Posted by cbriese on 8/3/2010 5:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by reinsel on 8/3/2010 5:26:00 PM (view original):
There are still a lot of "great" players.  Some are the #1 PF that is already a stud, and some are the #50 PF that has a ton of high potential categories.  That #50 PF isn't being recruited by the A prestige schools, but he is drawing interest from the B-/C+ schools.

I agree the D/D+ schools have it harder, but that is how it should be.  I was able to win NT games with players recruited by a team with prestige of D-/D/D+.  That should be almost impossible now, and that is ok.

But when those D-/D/D+ recruits do win a CT and make the NT, the school will become a C-/C/C+ school, and be able to recruit better, and maybe get to the second round... and keep repeating the cycle of improvement. I always said before that it took at least eight seasons to go from a D team to being a force in the tournament. So now maybe it takes 12. But that is pure speculation, because no one can be sure until we see 4 to 8 to 12 seasons with new recruits.

No, no one can be 100% sure of anything at this point. And if that's what you want to hang your hat on, that argument can be used as an attempt to invalidate any argument or observation.

That said, without being able to have 100%, iron-clad certainty, basically everyone I know and respect in this game feels that the new recruits have cut the heart out of low and mid DI teams. I honestly think that anyone who knows the DI game well and has spent a solid amount of time in the new engine would have to come to this conclusion.

That #50 pf that reinsel described above barely exists. I don't want to say he doesn't exist at all because I'm sure there are a few out there. But they are very, very few and far between. The difference between the high-end players and everyone else is simply enormous, and it's greatly exacerbated by the fact that there are now an incredible number of low potential ratings. It's a poisonous mix.

Posted by daalter on 8/3/2010 11:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cbriese on 8/3/2010 5:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by reinsel on 8/3/2010 5:26:00 PM (view original):
There are still a lot of "great" players.  Some are the #1 PF that is already a stud, and some are the #50 PF that has a ton of high potential categories.  That #50 PF isn't being recruited by the A prestige schools, but he is drawing interest from the B-/C+ schools.

I agree the D/D+ schools have it harder, but that is how it should be.  I was able to win NT games with players recruited by a team with prestige of D-/D/D+.  That should be almost impossible now, and that is ok.

But when those D-/D/D+ recruits do win a CT and make the NT, the school will become a C-/C/C+ school, and be able to recruit better, and maybe get to the second round... and keep repeating the cycle of improvement. I always said before that it took at least eight seasons to go from a D team to being a force in the tournament. So now maybe it takes 12. But that is pure speculation, because no one can be sure until we see 4 to 8 to 12 seasons with new recruits.

No, no one can be 100% sure of anything at this point. And if that's what you want to hang your hat on, that argument can be used as an attempt to invalidate any argument or observation.

That said, without being able to have 100%, iron-clad certainty, basically everyone I know and respect in this game feels that the new recruits have cut the heart out of low and mid DI teams. I honestly think that anyone who knows the DI game well and has spent a solid amount of time in the new engine would have to come to this conclusion.

That #50 pf that reinsel described above barely exists. I don't want to say he doesn't exist at all because I'm sure there are a few out there. But they are very, very few and far between. The difference between the high-end players and everyone else is simply enormous, and it's greatly exacerbated by the fact that there are now an incredible number of low potential ratings. It's a poisonous mix.

got my vote, daalter...spot on.

Posted by daalter on 8/3/2010 11:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cbriese on 8/3/2010 5:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by reinsel on 8/3/2010 5:26:00 PM (view original):
There are still a lot of "great" players.  Some are the #1 PF that is already a stud, and some are the #50 PF that has a ton of high potential categories.  That #50 PF isn't being recruited by the A prestige schools, but he is drawing interest from the B-/C+ schools.

I agree the D/D+ schools have it harder, but that is how it should be.  I was able to win NT games with players recruited by a team with prestige of D-/D/D+.  That should be almost impossible now, and that is ok.

But when those D-/D/D+ recruits do win a CT and make the NT, the school will become a C-/C/C+ school, and be able to recruit better, and maybe get to the second round... and keep repeating the cycle of improvement. I always said before that it took at least eight seasons to go from a D team to being a force in the tournament. So now maybe it takes 12. But that is pure speculation, because no one can be sure until we see 4 to 8 to 12 seasons with new recruits.

No, no one can be 100% sure of anything at this point. And if that's what you want to hang your hat on, that argument can be used as an attempt to invalidate any argument or observation.

That said, without being able to have 100%, iron-clad certainty, basically everyone I know and respect in this game feels that the new recruits have cut the heart out of low and mid DI teams. I honestly think that anyone who knows the DI game well and has spent a solid amount of time in the new engine would have to come to this conclusion.

