Posted by CoachSpud on 12/1/2016 6:28:00 PM (view original):
"Spud-- A lower tier D+ school should not be competing for a recruit with an A- Big 6 school. That recruit should be out of there league. That is a reflection of how things really work."

This is HD, not RL. In HD, that idea is a reflection of a sense of entitlement and incomplete understanding of 3.0. While common in RL, it isn't even absolutely true there.

HD is supposed to be a reflection of real life. Hence why it is called a simulation. A statement like yours is a reflection of entitlement and incomplete understanding of real life.

Shoe/Koops well explained plan trivializes many of the obstacles actually presented. Someone posted it before but if I recall correctly only 20-25% of recruits have a "late" signing preference. From the start you can only target 1/4 of the recruit pool (making your recruiting budget really only worth 1/4 of its dollar amount). Of those, you can only hope to put enough AP in to unlock the ability to spend money in the second period, not actually make gains on these recruits. Any other team with a normal resource allocation can double to triple the amount of AP you can invest, putting you at an extreme AP deficit before you even get to send visits. Given how overpowered AP appear to be at the moment, this deficit means that you likely will never be able to attain VH status, and can hope to reach High and force a dice roll with the probability against you. He is incorrect that you can max out effort on 3 recruits, you will be able to max out 2.7 local recruits. In his example he referenced a total of 4 openings, and said you should be able to fill 1 or 2. So in a best case (flawed) scenario, a successful team that recruited excellent players has at best. the chance to fill two of the openings with backups? I fail to see any fairness in punishing success like that.

And moreover, I asked how would YOU allocate resources. Koop/shoe has proven to be a better coach that you by any measure, yet you are the one telling us all to stop being entitled and plan for EE's. I want to know how YOU would approach the situation. You know, how would YOU, specifically, plan for it?

Posted by CoachSpud on 12/1/2016 6:28:00 PM (view original):
"Spud-- A lower tier D+ school should not be competing for a recruit with an A- Big 6 school. That recruit should be out of there league. That is a reflection of how things really work."

This is HD, not RL. In HD, that idea is a reflection of a sense of entitlement and incomplete understanding of 3.0. While common in RL, it isn't even absolutely true there.

When you are done explaining how you would allocate resources in a multiple EE situation, please find me one real life example of a D+ level school competing with an A- for a recruit? Just one.

snafu, your posts all read the same. "Hard work, bide your time, blah, blah, blah.." Agreed. Good life advice. HD isn't life. You can do those things moving from D3 to D2 to low level D1 to mid-level D1 and to the ACC, SEC, etc, etc. But, once you get to the big conference, you can't expect people to be content to be doormats because they are late to the party.

I used an example comparing Frank Martin to Coach Cal a few days ago. I'm not going to look it up but, basically, Martin is wooing the kid big-time. Kid is excited to go to the SEC but he'd like a coach with a better track record, a school that's going to March Madness, a coach that sends guys to the NBA, etc, etc, but SC is the only school talking to him. KY hasn't even sent a letter. Yet, the day before he signs with SC, Coach Cal calls. He goes to KY. That's real life. That's a terrible game to market.
First, KY doesn't contact a player once. They've made some calls, sent some texts, maybe visited.
Second, BMOC in HS is a tough nut to crack. He loves the attention. SC gave it, KY did not. Maybe he goes to KY but, just maybe, he tells Coach Cal to GFH for coming to him so late.
Finally, real life doesn't always translate.

In this game, you're not screwing SC out of recruiting. You're screwing a paying customer. It's tough to retain customers like that. You can't just let Paying Customer B dump all his resources into a fake player and then let Paying Customer A snatch said fake player on the last couple of cycles because he's at a better school. Somebody is going to get screwed. PCB who did all the right things or PCA who got to the better school first? We obviously disagree on who gets screwed but it's a person paying money to play this game(or maybe using credits). IMO, it can't be the guy who did everything right.

All chest-puffing and posturing aside, the HD you want has 20 owners in D1. Maybe that's a great game. I don't know. Maybe those who didn't start early should accept D2/D3 is their place. Maybe that's how it should be. Maybe there should be 30 worlds with D1 only. Maybe they should crank out a new one every 90 days to start a new race to Duke/Kentucky. But it's not a good way to turn a profit. The way to turn a profit is to have 150 users in D1 fighting for 1 of the 64(or 68 if HD is that far along) spots. And having the Loyola Maramounts of the game locking down a couple of NBA future guys from time to time.

