious cycle... because of my limited recruiting pool, I couldn't get beyond the Sweet 16 at Loyola to raise my prestige; I couldn't expand my recruiting pool and recruit players to get beyond the Sweet 16 because of my prestige.

As a paying customer, if I wanted to compete for a national title my choices were:

1) Move to a school with a higher baseline prestige.
2) Recruit a bunch of other top human coaches to join the same conference and make it into a power.
3) Drop back down to D2 or D3.

The game is WAY more appealing if you can win a national title at any school; as Miami pointed out, it is a game-killer when the majority of D1 schools are only there to serve as steps on a ladder for coaches trying to eventually win it all.

As far as haves versus have-nots, they will still exist just based on the different HD coaching ability levels of the humans who take them over; they shouldn't be predetermined based solely on original Admin's perception of NCAA program prestige circa 2000.

The problem was exclusively  baseline - it was the lack of coaches.  Mid majors could compete prior to recruit generation being updated (in an established Allen world, Maine, UNLV, Boston University, Yale, Cleveland State, and Southern all won NTs; UNLV, Weber State, and Utah all lost in the NT game; and Montana had a 6 season streak with 2 Final Fours, 2 Elite Eights and 2 Sweet 16s.  Starting with a full C-USA in Rupp dwindling to a half-full conference, in the past 19 completed seasons Marshall has 3 titles and 7 other trips to the Final Four or NT game, and has at least one win in the NT for 30 straight seasons.  

Pre-recruit generation changes low and mid-majors all could make runs, and even now mid-majors can make runs if they have a full or mostly full conference.  The biggest issue is with recruit generation and lack of users.

Posted by gillispie1 on 9/30/2015 1:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 9/30/2015 7:33:00 AM (view original):
How about we eliminate baseline prestige completely.  Dumbest concept implemented for HD.  This is not What if Sports, this is Recreate Real-life Power and Prestige Sports.  I guess RRPPS did not sound as good from a marketing standpoint as did WIS.

i guess my objection is that is what d2/d3 are (no baseline) and i really don't see the point of having a ladder up to d1 unless there is something significantly different about d1 itself.

I respect your opinion, gillispie, so I'm not going to attack it.

I don't know what to say at this point.  Real life college sports exist on a complicated revenue redistribution system where a choice number of schools generate most of the money and the rest live off of the them.  The problem is that, in this environment, the effects are essentially reversed.  The prestige schools generate LESS revenue for WIS due to rewards credits.  In this completely ***-backward setup, people are being given a choice in DI to either pay the lion's share of $12.95 each season for a school that has no chance of winning or paying a much reduced share of $12.95 by being in a power conference.  The result is a mostly full, lower profit BCS tier and a mostly empty, higher profit non BCS tier.

It is an absurd business model.

I'm with you Miami. This is a fantasy game and should replicate the real life game as much as possible but there should be room to tweak it if it enhances the overall experience. Get rid of the baseline prestige. I'm a cuse fan and it's not going to break my heart if someone drives that program into the ground on WIS.

That's the whole point of the game, to build a dynasty. If you can't do that at any school out there then it seems broken. All of these teams with great prestige didn't start that way.Uconn was pretty mediocre before the arrival of Calhoun. With this current system it seems like it'd be very hard for. Jim Calhoun to take over a team and turn it into a powerhouse. Doesn't make sense to me.

I Coach K left Duke and went to Miami or USC how do you think the prestige of those programs would change?  Or what if he went back to Army?  Might be interesting to have coach prestige have an even greater impact than it does.  If a great coach can bring their prestige along with them we may see more movement and more coaches take on the challenge of building a lower level team.

Cburton is right. Coach prestige is something important in this game. I mean, someone who has won everywhere, changes to say a C+ DIII no name team should affect the prestige.

Like Larry Brown did with SMU! Oh wait...

