There are 200 things that could be done to improve the game before this idea, whether the idea is good or not is an argument that doesn't need to be had.

Priorities are all out of whack it seems

This is not spoon feeding anybody anything. It's not like the engine itself is coming up with a formula to give you a rating for what players perform best in this engine. This is individual coaches putting a formula for what THEY think is best whether it's right or wrong, if a coach values speed and per as the 2 most important for SGs and rates them the highest in his formula it doesn't change the type of recruits he's going to recruit it just changes in what order he sees them when he searches. So if a D2 recruit has a 430 overall rating but 75sp and 70per he doesn't have to sift through a bunch of recruits he doesn't like to find that recruit. In the end he's still going to recruit the type of players that he likes but just have an easier time finding them.

Also the best coaches would never in a million years put their formula out for public use simply because that's one of the few secrets people have. I have never seen guys like OR, LM, billyG and some other great coaches specifically state what ratings they look for in players to build their team. Sure you can look at their team and get a good feel for the guys they like but there's more to it then just that and these guys would not give away their whole recruiting strategy.

Posted by cal_bears on 1/27/2011 1:00:00 PM (view original):
Make in-game planning more complex!  Do that if you raise the level of the game.  Just do that.  Something here.  When did this major aspect of the game, see a development.

Double team if leading scorer and LOSING

Every four minute game plan changes.

Sets of five guys you want to run together, for different reasons.

Things such as those.

these are the types of suggestions that should be WORKED on, not this. I mean get a spreadsheet and figure out which recruits meet your your standards, style of play.

Posted by cal_bears on 1/27/2011 1:00:00 PM (view original):
Make in-game planning more complex!  Do that if you raise the level of the game.  Just do that.  Something here.  When did this major aspect of the game, see a development.

Double team if leading scorer and LOSING

Every four minute game plan changes.

Sets of five guys you want to run together, for different reasons.

Things such as those.

Only if they want to increase the sim team rate to 90%.

why would that increase the sim rate to 90%

Posted by mjp8 on 1/27/2011 1:48:00 PM (view original):
There are 200 things that could be done to improve the game before this idea, whether the idea is good or not is an argument that doesn't need to be had.

Priorities are all out of whack it seems

This

Posted by colonels19 on 1/27/2011 8:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mjp8 on 1/27/2011 1:48:00 PM (view original):
There are 200 things that could be done to improve the game before this idea, whether the idea is good or not is an argument that doesn't need to be had.

Priorities are all out of whack it seems

This

Kinda my feeling.   It's sort of a neat idea-  althought at DI I'm not sure I'd put it to use.   But in the end- anything new is good for me.

IMO, this is not a BAD idea, but it solves a problem few coaches see as significant.  In other words, it would be a waste of time. Examples of good low-hanging-fruit problems to solve would be:
1) allowing coaches to set first-cycle recruiting plans
2) allowing coaches to set identical recruit tasks for multiple players at one time (e.g. to send calls to all 200 players in your initial D3 list, you could select all 200 with one click, then select 1 phone call in 1 screen, then send)
3) get the system to auto-collect and compile recon data for recruits (and dump the act of having to open and read any recruit emails) in one easy-to-read place, so as you discover a player played zone/flex, has various potentials, lists you currently as a backup, or drops down to you, etc., you could select a way of viewing recruits in the recruiting summary page, to show all those attributes in a table, similar to looking at their skill values now, so instead of seeing 48 22 65 17 etc for Ath Spd Reb Def etc, you could choose to see: recruitable flexC+ zoneD+ leading etc for availability-status offenselevel defenselevel considering-status etc.

It's as if the HD powers that be are hearing something that is not what the coach-customers are requesting.  So we say we want A, B and C, and HD responds, "what if we work on D?"  I don't get it.

Sorry for the rambling nature of this post.

I like this idea a lot.  I agree that it doesn't address any of the fundamental flaws in the game currently, but I do hope they implement it.  Dan, I'd say I tend to agree with probably 90% of your posts on HD topics, but I really don't see any harm or spoon-feeding going on with this proposal from seble.

Posted by udm_mike on 1/27/2011 8:49:00 AM (view original):
I don't hate or love it.  

That's my sentiment.  I just don't quite understand why something like this would get priority over larger issues with the game.  To me, this would be well down the list of needed game improvements.

Posted by mjp8 on 1/27/2011 1:48:00 PM (view original):
There are 200 things that could be done to improve the game before this idea, whether the idea is good or not is an argument that doesn't need to be had.

Priorities are all out of whack it seems

Exactly! What about all of the other things that people have been complaining about forever?!

It's not that I mind this idea so much. I think it's fine I guess. Not great, not the worst thing ever.

But what I would really like seble to explain (and I think he truly owes us the explanation) is why in the heck he's working on this when there are so many other things that people would rather see done. Some of them are big, but many are smaller and could be easily accomplished instead of this.

That's what really bothers me about this.

Posted by fmschwab on 1/27/2011 11:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mjp8 on 1/27/2011 1:48:00 PM (view original):
There are 200 things that could be done to improve the game before this idea, whether the idea is good or not is an argument that doesn't need to be had.

