Colonels.  You gotta be listening to everybody here.  We are not all in this just to argue with you.  I promise I am not...I am pretty new to the party here, and happened upon this thread.  It is understandable that you don't like the way this aspect works.  But, at least concede that maybe most people do think it belongs.  And, move on.

One reason, imo, that this aspect is in the game is to create some transfers.  Even if a player realizes that he is not good enough to play, he may still want to transfer, because there are other places where he IS good enough. 

You say you shouldn't have to adjust your lineup to keep these babies happy.  Well, you don't have to.  But, there is a risk.  I think that is what building a good game engine is about.  Building in risk/reward options. 

To expect that DI athletes just sit idly by while there 4 year opportunity to impress pro scouts slips away is a bit preposterous.  I played small college baseball for 4 years.  And, many of us thought we shoulda got more playing time.  Some guys were pretty unhappy.  A couple of guys quit.  If I had to guess I would say there was some conversation about playing time in the lockerroom after EVERY single game I was a part of in 4 years at an NAIA school 20 years ago.  So, I would surmise that juggling playing time is a pretty big obstacle for DI basketball coaches today.

-Brings additional strategy and decision making -- deciding if it's worth giving a player some more PT to ensure that he stays around, or keep him on the bench and gamble that he might leave.
-Makes you be smarter and actually have to think about how you build your team. If you have lots of upperclassmen, you know that you run the risk of alienating a non-freshman riding the pine.
-It is incredibly easy to avoid -- and you don't have to go 3-3-3-3 or take two walk-ons to do it. Freshmen don't get upset unless you're breaking a promise. So any team with even two freshmen (or one freshman and a RS from the previous season) will have no problems with this. If you choose to frontload your team so sevrely that you only have one freshman, there's a small inherent risk there.
-The notion that sophs and juniors who are riding the bench should all simply grin and bear it is absurd.

That's what it brings to the game, that's why not having it would make no sense, and that's how incredibly easy it is to avoid. EOS.

-Brings additional strategy and decision making -- deciding if it's worth giving a player some more PT to ensure that he stays around, or keep him on the bench and gamble that he might leave.

.........Big deal, as I've said and will continue to say, HD is interesting and strategic enough without having promise-less guys leave, grade problems, etc. It's all just to add to the FEATURE list to say HEY LOOK WHAT WE HAVE! My question is...how many new people has it brought in? This "facet" of the game tends to overcomplicate HD...I don't play to see if I can babysit like a bigtime D1 coach...I'd love to know how Boeheim runs with a 7 or 8 man rotation....

-Makes you be smarter and actually have to think about how you build your team. If you have lots of upperclassmen, you know that you run the risk of alienating a non-freshman riding the pine.

..........I realize that you're digging at me for having 6 seniors, but guess what man, that's the team I inherited. I know you talk about not having to do 3-3-3-3 in the next point, but that's essentially what you have to do. Wasn't ridding the game of the super classes/setting class limits enough? I have to be penalized on top of only having 6 guys from any class because they'll ALL expect to play a predetermined, class-gauged set of minutes? Come on...that's over the top. Typical WIS over-correct. And correct me if I'm wrong, I thought seble said that he was going to lessen the player gripes...I haven't seen it......

-It is incredibly easy to avoid -- and you don't have to go 3-3-3-3 or take two walk-ons to do it. Freshmen don't get upset unless you're breaking a promise. So any team with even two freshmen (or one freshman and a RS from the previous season) will have no problems with this. If you choose to frontload your team so sevrely that you only have one freshman, there's a small inherent risk there.

...........The avoidance factor has nothing to do with this...the question everyone should be asking themselves is "Does this feature logically belong in a game like HD?" If your answer is yes because that's how real life is, then I would argue that you haven't thought about the entirety of the argument and really how this "feature" affects HD. Like I've said, there's a fine line between realism and ridiculousness. Again, I didn't put 6 SRs on this team, but even if I did, I shouldn't be penalized for it...the class limits already do that just fine.

-The notion that sophs and juniors who are riding the bench should all simply grin and bear it is absurd.

..........Part of me sees dalter/daalter/girt25 trying to relive his "glory days" in this statement...your theory is that because it happened in Wisconsin that it can and does happen everywhere, all the time. Not everyone grins and bears it, but not everyone ******* to high heaven either. Tell me this (I probably know what you're going to say, just to be opposing me, but I'll run with it) if you're on a lowly D1 team (D prestige) that has 6 seniors on the squad that are CLEARLY better than you, you're 14-2 and going to make a run at the CC and CT championships, and you basically know that you'll be starting as a JR and/or SR while realizing that you aren't an NBA talent...are you really going to gripe about your situation?

