Posted by HalfAstros on 11/1/2010 10:07:00 AM (view original):
furry is just about right on.
Once upon a time, the old admin said that if distance isn't a factor, the money/value ratio of all the recruiting tools is the same.
In my experience, that's pretty much true. Just bring up a recruit 10 miles away from you and look at the prices - that will give you a pretty good idea of the relative value of each recruiting tool.
Of course, the values change a lot depending on distance, since the tools don't change price at the same rates, so knowing which to use at which distance gives you a significant advantage.
sorry, but this is such a severely egregious misrepresentation of fact that for the sake of those reading this thread, i just cannot allow it to stand uncontested -
old admin absolutely, positively, DID NOT SAY "if distance isn't a factor, the money/value ratio of all the recruiting tools is the same"
i believe i know exactly the instance you are speaking of. it was a low-level response to a question about the value of home and campus visits, if you should use all home visits or all campus visits or a mix, and admin said that it wasn't that big of a difference.
however, that statement by admin is so painfully misleading. we know for a fact that the value of a home visit is constant at all distances, same with campus visits, and that there are no diminishing returns. looking at different distances,
close distance, 300 vs 800, the ratio is 2.67
medium distance, 400 vs 1000, the ratio is 2.5
long distance, 700 vs 1300? (or is in 1200?), the ratio is 1.86
very long distance, 1300 vs 2000ish, the ratio is 1.54
this is a gigantic factor. pick any value between 1.54 and 2.67, and in some cases, the decision is one with massive ramifications. admin has proven time and time again he had become totally out of touch with the reality of this game at the highly competitive level. if you have no interest in being a good coach, then he gave good advice. but if you remember his representation of tempo, the +/- setting, and this instance, it should be abundantly clear that the top 5% of coaches were operating at a far higher level of detail and accuracy than the old admin was. he was looking at it from too high of a level - a level at which with a million factors in the game, none are very significant.