Posted by colonels19 on 9/19/2015 9:03:00 PM (view original):
I'm not totally put off at the moment, then again I don't really feel like I know what to expect either.  We'll see how it goes, but I want to see a deft hand control this, not E. Honda...

i had a sega controller that had "turbo" buttons above the standard a, b, and c. these buttons had the effect of basically spamming the relevant a/b/c button. it made e honda rather cheap - you could get that like, flying hand thing, where he was like ***** slapping at insane speed, with the hard slap - which was roughly impossible otherwise (at least for me, speaking as a non-asian ;). even just getting the "light" turbo ***** slap on demand was pretty helpful. you could just knock someone down and then stand over their fallen body ***** slapping the **** out of the air above them until they stood/recovered. it made for a pretty interesting dynamic with a number of players with those "spam" button effects. 

whenever I pulled that E Honda ***** move my brother would get Chun Li and inverted helicopter kick my *** over his hands somehow...

op has to be at least 70.

Posted by the0nlyis on 9/20/2015 10:57:00 PM (view original):
3 non b6 schools advanced to the 2nd round and 1 to the S16 this season. already way under the data I provided about real life NT stats

7 in S81 to 2nd round and 1 to the S16

5 in S80 to the 2nd round and 3 to the S16(and a one seed pretty amazing by drsnell)

8 in S79 to the 2nd round and 2 to the S16

so in the past 4 seasons Smith averages 5.75 to the 2nd round which is about half less than the real life (granted 10 seasons compared to 4) and avg of 1.75 to the S16 again much lower than real life.

And I would assume the rest of the worlds are even lower, so your example of mid majors going far is already much lower than real life and involves a very very elite D1 coach at Texas Southern who can't even get an A/A+ prestige with E8 and S16's the majority of the time which is absurd.

So it's clear adv for the big 6 and your best example of non big 6 going far is already about half as real life and involves super human efforts by a few coaches who can't even reach maintain A- or higher prestige.

I'll give you some props you won a D1 NC at Eastern Illinois but it was in the early seasons(was their even potential then?) so idk how non big 6 worked.  But you cannot say there is any resemblance of real life for midmajors.

The reason why the T Southern coach cant get to the A/A+ prestige is becuase of baseline for Tex South is a C.  Very hard to get to a A with that baseline unless you win a NT.

Frankly, I think the bigger the changes the better. I think this game is seriously broken for all but the A+ prestige programs.

I used to have two such programs and remember how easy recruiting was, but then I stepped away from the game for about 35 seasons and now I know how hard it is to try to build up programs from lower prestige levels. It seems almost impossible to build them beyond a B level.

There is no room for a Gonzaga, Butler, VCU to develop in HD. And it is very difficult to lose an A rating once you have one.

The playing field needs to be leveled or B level coaches and below will not stick around. I debate it every time I have to renew a team.

The issues are predominantly D1 issues. Personally, if we don't fix job logic, everything else is a waste. Our mid major conferences will continue to be empty and the glass ceiling the A-'s and B+'s bump up against will never be penetrable. Look at how many folks go  back to D2.
Make it harder to keep an A+ prestige. Good for recruiting and jobs.
Fire someone for God's sake.
Let open jobs "drop down" over the application period like recruits if they aren't applied for. Not wholesale but with some reasonable parameters.
D1 jobs for C- schools or less should be available to any coach from D1 to D3
Make Conference Coach of the Year and Conference championships, regular season and conf tournament, count towards getting a better job.
Make Sim teams recruit and plan better so they are more attractive to new coaches.

I think there are some really impressive ideas in the new recruiting/scouting package. Let's not throw the baby out with the bath water. The core of this game remains tremendous fun. And if you can better it, so be it.

The issues are predominantly D1 issues.

So fix D1, and leave the fundamental aspects of the game that affect all three divisions the same.?

if they make major changes i'll strongly consider letting my teams run out. coaches worked hard to make it to the upper level d1 programs, to completely change recruiting will reward those who luck out in figuring it out first or happen to have a team setup to take advantage of the new recruiting setup first (lots of open scholarships when it first happens, etc). "Thanks for all the time and money you spent making it to the top, but we're unilaterally making changes, hope you can figure out this entirely new game and keep your success level. Sincerely, WIS."

