All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > .500 Record Requirement for D1 Postseason(Poll)
5/16/2014 3:54 PM
What are you talking about, Stinenavy? Literally no one is implying that this is about player ratings. It's about where team's stand at the end of the year RPI wise, based on what they've done that season.
5/16/2014 5:47 PM
This poll just needs a 3rd option.
#3. Pride Button
A button to refuse a PIT invitation for when I suck and win 10 games, and don't want to compete for #65.
5/16/2014 6:03 PM
Posted by mizzou77 on 5/16/2014 5:47:00 PM (view original):
This poll just needs a 3rd option.
#3. Pride Button
A button to refuse a PIT invitation for when I suck and win 10 games, and don't want to compete for #65.
lol  they wouldn't use it. Seen one that almost lives in the PIT year in and out no matter which team they coach.
5/16/2014 7:00 PM
Posted by mizzou77 on 5/16/2014 5:47:00 PM (view original):
This poll just needs a 3rd option.
#3. Pride Button
A button to refuse a PIT invitation for when I suck and win 10 games, and don't want to compete for #65.
This would actually be pretty cool. I can think of a couple times I'd have used it.
5/16/2014 8:36 PM
Posted by stewdog on 5/16/2014 11:34:00 AM (view original):
I agree with wildcat. 
In Iba ACC, every coach is ridiculously good. we regularly have 10 make the NT. 
the problem is that the other 2-3 coaches (depending on the year) often go 9-1 or 10-0 out of conference and then get 1-2 conference wins. They finish under .500, but would be NT teams if they were in any other conference. 

They do NOT make the NT, and they shouldn't. But PIT is a good consolation prize and well deserved. They regularly make it far in the PT, though  they are low seeds (7-8 even) that have 10ish wins, thus proving they deserve to make it. 
The fact that 10 teams from your ACC make the NT doesn't make all of those coaches ridiculously good. Maybe they are, but making the NT when you're in an HD ACC doesn't in any way prove it, given the baseline / cash advantages they enjoy.

And even lower ACC teams should expect to do well if they make it to the PT - their average ratings are often much higher than mid-major competition - but that isn't the same thing as saying they deserved to be there in the first place. That's why I favor a middle ground - create a win minimum (around 12 or so) that ensures that you had at least minimal success in-conference to go along with dominating clearly less talented non-conf competition.
5/16/2014 8:47 PM
If you take all the Conference Champs that don't win their tournament, it probably eats up 4-8 slots each season in the PIT. This certainly helps the smaller conferences with cash and I suspect it keeps the BCS conference drecks out.
5/16/2014 8:56 PM
Posted by bhansalid00 on 5/16/2014 8:37:00 PM (view original):
Posted by stewdog on 5/16/2014 11:34:00 AM (view original):
I agree with wildcat. 
In Iba ACC, every coach is ridiculously good. we regularly have 10 make the NT. 
the problem is that the other 2-3 coaches (depending on the year) often go 9-1 or 10-0 out of conference and then get 1-2 conference wins. They finish under .500, but would be NT teams if they were in any other conference. 

They do NOT make the NT, and they shouldn't. But PIT is a good consolation prize and well deserved. They regularly make it far in the PT, though  they are low seeds (7-8 even) that have 10ish wins, thus proving they deserve to make it. 
The fact that 10 teams from your ACC make the NT doesn't make all of those coaches ridiculously good. Maybe they are, but making the NT when you're in an HD ACC doesn't in any way prove it, given the baseline / cash advantages they enjoy.

