Dear D1 coaches,

Please refrain from "poaching" freshman recruits from D2 teams at the cycle they are due to sign with the D2 team they have become interested in.  I understand you're under pressure to fill all of your scholarships, but with your C+ prestige do you really need to be aiming for the #162 C?  Some of us D2 coaches may need the #162 C after losing battles with D2 coaches for the #119 and #126 Cs. It should tell you something that the #162 C was still available long after signings had started. 

I understand that sometimes this happens to the best.  I remember in 2000 when Duke got jilted by a recruit and needed a last-minute PG. Coach K signed Andre Buckner from KY, who was on nobody's radar as a D1 player (and rode the Cameron Indoor bench for 4 seasons). But this appears to be less of an exception and more of a rule in HD-- I see a lot of human coaches going after D2 players that would be fine (but not great) in D2 but crappy in D1.  I understand when the mindless SimAI does it, but its methods are not ones that anyone thinks should be copied. 

If we could avoid this happening in the future, I think the entire D2 coaching community would appreciate it. 

Sincerely,

An A- prestige D2 coach. 

So you're comparing a C+ prestige to Duke? If Duke has had to do it in the past what do you think teams who are a comparable C+ school in real life have to do? Stop this silly complaining, it happens get over it. I have both D1 and D2 schools and think it's silly when either lower level D1 schools or high level D2 schools complain about D1 schools taking "their" recruits. It happens, get over it.

I'm "over" it, I'm just making a polite request and stating how much happier the D2 community would be if the request was complied with.  (And also suggesting that targeting a lower-tiered D2 player may not be a winning strategy for a D1 coach). 

sweet your in phelan next season i'll just poach all your recruits!

I, for one, will remember your request and consider it when deciding on recruits. Will I hurt my own program by not recruiting a DII prospect? No. But I will do everything I can to not take a DII recruit when at all possible. Thanks for the polite request...

One person's trash is another's treasure. 
 
Last year we had a guy on the local junior college team that was actively recruited by everything from DI to NAIA schools. Clearly the NAIA schools didn't think he could play DI or they wouldn't have wasted their time chasing him, and I'm sure they probably weren't thrilled to learn a DI had offered him. Clearly the DI guy thought he was getting someone who could step in and contribute to the program, not that he was poaching a lower division's player. 

Maybe that "lower tier" (but still #162) center looks good and fits into the DI program's philosophy. Given the number of teams in DI, the #162 prospect at a position is certainly within the realm of plausibility to sign with a low-level DI program. Heck, maybe the kid was local and DI signed him on the cheap to keep resources for a battle over some other player he's after. Lots of reasons that make perfect sense for it happening. 

Here is the #162 C I was referring to in this particular situation: 
http://www.whatifsports.com/hd/RecruitProfile/Ratings.aspx?rid=1903737

Potential:
REB, DEF, DUR - high
SPD, PER - low
everything else AVG. 

dude, that guy's going to get minutes at Chicago State this season. You can't blame him for that signing...

Sadly, this thread is more about the shi**y talents of the #50-#100 players than anything else.  2/3rds of the top 100 centers don't have LP and rebounding over 60.

This is my first year in D1 and its really true i always wondered why people complained but its so true, once you get outside of #50 its crap and alot of it is guys with solid cores but low potential so they won't get that much better.

Posted by reinsel on 12/5/2010 9:52:00 PM (view original):
Sadly, this thread is more about the shi**y talents of the #50-#100 players than anything else.  2/3rds of the top 100 centers don't have LP and rebounding over 60.

So I just made that up, but the actual % of top 100 C and PF that don't have either 60 rebounding or 60 LP is 62% in Allen this season. 


I have better players on my D3 team than the average #100 C. 

Posted by reinsel on 12/5/2010 9:52:00 PM (view original):
Sadly, this thread is more about the shi**y talents of the #50-#100 players than anything else.  2/3rds of the top 100 centers don't have LP and rebounding over 60.

If so, that's pretty sad.  #160 C was available because everyone else at D2 had passed on him.  He wasn't nearly as good as others that had been available (and centers drop quickly relative to other positions, so by the time signing period had started he was pretty much available to all).  

I think the other thread on monster D3 recruits does illustrate a problem with recruit generation.  There are high potential D3 players with really high caps such that they look like D1 players by the time they're done.

To use an example from my own team, this PG was the #200, I pulled him down with C- prestige.  
http://www.whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=0&pid=1645628
He had high potential in just about every key category and still has room to grow.  I look at some top-100 PGs in that class playing in D1 and see that he has now outpaced them.  That just shouldn't happen as often as it appears to be doing now. 

Posted by cthomas22255 on 12/5/2010 4:55:00 PM (view original):
Dear D1 coaches,

Please refrain from "poaching" freshman recruits from D2 teams at the cycle they are due to sign with the D2 team they have become interested in.  I understand you're under pressure to fill all of your scholarships, but with your C+ prestige do you really need to be aiming for the #162 C?  Some of us D2 coaches may need the #162 C after losing battles with D2 coaches for the #119 and #126 Cs. It should tell you something that the #162 C was still available long after signings had started. 

I understand that sometimes this happens to the best.  I remember in 2000 when Duke got jilted by a recruit and needed a last-minute PG. Coach K signed Andre Buckner from KY, who was on nobody's radar as a D1 player (and rode the Cameron Indoor bench for 4 seasons). But this appears to be less of an exception and more of a rule in HD-- I see a lot of human coaches going after D2 players that would be fine (but not great) in D2 but crappy in D1.  I understand when the mindless SimAI does it, but its methods are not ones that anyone thinks should be copied. 

If we could avoid this happening in the future, I think the entire D2 coaching community would appreciate it. 

Sincerely,

An A- prestige D2 coach. 

You can't be serious.  Man, it happens, deal with it and move on.  What's really ironic about this whole post is you trash D1 teams for recruiting the #162 C and then in another of your posts admit that the #200 PG you pulled down with your C- prestige team is outpacing some of the top 100 PG's from the same class.  You do realize that you just destroyed your own "request" with that post right?

If the #200 PG is turning out to be better than some top 100 PG's, isn't it reasonable to think that the #162 C will turn out better than some of the top 100 C's?  I think Furry summed it up best with  .  Hate to be rude but you sound like a damn baby with that initial post.

Just re-read your initial post/request and now I'm not sure if "baby" is a strong enough word.  I almost think that this has to be some kind of a joke-type thread because no one could actually write something like that and be serious about it.

By the way, if this thread IS actually serious, it wouldn't surprise me in the least to see everyone of your recruits next season "poached" by a D1 team just to see how bad they could **** you off.  And you'll have to admit, you opened yourself up for it by posting this "interesting" request.  Best of luck next recruiting cycle, have to admit, if I had a D1 team in Phelan I'd target one of your recruits just to be a ***** about the whole thing.