That #50 pf that reinsel described above barely exists. I don't want to say he doesn't exist at all because I'm sure there are a few out there. But they are very, very few and far between. The difference between the high-end players and everyone else is simply enormous, and it's greatly exacerbated by the fact that there are now an incredible number of low potential ratings. It's a poisonous mix.

You cut me to the quick with that one, daalter. I think I know the D1 game, particularly the low-to-mid level D1 teams, pretty well. I know what we were able to do in the past. I have absolutely no doubt that the same success can be had with the new recruit mix. It will just be more difficult. Adain, I think people are only scratching the surface of the impact of the recruits.

No one is trying to quantify, for example, the effects of a smaller premier player pool (and subsequent dropoff) on the success of the elite teams. There was at one point a couple of years ago a thread called Moy's Battle Cry, which lamented the fact that no one was willing to battle the ORs or lostmyths of the world, and their A-/A/A+ recruiting efforts very often went unchallenged. I would argue that's not the case anymore. Coaches have the choice to now implement a high-risk, high-reward recruiting strategy, or a lower-risk, but substantially lower reward one. In the past, you'd simply leave the #3 PG to OR, and just move on to the #19 PG, who was likely to be about the same in his junior year. That easy decision no longer exists.

Teams are going to be forced to put more thought and effort into scheduling, into game planning and maybe even into practice planning in order to squeeze every ounce of success out of their team. This is not a bad thing.

What amuses me is that for years everyone asked for WIS to make recruits more varied, and to make practice planning mean something. Well, they've done it, and the game is changed (yes, I am sure someone will bloviate about an over-correction). And, from what I understand, the press is no longer magic. So there's that.

I understand where you're coming from, and the new recruit hierarchy may indeed result in more high-end battles.

I also get where you're trying to come from re: "What amuses me ..." in the last paragraph. But this is no different than anything you and I have seen WIS do many, many times in the past -- the classic overcorrection. Yes, the recruiting pool needed more variance. And double yes, we needed less 90+ ratings in DI. But triple yes ... it's a fairly massive overcorrection.

There are very few suitable mid-tier players. Couple that with the scores and scores of low potential categories, and WIS has made a real mistake.

And as for the rest of your contentions ... practice plan is actually less important that at any point of played HD. So many ratings get capped out and there are so many low potential categories, there really isn't all that much difference between how I set my practice plan and how a moderately-trained money might. (Insert joke here.) The practice plan has basically been pre-ordained for us.

So yes, in some instances it won't be as easy to coast in for a BCS team. But we could have that added plus along with not absolutely killing the rest of DI. The two don't have to be mutually exclusive. Enough one step forward, two steps back.

Posted by cbriese on 8/3/2010 11:56:00 PM (view original):

Posted by daalter on 8/3/2010 11:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cbriese on 8/3/2010 5:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by reinsel on 8/3/2010 5:26:00 PM (view original):
There are still a lot of "great" players.  Some are the #1 PF that is already a stud, and some are the #50 PF that has a ton of high potential categories.  That #50 PF isn't being recruited by the A prestige schools, but he is drawing interest from the B-/C+ schools.

I agree the D/D+ schools have it harder, but that is how it should be.  I was able to win NT games with players recruited by a team with prestige of D-/D/D+.  That should be almost impossible now, and that is ok.

But when those D-/D/D+ recruits do win a CT and make the NT, the school will become a C-/C/C+ school, and be able to recruit better, and maybe get to the second round... and keep repeating the cycle of improvement. I always said before that it took at least eight seasons to go from a D team to being a force in the tournament. So now maybe it takes 12. But that is pure speculation, because no one can be sure until we see 4 to 8 to 12 seasons with new recruits.

No, no one can be 100% sure of anything at this point. And if that's what you want to hang your hat on, that argument can be used as an attempt to invalidate any argument or observation.

That said, without being able to have 100%, iron-clad certainty, basically everyone I know and respect in this game feels that the new recruits have cut the heart out of low and mid DI teams. I honestly think that anyone who knows the DI game well and has spent a solid amount of time in the new engine would have to come to this conclusion.

That #50 pf that reinsel described above barely exists. I don't want to say he doesn't exist at all because I'm sure there are a few out there. But they are very, very few and far between. The difference between the high-end players and everyone else is simply enormous, and it's greatly exacerbated by the fact that there are now an incredible number of low potential ratings. It's a poisonous mix.

You cut me to the quick with that one, daalter. I think I know the D1 game, particularly the low-to-mid level D1 teams, pretty well. I know what we were able to do in the past. I have absolutely no doubt that the same success can be had with the new recruit mix. It will just be more difficult. Adain, I think people are only scratching the surface of the impact of the recruits.

