You know, at D1, that the cost to play on a top recruit is max effort (maybe not 30 minutes), but certainly some minutes, 20hv +1cv. To say you have a backup plan assumes the existence of comparable recruits later in recruiting. Some exist, but many of those were someone else's primary target, so when you move in earnest in those, you are playing from far behind.

Everyone has a backup plan, but that doesn't mean they have the available resources (in terms of AP/cycles) to effect the plan. The question is one of human behavior: if you develop back up plans A, B & C, doesn't thay cede the advantage to the user that ignores investing in contingencies and maxes out effort on A?

I could admit that it's an interesting experiment to see what choice folks make, but there is a cost to developing too many backup plans... especially so when even one EE means you are handicapped by not having resources available until very late in the game.

No, a back-up plan does not assume comparable recruits. It assumes lesser players or it would be a primary plan.

Everyone should know what they need to complete a back-up plan. Or they should learn.

Finally, EE is a mystery to me. However, for an owner who has experienced EE losses, I would think he'd have a pretty good idea if a player is EE quality. If he is, the time to plan for it is before it happens.

This isn't HD knowledge. It's common sense.

I would agree that those getting the EEs are some combination of talented and/or lucky (with some recruits it might be more lucky and with some recruits talent may be the factor) but in any event resources (APs and budget) are the most important factor - particularly when combined with a high prestige.

So the point is if you keep giving people resources to replace the talent then there is literally no downside to recruiting EE level players. Sure, you might only get them for two or three years, but the reason successful teams have ALWAYS pursued those players is because even for the shorter period of time they get them they are worth it. It's not even a consideration. Give me a choice between a 5 star guy who stays two or three season that is already close to max levels in all his key areas and I'll take that over the guy I have to develop EVERY time.

The downside now is I don't WANT to recruit three or four "Five Star" guys anymore or I wind up with the problem that johnsensing complains about in another thread. The reason I don't want to is the repercussions of doing so deter me from that approach. As it is now, I no longer think it's the best strategy if I want to have a team that can consistently challenge for titles. However, if you give me those resources early along with my A+ prestige I'd probably not feel as deterred from pursuing multiple EEs because there would no longer be a reason not to, I'd now have the resources to compliment my talent and luck.

So the RL Kentucky example is relevant in that anyone can still shoot for three, four or five EE level players in 3.0 and they will probably have a very talented team that competes for a title but the risk in that strategy in 3.0 is likely to come at the cost of consistency just as it does in real life.

The decision now is to build teams that will consistently challenge for titles or build a team that will likely have ups and downs and that adds a level of strategy that didn't exist in 2.0 ... There are more ways to build a winner now and that's a good thing.

By comparable, I mean able to play competitively at BCS, not top tier. The laugh here is that everyone is going through about season 2 or 3 in the new game. With no knowledge, you lambast all other users for not having well developed backup plans. Ok.

My point has been that the developer suggested the same...have a backup plan. However, no one has explained how that's feasible when you know a competitor will go all-in on your primary.

To develop a backup plan that is remotely comparable or even playable at BCS means allocating AP early (zero sum, those are no longer available on your primary). And with EE, the AP are not available in period 1. So, you're dealing from a lesser hand and you're asked to spilt that to develop back up options. Do it and I'll beat you! Don't do it and you'll be ridiculed by coach and his ilk.

I don't think I'm lambasting anyone. I think people are complaining about a lack of resources when they know they're going to face a lack of resources. They know that they are not going to get every primary target. When you add those two things together, you know need a secondary objective. Everyone is your position is facing the same obstacle.

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/30/2016 10:00:00 PM (view original):
I don't think I'm lambasting anyone. I think people are complaining about a lack of resources when they know they're going to face a lack of resources. They know that they are not going to get every primary target. When you add those two things together, you know need a secondary objective. Everyone is your position is facing the same obstacle.