Posted by davis on 9/30/2015 12:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 9/30/2015 12:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by iwanturmind2 on 9/30/2015 8:57:00 AM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 9/30/2015 7:33:00 AM (view original):
How about we eliminate baseline prestige completely.  Dumbest concept implemented for HD.  This is not What if Sports, this is Recreate Real-life Power and Prestige Sports.  I guess RRPPS did not sound as good from a marketing standpoint as did WIS.

There has to be a check and balance and I feel the baseline put that in order. In any college division NCAA, NAIA, WIS there is have and have nots.  There needs to be a reason for people to move up and having Divisions and Major conferences in each makes it realistic.  If everybody is the same there would not be schools getting Nike contracts lol.  I like the baseline I just feel there should be some schools with higher baselines and a new Major Conference.  To make it more like todays CBB.

No, there does not.  The goal for WIS should be to have every DI school occupied by a paying customer.  From a business standpoint, WIS should be looking to make ALL DI schools attractive enough to pay money for.  Favoring 70-80 schools and completely destroying the playability of the other 250 equates to massive lost revenue.  This game is not about realism.  If it was, then the conference champion would be guaranteed a PIT berth among a host of other things.  This is a fantasy dynasty game...fantasy...ideas that are improbable if not impossible...

Definitely agree with Miami on this one.  I took over a couple of D1 mid-majors in relatively empty conferences for long periods of time just to experiment.  I pulled Loyola Chicago (don't remember which world) up to a B or B+ prestige but could get no higher; had a similar experience with another D1 school as well.  It was a vicious cycle... because of my limited recruiting pool, I couldn't get beyond the Sweet 16 at Loyola to raise my prestige; I couldn't expand my recruiting pool and recruit players to get beyond the Sweet 16 because of my prestige.

As a paying customer, if I wanted to compete for a national title my choices were:

1) Move to a school with a higher baseline prestige.
2) Recruit a bunch of other top human coaches to join the same conference and make it into a power.
3) Drop back down to D2 or D3.

The game is WAY more appealing if you can win a national title at any school; as Miami pointed out, it is a game-killer when the majority of D1 schools are only there to serve as steps on a ladder for coaches trying to eventually win it all.

As far as haves versus have-nots, they will still exist just based on the different HD coaching ability levels of the humans who take them over; they shouldn't be predetermined based solely on original Admin's perception of NCAA program prestige circa 2000.

As a paying customer I don't want to see Loyola Chicago competing for NCs, it makes the game less like real life. If you want balance play D2.

Posted by gomiami1972 on 9/30/2015 7:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gillispie1 on 9/30/2015 1:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 9/30/2015 7:33:00 AM (view original):
How about we eliminate baseline prestige completely.  Dumbest concept implemented for HD.  This is not What if Sports, this is Recreate Real-life Power and Prestige Sports.  I guess RRPPS did not sound as good from a marketing standpoint as did WIS.

i guess my objection is that is what d2/d3 are (no baseline) and i really don't see the point of having a ladder up to d1 unless there is something significantly different about d1 itself.

I respect your opinion, gillispie, so I'm not going to attack it.

I don't know what to say at this point.  Real life college sports exist on a complicated revenue redistribution system where a choice number of schools generate most of the money and the rest live off of the them.  The problem is that, in this environment, the effects are essentially reversed.  The prestige schools generate LESS revenue for WIS due to rewards credits.  In this completely ***-backward setup, people are being given a choice in DI to either pay the lion's share of $12.95 each season for a school that has no chance of winning or paying a much reduced share of $12.95 by being in a power conference.  The result is a mostly full, lower profit BCS tier and a mostly empty, higher profit non BCS tier.