No one is trying to quantify, for example, the effects of a smaller premier player pool (and subsequent dropoff) on the success of the elite teams. There was at one point a couple of years ago a thread called Moy's Battle Cry, which lamented the fact that no one was willing to battle the ORs or lostmyths of the world, and their A-/A/A+ recruiting efforts very often went unchallenged. I would argue that's not the case anymore. Coaches have the choice to now implement a high-risk, high-reward recruiting strategy, or a lower-risk, but substantially lower reward one. In the past, you'd simply leave the #3 PG to OR, and just move on to the #19 PG, who was likely to be about the same in his junior year. That easy decision no longer exists.

Teams are going to be forced to put more thought and effort into scheduling, into game planning and maybe even into practice planning in order to squeeze every ounce of success out of their team. This is not a bad thing.

What amuses me is that for years everyone asked for WIS to make recruits more varied, and to make practice planning mean something. Well, they've done it, and the game is changed (yes, I am sure someone will bloviate about an over-correction). And, from what I understand, the press is no longer magic. So there's that.

making more recruits more varied didnt inherently have to mean making them so much worse at the d1 level. saying you have "absolutely no doubt" the same success can be had with these new recruits for low d1 teams is absurd, especially when you previously said we have to wait 4 years to make any determinations. so which is it, you're positive or you have no way to know?

In Naismith, I've taken over Seton Hall, with C prestige. I am in the East Division of the Big East with two A+ schools, an A- school, a B+ school and another C school. In conference play, I have to play seven games against A-level schools, five against B-level and four against C-level schools. I have to figure out how to schedule intelligently, recruit well, plan practice to maximize improvement, and game plan every single game. Making the NT will require either a miracle CT run, or going something like 8-2 non-conf and 7-9 during conference play. There is very little margin for error there. There is no setting the game plan for the season, and going with it. You have to put time in to succeed.

And that's why I came back to HD.

Posted by seabreeze on 8/4/2010 12:26:00 AM (view original):
In Naismith, I've taken over Seton Hall, with C prestige. I am in the East Division of the Big East with two A+ schools, an A- school, a B+ school and another C school. In conference play, I have to play seven games against A-level schools, five against B-level and four against C-level schools. I have to figure out how to schedule intelligently, recruit well, plan practice to maximize improvement, and game plan every single game. Making the NT will require either a miracle CT run, or going something like 8-2 non-conf and 7-9 during conference play. There is very little margin for error there. There is no setting the game plan for the season, and going with it. You have to put time in to succeed.

And that's why I came back to HD.

You have to put time in to succeed.

<Sigh>.  The point is a lower DI school can not succeed even when they "put their time in".  Here is why:

--They can not get the big recruits.  Nothing has changed on the front and reasonably so.

--The new recruits cap out so early, they will not improve to the point where you can compete against the big dogs.

--Since there are less recruits, you cant get 4 or 5 and develop them (again they cap too early) to where you can make a run when they are Seniors.


Just my 2 cents. 

Well, one thing is definitely sure: you can't succeed if you give up. Just my two cents.

Is it weird that while i'm reading this thread for the first time, my Pandora radio station just started playing Cinderella's "Don't know what you've got til its gone"...? smalls312 knows what i'm talking about.

Posted by seabreeze on 8/4/2010 12:26:00 AM (view original):
In Naismith, I've taken over Seton Hall, with C prestige. I am in the East Division of the Big East with two A+ schools, an A- school, a B+ school and another C school. In conference play, I have to play seven games against A-level schools, five against B-level and four against C-level schools. I have to figure out how to schedule intelligently, recruit well, plan practice to maximize improvement, and game plan every single game. Making the NT will require either a miracle CT run, or going something like 8-2 non-conf and 7-9 during conference play. There is very little margin for error there. There is no setting the game plan for the season, and going with it. You have to put time in to succeed.

And that's why I came back to HD.

Your situation you described above in the BEast could and did happen in the old engine, and not infrequently.

Posted by daalter on 8/4/2010 7:37:00 AM (view original):

Posted by seabreeze on 8/4/2010 12:26:00 AM (view original):
In Naismith, I've taken over Seton Hall, with C prestige. I am in the East Division of the Big East with two A+ schools, an A- school, a B+ school and another C school. In conference play, I have to play seven games against A-level schools, five against B-level and four against C-level schools. I have to figure out how to schedule intelligently, recruit well, plan practice to maximize improvement, and game plan every single game. Making the NT will require either a miracle CT run, or going something like 8-2 non-conf and 7-9 during conference play. There is very little margin for error there. There is no setting the game plan for the season, and going with it. You have to put time in to succeed.

And that's why I came back to HD.

Your situation you described above in the BEast could and did happen in the old engine, and not infrequently.