I guess I just fundamentally approach the game from a different place than you. I want a game where when coach Cal calls the recruit drops everything and I get screwed (or more appropriately, beaten). It makes the game harder (can't even count how many times I had that happen to me--it forced me to get better), and I am here for the competition. I was gladly paying for HD for a chance to play that ruthless game. As a paying customer, that is what I wanted out of HD and that is what I wanted to beat other people at. I guess it is naive of me to assume other people are here for the competition, and maybe they are just here for the chance to have their name attached to a school they like? I don't know, that doesn't make any sense to me. I want punishing competition that rewards excellence and punishes mediocrity. As a paying customer (well, formerly paying, still working off those credits) I look at HD 3.0 and see a game that punishes excellence and rewards mediocrity. I don't expect you to agree with me at this point, on account of what a dick I generally am, but I would at least like you to acknowledge my position. I feel like there is no more competition, that the dynasty part of HD is gone. I was that paying customer getting "screwed" and I liked it. It is the reason I play HD--to overcome superior competition and reach the top, to climax as it were. I realize how dirty that sounds and that is not the direction I meant to go but I do feel like it encapsulates my sentiment today so I am sticking with it.

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/1/2016 6:53:00 PM (view original):
All chest-puffing and posturing aside, the HD you want has 20 owners in D1. Maybe that's a great game. I don't know. Maybe those who didn't start early should accept D2/D3 is their place. Maybe that's how it should be. Maybe there should be 30 worlds with D1 only. Maybe they should crank out a new one every 90 days to start a new race to Duke/Kentucky. But it's not a good way to turn a profit. The way to turn a profit is to have 150 users in D1 fighting for 1 of the 64(or 68 if HD is that far along) spots. And having the Loyola Maramounts of the game locking down a couple of NBA future guys from time to time.

I am curious if there are other coaches who crave the ruthless competition I do and are willing to pay for it, or if the majority are just here to pull 5-Stars at Loyola Maramount. I understand your argument about profitability, and my counter is that I won't pay to play the game they have created because it has removed the reason I started playing in the first place. I disagree that my vision of HD has 20 owners. I played happily at UNH for a long time before jumping to Nova. There is competition at every level, just harder competition the higher you go. I only left UNH when I found out my rival had been cheating--probably would have stayed there a lot longer to see how high I could get them (I left them at a high B+ if I recall). My point being, not getting to compete for the national championship every year did not deter me from enjoying the game. My goal was making the second round. One year I upset #1 seed Kansas and made the sweet 16. I was happier with that then when I made the final four with Nova.

I fully understand and accept your position. Now you should fully understand that I don't want anything given to me. I was offered a spreadsheet by an accomplished owner. I declined because A) I like to learn on my own B) I've answered every HBD question asked but refused to give up my spreadsheets. If I stick with the game, I'll work my way to D1 just as I did 10 years ago. But, when I reach the ACC, I want to have a chance at a game-changing player. It doesn't even have to be a good chance, just a shot. That was not the case in 2006. If Duke or UNC showed interest, I was done. The better owner got those schools first. It wasn't like I could hit the gym and beat their *** on the street. They simply had more resources and, if they wanted a guy, they got the guy. I could have stuck around 10 years and maybe, just maybe, cracked that nut. But this is an internet game. Surely I had something to do that I enjoyed more. I did. I don't think I was alone. So WifS changed the game. Maybe they went too far in the other direction. I don't know. But I know they needed more users. Otherwise, HD is Clutch Dynasty. Try to join that now.

Here. I don't know if you can access this. I wasn't great but I'm not "Hand my 5 stars" either.

https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/CoachProfile/Default.aspx?uid=222248&wid=5

What I found at VaTech was that the road to success as a bottom-feeder ACC team was longer than I cared to travel.

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/1/2016 7:02:00 PM (view original):
I fully understand and accept your position. Now you should fully understand that I don't want anything given to me. I was offered a spreadsheet by an accomplished owner. I declined because A) I like to learn on my own B) I've answered every HBD question asked but refused to give up my spreadsheets. If I stick with the game, I'll work my way to D1 just as I did 10 years ago. But, when I reach the ACC, I want to have a chance at a game-changing player. It doesn't even have to be a good chance, just a shot. That was not the case in 2006. If Duke or UNC showed interest, I was done. The better owner got those schools first. It wasn't like I could hit the gym and beat their *** on the street. They simply had more resources and, if they wanted a guy, they got the guy. I could have stuck around 10 years and maybe, just maybe, cracked that nut. But this is an internet game. Surely I had something to do that I enjoyed more. I did. I don't think I was alone. So WifS changed the game. Maybe they went too far in the other direction. I don't know. But I know they needed more users. Otherwise, HD is Clutch Dynasty. Try to join that now.

I feel like looking at my record at Nova shows that you can break through. I picked up Nova at a C+ prestige, recruiting against two legendary coaches. The first few seasons I got tossed around, but then I learned what worked and learned to compete with them. I got up to an A prestige, they wouldn't touch some of my recruits, and I vied for the conference championship every year. The chance to succeed was there in HD, and I think there went waaaaay to far in the other direction in an effort to gain more users. As I said, maybe I am the minority who was looking for that type of challenge.

Posted by snafu4u on 12/1/2016 5:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Trentonjoe on 12/1/2016 4:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by snafu4u on 12/1/2016 4:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/1/2016 4:20:00 PM (view original):
Uh, no. It was a race to the top. I was involved. The better owners beat me to Duke, Kentucky, etc. And, when I arrived, beat the **** out of my VaTech team. And got all the best recruits to ensure they beat the **** out of me next season. I played 4 seasons of that, made marginal improvement and decided to play HBD because you really did have the same resources when the season started.

