I think many are getting riled up about the elimination of conference postseason money-sharing because they fear that the D2 and D3 superconferences that they occupy are going to fall apart without it, as several high-prestige schools recruiting in close proximity to one another will be far less feasible without the bonus money enabling them to recruit further from home base. 

Why not keep postseason sharing at D2 and D3, but eliminate it at D1, where it's a much bigger problem? At D1, the drastically elevated effect of prestige in recruiting along with far-less balanced distribution of postseason wealth--and, in the long-term, the parasitic effect of low-baseline prestige on a D1 program--makes this division far less competitive than it could and should be. 

I believe that if D1 were as fun as D2 and D3, those bottom two divisions would be even more sparsely populated (full disclosure: I've yet to try D1). Most HD users probably come here with the eventual goal of coaching their favorite D1 school--I know I did, as did any friends I referred--but many like me remain at the lower levels because D1 just doesn't seem all that fun or alluring largely due to the huge time investment it requires to realistically compete for a championship, even if you're an excellent coach--recruit generation is probably the second driving factor in my resistance to move to D1. 

I do think that eliminating postseason cash will make D1 more competitive, but it would be the nail in the coffin for D2 and D3. There would be less incentive to compete in conferences with other humans and this could curb users' competitive edge, leading some to quit altogether. Those that remain would suffer less populated worlds as a result and surely many would stay awhile, but it would do no good for HD. 

Lack of enough quality DI coaches in each world makes it not competitive, NOT post season money. There have already been experiments done to prove a group of strong coaches can be successful in any conference. However, at some point those coaches invariably CHOOSE to leave on their own for a Big 6 school.

But, lets assume you are correct.
An obvious flaw in your plan is that now DII schools will be able to compete and beat out DI schools more often because the D2 school now has post season money.

Second, I doubt Seble wants separate programming between divisions.

So rather than eliminate post season money, merely reduce the payout to a certain % of schollie money for each NT/PIT appearance. Since DI schollies are worth more, you will impact DI more than DII and DIII while not eliminating it all together.

Not that it matters and it's only a small point, but there is different programming between levels. Ineligibles can play right away at DIII, they have to sustain a certain level of gpa in DI to remain eligible for their 4th season of eligibility. Even the amount of recruiting cash per open scholarship at each level is different.

Then again I have no interest in playing DI, so it doesn't much matter to me. However, I might if DI were a little more of a level playing field..

You're right a group of good coaches can take over a mid major conference and compete with the big 6. It's been done. However, in order to do that all the coaches have to be in it together. I remember reading about it in the forums and thinking that sure sounds close to being collusion. I wonder how many battles were avoided to make that conference strong.

I think you hit the nail on the head, milwood. Sure you can build up a competitive non-Big 6 conference at D1 with a bunch of great coaches that are avoiding battles with each other, but it shouldn't require that.

Posted by trail on 11/13/2015 9:57:00 AM (view original):
I think you hit the nail on the head, milwood. Sure you can build up a competitive non-Big 6 conference at D1 with a bunch of great coaches that are avoiding battles with each other, but it shouldn't require that.

What should it require?  If you're looking for a world where any school can reach any prestige, you need to stick to D2 and D3.  That's what they are.  

Postseason cash has been the same forever; it only became a huge issue when recruit generation was changed.  Before then, it might have been too easy (at least compared to real life) to build a contender outside the big-6.  Fix recruit generation and the money becomes much less of an issue.

Posted by milwood on 11/13/2015 9:43:00 AM (view original):
Not that it matters and it's only a small point, but there is different programming between levels. Ineligibles can play right away at DIII, they have to sustain a certain level of gpa in DI to remain eligible for their 4th season of eligibility. Even the amount of recruiting cash per open scholarship at each level is different.

Then again I have no interest in playing DI, so it doesn't much matter to me. However, I might if DI were a little more of a level playing field..

You're right a group of good coaches can take over a mid major conference and compete with the big 6. It's been done. However, in order to do that all the coaches have to be in it together. I remember reading about it in the forums and thinking that sure sounds close to being collusion. I wonder how many battles were avoided to make that conference strong.

The premise of this thread was to keep postseason money for D2 and D3 so they can recruit further away and avoid inter-conference battles. 

But in the new system, recruiting does not cost money.  Scouting only costs money.  Therefore, it does not cost any more to recruit a player in California for a Div-3 team in Maine than it costs a team in LA.  All teams get the exact same number of Home Visits and Campus Visits and Effort Points (per opening).  Scouting only gives info .. that costs money, but does not impact recruiting effort.

It does cost more to get 'all the information' about that California player from Maine .. but you can do targeted scouting trips for individual players, etc.

Posted by hughesjr on 11/14/2015 7:13:00 AM (view original):
But in the new system, recruiting does not cost money.  Scouting only costs money.  Therefore, it does not cost any more to recruit a player in California for a Div-3 team in Maine than it costs a team in LA.  All teams get the exact same number of Home Visits and Campus Visits and Effort Points (per opening).  Scouting only gives info .. that costs money, but does not impact recruiting effort.

It does cost more to get 'all the information' about that California player from Maine .. but you can do targeted scouting trips for individual players, etc.

I'm not sure about this.  Seble said (in one of the longer threads) national recruiting in D3 would be sorta possible but it wasn't going to be likely.  I'm not sure if that's because scouting will be so expensive or there's going to be some distance limit to how far a D3 school can recruit from.