solutions to d1 problems don't work for d2/d3 Topic

jtt8355
Posts: 593 (0)
Hall of Famer
201
Prospect
Without much firsthand experience with the problems with D1, I gather that most d1 coaches agree that a big fix is necessary, the disagreement is which are the main problems (too much $$$ to elite schools; prestige imbalance; recruit generation; hiring logic; lack of firing; etc, etc, etc.) and how to fix them. the problem is that these issues don't exist at d2 or d3. By way of example: 4 seasons ago, i picked up chadron st (d2) in knight. at the time, they were a C- prestige. with very a limited budget and non-existent local recruiting pool (see below), in 4 seasons, we finished the regular season undefeated and got upset in the E8, finishing ranked no. 4 with an 8 rpi. team prestige is now an A. we had players from 8 different states (i don't recall how many other states we recruited - would have been good to know!), with our best players being from alaska and connecticut.

i am hardly an elite coach; though i'm probably above average. but i bring up the chadron st example to show that it is very, very possible for any non-elite coach to take a team on a limited budget with bad, local recruiting options to NT success (or to at least take a $h!++y team and make them competitive) at the d2/d3 levels. if the proposed HD overhaul changes are meant to level out the playing field at d1, what is their purpose at d2/d3 where neither prestige, budget or recruit generation really affect the ability of a coach to quickly turn a team into a contender? i would posit that any tweaks to "level the playing field" at d2 or d3 would only further diminish the skill and strategy that makes these lower levels more fun than d1.



For anyone unfamiliar with Chadron St., it is in the northwest part of nebraska, close to south dakota and wyoming. relevant to HD, there are rarely 10 recruits within 100 miles of campus. when i took on the job, the rocky mountain conference only had 2 other human coaches, and none had made any significant post season contribution the season before. the coffers barely had more than the money i received for the 3 or 4 scholarships i had open. i cut all non-seniors and ended up putting together a pretty decent six-man freshman class. i was starting my first ever superclass! (while its extremely gimmicky, its not as easy as one might think! in fact, there are a ton of pitfalls with the superclass that the uninitiated, like myself, might struggle with.) i also switched the iqs to FB/FCP (in 8 RL years of HD, this would be my first time ever using the FB). so our adventure started with 6 freshmen; 3 seniors; and 3 walk-ons. we went 0-27 that season. the next season, we got 6 more freshman and finished 22-8. this past season - my 4th, which was when my first class were all seniors - we ended up with the results described above, which was really more than i ever expected for this team. 

and to dispel any notion that this was a fluke or resulted from the superclass or from an empty conference, etc., prior to my stint at Chadron St, i'd done something similar at fairleigh dickinson (d3), without a superclass, but with a full conference all in the same recruiting region as me. 
10/7/2015 1:41 PM
43tj
Posts: 46 (0)
Hall of Famer
195 28
Prospect
I agree with everything jtt, except that you are an elite coach.  Now I have done similar things, currently in Crum I am at Ferrum which was a C, I just finished my sixth season, first 3 no postseason as I was building, last 3 seasons three NT trips with a SS and an E8.  I have coached at the lower levels of D1 and it is virtually impossible to compete when you start at D-. But at both D2 & D3 been successful by just doing the basics.  Getting better players, and scheduling more aggressively.

Please don't mess up D2 and D3 while you fix D1.
10/8/2015 1:15 PM
jsajsa
Posts: 631 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 28 1 133 3
Rookie
Yes, Seble is overhauling the entire game for issues that are only issues at DI. It is what it is. "Lower" levels work great as it is as your situation is hardly unique - that's part of the beauty there in that anyone can take over any program and have them contending within 4 seasons.

10/8/2015 5:30 PM
fd343ny
Posts: 2251 (0)
Hall of Famer
7 605 36
Veteran
I do not think that most D1 coaches think that a big fix is necessary.  Many think that modest changes to some aspects of the game could greatly improve D1 and the game.  I say this based on forum and coaches corner discussions.
10/8/2015 10:08 PM
tarvolon
Posts: 1173 (0)
Hall of Famer
299
Rookie
I think seble has explicitly said that this is not all about fixing problems but partially about making the game more realistic (and hopefully fun). 
10/9/2015 10:36 AM
mmt0315
Posts: 450 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 323 4 7
Prospect
Posted by fd343ny on 10/8/2015 10:08:00 PM (view original):
I do not think that most D1 coaches think that a big fix is necessary.  Many think that modest changes to some aspects of the game could greatly improve D1 and the game.  I say this based on forum and coaches corner discussions.
This. I for one like the game the way it is.
10/9/2015 12:02 PM
chapelhillne
Posts: 2469 (0)
Hall of Famer
3 717 17 2
Veteran
I think that it will still enhance the experience at D2 and D3, with things like scouting camps, etc. as long as enough of a budget is available for those schools to take advantage of it. But I do understand the concern too.
10/9/2015 8:18 PM
zorzii
Posts: 3660 (0)
Hall of Famer
306
Prospect
As long as it does not destroy it. I mean, I am up for changes, I don't mind realistic things, but I am more concerned about losing a lot of active owners because they feel the changes are not relevant and are destroying the game. I don't see a lot to do in DIII and DII, to be honest, maybe change the job process and make people work harder to jump to a A rep team from DIII, same in DII going to a better DII...