What I can tell you is that you haven't really seen how it works. Your back-up B plan is already plan A for another team, your C, the same. If you stick with plan A or shy away from it ( going B or C ) you are still in a battle going all in. The only thing making you breathe is to be vh on a late preference recruit and thinking nobody is coming into battle. Say you lose A,B,C... You are left with AP and plan bad player left. You cannot win in D1 with 60 ATH players... I could build a team like this but I would not be competitive. All 70+ AP players are scouted and competed for... Even those reaching 70+ later on. And if you always strategize and get potential players, you will only be able to see Nt two years out of four with an early exit...

So your situation is unique or does it apply to everyone? Because, if it applies to everyone, there's no real problem. It's called a level playing field.

The situation is allright if you get probabilities out of it so you can make some sort of a plan that will stick... Or it is probs that will decide who wins and who loses. I am currently 1 out of 5 in vh to vh battles... 0 out of 2 in h to vh. And 0 out 1 i Vh to H. I took on two d1 teams big six to see if they were ways out of key battles and there is only none unless nobody discovers your stud... You can get 1 to 2 good serviceable player or potential player while avoiding battles but it does not get you to the nt if it's all you strike in four years. Put the game into the hands of those playing it. Let skills or decisions make the difference. Not a VH to VH roll.

Catching up on a couple of points ...

"All people are saying in regards to EE is "give the same resources that you'd get if a player graduated". That's it. Nothing more. Not a hand out. Not another advantage."
LOL. Hmm, I missed those posts amidst the blizzard of posts asking for extra AP’s and early declarations. In fact, I think those posts don’t exist.

And for all of you so into the ad hominem attacks, I’ll give you a quota. I’m asking for one ad hominem attack from each coach who has a #1 and #3 recruiting class in the conference in his first two seasons at a bottom tier D1 school with D+ prestige. I expect a lot of silence. On second thought, no, really I expect that haters gotta hate.

“So, assuming they do understand how the game is designed, how can they NOT have a back-up plan in place? Or is it just the standard ******** and moaning about the game design?” “This isn't HD knowledge. It's common sense.”
You got it. The majority of D1 coaches are preparing exactly as you describe. The rest, yeah, “standard ******** and moaning.” And common sense is not so common, is it?

Here’s another guy who gets it: “The decision now is to build teams that will consistently challenge for titles or build a team that will likely have ups and downs and that adds a level of strategy that didn't exist in 2.0 ... There are more ways to build a winner now and that's a good thing.” And it’s going to take more skill in the more competitive environment that now exists.

As long as the majority of D1 coaches are coping wih EE's already, the few complainers aren't going to get much traction.

Posted by CoachSpud on 12/1/2016 1:35:00 AM (view original):
Catching up on a couple of points ...

"All people are saying in regards to EE is "give the same resources that you'd get if a player graduated". That's it. Nothing more. Not a hand out. Not another advantage."
LOL. Hmm, I missed those posts amidst the blizzard of posts asking for extra AP’s and early declarations. In fact, I think those posts don’t exist.

And for all of you so into the ad hominem attacks, I’ll give you a quota. I’m asking for one ad hominem attack from each coach who has a #1 and #3 recruiting class in the conference in his first two seasons at a bottom tier D1 school with D+ prestige. I expect a lot of silence. On second thought, no, really I expect that haters gotta hate.

“So, assuming they do understand how the game is designed, how can they NOT have a back-up plan in place? Or is it just the standard ******** and moaning about the game design?” “This isn't HD knowledge. It's common sense.”
You got it. The majority of D1 coaches are preparing exactly as you describe. The rest, yeah, “standard ******** and moaning.” And common sense is not so common, is it?

Here’s another guy who gets it: “The decision now is to build teams that will consistently challenge for titles or build a team that will likely have ups and downs and that adds a level of strategy that didn't exist in 2.0 ... There are more ways to build a winner now and that's a good thing.” And it’s going to take more skill in the more competitive environment that now exists.

As long as the majority of D1 coaches are coping wih EE's already, the few complainers aren't going to get much traction.

