Looks like change is coming! - Page 3 - Hoops Dynasty

Posts: 450 (0)

Hall of Famer

1 323 4 7

Prospect

And girt...in the older worlds they werent so healthy...only in Knight Phelan and maybe Tark...and again because of newness...you have clout...get a 12 human to join the Big West or another small conference....and I guarantee withing 5-6 seasons (assuming everyone stayed) the conference would be the same as a big six....I for one would volunteer to join the experiment.

9/10/2011 3:08 PM

mmt0315

Posts: 450 (0)

Hall of Famer

1 323 4 7

Prospect

Posted by stinenavy on 9/10/2011 12:12:00 PM (view original):
If D1 non-BCS conferences are empty because of recruit generation, wouldn't D2 and D3 be filling to the brim? I haven't seen the updated numbers of coaches per division, but I would assume that D2 and D3 are becoming more barren as well.

I believe a big issue is with attracting more people that want to play the game. The forums for all of WIS are much less active across the board over the course of the last few years.

+1

9/10/2011 3:09 PM

tkimble

Posts: 1347 (0)

Hall of Famer

2 335 1 1

Rookie

IMO, the problem with D1 is the job process. Firing should be revamped based on the baseline prestige at a school. At a D baseline school it should be very hard to be fired. At an A baseline school, if you don't win an NT game in a 3 season stretch you should be gone, and that's a huge window. It should be easier to move up to D-baseline teams. You should be able to, if you make back to back NTs, move up after 3 seasons at D2. If you spend 4+ seasons at D2 and have good success (getting to the sweet 16 and beyond multiple times), you should be able to move up to C prestige level teams. If you make the NT as a low D1 team (after 3 seasons at a school), you should be able to move up pretty easily.

For me, I was able to build a very competitive team at Nevada, a C baseline team (with D prestige when I got there), but by no means am I a great coach. If you've learned how to recruit at the lower levels and can properly evaluate players, you should be able to put out a competitive teams at D1. I wouldn't be so opposed to putting coaches who aren't ready for D1 into the mix just so they can learn. Yeah, it's a lot harder to win at a smaller school, but it definitely can be done (and it's very rewarding).

9/10/2011 3:50 PM

cornfused

Posts: 1492 (0)

Hall of Famer

2 235 11

Prospect

I agree - you shouldn't have to drop down to D2 after you get fired from an A baseline, either.

9/10/2011 3:56 PM

oldresorter

Posts: 646 (0)

Hall of Famer

1110 1

Prospect

Posted by mmt0315 on 9/10/2011 3:08:00 PM (view original):
And girt...in the older worlds they werent so healthy...only in Knight Phelan and maybe Tark...and again because of newness...you have clout...get a 12 human to join the Big West or another small conference....and I guarantee withing 5-6 seasons (assuming everyone stayed) the conference would be the same as a big six....I for one would volunteer to join the experiment.

mmt - you are right - if 12 great coaches join a conference they can win - the issue is when an average coach joins d1, with fewer decent or lets say capable of competing recruits (not none, just fewer), they game got harder (not impossible just harder).

Hence, the average coaches decided it wasn't worth it. Luckily, with fewer coaches now playing, the game has sort of evened out, I don't think for the number of guys playing, the game is too much different, a new level playing field sort of developed, with maybe 30-60 fewer d1 coaches because maybe 90-150 fewer capable d1 recruits exist.

9/10/2011 3:59 PM

mmt0315

Posts: 450 (0)

Hall of Famer

1 323 4 7

Prospect

Or --- I think you hit it on the head...and IMO...if youre going to play DI...things shouldnt be handed to you...weve all been given our share of "lumps" and they shouldnt have to change recruiting simply to make things easier...they need to change the job hiring process...and if at that point DI mid majors are still empty and/or have problems competing so things should be reevaluated...however, things have never been better at DI in terms of recruiting and battles and whatnot...DII and DIII is no challenge to recruit which is why people dont complain...there are so many options that people can pick and choose who they want...DI should not be the same.

9/10/2011 5:16 PM

girt25

Posts: 2136 (0)

Hall of Famer

1 122 1 1

Rookie

Posted by mmt0315 on 9/10/2011 3:08:00 PM (view original):
And girt...in the older worlds they werent so healthy...only in Knight Phelan and maybe Tark...and again because of newness...you have clout...get a 12 human to join the Big West or another small conference....and I guarantee withing 5-6 seasons (assuming everyone stayed) the conference would be the same as a big six....I for one would volunteer to join the experiment.

Sorry, but you know very little of what you speak.

They were strong in the worlds other than Knight/Phelan/Tark. Allen was easily the strongest, with teams like Southern, Yale, Cleveland State, Maine, Boston U and UNLV winning the championship over a 12-season stretch. (And a host of others repeatedly making deep runs and being relevant on a national scale.) In Rupp you had Toledo, UNCW and Delaware winning it all, etc.