That's what it brings to the game, that's why not having it would make no sense, and that's how incredibly easy it is to avoid. EOS.

...........You didn't convince me, and seemingly as usual, we have differing opinions about the "feature". Just because there are ways to defeat/get by something, doesn't mean that they should be in place in the first place, and part of/a lot of what you're doing is arguing just to argue, and hell I'll do this til 2020. Bottom line is, people will LEAVE because of this feature, they probably have before and probably will again. Can you really find me anyone that joined because players can gripe about PT with no promises, regardless of team success and talent and player talent for that matter? I think that's about the 3rd time I'm challenging you to do this, and still no answer. Just reading it, I think one can realize how ridiculous the "feature" is.

Posted by girt25 on 8/8/2010 10:33:00 AM (view original):
-Brings additional strategy and decision making -- deciding if it's worth giving a player some more PT to ensure that he stays around, or keep him on the bench and gamble that he might leave.
-Makes you be smarter and actually have to think about how you build your team. If you have lots of upperclassmen, you know that you run the risk of alienating a non-freshman riding the pine.
-It is incredibly easy to avoid -- and you don't have to go 3-3-3-3 or take two walk-ons to do it. Freshmen don't get upset unless you're breaking a promise. So any team with even two freshmen (or one freshman and a RS from the previous season) will have no problems with this. If you choose to frontload your team so sevrely that you only have one freshman, there's a small inherent risk there.
-The notion that sophs and juniors who are riding the bench should all simply grin and bear it is absurd.

That's what it brings to the game, that's why not having it would make no sense, and that's how incredibly easy it is to avoid. EOS.

There are definitely still some problems with current players complaining about playing time.  First, ineligibles in their SO year should not expect the same playing time as other SO.  While I understand that some players should complain, there should be some variability among player expectations.  Not all SO should expect the same amount of minutes.  Some should be satisfied with being third string on the depth chart. 

Well said.

Posted by colonels19 on 8/8/2010 11:35:00 AM (view original):
Well said.

really? i thought "nobody" should complain and they should take it out of the game...

and the simple fact that so many people disagree with you, even after you having explained yourself 50 times, says you're wrong at that it does belong in the game. its a game for everyone, not just you.

Posted by jetwildcat on 8/8/2010 12:40:00 PM (view original):

Posted by colonels19 on 8/8/2010 11:35:00 AM (view original):
Well said.

really? i thought "nobody" should complain and they should take it out of the game...

That's what I would love to see and what I want to happen. It will probably never happen because I am in a vast minority, but that doesn't make my viewpoint WRONG as you suggest in your next post here. Had you read more of the thread, you would have seen (page 5 I think) that I said that "at the very least, the minute expectations should be reduced". That guy suggested that that "feature" could use tweaking, and I'm in favor of thinkers who question why about facets of this game. Let's face it, my arguments and the arguments of those opposed to me are basically the same argument...just on completely different ends of the spectrum. We are both stubbornly engrained in our thought processes, and neither side would probably jump ship. It just amazes me how many people here don't see how this "feature" can be negative to the game...that's the funny part. You guys have your "feature" and like to act like it's pristine, etc...but it's certainly not as perfect/good as any of you think, and that's why I show my cards here.

Posted by jetwildcat on 8/8/2010 1:15:00 PM (view original):
and the simple fact that so many people disagree with you, even after you having explained yourself 50 times, says you're wrong at that it does belong in the game. its a game for everyone, not just you.

LOL! Minority = Wrong...got it...

1. nobody said the feature can't be improved. not even you, in fact. if the question is "should it be removed?" everyone but you seems to be saying "no"

2. HD would be pointless without hundreds/thousands of users. if the majority of these users want the realism of some players complaining, then it belongs in the game.

1. That doesn't mean that my feeling/opinion is wrong...though I know you suggest otherwise.

2. Does HD really have thousands of users at this point? I think more people will leave because of this feature than people will join because of this feature. I don't really think it's a big deal if you get rid of it...if you quit because you/everyone gets to keep their rosters that they recruited without fear of random player gripes, then I would have to call you an idiot. Considering the verility of some recruiting battles, I think it's only proper that you should get to keep your unpromised roster without remorse. I feel that this is both fair and logical.

Colonels. . there are no RANDOM player gripes.  They are rather predictable.

Not really, not all guys gripe...not all leave...there is a fair amount of randomness to the process. Again, look at you pick ONE WORD out of my response and dig at it, and respond to nothing else. Point proven about you.

Actually, its not random at all. No FR complains unless promised. All SO/JR/SR want a set amount of minutes - each the same as every other so/jr/sr. If they don't get it, they will complain. The random part? like 0.00002% will eventually transfer.