Just a thought maybe we should eliminate some worlds to create more competition in the remaining worlds... bad idea? or good idea?

in theory maybe not bad, but i'd be ****** if my world got shut down and i lost a team i had worked hard to build...especially if i couldnt take over that same team in another world. 

they'd have to offer me a whole bunch of free seasons to make me ok with it.

I wouldn't necessarily need the same school again, but I'd want players with duplicate ratings, and a team with duplicate prestige to the one I was giving up.  In other words, 'copy and paste' my team into a different world. . 

I don't think it could be done, based on the fact that people have worked hard and spent lots of money to get to their dream schools.

I think the right answer instead is to double marketing efforts (sadly a bad choice of words, since two times zero is zero) and make the game a bit more accessible to newbies somehow.  At various points people have posted the idea of running miniature "starter worlds," kind of like spring training baseball leagues in SLB, where new players could compete in shortened season for free to get a feel for the game without losing cash to do it.  Might be time to revisit that idea?  Condense recruiting to 36 hours and just have ten teams in a "world," where everyone plays everyone else once.  You don't actually renew seasons, so when you jump into another starter league you get completely different rosters/opponents/etc...  Maybe a painless way to get new coaches up to speed on the basics?

"I don't think it could be done, based on the fact that people have worked hard and spent lots of money to get to their dream schools."

In real life actual franchises have been contracted, so if it can be done in real life it can be done in a pretend game especially if in the long run it makes the game more enjoyable. Alblack's idea is the way I would think it would be or should be done. Make every effort to give those who had their school taken away from them the same team and same players in another world. The biggest obstacle to this is the D1 schools, unlike D2 and D3 and even the lower levels of D1 where odds are in the 10 worlds every school is open in at least 1 there is no world where the likes of UCONN, Duke, UNC, UCLA, Kentucky etc., are open. So if you take Duke away from somebody it may take a whole lot to keep them around in the game, 20 free seasons might not even be enough.

thank goodness you made a post about this. i don't think anyone has addressed this issue before. 

Do another promo for a free season.  Thats what got me playing last march or so...

Posted by qbydeuce22 on 1/18/2011 2:30:00 PM (view original):
Do another promo for a free season.  Thats what got me playing last march or so...

I'm sure they will NCAA time

Posted by kmasonbx on 1/18/2011 1:45:00 PM (view original):
"I don't think it could be done, based on the fact that people have worked hard and spent lots of money to get to their dream schools."

In real life actual franchises have been contracted, so if it can be done in real life it can be done in a pretend game especially if in the long run it makes the game more enjoyable. Alblack's idea is the way I would think it would be or should be done. Make every effort to give those who had their school taken away from them the same team and same players in another world. The biggest obstacle to this is the D1 schools, unlike D2 and D3 and even the lower levels of D1 where odds are in the 10 worlds every school is open in at least 1 there is no world where the likes of UCONN, Duke, UNC, UCLA, Kentucky etc., are open. So if you take Duke away from somebody it may take a whole lot to keep them around in the game, 20 free seasons might not even be enough.

No one is saying that it CAN'T be done. Of course it could. They're saying it would quite simply be a terrible idea that would serve to alienate a ton of loyal customers. This idea gets brought up from time to time and I can't sugarcout my response -- I think it's the single worst idea offered up in this forum.

i am pretty much in the worst idea ever crowd. splitting the elites would be a nightmare. plus all the world records would get totally messed up. but for me, none of that compares to the pain of splitting conferences. if my favorite conference got split i would never play again, absolutely no question about it.

its pretty much a moot point though, no way seble is stupid enough to do something like this. plus, its WAY too much work. developers may work hard, but they are lazy, and the last thing they want to do is deal with this crap.

If Rupp was to be disbanded... I'd officially retire from HD. Its my only team left and I don't have the desire to try and get back to U of I in another world. Free seasons would be pointless.

how about give away a bunch of free teams to existing owners who join new worlds (and commit to X amount of seasons in X amount of worlds, or something)?

You could start by not allowing new coaches into the world.  It's possible that that is all you would need to do to get the desired effect.

I think the howling and screaming and gnashing of teeth that was heard when the engine was changed over would pale in comparison to the outrage you'd hear at worlds being contracted and might even rival the level of outrage that can be found any given day over in GD right now.

It isn't just the teams. It's also the friendships and rivalries that are created among people playing in the same conference that would be changed. I won't go so far as to say it would be the equivalent of dropping a nuke on the game, but from a cost/benefit standpoint I bet it would hack off a whole lot more folks than it would endear