FWIW, this is a sim game. You should probably calm down just a tad. It's not worth having a stroke over. Seriously.

You again state the problem so well. You got to a big 6 school, couldn't figure out how to play, and quit. Millennial. I got to a big 6 school, I figured out how to play, and I succeeded. Now you are back, and are super stoked that they changed the rules so that now you don't need to learn to play because everyone is exactly the same and nobody has any advantages.

FWIW--you have posted a metric crap ton more than me (literally 845X MORE than me, you have over 40k freaking posts!!!), so I am a little worried you might be on your death bed with how concerned you are if we go by your logic. Otherwise, I can only interpret it to mean that once again you don't have an answer and are doing your best to deflect.

Also, how close was I on the age guess? Also also, did you play left back when you earned your soccer participation trophies? I bet you did....that is where they put kids who can't compete but who's parents get really upset when they don't get any PT.

Mikes n his 40s. He's pretty much an anti millennial.

And aaying everyone under 30 doesn't want to work for success is pretty much a dick move. And wrong.

I disagree. I can count on one hand the number of people under 30 I know who work hard. I worked in academia for 8 years before leaving for the private sector. I taught a range of courses (at a major basketball university) and was utterly shocked and dismayed at the entitlement displayed by my students. When the did poorly on a test, I would invariably get a phone call from their parents, screaming at me "We pay your salary, how dare you give a low grade to my special little snowflake". I got sick of the weekly phone calls, the students who would come into my office and cry like babies because they got a C on a paper, hoping I would change the grade (when I wouldn't, I would then get a phone call about that from their parents). When I started seeing the behavior creeping into the incoming graduate students, I left and started a small business in town so I could get even with all these spoiled little fops and their helicopter parents by duping them out of their money. So far it has been a colossal change for the good. But back to the point, 99% of people under 32 that I have encountered are entitled brats that wouldn't know how to work hard if their life depended on it. Call me a dick if you want (I really can be a dick when it comes down to it), but my position is based off of extensive experience, and not wrong.

You seem friendly.

trentonjoe said it took you 9 years to compete for a NT. That's a lot of trials and tribulations for an internet game. Not being facetious but good on you. Not many, including myself, will wait that long to compete in a somewhat meaningless endeavor.

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/1/2016 7:15:00 PM (view original):
trentonjoe said it took you 9 years to compete for a NT. That's a lot of trials and tribulations for an internet game. Not being facetious but good on you. Not many, including myself, will wait that long to compete in a somewhat meaningless endeavor.

Mike : what's the point of all this. Move on.

Posted by zorzii on 12/1/2016 7:17:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/1/2016 7:15:00 PM (view original):
trentonjoe said it took you 9 years to compete for a NT. That's a lot of trials and tribulations for an internet game. Not being facetious but good on you. Not many, including myself, will wait that long to compete in a somewhat meaningless endeavor.

Mike : what's the point of all this. Move on.

Haven't we danced this dance? You're an authority on nothing. I'll move on when I want to move. I'll discuss what I want to discuss.

If you'd rather not be involved, please do so. That will prevent your meaningless posts in the future. Thanks in advance for your non-participation.

Was I more clear this time?

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/1/2016 7:15:00 PM (view original):
trentonjoe said it took you 9 years to compete for a NT. That's a lot of trials and tribulations for an internet game. Not being facetious but good on you. Not many, including myself, will wait that long to compete in a somewhat meaningless endeavor.

Please read my response to him. I stayed in DII for a long time because I loved the competition in my conference. Followed my rival to the patriot league. Stayed there for a while and got UNH up to a high B+ prestige. Had no plans on leaving until I discovered my rival had been cheating, so I moved up to Nova. Took a few months after taking over Nova to start competing at an A level. The 7.5 years before I went DI I was a paying customer loving the game, loving the competition I had found in DII.

Posted by snafu4u on 12/1/2016 7:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/1/2016 7:15:00 PM (view original):
trentonjoe said it took you 9 years to compete for a NT. That's a lot of trials and tribulations for an internet game. Not being facetious but good on you. Not many, including myself, will wait that long to compete in a somewhat meaningless endeavor.

Please read my response to him. I stayed in DII for a long time because I loved the competition in my conference. Followed my rival to the patriot league. Stayed there for a while and got UNH up to a high B+ prestige. Had no plans on leaving until I discovered my rival had been cheating, so I moved up to Nova. Took a few months after taking over Nova to start competing at an A level. The 7.5 years before I went DI I was a paying customer loving the game, loving the competition I had found in DII.

That's fair. As I said, I was only reading a couple of lines of your posts.

So it was a year and a half at D1 before contending. What's that? 10-12 seasons? Maybe I should have stuck it out another 6-8 seasons. If I had, maybe I'm you extolling the virtues of 2.0. That's pretty funny if you think about it.