This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
3/27/2013 12:59 PM
I don't think they need to have 100% "real" conferences.  But its so outdated and wrong at this point, that it would be refreshing to see *some* realignment. Keep it at 12 team conferences, but switch things around a little to better reflect current conferences. 
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
3/27/2013 3:40 PM
Posted by graff on 3/27/2013 9:49:00 AM (view original):
I understand that the 12 teams/conference cookie cutter makes life easier for people but why are we FORCED to live in that box again? 

Why can't teams play different numbers of conference and non-conference games, just like in real life? It might mean the coders have to have different schedule functions based on the conference affiliation but I don't see why it's not doable.

Honest question here because the make believe conferences really detracts from the game. I had a friend ready to sign up until they saw this and I got laughed out of the office for playing a "totally erroneous fantasy land game akin to dungeons and dragons built upon a big random number generator". Sadly I couldn't argue too much.
Your quote in the third paragraph is definitely something a rational person would say in real life.
3/27/2013 3:42 PM
Posted by kcsundevil on 3/27/2013 3:40:00 PM (view original):
Posted by graff on 3/27/2013 9:49:00 AM (view original):
I understand that the 12 teams/conference cookie cutter makes life easier for people but why are we FORCED to live in that box again? 

Why can't teams play different numbers of conference and non-conference games, just like in real life? It might mean the coders have to have different schedule functions based on the conference affiliation but I don't see why it's not doable.

Honest question here because the make believe conferences really detracts from the game. I had a friend ready to sign up until they saw this and I got laughed out of the office for playing a "totally erroneous fantasy land game akin to dungeons and dragons built upon a big random number generator". Sadly I couldn't argue too much.
Your quote in the third paragraph is definitely something a rational person would say in real life.
Hahaha, I thought the exact same thing... Maybe this guy works with a grown up and educated middle school bully.
3/27/2013 6:17 PM
Posted by graff on 3/27/2013 3:03:00 PM (view original):
Put it this way, if we don't "care" about real conferences, and they are as incorrect and made-up as they currently are, and customers are okay with that, then I ask why even bother with ANY conference affiliations? Why not just let the sim schedule you to play 26 games against random opponents? I mean the team  you are playing doesn't matter right? After all it doesn't matter if it's realistic or if those teams ever play each other in real life. It's all just make-believe and we need it to be as easy on the developers as possible.

Would you guys be okay with THAT? 

I say again, this sim doesn't have to be PERFECT but it does have to be ROOTED in reality. Otherwise I can go play dice against my computer RNG and accomplish the same thing. I could even call the result of our die rolls a "basketball game" if I wanted :).
It is rooted in reality.  I don't know the numbers but I bet most schools are still where they were and even the ones that aren't are still playing in a conference, they still try to win enough games to get the conference regular season championship, they still try to win the conference tourney or at least do well enough to get an at large bid.  From a fan experience standpoint, it hits 99% of what it can do given the other constraints.  There's just no reason to try to get that last 1% when it's likely to just screw up a bunch of other things.

3/27/2013 6:37 PM
Posted by alblack56 on 3/27/2013 3:30:00 PM (view original):
Posted by graff on 3/27/2013 3:03:00 PM (view original):
Put it this way, if we don't "care" about real conferences, and they are as incorrect and made-up as they currently are, and customers are okay with that, then I ask why even bother with ANY conference affiliations? Why not just let the sim schedule you to play 26 games against random opponents? I mean the team  you are playing doesn't matter right? After all it doesn't matter if it's realistic or if those teams ever play each other in real life. It's all just make-believe and we need it to be as easy on the developers as possible.

Would you guys be okay with THAT? 

I say again, this sim doesn't have to be PERFECT but it does have to be ROOTED in reality. Otherwise I can go play dice against my computer RNG and accomplish the same thing. I could even call the result of our die rolls a "basketball game" if I wanted :).
I think re-organizing the conferences is a good idea. How would you do it, keeping 12-team conferences?
I reject the constraint of 12-team conferences. I think it's EASIER for them for sure, but it's not necessarily the best.