And even lower ACC teams should expect to do well if they make it to the PT - their average ratings are often much higher than mid-major competition - but that isn't the same thing as saying they deserved to be there in the first place. That's why I favor a middle ground - create a win minimum (around 12 or so) that ensures that you had at least minimal success in-conference to go along with dominating clearly less talented non-conf competition.
Yeah, basically it does. When 10 teams from one conference make the NT with some regularity, those coaches are likely VERY good. Winning at high-major division 1 is very hard. MUCH harder than winning in low- and mid-major D1, and it's not close.
5/16/2014 9:12 PM
Posted by stewdog on 5/16/2014 11:34:00 AM (view original):
I agree with wildcat. 
In Iba ACC, every coach is ridiculously good. we regularly have 10 make the NT. 
the problem is that the other 2-3 coaches (depending on the year) often go 9-1 or 10-0 out of conference and then get 1-2 conference wins. They finish under .500, but would be NT teams if they were in any other conference. 

They do NOT make the NT, and they shouldn't. But PIT is a good consolation prize and well deserved. They regularly make it far in the PT, though  they are low seeds (7-8 even) that have 10ish wins, thus proving they deserve to make it. 
Well you have me.  I am in no way the self proclaimed "ridiculously good" coach you profess yourself and the other members of Iba's ACC to be - I'm quite the opposite actually.  But where you see a team with an overall rating of 757 that goes 8-19 (2-14 in conference) heading into post season play as "deserving" of the "consolation prize" that is the PIT, I see a team that underperformed and was nowhere near deserving of post season play - but again, I am not a "ridiculously good" coach so I probably don't see things with your clarity.  That being said, it really is a false argument to talk about how a 2-14 ACC team would be an NT team if they were in any other conference because that is deceptively true.  Yes, it's probably true that this team, as is and as it was recruited as part of the ACC with ACC recruiting dollars, is probably good enough to win any of the non Big Six conferences and make the NT, and they should be.  But take away the ACC recruiting dollars and conference prestige and stick this team in the Big South and this team (as it is with the current roster) would never exist.  And if it did and remained there consistently, well then I'd show you a "ridiculously good" coach.   Conversely take any team from the Big South, as is, put them in the ACC and you probably have a team that will lose all of its conference games.   If you want to talk about how good a team would be if they played in the Big South, or any other conference, then go pick up a team in that conference and show me how good they would be because any other comparison is just conjecture.

Just so we are clear, the .500 rule, if implemented, would have meant that Iba's ACC would not have had one team play two games in the PIT this past season.  That would have cost your conference a whopping $833 per team in recruiting dollars and next recruiting season you would have to somehow still recruit those top tier players with just $46,917 in extra cash instead of the $47,750 you are actually getting.  And yes that would probably mean that a non Big Six conference like the Big South might have gotten those funds instead and would be recruiting with $2,500 per team rather than the $1,666 they are actually getting.

Of course, having put those numbers out there, I now see why you oppose this idea.  I mean how will any of the Big Six schools survive with this kind of competitive balance upheaval?  Seriously though, I don't ask for this game to be completely equitable, I think there should be advantages in place for the Big Six schools and the traditional powerhouses, just not with the current level of disparity.

So yes, by all means, continue to stand by the disjointed notion that the Iba ACC (or any other Big Six power conference) represents any semblance of reality and that these kind of dominant Big Six conferences are not artificially induced by giving the coaches within an over abundance of advantages (recruiting dollars, baseline prestige, recruiting dollars, conference prestige, oh, and did I mention the recruiting dollars?) that allow them recruit the best players year in and year out.  I think some people here just want to see SOME of those advantages diminished a little to make the game more enjoyable.  But what do I know?  I'm just a crappy coach who plays this game for fun.
5/16/2014 9:12 PM
Posted by mizzou77 on 5/16/2014 5:47:00 PM (view original):
This poll just needs a 3rd option.
#3. Pride Button
A button to refuse a PIT invitation for when I suck and win 10 games, and don't want to compete for #65.
+1
5/16/2014 9:14 PM
Posted by Trentonjoe on 5/16/2014 8:47:00 PM (view original):
If you take all the Conference Champs that don't win their tournament, it probably eats up 4-8 slots each season in the PIT. This certainly helps the smaller conferences with cash and I suspect it keeps the BCS conference drecks out.
I like this idea too.
5/16/2014 9:25 PM
Posted by possumfiend on 5/16/2014 9:12:00 PM (view original):
Posted by stewdog on 5/16/2014 11:34:00 AM (view original):
I agree with wildcat. 
In Iba ACC, every coach is ridiculously good. we regularly have 10 make the NT. 
the problem is that the other 2-3 coaches (depending on the year) often go 9-1 or 10-0 out of conference and then get 1-2 conference wins. They finish under .500, but would be NT teams if they were in any other conference. 