There is no majority nor people liking the rolling at the end of the battle

Posted by zorzii on 12/1/2016 6:29:00 AM (view original):

Posted by CoachSpud on 12/1/2016 1:35:00 AM (view original):
Catching up on a couple of points ...

"All people are saying in regards to EE is "give the same resources that you'd get if a player graduated". That's it. Nothing more. Not a hand out. Not another advantage."
LOL. Hmm, I missed those posts amidst the blizzard of posts asking for extra AP’s and early declarations. In fact, I think those posts don’t exist.

And for all of you so into the ad hominem attacks, I’ll give you a quota. I’m asking for one ad hominem attack from each coach who has a #1 and #3 recruiting class in the conference in his first two seasons at a bottom tier D1 school with D+ prestige. I expect a lot of silence. On second thought, no, really I expect that haters gotta hate.

“So, assuming they do understand how the game is designed, how can they NOT have a back-up plan in place? Or is it just the standard ******** and moaning about the game design?” “This isn't HD knowledge. It's common sense.”
You got it. The majority of D1 coaches are preparing exactly as you describe. The rest, yeah, “standard ******** and moaning.” And common sense is not so common, is it?

Here’s another guy who gets it: “The decision now is to build teams that will consistently challenge for titles or build a team that will likely have ups and downs and that adds a level of strategy that didn't exist in 2.0 ... There are more ways to build a winner now and that's a good thing.” And it’s going to take more skill in the more competitive environment that now exists.

As long as the majority of D1 coaches are coping wih EE's already, the few complainers aren't going to get much traction.

There is no majority nor people liking the rolling at the end of the battle

I don't think either of you can make a statement like you have with any certainty.

How many users play HD? How many are complaining? How many never post?

Exactly. Throw out a poll and I will buy it.

Posted by shoe3 on 11/30/2016 8:36:00 PM (view original):

Posted by snafu4u on 11/30/2016 7:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 11/30/2016 7:29:00 PM (view original):
Jackson St is low d1 and he's been there for 2 seasons. I'm one year into a couple low d1 rebuilds, and sure my D2 is quite a bit better than both, and likely will be for a couple years. Don't be dense.The petty crap is getting ridiculous.

Says the guy who also has zero DI experience, nevermind high DI experience and therefor has no place discussing the problems facing high DI programs. You are no different then Spudhole. A coach with no experience at DI trying to dispense information as if he was a seasoned vet. The petty crap is coming from guys like you and Spud.

This is a stupid response. First of all, I play as pkoopman as well, and have 2 big 6 programs I'm 10-12 seasons in. Both were rebuilding doormats, and both are now about ready to start competing for the types of players we're talking about. You don't know who anyone else plays as. This ad hominem junk is a cop out, because you apparently don't have anything useful to say yourself.

If you don't think I have had enough success to listen to, that's fine. Block me if you want, make your life easier. But you're not a shareholder, and this isn't a board election. You're a customer, like me. My opinion and preference as to how the game plays matter as much as yours do.

By the way, are you sure you're good enough to comment? I mean, no championships... took how long to get past the second round with a big 6 school. Only 1 trip to the national tournament in your first 6 seasons at low D1, I mean come on, those conference titles are pretty easy after a couple seasons of your own recruits, right?

You really nailed me here. After losing on a last second 3 in the championship game I should know my place. Making three out of the seven last Final Fours is meaningless if I can't seal the deal.

If you don't post, you may not frequent the forums. I don't think a poll would prove anything unless the vast majority of HD players voted. Unhappy people are a lot more likely to complain than happy people are to expound upon the virtues of 3.0. That's just America.

Weren't we just talking about how so many B6 D1 jobs were now open because coaches are leaving? Is it because of EEs or something else? Hard to say. But to say that the 'majority of coaches are coping with it' is based upon personal opinion without any evidence. We have no idea what the majority of coaches who have experienced EEs feel about it or how they've handled it because the majority of coaches don't post on here. So unless someone has sitemailed all these coaches, they're just pulling this info out their bum.