It is an absurd business model.

thats fair. i mean, d1 as it is today is clearly broken, i 100% agree with that. i guess we just disagree on why - and not even that much - im for a half fluid baseline, i guess thats not halfway to no baseline, but a 100% fluid baseline and no baseline seem *pretty* similar to me.

i am really with options on his post a couple below yours. before recruit gen changes, plenty of mid majors were successful - you could win anywhere, and there were many more mid major programs that were filled than BCS programs. at that time, baseline was (per seble) stronger than it is now, although i cant personally see the weakening effects he said he put into place. today, you can't win everywhere, but eliminating baseline won't move that needle much - IMO - because there are still going to be a+ programs (regardless of baseline) who have massively better teams than everyone else, and its going to be a very similar problem to today - its just a slightly different set of folks who will be the haves. when i try to coach up a team, i don't feel baseline pulling me down, its all about getting into that class of schools who can get the good guys.

that said, im still for an adjustment to baseline and bonus money. i just don't think its going to get us that far under the current recruit gen paradigm, and i am for moderated change in general, so i probably will never see eye to eye on a 100% rip out (at least without some incremental changes and a reassessment in between).

I remember I had Fordham univ in Tark to the sweet 16 before Potential. I think multiple things need to happen. A tweet of baseline prestige, a change back to the previous player generation and postseason cash. It is work getting to a bcs level school and I feel most of the people that complain are coaches at small schools. The guys that earned the school should not be punished either.

Posted by gillispie1 on 9/30/2015 1:17:00 PM (view original):

Posted by davis on 9/30/2015 12:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 9/30/2015 12:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by iwanturmind2 on 9/30/2015 8:57:00 AM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 9/30/2015 7:33:00 AM (view original):
How about we eliminate baseline prestige completely.  Dumbest concept implemented for HD.  This is not What if Sports, this is Recreate Real-life Power and Prestige Sports.  I guess RRPPS did not sound as good from a marketing standpoint as did WIS.

There has to be a check and balance and I feel the baseline put that in order. In any college division NCAA, NAIA, WIS there is have and have nots.  There needs to be a reason for people to move up and having Divisions and Major conferences in each makes it realistic.  If everybody is the same there would not be schools getting Nike contracts lol.  I like the baseline I just feel there should be some schools with higher baselines and a new Major Conference.  To make it more like todays CBB.

No, there does not.  The goal for WIS should be to have every DI school occupied by a paying customer.  From a business standpoint, WIS should be looking to make ALL DI schools attractive enough to pay money for.  Favoring 70-80 schools and completely destroying the playability of the other 250 equates to massive lost revenue.  This game is not about realism.  If it was, then the conference champion would be guaranteed a PIT berth among a host of other things.  This is a fantasy dynasty game...fantasy...ideas that are improbable if not impossible...

Definitely agree with Miami on this one.  I took over a couple of D1 mid-majors in relatively empty conferences for long periods of time just to experiment.  I pulled Loyola Chicago (don't remember which world) up to a B or B+ prestige but could get no higher; had a similar experience with another D1 school as well.  It was a vicious cycle... because of my limited recruiting pool, I couldn't get beyond the Sweet 16 at Loyola to raise my prestige; I couldn't expand my recruiting pool and recruit players to get beyond the Sweet 16 because of my prestige.

As a paying customer, if I wanted to compete for a national title my choices were:

1) Move to a school with a higher baseline prestige.
2) Recruit a bunch of other top human coaches to join the same conference and make it into a power.
3) Drop back down to D2 or D3.

The game is WAY more appealing if you can win a national title at any school; as Miami pointed out, it is a game-killer when the majority of D1 schools are only there to serve as steps on a ladder for coaches trying to eventually win it all.

As far as haves versus have-nots, they will still exist just based on the different HD coaching ability levels of the humans who take them over; they shouldn't be predetermined based solely on original Admin's perception of NCAA program prestige circa 2000.

i agree with the premise that you should be able to win a national title at any school - i disagree with the premise that you have to completely eliminate baseline prestige to make that happen.

plenty of mid major programs were highly successful, before seble's new engine release that wrecked d1 mid majors via recruit generation changes. i am all for reducing the impact of starting baseline by making it half fluid, but i think removing it altogether would be a mistake. its true you should be able to win anywhere, but its also true that carrots on a stick work. having the carrot of getting to a big conference and coaching an elite program, there is definitely value in that. having the carrot of building up your own baseline prestige over a long run, i see value in that, too. what i don't see value in is completely eliminating baseline and bringing d1 more in line with d2/d3. some coaches prefer the flat structure, some don't, and with 3 divisions, i think it would be foolish to make all 3 the same.