The problem is in DI, and it is not that big also. Recruit générations, cutting down conf money... making the recruiting more challenging to big six teams and getting players to choose playingtime over sitting on the bench.
10/9/2015 8:57 PM
dahsdebater
Posts: 10036 (0)
Hall of Famer
284 270 18
Pro
Posted by chapelhillne on 10/9/2015 8:18:00 PM (view original):
I think that it will still enhance the experience at D2 and D3, with things like scouting camps, etc. as long as enough of a budget is available for those schools to take advantage of it. But I do understand the concern too.
Maybe for people who have a lot more free time than I do, it will enhance the experience.  Being required to check in on recruiting actions throughout the course of the season will probably drive me out of the game.  I just don't consistently have the time to deal with that, and frankly, don't want to play against a massive handicap.  I already miss tons of recruiting cycles and tend to play with subpar teams as it is.  If that's getting exacerbated, I'm walking away.
10/9/2015 9:38 PM
gillispie1
Posts: 5030 (0)
Hall of Famer
95
Veteran
Posted by dahsdebater on 10/9/2015 9:38:00 PM (view original):
Posted by chapelhillne on 10/9/2015 8:18:00 PM (view original):
I think that it will still enhance the experience at D2 and D3, with things like scouting camps, etc. as long as enough of a budget is available for those schools to take advantage of it. But I do understand the concern too.
Maybe for people who have a lot more free time than I do, it will enhance the experience.  Being required to check in on recruiting actions throughout the course of the season will probably drive me out of the game.  I just don't consistently have the time to deal with that, and frankly, don't want to play against a massive handicap.  I already miss tons of recruiting cycles and tend to play with subpar teams as it is.  If that's getting exacerbated, I'm walking away.
i dont think you'll HAVE to. i think you can do all of scouting in 1 day if you want, or you can spread it out, i *think* its going to be up to the coach how they want to handle it.
10/10/2015 12:16 AM
dahsdebater
Posts: 10036 (0)
Hall of Famer
284 270 18
Pro
The scouting probably can be done in a few sessions, if you are thorough enough.  But 8 days of signings during which to keep up with it?  Not a move in the right direction.
10/10/2015 4:03 AM
wvufan76
Posts: 1302 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 2 644 45
Prospect
Posted by dahsdebater on 10/10/2015 4:03:00 AM (view original):
The scouting probably can be done in a few sessions, if you are thorough enough.  But 8 days of signings during which to keep up with it?  Not a move in the right direction.
Agree with this...Scouting will be up to each Coach.  Much longer recruiting will kill me.  At the very least being in all "1's" will drop to being in a couple only.
10/10/2015 6:36 AM
possumfiend
Posts: 511 (0)
Hall of Famer
130 5
Pro
Posted by wvufan76 on 10/10/2015 6:36:00 AM (view original):
Posted by dahsdebater on 10/10/2015 4:03:00 AM (view original):
The scouting probably can be done in a few sessions, if you are thorough enough.  But 8 days of signings during which to keep up with it?  Not a move in the right direction.
Agree with this...Scouting will be up to each Coach.  Much longer recruiting will kill me.  At the very least being in all "1's" will drop to being in a couple only.

From the recent developer's chat:

Q:  Currently, recruiting is 5 days long. The update will make it 8 days long, albeit spread out a bit more. Do you think users will need to pay more, less, or the same amount of attention to recruiting? (darnoc29099 - Hall of Famer - 3:59 PM)

A:  I think it will be about the same amount of time overall, but more spread out. I hope that makes it more fun and less stressful. You won't have to do so much scheduled work (hitting every 3-hour cycle) so you'll be able to do it more at your own pace.

10/10/2015 9:10 AM (edited)
solutions to d1 problems don't work for d2/d3 Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 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.