They do NOT make the NT, and they shouldn't. But PIT is a good consolation prize and well deserved. They regularly make it far in the PT, though  they are low seeds (7-8 even) that have 10ish wins, thus proving they deserve to make it. 
Well you have me.  I am in no way the self proclaimed "ridiculously good" coach you profess yourself and the other members of Iba's ACC to be - I'm quite the opposite actually.  But where you see a team with an overall rating of 757 that goes 8-19 (2-14 in conference) heading into post season play as "deserving" of the "consolation prize" that is the PIT, I see a team that underperformed and was nowhere near deserving of post season play - but again, I am not a "ridiculously good" coach so I probably don't see things with your clarity.  That being said, it really is a false argument to talk about how a 2-14 ACC team would be an NT team if they were in any other conference because that is deceptively true.  Yes, it's probably true that this team, as is and as it was recruited as part of the ACC with ACC recruiting dollars, is probably good enough to win any of the non Big Six conferences and make the NT, and they should be.  But take away the ACC recruiting dollars and conference prestige and stick this team in the Big South and this team (as it is with the current roster) would never exist.  And if it did and remained there consistently, well then I'd show you a "ridiculously good" coach.   Conversely take any team from the Big South, as is, put them in the ACC and you probably have a team that will lose all of its conference games.   If you want to talk about how good a team would be if they played in the Big South, or any other conference, then go pick up a team in that conference and show me how good they would be because any other comparison is just conjecture.

Just so we are clear, the .500 rule, if implemented, would have meant that Iba's ACC would not have had one team play two games in the PIT this past season.  That would have cost your conference a whopping $833 per team in recruiting dollars and next recruiting season you would have to somehow still recruit those top tier players with just $46,917 in extra cash instead of the $47,750 you are actually getting.  And yes that would probably mean that a non Big Six conference like the Big South might have gotten those funds instead and would be recruiting with $2,500 per team rather than the $1,666 they are actually getting.

Of course, having put those numbers out there, I now see why you oppose this idea.  I mean how will any of the Big Six schools survive with this kind of competitive balance upheaval?  Seriously though, I don't ask for this game to be completely equitable, I think there should be advantages in place for the Big Six schools and the traditional powerhouses, just not with the current level of disparity.

So yes, by all means, continue to stand by the disjointed notion that the Iba ACC (or any other Big Six power conference) represents any semblance of reality and that these kind of dominant Big Six conferences are not artificially induced by giving the coaches within an over abundance of advantages (recruiting dollars, baseline prestige, recruiting dollars, conference prestige, oh, and did I mention the recruiting dollars?) that allow them recruit the best players year in and year out.  I think some people here just want to see SOME of those advantages diminished a little to make the game more enjoyable.  But what do I know?  I'm just a crappy coach who plays this game for fun.
Well said. I would only add that if a coach is at a Big Six and can not get a .500 conference record after 5 years, they are not a Big Boy great coach. They hang to their jobs simply for the PIT and because of the PIT.
5/16/2014 9:26 PM
Posted by possumfiend on 5/16/2014 9:12:00 PM (view original):
Posted by stewdog on 5/16/2014 11:34:00 AM (view original):
I agree with wildcat. 
In Iba ACC, every coach is ridiculously good. we regularly have 10 make the NT. 
the problem is that the other 2-3 coaches (depending on the year) often go 9-1 or 10-0 out of conference and then get 1-2 conference wins. They finish under .500, but would be NT teams if they were in any other conference. 

