Posted by CoachSpud on 1/3/2017 8:51:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 1/3/2017 8:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jskenner on 1/3/2017 7:08:00 PM (view original):
Actually for me the oddest omission of preference by the guys who produced 3.0 is the lack of "coach history of EEs" pref, which would CLEARLY fit their stated desire to retain "realism," not to mention it would seem to be a well-designed counter weight to the newly minted struggle to run an "EE" dominant program.

I pushed early and often in beta for a preference for "future priorities", that would include academics and playing pro ball. Players who preferred academics would look at team gpa. Players who wanted to play in the pros would value a coach's record of getting players drafted.

"Players who wanted to play in the pros would value a coach's record of getting players drafted."

I'm surprised more D1 coaches didn't pick up on a rich-get-richer artifice like that.

Would you make the argument that D1 recruits don't care how many NBA players a college produces? I understand you want to call all D1 coaches whiners that want everything made easy, but that suggestion actually sounds really solid.

Posted by mbriese on 1/4/2017 12:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by CoachSpud on 1/3/2017 8:51:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 1/3/2017 8:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jskenner on 1/3/2017 7:08:00 PM (view original):
Actually for me the oddest omission of preference by the guys who produced 3.0 is the lack of "coach history of EEs" pref, which would CLEARLY fit their stated desire to retain "realism," not to mention it would seem to be a well-designed counter weight to the newly minted struggle to run an "EE" dominant program.

I pushed early and often in beta for a preference for "future priorities", that would include academics and playing pro ball. Players who preferred academics would look at team gpa. Players who wanted to play in the pros would value a coach's record of getting players drafted.

"Players who wanted to play in the pros would value a coach's record of getting players drafted."

I'm surprised more D1 coaches didn't pick up on a rich-get-richer artifice like that.

Would you make the argument that D1 recruits don't care how many NBA players a college produces? I understand you want to call all D1 coaches whiners that want everything made easy, but that suggestion actually sounds really solid.

Are you talking about RL or HD here? If RL. I consider that borderline irrelevant. If HD, I look at whether a change would improve game playability top to bottom sufficiently to make the coding efforts worthwhile. There are several other things HD needs from the developers a lot more urgently.

Posted by CoachSpud on 1/4/2017 12:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mbriese on 1/4/2017 12:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by CoachSpud on 1/3/2017 8:51:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 1/3/2017 8:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jskenner on 1/3/2017 7:08:00 PM (view original):
Actually for me the oddest omission of preference by the guys who produced 3.0 is the lack of "coach history of EEs" pref, which would CLEARLY fit their stated desire to retain "realism," not to mention it would seem to be a well-designed counter weight to the newly minted struggle to run an "EE" dominant program.

I pushed early and often in beta for a preference for "future priorities", that would include academics and playing pro ball. Players who preferred academics would look at team gpa. Players who wanted to play in the pros would value a coach's record of getting players drafted.

"Players who wanted to play in the pros would value a coach's record of getting players drafted."

I'm surprised more D1 coaches didn't pick up on a rich-get-richer artifice like that.

Would you make the argument that D1 recruits don't care how many NBA players a college produces? I understand you want to call all D1 coaches whiners that want everything made easy, but that suggestion actually sounds really solid.

Are you talking about RL or HD here? If RL. I consider that borderline irrelevant. If HD, I look at whether a change would improve game playability top to bottom sufficiently to make the coding efforts worthwhile. There are several other things HD needs from the developers a lot more urgently.

I agree that there are more urgent concerns that I'd prefer the developers look at first, but I still like that suggestion. I doubt it would affect D2 and D3 recruiting much if at all, and it'd offer a very slight bonus to those schools that are hurt by EEs. I haven't coached in D1 yet, but the nerdy side of me would really enjoy seeing players I recruit drafted to NBA teams (I understand it's completely fictional, but I'm a dorky sports fan), and think it would make sense to give schools that produce NBA talent a slight single-preference advantage in getting top tier recruits that have their sights set on the NBA. Some suggestions I've seen favor D1 coaches too drastically, but I think that added preference suggestion would be a pretty neat add once larger concerns are hopefully addressed.

