Who says this game is about Elite Big6 programs? It's ridiculous to think the entire focal point should be that. If it is, instead of 10 worlds with 380ish schools, make it 55 worlds with 72 schools.

Posted by ab90 on 12/12/2016 11:46:00 PM (view original):
The title is the first question.

The second question is how long and how much success (rough estimates) does it take to qualify for an elite job at the D1 level.

The third question is why is taking over a D1 job mid-season so ******* difficult in recruiting? I can't compete with D3 schools. AS A B+ PRESTIGE, I CANT ******* COMPETE WITH SCHOOLS LIKE MUSKINGUM AND OGLETHORPE AND ALBION AND AMHERST? THE **** IS THAT ABOUT? This has nearly been enough to drive me back to D2 before I've coached a game at D1.

Are D2 and D3 inherently more fun, to most people?

Jeez. There are some ignorant folks that are mixing up the discussion. The answers are:

1. There are so many open elite D1 positions because many long-time users that were qualified for those posts don't like the changes and have stopped playing.
2. If you are trying to apply for an A baseline / A present-prestige position, then that's going to take multiple (5 or 6) consecutive NT seasons at D1. If you are hoping for an B+ baseline / beat to hell C present-prestige position, then that might be a possible to jump from multiple seasons of D2 NT success. So, until the job process is changed, you almost have to have built an elite D1 team to move to another elite D1 team. However, it certainly will be possible to build an elite program at about any BCS post.
3. This is where everyone is talking ****... The problem at D1 is that the D3 & D2 teams have been pushing over-valued AP into the recruit for the entire first cycle. When you take over at the start of cycle #2, you are completely behind the 8 ball! The coach you've replaced, human or sim, probably didn't put any useful effort into recruiting. You probably can beat a D2 or D3 team on a "late" recruit, but some may sign before you can unlock and spend any money ("whenever" or early preferences can be a problem).
4. No. The job change takeover before cycle #2 is a complete disaster at every level. It is just worse at D1 as you watch recruits sign down to D2 & D3 while you are trying to unlock actions. Following years do not have the same problem....although those with very unexpected EE departures can be put back in the same boat.

the recruiting two step is a chronic problem for transitions - the transition for teams with EEs and the transition for coaches moving to new teams

Now, perhaps that is intended - odd decision to make it harder for a customer to move up or over from team to team.

Zorzii - I completely agree with you that Jackman going to a D2 school is a bit of a joke. I was battling with USciences for him and I think I even had a better than even chance of signing him. When you offered a scholarship from PSU I immediately stopped putting effort into him because I thought, incorrectly, that I'd have no shot as Ashland trying to beat out Penn State. The fact that you promised a start makes it even more ****ed up.

Maybe it will normalize a bit as people get better at recruiting in 3.0, but something probably needs to be tweaked at least a little.

Posted by mrslam34 on 12/13/2016 3:16:00 PM (view original):
Zorzii - I completely agree with you that Jackman going to a D2 school is a bit of a joke. I was battling with USciences for him and I think I even had a better than even chance of signing him. When you offered a scholarship from PSU I immediately stopped putting effort into him because I thought, incorrectly, that I'd have no shot as Ashland trying to beat out Penn State. The fact that you promised a start makes it even more ****ed up.

Maybe it will normalize a bit as people get better at recruiting in 3.0, but something probably needs to be tweaked at least a little.

Some folks think it's allright but let it be known that the kid is a one star prospect, 616 overall frosh with upside. He will end up at 85 ath and over 80 def, could score the ball consistently too as a junior and senior. He is a legit D1 player.

Posted by mamxet on 12/13/2016 3:12:00 PM (view original):
the recruiting two step is a chronic problem for transitions - the transition for teams with EEs and the transition for coaches moving to new teams

Now, perhaps that is intended - odd decision to make it harder for a customer to move up or over from team to team.

It's been mentioned a few times about how elite coaches staying at D3 makes it harder for newbies to come in and compete. I'd think that WIS would want to encourage these coaches to move up to D2 and D1. But maybe not. Who knows.

Posted by lakevin on 12/13/2016 2:27:00 PM (view original):
See Duncan Robinson. Robinson was at the best D-III academic school in the country (Williams College) and led Williams to the 2014 national title game, scoring 17 PPG and winning a national freshman of the year award.

Then the D-I coaches started calling and his D-III coach left for a better job. BING! He transferred to a .500 Michigan team, sat out a year, and is now contributing at 7.8 PPG and 19 mpg for the Wolverines. And that's down from last year when he scored 11.2 PPG.

This is about Elite Big6 programs. And it is broken. Badly. I haven't given up hope that it will be fixed. But it needs to be. Soon.

And there again is something no one seems to be clamoring for. Why aren't stud D3/D2 players transferring to D1 programs in HD? Maybe it's because it'd be really hard to do implement, I'm not sure. But it'd certainly add to the realism, if that's what people want.

Posted by Benis on 12/13/2016 3:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by lakevin on 12/13/2016 2:27:00 PM (view original):
See Duncan Robinson. Robinson was at the best D-III academic school in the country (Williams College) and led Williams to the 2014 national title game, scoring 17 PPG and winning a national freshman of the year award.

