So letting you create your OWN formulas for recruiting and use them takes all of the fun and work out of recruiting?  What am I missing here?  Right now there is a 'generic talent evaluation' number people use, 'overall rating'.  This just replaces overall rating with something people will agree or disagree with use or discard depending on individual preferences.  Then come up with their own formulas and then ask about them. . .I really don't think that this would somehow all of the ambiguity out of the game.

The fact that the tool or calculator is inside WIS instead of in an excel spreadsheet makes it bad?

What you're missing is that its arranging deck chairs on the Titanic.  Its a fine idea to increase the mass appeal of the game by making it somewhat easier to manage the complexity.  But until they fix the core issues with the game...you can generate all the mass appeal you want but people will still leave in droves once they play a little and see the glaring issues that don't get addressed.

I dont see a need for this.. Would rather see in-season tournaments.. 

Is it a bad idea? No, I wouldnt say it was. Are there more pressing issues that should be worked on before this? ABSOLUTELY!

1. like the idea

2. please keep the raw overall rating

3.  if you are playing with the recruiting search pages, please consider adding the ability to specify distances for the search along the lines of the way one can specify skills ratings - but let us specify top and bottom range for distance (so one could search say 200 - 360 miles...

4.  likewise, please consider adding a notes box for each recruit to let coach write some note that would display in a notes column when looking at recruits on your watch or action list

thanks!

Seems to be some confusion, so to clarify: we wouldn't be doing the evaluation for you.  It would just be a tool to create a single number based on YOUR OWN weighting of each rating.  The default would be equal rating on all.  This doesn't help coaches recruit better players, just saves time.

Posted by seble on 1/27/2011 11:03:00 AM (view original):
Seems to be some confusion, so to clarify: we wouldn't be doing the evaluation for you.  It would just be a tool to create a single number based on YOUR OWN weighting of each rating.  The default would be equal rating on all.  This doesn't help coaches recruit better players, just saves time.

totally what I thought you meant - and a good idea

Posted by seble on 1/27/2011 11:03:00 AM (view original):
Seems to be some confusion, so to clarify: we wouldn't be doing the evaluation for you.  It would just be a tool to create a single number based on YOUR OWN weighting of each rating.  The default would be equal rating on all.  This doesn't help coaches recruit better players, just saves time.

SEBLE -- with all of the numerous issues big and small that people have been clamoring about, is this really what you feel good about spending your time and energy on? Putting the big stuff aside (which of course it the most important), there are so many small fixes that people have been clamoring for that actual address deficiences in the current game (allowing people to put in their initial recruiting moves in advance for the first cycle or having recruits show up on your roster when they sign are two of very many easy improvements that spring to mind).

Why is this the focus? It makes no sense.

The more I think about it the more I like it. If you've played GD, which I used to until the last update, it's not much different that Bhazelwood's GD Reports stuff, which pretty much everyone seems to use. It was the GD reports that got me making my own excel spreadsheets with different weights being given for positions and specific attributes. I think it has helped a ton, though it still takes some work to get the recruits incorporated. While there would definately be some sharing of weighting by coaches, I think that there are enough different opinions out there that not everyone will want or use the same one. In my recruiting I can imagine myself changing them around multiple times to find a guy I like. For example say you have a great shooter already considering you, and you want a lock down defender to pair him with. You can adjust your formula to find your guy. Lazy coaches will just use a one size fits all formula, and deprive themselves of the benefits. Right now I spend enough time copying and pasting to find the guys that I want that I don't customize it further. I think the fact that I can do more research in the same amount of time will offset the fact that guys who do a crappy job of researching now, will be able to do a slightly less crappy job with the customization in place.

Posted by girt25 on 1/27/2011 12:25:00 PM (view original):

Posted by seble on 1/27/2011 11:03:00 AM (view original):
Seems to be some confusion, so to clarify: we wouldn't be doing the evaluation for you.  It would just be a tool to create a single number based on YOUR OWN weighting of each rating.  The default would be equal rating on all.  This doesn't help coaches recruit better players, just saves time.

SEBLE -- with all of the numerous issues big and small that people have been clamoring about, is this really what you feel good about spending your time and energy on? Putting the big stuff aside (which of course it the most important), there are so many small fixes that people have been clamoring for that actual address deficiences in the current game (allowing people to put in their initial recruiting moves in advance for the first cycle or having recruits show up on your roster when they sign are two of very many easy improvements that spring to mind).

Why is this the focus? It makes no sense.

he probably has a list going of small things that will be taken care of in the next update. things big enough that require discussion, i'm not so sure.

Posted by dacj501 on 1/26/2011 6:53:00 PM (view original):
please do not remove anything. if you want to add this, ok, but I would not like the "old"  to go away.

My thoughts as well. An additional tool for those that feel it necessary. However I would not want it forced on those who still look at a great many players.

Love the idea, also really need notes field for each recruit.

Posted by seble on 1/27/2011 11:03:00 AM (view original):
Seems to be some confusion, so to clarify: we wouldn't be doing the evaluation for you.  It would just be a tool to create a single number based on YOUR OWN weighting of each rating.  The default would be equal rating on all.  This doesn't help coaches recruit better players, just saves time.

Yes seble, but you said on page 2 that you would be considering a default formula. Wouldn't a default formula be WIS-created, and wouldn't it have WIS-supplied weightings? This would potentially giving away too much information IMO, and leads to my spoonfeeding/dumbing down worries. A default formula would tell you exactly what WIS thinks players are worth.

I'd be more likely to embrace this tool if there were no defaults and coaches had to generate all weighting on their own, and with no potential functionality.

The default would be equal weighting on each rating, possibly excluding Work Ethic and Durability.

seble, who do you see as the target audience for this proposed change? Is this mainly to help newer coaches by saving them having to create this themselves in Excel, or is this for vet coaches who presumably already do more number-crunching because they have some idea of relative weightings?