I wonder what would happen if HD did away with baseline entirely. My theory is that coaches would still gravitate to the big name schools, just because they are big name schools, and those conferences would fill up, which would cause the big name schools to still have more successful programs, which would conform to reality. However, I think it would draw more coaches to Division 1 because a coach would at least feel he had a chance to build up a program at a smaller school because an artificial baseline prestige would not keep dragging the prestige down. I'd like to see WIS create a world like this sometime just to see what would happen. My poll is, if there was no baseline, do you feel that Big 6 teams would still mostly be full?

voted yes, but my favorite (and hometown) team is Syracuse...

I think it would be great if they removed baseline prestige. In a game where our fake success and failure determines our prestige, real life baseline prestige should not influence the game. Without it, we could truly build whatever school into a major power (as the game advertises) and we could see mid major conferences become more successful than big 6 conferences. Big 6 schools will always attract users because they are well known, but the potential to make mid majors conferences into power conferences would be much easier and the worlds could look much different.

Voted no but I would jump on St. John's if they were open (hometown team and alma mater)

Posted by jetsrok68 on 5/26/2013 12:47:00 PM (view original):
Voted no but I would jump on St. John's if they were open (hometown team and alma mater)

Same (except Michigan, instead of St. Johns).

sorry chap  - hate the idea - no baseline world = DII

I would still try to get my favorite st,johns or usc or Syracuse.

I'm either into a no-baseline world,  or just strongly weakening the effects of baseline prestige. D1 is no fun because of the extreme difficulty of  being able to make a small school competitive. 

Posted by bbunch on 5/26/2013 1:23:00 PM (view original):
I'm either into a no-baseline world,  or just strongly weakening the effects of baseline prestige. D1 is no fun because of the extreme difficulty of  being able to make a small school competitive. 

even with the prestige and money advantages that exist today, it was much more reasonable to try to compete with the big boys from a small d1 school, until seble butchered the **** out of recruit generation in the "new engine". i agree the advantages should be lessened, only pointing out that in and of themselves, they dont make competition impossible. its the combination of the recruit generation and the advantages that make it so ******, that caused so many people to quit d1 when the new engine came out. how a lead developer can put out a change that costs all of d1 close to a third of all teams, and not acknowledge there is a problem, is beyond me. theres only a few options i guess - arrogance, ignorance, and sheer mental insanity.

Posted by mullycj on 5/26/2013 1:09:00 PM (view original):
sorry chap  - hate the idea - no baseline world = DII

Not really because the difference between D1 and D2 is about recruiting strategy and baseline prestige has nothing to do with that.

I also think that this hypothetical no-baseline world should have floating baselines (I think that's the correct terminology). For example, one could go to Butler or whatever, build it up/ have success, and then this would make the school's baseline higher in the long-term. I think it'd be cool for one to be able to make their favorite small school a D1 powerhouse. The floating baseline would differentiate this D1 world from DII and DIII, and could be really interesting and fun.

Guess I'm the only one from a low major D1 alma mater around here?

Posted by paynebrow on 5/27/2013 1:10:00 AM (view original):
Guess I'm the only one from a low major D1 alma mater around here?

Try NAIA...my school (the 2013 national champion Georgetown Tigers) is  not even represented in this game.

I agree with bbunch, however. I've never played D1 but would likely try it if they made the mid-majors more competitive.

This is kind of an indirect comparison, but I always kind of enjoyed in NCAA Football 2004 when you're 40 seasons in on a 60 season dynasty or so and Ohio or San Diego State or SMU or Navy is making the championship game every once in a while, even in spite of the BCS rules, guaranteeing the 6 BCS conference champions auto-bids to BCS bowl games.

Since there are/were real players in the game, all the "big boys" started at the top and their prestiges were high, but there was no need to "baseline" them because their fate was TBD in your hands.  I'm not a fan of baseline prestige, especially when you just think about the "what if" concept.