Then the D-I coaches started calling and his D-III coach left for a better job. BING! He transferred to a .500 Michigan team, sat out a year, and is now contributing at 7.8 PPG and 19 mpg for the Wolverines. And that's down from last year when he scored 11.2 PPG.

This is about Elite Big6 programs. And it is broken. Badly. I haven't given up hope that it will be fixed. But it needs to be. Soon.

And there again is something no one seems to be clamoring for. Why aren't stud D3/D2 players transferring to D1 programs in HD? Maybe it's because it'd be really hard to do implement, I'm not sure. But it'd certainly add to the realism, if that's what people want.

Last time I looked, IRL D2 players could not transfer to D1 without sitting out a year, but D3 could transfer to D1 just like a JuCo. However, in this game we play under the premise that D3 schools can offer scholarships and sign recruits to LOI.

Posted by Benis on 12/13/2016 3:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mamxet on 12/13/2016 3:12:00 PM (view original):
the recruiting two step is a chronic problem for transitions - the transition for teams with EEs and the transition for coaches moving to new teams

Now, perhaps that is intended - odd decision to make it harder for a customer to move up or over from team to team.

It's been mentioned a few times about how elite coaches staying at D3 makes it harder for newbies to come in and compete. I'd think that WIS would want to encourage these coaches to move up to D2 and D1. But maybe not. Who knows.

I have suggested that rewards start being pared back after 10 - 20 seasons at D3. That would at least give the appearance that D3 was not dominated by long-time users. The howl from coaches that prefer playing at D3 remains astonishing to me. However, it would help in the long term to nudge coaches with 15 seasons at D3 up to D2 or D1.

The reality is that they might be able to re-capture the same post with an ALT-ID anyhow, but, as bad as the current job process is, that would actually be difficult to accomplish.

Posted by rogelio on 12/13/2016 4:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 12/13/2016 3:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mamxet on 12/13/2016 3:12:00 PM (view original):
the recruiting two step is a chronic problem for transitions - the transition for teams with EEs and the transition for coaches moving to new teams

Now, perhaps that is intended - odd decision to make it harder for a customer to move up or over from team to team.

It's been mentioned a few times about how elite coaches staying at D3 makes it harder for newbies to come in and compete. I'd think that WIS would want to encourage these coaches to move up to D2 and D1. But maybe not. Who knows.

I have suggested that rewards start being pared back after 10 - 20 seasons at D3. That would at least give the appearance that D3 was not dominated by long-time users. The howl from coaches that prefer playing at D3 remains astonishing to me. However, it would help in the long term to nudge coaches with 15 seasons at D3 up to D2 or D1.

The reality is that they might be able to re-capture the same post with an ALT-ID anyhow, but, as bad as the current job process is, that would actually be difficult to accomplish.

I mean, I'm certainly in the camp of wanting to keep a couple teams at D3. But I get the opinion that you'd want coaches like me to move up. Makes sense.

But right now, the biggest barrier to encouraging coaches to move up is that if they did we'd have NO ONE at D3. You'd have worlds with 20-30 teams at start of new coach signups. Tark is at 46 right now...

Did Tark run at 46 last season or is that just the number renewed at the transition?

My expectation has always been that the ground-floor on population should be 64, but with a normal floor expectancy of ~96 at each level. There is no legitimate reason to expect more humans than post-season slots in any given world at each level. It would really be foolish NOT to get a team in Tark, if the number had dropped below 64. That is, unless the common wisdom has arrived at the conclusion that the game sucks at every level. I don't think we're there yet.

I can't remember what it was during the season at Tark. I had picked up a team there but just moved to D2.

So 46 is the number right now with new coach signups starting tomorrow. So maybe it'll spike up to 150 with a whole bunch of free seasons being used or something. But we need to retain a significant portion of those. I still maintain that a free season giveaway is a bad way to get people to try this game out, but that's just my 2 cents.

Posted by Benis on 12/13/2016 3:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mamxet on 12/13/2016 3:12:00 PM (view original):
the recruiting two step is a chronic problem for transitions - the transition for teams with EEs and the transition for coaches moving to new teams

Now, perhaps that is intended - odd decision to make it harder for a customer to move up or over from team to team.

It's been mentioned a few times about how elite coaches staying at D3 makes it harder for newbies to come in and compete. I'd think that WIS would want to encourage these coaches to move up to D2 and D1. But maybe not. Who knows.

As long as a modicum of success allows one to move to D2, this isn't an issue. I've said before that no one, or something close to that, is joining HD for NC glory at W Conn St. It's just a stepping stone to reach a school you see in March.

Simply put, I don't have to play your D3 powerhouse until the NT.

I have not changed jobs in 3.0 and doubt that I will for a long time

but people say that the two step makes the first season at a new job painful - more painful.

I agree with Mike that the presence of some exceptional D3 programs wont matter too much - but if moving up to D2 - and then DI - is turrible in season one, that likely will matter to some.

Taking a new team in D3 is horrible in S1, my 7-21 record can attest to that, so I'm not sure, after suffering thru that, getting smoked in my first season in D2 or D1 will be that painful. You just know it's likely to happen.