Posted by zhawks on 1/3/2017 6:56:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/3/2017 2:45:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wvufan76 on 1/3/2017 2:39:00 PM (view original):
I like the tweak of adding the one more preference field for D1 players if they will drop to lower division or not. Makes perfect sense to me.

This is probably the simplest solution. Same with D2.

Seems simple, depends on how they coded it too though.

And actually the easiest way to do this is have the "early" signee pref drop after a few days... end of period one midway though... period 2 guys maybe right near the end and the late guys never. Whenever is what it is crap shoot

Posted by jskenner on 1/3/2017 12:56:00 PM (view original):
Congratulations on your NT, tarv. You may have already realized this, but you will actually have NINE scholarship players, because the Sim no longer allows taking more than 3 walkons, and as session 2 completes, the Sim will autosign 4 DI players for you. You'll have no input in the players signed, and you won't be able to release any of those players to free up recruiting spots for next season's recruiting until AFTER recruiting is over. This has been my experience at Naismith Duke in one recruiting session so far, and it's actually noted in the 3.0 rules. Only way I've seen so far to avoid this is to sign Sr transfers, but those are rare now, and as 3.0 knowledge matures, I can imagine them becoming practically non-existent. Good luck this season and as you go forward.

I did see that rule, but I actually have six walkons and only one crappy sim-signed guy, so that's a pleasant surprise.

Posted by jskenner on 1/3/2017 7:08:00 PM (view original):
Actually for me the oddest omission of preference by the guys who produced 3.0 is the lack of "coach history of EEs" pref, which would CLEARLY fit their stated desire to retain "realism," not to mention it would seem to be a well-designed counter weight to the newly minted struggle to run an "EE" dominant program.

+1

Tarv, do you have an idea as to why the sim only brought your squad to 6 scholly players instead of 9 like in my experience? I'd love to figure out how to combat this better. Thanks for any insight you can give.

Posted by jskenner on 1/3/2017 7:08:00 PM (view original):
Actually for me the oddest omission of preference by the guys who produced 3.0 is the lack of "coach history of EEs" pref, which would CLEARLY fit their stated desire to retain "realism," not to mention it would seem to be a well-designed counter weight to the newly minted struggle to run an "EE" dominant program.

I pushed early and often in beta for a preference for "future priorities", that would include academics and playing pro ball. Players who preferred academics would look at team gpa. Players who wanted to play in the pros would value a coach's record of getting players drafted.

That was a nice suggestion shoe, and I wish the powers that be had heeded your advice.

Posted by shoe3 on 1/3/2017 8:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jskenner on 1/3/2017 7:08:00 PM (view original):
Actually for me the oddest omission of preference by the guys who produced 3.0 is the lack of "coach history of EEs" pref, which would CLEARLY fit their stated desire to retain "realism," not to mention it would seem to be a well-designed counter weight to the newly minted struggle to run an "EE" dominant program.

I pushed early and often in beta for a preference for "future priorities", that would include academics and playing pro ball. Players who preferred academics would look at team gpa. Players who wanted to play in the pros would value a coach's record of getting players drafted.

"Players who wanted to play in the pros would value a coach's record of getting players drafted."

I'm surprised more D1 coaches didn't pick up on a rich-get-richer artifice like that.

Posted by jskenner on 1/3/2017 7:45:00 PM (view original):
Tarv, do you have an idea as to why the sim only brought your squad to 6 scholly players instead of 9 like in my experience? I'd love to figure out how to combat this better. Thanks for any insight you can give.

I really have no idea, but it did the same at Syracuse--five walkons. Maybe it's because I ran them out of money and my assistant struggled to win battles for the remaining guys? That doesn't really make sense, but I don't know

In all your cases, did the Sim sign ONE recruit? If so, maybe that's it: the logic would be "if less than 9 scholly players, then sign 1 leftover; else do nothing." I hope that's the case, as I'd hate to be saddled with multiple leftovers. Thanks, tarv.

Posted by jskenner on 1/3/2017 10:07:00 PM (view original):
In all your cases, did the Sim sign ONE recruit? If so, maybe that's it: the logic would be "if less than 9 scholly players, then sign 1 leftover; else do nothing." I hope that's the case, as I'd hate to be saddled with multiple leftovers. Thanks, tarv.

Tiny sample, but that does describe both of my cases

Posted by CoachSpud on 1/3/2017 8:51:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 1/3/2017 8:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jskenner on 1/3/2017 7:08:00 PM (view original):
Actually for me the oddest omission of preference by the guys who produced 3.0 is the lack of "coach history of EEs" pref, which would CLEARLY fit their stated desire to retain "realism," not to mention it would seem to be a well-designed counter weight to the newly minted struggle to run an "EE" dominant program.

I pushed early and often in beta for a preference for "future priorities", that would include academics and playing pro ball. Players who preferred academics would look at team gpa. Players who wanted to play in the pros would value a coach's record of getting players drafted.

"Players who wanted to play in the pros would value a coach's record of getting players drafted."

I'm surprised more D1 coaches didn't pick up on a rich-get-richer artifice like that.

2017 and still a fking d-bag

Posted by shoe3 on 1/3/2017 8:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jskenner on 1/3/2017 7:08:00 PM (view original):
Actually for me the oddest omission of preference by the guys who produced 3.0 is the lack of "coach history of EEs" pref, which would CLEARLY fit their stated desire to retain "realism," not to mention it would seem to be a well-designed counter weight to the newly minted struggle to run an "EE" dominant program.

I pushed early and often in beta for a preference for "future priorities", that would include academics and playing pro ball. Players who preferred academics would look at team gpa. Players who wanted to play in the pros would value a coach's record of getting players drafted.

+1

Posted by mullycj on 1/4/2017 12:53:00 AM (view original):

Posted by CoachSpud on 1/3/2017 8:51:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 1/3/2017 8:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jskenner on 1/3/2017 7:08:00 PM (view original):
Actually for me the oddest omission of preference by the guys who produced 3.0 is the lack of "coach history of EEs" pref, which would CLEARLY fit their stated desire to retain "realism," not to mention it would seem to be a well-designed counter weight to the newly minted struggle to run an "EE" dominant program.

I pushed early and often in beta for a preference for "future priorities", that would include academics and playing pro ball. Players who preferred academics would look at team gpa. Players who wanted to play in the pros would value a coach's record of getting players drafted.

"Players who wanted to play in the pros would value a coach's record of getting players drafted."

I'm surprised more D1 coaches didn't pick up on a rich-get-richer artifice like that.

2017 and still a fking d-bag

Mullycj-- I am not sure he is so much of a d-bag. I think of him more as an azzhat.

Spud's blind defense of HD 3.0 and unwillingness to discuss anything that could improve upon the issues deteriorating the game is beginning to make him look silly. The more he posts the sillier he looks. Someone who continues to humiliate themselves (have you looked at his roster?) while assuming a tone of superiority really isn't a d-bag. They are an azzhat.

A normally developing child moves beyond that kind of name-calling at about age 9 or 10. Now eat your breakfast and catch the bus. Don't lose your lunch money this time.

Same boring reply Spudhole. Go to your book of catchy phrases and try to come up with something original.