The difference was you were able to pick up the #20 PG at a C prestige Big East team before, and by his junior year, he'd be just about as good as the #3 PG that year. You had more margin for error. The #20 PG now will likely never be as good as the #3 PG, because of the disparity between the top recruits and the next level.

[Which reminds me of "Admin, why can't we have more impact freshmen?" whines through the years. Because you would never notice them, sitting 9th on the depth chart at Kentucky]

While there has been all the wringing of hands about the death of low-level D1 school with the new recruit mix, I think the real challenge will now be taking a C prestige school in a major conference and getting it to B/B+ range and to the NT consistently. With a school in the Big Sky, you need only be better than maybe one, two or three human-coached, competitive schools in the conference to win the CT.

Lets all jump back into the CAA and test the theory.

Posted by chewchad on 8/4/2010 12:39:00 AM (view original):

Posted by seabreeze on 8/4/2010 12:26:00 AM (view original):
In Naismith, I've taken over Seton Hall, with C prestige. I am in the East Division of the Big East with two A+ schools, an A- school, a B+ school and another C school. In conference play, I have to play seven games against A-level schools, five against B-level and four against C-level schools. I have to figure out how to schedule intelligently, recruit well, plan practice to maximize improvement, and game plan every single game. Making the NT will require either a miracle CT run, or going something like 8-2 non-conf and 7-9 during conference play. There is very little margin for error there. There is no setting the game plan for the season, and going with it. You have to put time in to succeed.

And that's why I came back to HD.

You have to put time in to succeed.

<Sigh>.  The point is a lower DI school can not succeed even when they "put their time in".  Here is why:

--They can not get the big recruits.  Nothing has changed on the front and reasonably so.

--The new recruits cap out so early, they will not improve to the point where you can compete against the big dogs.

--Since there are less recruits, you cant get 4 or 5 and develop them (again they cap too early) to where you can make a run when they are Seniors.


Just my 2 cents. 

Seton Hall will always get the additional recruiting money and the artificial conference prestige boost for playing in one of the CHOSEN (Big East.)  That's why putting time in at Seton Hall may be fruitful. 

...and that's not the case for true lower DI schools.

Posted by cbriese on 8/4/2010 7:54:00 AM (view original):

Posted by daalter on 8/4/2010 7:37:00 AM (view original):

Posted by seabreeze on 8/4/2010 12:26:00 AM (view original):
In Naismith, I've taken over Seton Hall, with C prestige. I am in the East Division of the Big East with two A+ schools, an A- school, a B+ school and another C school. In conference play, I have to play seven games against A-level schools, five against B-level and four against C-level schools. I have to figure out how to schedule intelligently, recruit well, plan practice to maximize improvement, and game plan every single game. Making the NT will require either a miracle CT run, or going something like 8-2 non-conf and 7-9 during conference play. There is very little margin for error there. There is no setting the game plan for the season, and going with it. You have to put time in to succeed.

And that's why I came back to HD.

Your situation you described above in the BEast could and did happen in the old engine, and not infrequently.

The difference was you were able to pick up the #20 PG at a C prestige Big East team before, and by his junior year, he'd be just about as good as the #3 PG that year. You had more margin for error. The #20 PG now will likely never be as good as the #3 PG, because of the disparity between the top recruits and the next level.

[Which reminds me of "Admin, why can't we have more impact freshmen?" whines through the years. Because you would never notice them, sitting 9th on the depth chart at Kentucky]

While there has been all the wringing of hands about the death of low-level D1 school with the new recruit mix, I think the real challenge will now be taking a C prestige school in a major conference and getting it to B/B+ range and to the NT consistently. With a school in the Big Sky, you need only be better than maybe one, two or three human-coached, competitive schools in the conference to win the CT.

Lets all jump back into the CAA and test the theory.

cb, you keep focusing on certain parts and ignoring others.

Yes -- there are some more impact freshmen now.
Yes -- there may be some more BCS battles.
Yes -- there is less margin for error.

But the point is that we could still have all of those things (and more) without also putting together the system that essentially sounds the death knell for many low/mid teams. I'm not saying that there are no positives with the new system -- there are some positives. But why not have those positives w. out the couple tremendous negatives as well? It would be easy and straightforward to accomplish.

Posted by a_in_the_b on 8/3/2010 10:40:00 PM (view original):
Again though;  the position names on the recruits is purely cosmetic.

This doesn't make it any less ridiculous...why even have position designations if you're just going to cover your *** by having ZERO position penalty, especially regardless of height and weight? With position designations, there should be a reasonable expectation of what ratings a player would/should be good at and what they shouldn't. On top of all this...let's say I want to play this guy at SF, but when I go to search for SF recruits, I don't see this guy because he's ridiculously listed as a PG. With the new generation, you're more likely to miss out on guys that you might not have before.

Just because seble has an excuse, doesn't mean that it's a good format/setup.