Posted by rednation58 on 9/2/2012 4:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by milkamania on 9/2/2012 9:59:00 AM (view original):
"" I feel I am correct when I say not everyone would react badly to having their minutes cut as an upperclassman""

bis, you obviously don't read the responses people post very well.  i think multiple people, if not most, would AGREE with this statement and have done so repeatedly.  yes, it is slightly unrealistic  for everyone to have the same response to not getting minutes, especially D3 scholarship athletes, which DONT EXIST IN THE REAL WORLD,  a fact you keep leaving out of your realism arguments.

what you fail to acknowledge, which again everyone here agrees with, is that this feature you want to add would have LITERALLY ZERO BENEFIT.  no one would ever recruit a player because that player would be cool with sitting on the bench as an upperclassmen.  if they aren't good enough to play, then cut them or let them transfer, but this magical player who hasn't improved enough by his junior year to get on the court isn't suddenly gonna become a contributor in his senior year. 

and please don't talk about inherited teams, that just destroys your whole argument.  you want a feature that you can base YOUR recruiting decisions on, and you use as examples players that weren't recruited by you.

that's why you are being called a troll.  you have been told, in clear terms, why what you want is not part of the game, and you tell us we aren't listening.

+1

"Perhaps I'm not making myself clear enough on what I want. I'm not only arguing in favor of wanting to know how a player will react during recruiting, but also if that doesn't exist, the default should be for players not to demand minutes instead of vice versa. The coach should have ultimate veto power over the players without any negative act from players. That's what I'd like to see."

So again, as has been stated a nauseum, you don't want any repercussions for any of the coaching decisions you make that involve lineup changes or minutes allocated to players.  None.  Okay, you want to use the "real life" argument all the time, so I'm saying that "in real life", no matter what kind of personalities you "think" you've recruited, "in real life", this doesn't exist.  You've got a roster of 12 kids (between the ages of 18 and 22, most likely and this is important to remember, the ages of the kids involved), so okay yeah, you're gonna find a dozen kids (who are skilled enough as basketball players that you decided to recruit them in the first place.  To, you know, achieve your objective of actually winning basketball games) who will work as hard as they can, all the time, no questions asked, to do what massa says, with no complaints EVER.  Umm, only in a fantasy world.  Ain't gonna happen in the real world.  Sorry.  Not if you're recruiting kids who are skilled enough to play.  If they are, they are gonna want their minutes.  And if they aren't skilled enough to get those extra minutes, why in the world would you recruit them anyway?  You want to have your cake and eat it too.  You want to compete with all highly skilled kids who won't complain if they don't get the time they think they deserve.  Sorry, Bistiza, but "in real life", that scenario doesn't exist and in HD that doesn't exist.  If you want to be competitive and be able to compete for titles, you have to take the attitudes that come with that goal, bottom line.  No other way around it, in HD or the real world.  Not when you're dealing with primarily teenage kids.  You want realism, that is reality.  Sorry to burst your utopian bubble.

I guess the quote from about 12 pages ago really WAS right on the mark.  Someone is living in a fantasy world inside a simulated world. 
 

Posted by fd343ny on 9/2/2012 10:08:00 PM (view original):
colonel19 was much more fun

Posted by dahsdebater on 9/2/2012 8:23:00 PM (view original):
If you think people need to ask you what your analogies mean, they're bad analogies.  Period.

Posted by dahsdebater on 9/2/2012 8:23:00 PM (view original):
If you think people need to ask you what your analogies mean, they're bad analogies.  Period.

Posted by fd343ny on 9/2/2012 12:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bistiza on 8/27/2012 6:14:00 PM (view original):
I don't think the game should punish you for not playing someone - you're the coach, you should be able to do what you want as far as who plays and how much.

They shouldn't come to your school with any expectation unless you give them one.

I call bull on the claim that the position has not shifted - see above where the position of the great bis was that there should be NO expectations

later in the thread the position was that expectations should vary and NOT EVERYONE should have the same expectations - where was that at the start? no where - it was not that folks didnt understand 

Please dont say that WE are not understanding you, when you are simply spouting illogic and changing your stance.  I fully understand all that you have said and I think most of it is a boatload of unrealistic expectations, smarmy attempts to act like you are smarter than the rest of the world and foolish imposition of your view of the real world on a game.

It is possible for even the great and wise, Galileo like original poster to be simply WRONG and not just misunderstood - and this thread is a good example of being wrong.

Yeah, you got me there.  Couldn't resist.

Posted by gillispie1 on 9/3/2012 2:25:00 AM (view original):
i maintain he is doing too many drugs... and i don't even say that about my friends-turned-addicts who have thrown their entire lives away. why? because when the words flow from their mouths, even if the drool comes with it... THEY STILL MAKE SOME SENSE!

bis.. i think you have just gotten too deep. just pretend this thread never existed, never speak of this topic again, and you will be much better off for it. in the other threads, where you asked for help, you seemed fairly reasonable. you didn't seem like through heavy drug use, you had reduced your brain to being a single celled organism. just give it up, already :O