Somebody else on here mentioned some consternation others had about off days. Why?? I'd much rather have 5-10 off days a season that would be required to allow for different schedules from different sized conferences. All it would do is make your $12.95 last a week longer per season. Maybe WiS could raise the price to $13.95 to recoup the additional time and not take a hit on revenue since more people would be apt to join and continue to participate in a sim that's much more realistic. 
3/27/2013 7:50 PM
Posted by arssanguinus on 3/27/2013 10:20:00 AM (view original):
Posted by graff on 3/27/2013 10:08:00 AM (view original):
Also, if each teams schedule was a function of the # of teams in the conference (i.e. if z conference members then, you play x conference games, y non-conference games and this is how the conference tourney seedings are paired up) then conference realignment becomes REALLY easy. You just change the name of the conference variable as teams change conferences, have it count the # of teams with that variable and then use the created function above. Once it's set up it's literally as easy as changing ONE field value.

So, what is it that I'm missing about forcing us into these 12 team leagues, because until we can get away from that there will always be wacky unrealistic conferences (and even teams in the entirely wrong division).
So you think it would be good for teams to be yanked around? If someone is in division two and their team moves up they should be moved up without a choice? If someone stays in a conference and develops relationships with teammates and earns a place in a string conference and the team moves somewhere else suddenly he has to move?


What would you do with an independent school?
California state bakersfield and New Orleans in d1?

There are six more independents in division two ...

Yes I think teams should be "forced" to move up or down a division as they happen in real life. But then again I play against the game and don't ever really establish "relationships" with anybody in my league...they're just an opponent to try and beat :). 

Indie's would have to come up with all non-con opponents and then attempt to get into the tournament as an at-large exactly like they should. If teams have additional off days throughout the season to accommodate the different conference sizes and amounts of games then that leaves any # of schools who have the ability to schedule a game with indie's.
3/27/2013 7:54 PM
Posted by kcsundevil on 3/27/2013 3:40:00 PM (view original):
Posted by graff on 3/27/2013 9:49:00 AM (view original):
I understand that the 12 teams/conference cookie cutter makes life easier for people but why are we FORCED to live in that box again? 

Why can't teams play different numbers of conference and non-conference games, just like in real life? It might mean the coders have to have different schedule functions based on the conference affiliation but I don't see why it's not doable.

Honest question here because the make believe conferences really detracts from the game. I had a friend ready to sign up until they saw this and I got laughed out of the office for playing a "totally erroneous fantasy land game akin to dungeons and dragons built upon a big random number generator". Sadly I couldn't argue too much.
Your quote in the third paragraph is definitely something a rational person would say in real life.
Probably because I talked it up in trying to convince him to join with me. After he did some research and found out how it worked he thought it was a joke and his comment above was meant to make a point. As in, not only am I not going to waste my time with this, but why are YOU?

I keep coming back for the potential this place has. Whether it ever becomes a reality or not is the big question.
3/27/2013 8:06 PM
I'd much rather have 5-10 off days a season that would be required to allow for different schedules from different sized conferences.

No, No, No, No, No.   If this was done in just one of the worlds I would avoid it at all costs.  I hate the day off between non-conference and conference and in one world I had back-to-back days off in conference play.  I can't say how much I hated this.  No, No, No, No, No.  Do not increase the number of off days.
3/27/2013 8:14 PM
Posted by graff on 3/27/2013 7:54:00 PM (view original):
Posted by kcsundevil on 3/27/2013 3:40:00 PM (view original):
Posted by graff on 3/27/2013 9:49:00 AM (view original):
I understand that the 12 teams/conference cookie cutter makes life easier for people but why are we FORCED to live in that box again? 

Why can't teams play different numbers of conference and non-conference games, just like in real life? It might mean the coders have to have different schedule functions based on the conference affiliation but I don't see why it's not doable.

Honest question here because the make believe conferences really detracts from the game. I had a friend ready to sign up until they saw this and I got laughed out of the office for playing a "totally erroneous fantasy land game akin to dungeons and dragons built upon a big random number generator". Sadly I couldn't argue too much.
Your quote in the third paragraph is definitely something a rational person would say in real life.
Probably because I talked it up in trying to convince him to join with me. After he did some research and found out how it worked he thought it was a joke and his comment above was meant to make a point. As in, not only am I not going to waste my time with this, but why are YOU?

I keep coming back for the potential this place has. Whether it ever becomes a reality or not is the big question.
So your point is that your buddy thinks we are all stupid. Why should I give a **** about what he thinks then exactly?
3/27/2013 8:27 PM
I don't think I have ever heard anyone actually say the word "akin" before.  And I play Dunegeons and Dragons (capitalize it please, show a little respect).

This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
of 8

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 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.