Agree. Best way may instead to increase value significantly for favorite schools and starts and minutes promises and perhaps other new categories of recruit preference - or school preference for recruits (gpa, etc) so some elite players can filter down.....more prestige movement and no caps on team and conf basis could hep too.....

Im  not seeing why alot of myou guys have Boston College anything above a B-?

1994	#9	First Round Second Round Sweet Sixteen Elite Eight	Washington State North Carolina Indiana Florida	W 67–64 W 75–72 W 77–68 L 66–74
1996	#11	First Round Second Round	Indiana Georgia Tech	W 64–51 L 89–103
1997	#5	First Round Second Round	Valparasio Saint Joseph's	W 73–66 L 77–81OT
2001	#3	First Round Second Round	Southern Utah USC	W 68–65 L 71–74
2002	#11	First Round	Texas	L 57–70
2004	#6	First Round Second Round	Utah Georgia Tech	W 58–51 L 54–57
2005	#4	First Round Second Round	Penn Milwaukee	W 85–65 L 75–83
2006	#4	First Round Second Round Sweet Sixteen	Pacific Montana Villanova	W 88–762OT W 69–56 L 59–60OT
2007	#7	First Round Second Round	Texas Tech Georgetown	W 84–75 L 55–62
2009	#7	First Round	USC	L 55–72

FLORIDA ST should probably be a B

1980	#8	First Round Second Round	#9 Toledo #1 Kentucky	W 94–91 L 78–97
1988	#12	First Round	#5 Iowa	L 98–102
1989	#4	First Round	#13 Middle Tennessee	L 83–97
1991	#7	First Round Second Round	#10 USC #2 Indiana	W 75–72 L 69–82
1992	#3	First Round Second Round Second Round	#14 Montana #6 Georgetown #2 Indiana	W 78–68 W 78–68 L 74–85
1993	#3	First Round Second Round Sweet Sixteen Elite Eight	#14 Evansville #11 Tulane #7 WKU #1 Kentucky	W 82–70 W 94–63 W 81–78OT L 81–106
1998	#12	First Round Second Round	#5 TCU #13 Valparaiso	W 96–87 L 77–83OT
2009	#5	First Round	#12 Wisconsin	L 59–61OT
2010	#9	First Round	#8 Gonzaga	L 60–67
2011	#10	Second Round Third Round Sweet Sixteen	#7 Texas A&M #2 Notre Dame #11 VCU	W 57–50 W 71–57 L 71–72OT
2012	#3	Second Round Third Round	#14 St. Bonaventure #6 Cincinnati	W 66–63 L 56–62

fresno state why anything above a C or C-?

Year	Seed	Round	Opponent	Result/Score
1981	#6	Round of 48	#11 Northeastern	L 53–55
1982	#4	Round of 32 Sweet Sixteen	#5 West Virginia #1 Georgetown	W 50–46 L 40–58
1984	#7	Round of 48	#10 Louisiana Tech	L 56–66
2000*	#9	Round of 64	#8 Wisconsin	L 56–66
2001	#9	Round of 64 Round of 32	#8 California #1 Michigan State	W 82–70 L 65–81

Posted by waykbordr on 10/2/2015 10:32:00 AM (view original):
fresno state why anything above a C or C-?

Year	Seed	Round	Opponent	Result/Score
1981	#6	Round of 48	#11 Northeastern	L 53–55
1982	#4	Round of 32 Sweet Sixteen	#5 West Virginia #1 Georgetown	W 50–46 L 40–58
1984	#7	Round of 48	#10 Louisiana Tech	L 56–66
2000*	#9	Round of 64	#8 Wisconsin	L 56–66
2001	#9	Round of 64 Round of 32	#8 California #1 Michigan State	W 82–70 L 65–81

Hummmm I was thinking when Tark coached them maybe C