They do NOT make the NT, and they shouldn't. But PIT is a good consolation prize and well deserved. They regularly make it far in the PT, though  they are low seeds (7-8 even) that have 10ish wins, thus proving they deserve to make it. 
Well you have me.  I am in no way the self proclaimed "ridiculously good" coach you profess yourself and the other members of Iba's ACC to be - I'm quite the opposite actually.  But where you see a team with an overall rating of 757 that goes 8-19 (2-14 in conference) heading into post season play as "deserving" of the "consolation prize" that is the PIT, I see a team that underperformed and was nowhere near deserving of post season play - but again, I am not a "ridiculously good" coach so I probably don't see things with your clarity.  That being said, it really is a false argument to talk about how a 2-14 ACC team would be an NT team if they were in any other conference because that is deceptively true.  Yes, it's probably true that this team, as is and as it was recruited as part of the ACC with ACC recruiting dollars, is probably good enough to win any of the non Big Six conferences and make the NT, and they should be.  But take away the ACC recruiting dollars and conference prestige and stick this team in the Big South and this team (as it is with the current roster) would never exist.  And if it did and remained there consistently, well then I'd show you a "ridiculously good" coach.   Conversely take any team from the Big South, as is, put them in the ACC and you probably have a team that will lose all of its conference games.   If you want to talk about how good a team would be if they played in the Big South, or any other conference, then go pick up a team in that conference and show me how good they would be because any other comparison is just conjecture.

Just so we are clear, the .500 rule, if implemented, would have meant that Iba's ACC would not have had one team play two games in the PIT this past season.  That would have cost your conference a whopping $833 per team in recruiting dollars and next recruiting season you would have to somehow still recruit those top tier players with just $46,917 in extra cash instead of the $47,750 you are actually getting.  And yes that would probably mean that a non Big Six conference like the Big South might have gotten those funds instead and would be recruiting with $2,500 per team rather than the $1,666 they are actually getting.

Of course, having put those numbers out there, I now see why you oppose this idea.  I mean how will any of the Big Six schools survive with this kind of competitive balance upheaval?  Seriously though, I don't ask for this game to be completely equitable, I think there should be advantages in place for the Big Six schools and the traditional powerhouses, just not with the current level of disparity.

So yes, by all means, continue to stand by the disjointed notion that the Iba ACC (or any other Big Six power conference) represents any semblance of reality and that these kind of dominant Big Six conferences are not artificially induced by giving the coaches within an over abundance of advantages (recruiting dollars, baseline prestige, recruiting dollars, conference prestige, oh, and did I mention the recruiting dollars?) that allow them recruit the best players year in and year out.  I think some people here just want to see SOME of those advantages diminished a little to make the game more enjoyable.  But what do I know?  I'm just a crappy coach who plays this game for fun.
I'm just now dipping my toe in high-major water, and also have a team in the low-major category. Here's the thing: all you have to do to get that extra cash for the Big South is schedule better in the non-con, so your RPI is such that if you miss the NT, you'll be in the PIT. Simple as that.
5/16/2014 9:35 PM (edited)
Big East is low Major? Hmmm  ok. It must be different from world to world
5/16/2014 9:41 PM
Posted by taniajane on 5/16/2014 9:35:00 PM (view original):
Big East is low Major? Hmmm  ok. It must be different from world to world
Did you even read my post? Or look at my profile? I have Villanova (thus the "dipping my toe in high major" part) and Sam Houston State in the Southland Conference, which is firmly in the "low major" category.
5/16/2014 9:45 PM
ooh Ok sorry misread it. Yes I did see Villanova....and your 4 year conference winning pct. I also saw Campbell and  a sim dominant league  and your PIT
of 12
All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > .500 Record Requirement for D1 Postseason(Poll)

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.