Priorities are all out of whack it seems

Exactly! What about all of the other things that people have been complaining about forever?!

It's not that I mind this idea so much. I think it's fine I guess. Not great, not the worst thing ever.

But what I would really like seble to explain (and I think he truly owes us the explanation) is why in the heck he's working on this when there are so many other things that people would rather see done. Some of them are big, but many are smaller and could be easily accomplished instead of this.

That's what really bothers me about this.

I think this is more of my point. I don't like the change, I think it's spoon feeding, but my bigger issue truly is that seble would be focusing on that when there are so many other thing that game needs, and so many other things we've been asking for. Makes me feel like he's not listening and/or is out-of-touch.

It's not unlike HBD where you can put in a weighted formula on how to value potential draft choices.  Since inception everyone keeps telling others that "overall ratings don't matter."  Now they will, except those ratings will matter for them.

Posted by girt25 on 1/28/2011 7:56:00 AM (view original):

Posted by fmschwab on 1/27/2011 11:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mjp8 on 1/27/2011 1:48:00 PM (view original):
There are 200 things that could be done to improve the game before this idea, whether the idea is good or not is an argument that doesn't need to be had.

Priorities are all out of whack it seems

Exactly! What about all of the other things that people have been complaining about forever?!

It's not that I mind this idea so much. I think it's fine I guess. Not great, not the worst thing ever.

But what I would really like seble to explain (and I think he truly owes us the explanation) is why in the heck he's working on this when there are so many other things that people would rather see done. Some of them are big, but many are smaller and could be easily accomplished instead of this.

That's what really bothers me about this.

I think this is more of my point. I don't like the change, I think it's spoon feeding, but my bigger issue truly is that seble would be focusing on that when there are so many other thing that game needs, and so many other things we've been asking for. Makes me feel like he's not listening and/or is out-of-touch.

You are assuming a lot here daalty.

How do you know seble is not currently working on other aspects of HD? Because he asked if coaches wanted an additional recruiting tool? Do you think he can't multitask or delegate one function to one employee and another to someone else?

I don't understand why the HD community feels 'obligated' to have input in ALL changes, hell, even ANY changes to HD. When was the last time your employer asked you or any customers how to run their business? Some in the HD community make it sound like inmates should run the prison, students should teach the class, and customers should run the business.

Seble is simply asking if wis should spend time adding a recruiting tool. I can say with absolute certainty his team is working on other aspects of the game (i.e. job process) right now. You are reading way too much into a simple question and btw ---- just cause he's asking does not even mean you will see a new recruiting sort tool feature in 2011. This is WIS - when was the last time they released something new in a timely manner?

Posted by moy23 on 1/28/2011 9:34:00 AM (view original):

Posted by girt25 on 1/28/2011 7:56:00 AM (view original):

Posted by fmschwab on 1/27/2011 11:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mjp8 on 1/27/2011 1:48:00 PM (view original):
There are 200 things that could be done to improve the game before this idea, whether the idea is good or not is an argument that doesn't need to be had.

Priorities are all out of whack it seems

Exactly! What about all of the other things that people have been complaining about forever?!

It's not that I mind this idea so much. I think it's fine I guess. Not great, not the worst thing ever.

But what I would really like seble to explain (and I think he truly owes us the explanation) is why in the heck he's working on this when there are so many other things that people would rather see done. Some of them are big, but many are smaller and could be easily accomplished instead of this.

That's what really bothers me about this.

I think this is more of my point. I don't like the change, I think it's spoon feeding, but my bigger issue truly is that seble would be focusing on that when there are so many other thing that game needs, and so many other things we've been asking for. Makes me feel like he's not listening and/or is out-of-touch.

You are assuming a lot here daalty.

How do you know seble is not currently working on other aspects of HD? Because he asked if coaches wanted an additional recruiting tool? Do you think he can't multitask or delegate one function to one employee and another to someone else?

I don't understand why the HD community feels 'obligated' to have input in ALL changes, hell, even ANY changes to HD. When was the last time your employer asked you or any customers how to run their business? Some in the HD community make it sound like inmates should run the prison, students should teach the class, and customers should run the business.

Seble is simply asking if wis should spend time adding a recruiting tool. I can say with absolute certainty his team is working on other aspects of the game (i.e. job process) right now. You are reading way too much into a simple question and btw ---- just cause he's asking does not even mean you will see a new recruiting sort tool feature in 2011. This is WIS - when was the last time they released something new in a timely manner?

Moy, we've been begging since the dawn of time for better communication, more transparency and more input. It's easy to do, not to mention Business 101 and basic customer service.

If we had even a smidgen of that, I wouldn't have to make any assumptions. We'd know the basics of what was going on (we don't need all of the intricate details, but the basics). But when we get absolutely nothing, and issues we've been begging about for months and years get no response, and then the first thing we do hear is about a superfluous recruiting tool, well ...

All he needs to do is basic outreach/communication/customer service, and this problem vanishes.