Congrats on your title tarvolon. My plan if I get to your position is to add a few transfers to keep competitive for one or two seasons while my younger players develop for the next title run. See that done in major college ball....

Posted by CoachSpud on 1/4/2017 12:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mbriese on 1/4/2017 12:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by CoachSpud on 1/3/2017 8:51:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 1/3/2017 8:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jskenner on 1/3/2017 7:08:00 PM (view original):
Actually for me the oddest omission of preference by the guys who produced 3.0 is the lack of "coach history of EEs" pref, which would CLEARLY fit their stated desire to retain "realism," not to mention it would seem to be a well-designed counter weight to the newly minted struggle to run an "EE" dominant program.

I pushed early and often in beta for a preference for "future priorities", that would include academics and playing pro ball. Players who preferred academics would look at team gpa. Players who wanted to play in the pros would value a coach's record of getting players drafted.

"Players who wanted to play in the pros would value a coach's record of getting players drafted."

I'm surprised more D1 coaches didn't pick up on a rich-get-richer artifice like that.

Would you make the argument that D1 recruits don't care how many NBA players a college produces? I understand you want to call all D1 coaches whiners that want everything made easy, but that suggestion actually sounds really solid.

Are you talking about RL or HD here? If RL. I consider that borderline irrelevant. If HD, I look at whether a change would improve game playability top to bottom sufficiently to make the coding efforts worthwhile. There are several other things HD needs from the developers a lot more urgently.

Are you seriously arguing that in RL recruits don't care how many NBA players a college produces? If so I am aghast at either your ignorance of college basketball or self inflicted stupidity. For years and years at Kentucky that has been coach Cal's selling point. At UConn (my hometown school) that was virtually the only selling point under both Calhoun and Ollie--and has been cited as such by countless recruits. I can't take you seriously when you say things as unfounded and utterly ridiculous as players getting drafted is irrelevant. There is a volume of history against you.

Snafu - you missed this

"There are several other things HD needs from the developers a lot more urgently."

What?! You mean HD isn't perfect???

"Are you seriously arguing that in RL recruits don't care how many NBA players a college produces?"

Are you seriously suggesting that that is your level of reading comprehension?

Posted by CoachSpud on 1/4/2017 4:48:00 PM (view original):
"Are you seriously arguing that in RL recruits don't care how many NBA players a college produces?"

Are you seriously suggesting that that is your level of reading comprehension?

You wrote: "If RL. I consider that borderline irrelevant."

Posted by snafu4u on 1/4/2017 5:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by CoachSpud on 1/4/2017 4:48:00 PM (view original):
"Are you seriously arguing that in RL recruits don't care how many NBA players a college produces?"

Are you seriously suggesting that that is your level of reading comprehension?

You wrote: "If RL. I consider that borderline irrelevant."

Exactly, because we are talking about HD, not RL. Duh.

"Are you talking about RL or HD here? If RL. I consider that borderline irrelevant. If HD..."

This reads as saying: If talking about real life, you consider [how many players a coach has had drafted] borderline irrelevant.

If talking about HD, you think it would be important to consider whether nor not it has a positive impact on the game as a whole.

But again, you wrote that if talking about real life you "consider that borderline irrelevant."

If what you meant to say was "if he is talking about real life, you consider the whole point irrelevant to the discussion, regardless of its bearing in real life recruiting, because this is a game and real life doesn't matter at all," then I think you have some agreement issues with your use of "that".

Good try, doesn't fly.

Posted by CoachSpud on 1/4/2017 5:30:00 PM (view original):
Good try, doesn't fly.

lurn ingrish azzhat

Posted by CoachSpud on 1/4/2017 5:30:00 PM (view original):
Good try, doesn't fly.

Snafu - You've been Spudded!

Posted by Benis on 1/4/2017 5:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by CoachSpud on 1/4/2017 5:30:00 PM (view original):
Good try, doesn't fly.

Snafu - You've been Spudded!

I know! He rhymed all over me. He has yet to address a single point I have made with any substance. And he is still a liar and an azzhat; but for some strange reason I feel like I accomplished something.

You didn't. Back patting time is over.