Something has to change in recruiting. I'm recruiting now and have a a+ school recruiting a 2 star player. That is messed up.

Posted by iwanturmind2 on 9/29/2015 9:02:00 PM (view original):
Something has to change in recruiting. I'm recruiting now and have a a+ school recruiting a 2 star player. That is messed up.

I would welcome a change preventing bottom feeding D1 schools from trolling D2 waters. 

Posted by possumfiend on 9/29/2015 10:41:00 PM (view original):

vandy - I get your point but aren't you essentially just arguing that you prefer to continue rewarding those who "lucked out' four or five years ago when WIS changed the game by adding potential and modifying recruit generation and just happened to be in position where they could grab and setup all the high baseline schools (that they never have to leave) to take advantage of a flawed recruiting dynamic that serves to perpetuate their success season after season after season to the detriment of those who only started playing more recently?

I started playing this game five years ago and have finally succeeded in building a team that is capable of competing season in and season out and I, for one, welcome changes that have the potential to make this game more enjoyable for everyone and not just those at the top who experience very little in the way of adversity in this game.

 

Granted I haven't seen the end result of these proposed changes, but the current proposals seem about 10 times greater for their change and impact on the game, plus there are certainly coaches who established their position at upper level schools much prior to the approximate 5 year ago timeline you mention.

im not disagreeing that those at the top schools now may have it too easy, I'm just in the camp of those who think the proposed changes just seem extreme based upon the current flaws in the game. As I've said before, this game needs some remodeling while the proposed changes seem to burn the whole house down when it comes to recruiting.

I agree the proposed changes appear ambitious but I'm not as convinced they are as extreme as you fear. I guess time will tell. I also concede that there are many who established their positions prior to the advent of potential and recruit gen. but the mere fact they were already established at those elite schools means they still "lucked out" in that they were simply "here first" and as a result in position to take advantage of the current game metrics when they were rolled out. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a proponent for forcing anyone to leave a job after x number of seasons, but it is detrimental to the game that the most prestigious jobs are, by and large, monopolized in each of the worlds. There are several factors one can point to as the root causes of the imbalances that exist but I believe the long term success of this game depends on reducing those imbalances. giving more users more opportunity for success. and providing a more enjoyable game for all users. I don't believe everything should be equal, but the game does need more elements that require success to be earned every season and that is missing from the game today.

also need to increase juco/transfer players at D1.

theres maybe a 20/30 of juco's at D1 and very few transfers.  D1 teams tend to drop to D2 to grb more juco's that will never play.

I'm did this last season there were only 2 Juco's near me with any resemblance of talent in D1 if I remember both 100+ ranked taken by A+ programs since they were 90 ath/spd/def pot so they were also super underranked.  then i grabbed 4 D2 juco's since their were no other juco's at D1 with more than d3 talent

Which falls under recruit generation which is clearly the biggest problem outside post season cash.

Posted by the0nlyis on 9/30/2015 12:52:00 AM (view original):
also need to increase juco/transfer players at D1.

theres maybe a 20/30 of juco's at D1 and very few transfers.  D1 teams tend to drop to D2 to grb more juco's that will never play.

I'm did this last season there were only 2 Juco's near me with any resemblance of talent in D1 if I remember both 100+ ranked taken by A+ programs since they were 90 ath/spd/def pot so they were also super underranked.  then i grabbed 4 D2 juco's since their were no other juco's at D1 with more than d3 talent

Which falls under recruit generation which is clearly the biggest problem outside post season cash.

Agreed. D1 needs something done when it comes to recruit generation and maybe the way recruting works. My MSUV in D1, all players recruited by myself, is a DII team not even a top DII team right now because there is nothing to grab to compete. I won't compete next season, so it's four years before you actually see something happening. It's either the way the recruiting works or the recruit generation. Honestly, I'd get fired as soon as I would of presented my first class. The AD would of said, how do you expect to win with these kids the next three seasons?

Post cash money is easy to change. No change at DIII, DII, half at DI. Increase the cash for successful NT teams... the further they go.