All of the worlds were pretty healthy when it came to non-BCS success, some more than others. But what was certainly true is that non-BCS schools were significantly more successful in every single HD world than they were in real life.

Now, you hear nary a peep from them, with occasional instances to the contrary. And while I'd love to think that we had so much power, that OR and I coming in here and decrying it could make it so across every world at the same time, the notion is patently ridiculous.

9/10/2011 5:33 PM

girt25

Posts: 2136 (0)

Hall of Famer

1 122 1 1

Rookie

Posted by mmt0315 on 9/10/2011 5:16:00 PM (view original):
Or --- I think you hit it on the head...and IMO...if youre going to play DI...things shouldnt be handed to you...weve all been given our share of "lumps" and they shouldnt have to change recruiting simply to make things easier...they need to change the job hiring process...and if at that point DI mid majors are still empty and/or have problems competing so things should be reevaluated...however, things have never been better at DI in terms of recruiting and battles and whatnot...DII and DIII is no challenge to recruit which is why people dont complain...there are so many options that people can pick and choose who they want...DI should not be the same.

No one is saying that they should be handed to you.

We're not saying change recruiting to make things easy.

They already made a change to recruiting that made things much harder; we're just saying tweak it back (probably a happy medium) to give non-BCS schools a better chance to compete in a relevant way.

Your assertion that "things have never been better at DI in terms of recruiting and battles" is ludicrous and unsubstantiated by fact. And again, no one is saying there shouldn't be battles. No one is saying you should be able to pick and choose players. No one is saying it shouldn't be a challenge. You are creating a straw man. We are just saying that there shouldn't be such an enormous gulf between the haves and have nots in recruiting. That has been plainly demonstrated to be horrendous for the health of DI.

9/10/2011 5:37 PM

kobo

Posts: 51 (0)

Hall of Famer

2 6 66 206 61

Prospect

Seble's changes to recruiting, although well intentiioned ruined the competitive nature of Div. 1. No team outside of the BCS has any chance of advancing beyond the Sweet 16 and even that is a huge long shot. The problem is the huge change in the availability of medium recruits. Non-BCS schools were not landing 5 star guys anyway (except in very rare cases) Now however, they cannot even land a 3 or 4 star unless those guys are horribly overrated and have no hope of improving. The odds are that a competitive and well run mid-major team will end up with a seed in the bottom 8. perhaps get a lucky first draw and then face a team with multiple elite (900 overall ratings) and have almost no chance of winning. Look at the final 4 teams before and after the recruiting change if you doubt me.

As a result there has been a huge exodus from these conferences (and from HD in general) and it has juust gotten more difficult to compete with BCS schools. Sure a human can get to the NT but it is impossible to advance. The change in recruiting was not all bad but the distribution of recruits (the relative lack of decent medium skilled project players) has screwed over the small conference schools. I gave up myself and moved to a BCS conference.

The neglect shown by WIS is unacceptable and a token $10.00 bribe is not enough. I expect some changes to return D1 back to some degree of parity (of course it should be harder in the smaller conferences, but not impossible)

9/10/2011 6:04 PM

mmt0315

Posts: 450 (0)

Hall of Famer

1 323 4 7

Prospect

Girt --- no offense --- but the only thing you use to prove your point it the numbers in DI --- The bottom line is the conferences that have humans, compete and thats the bottom line...I think initially there was an abandonment based on fear of change that is always natural --- that being said the conferences with humans do well and thats a fact go take a look...you are living in a dream land if you think battles arent going on in the upper level DI conferences in ways weve never seen...go check out DI Naismith this period for the most recent example, where virtually every conference is fighting over that very thing.

9/10/2011 6:13 PM

oldresorter

Posts: 646 (0)

Hall of Famer

1110 1

Prospect

Posted by mmt0315 on 9/10/2011 5:16:00 PM (view original):
Or --- I think you hit it on the head...and IMO...if youre going to play DI...things shouldnt be handed to you...weve all been given our share of "lumps" and they shouldnt have to change recruiting simply to make things easier...they need to change the job hiring process...and if at that point DI mid majors are still empty and/or have problems competing so things should be reevaluated...however, things have never been better at DI in terms of recruiting and battles and whatnot...DII and DIII is no challenge to recruit which is why people dont complain...there are so many options that people can pick and choose who they want...DI should not be the same.

MMT - I sort of have lost my interest in this debate, but from the little I recall / and from reading this thread, are you an advocate of relaxing the standards to fill d1? If so, isn't that making the d1 game easier? In theory, I don't really have a problem with that suggestion per se, but my fear would be 90% of those coaches who would come under relaxed standards would not be ready for d1 in some way shape or form.

When I moved into d1, the standards were much tougher to get in. By the time I was moving up, I had won multiple d3 national titles, and some thought of me as one of the best coaches in the game, yet, I am pretty sure I had to go thru 2 or 3 different low level d1 jobs to get BCS level jobs. Also, I seem to recall blogging on a 'team' thread at the time, that I was surprised at how little I knew about the game, or how much I learned in d1. I don't think any d2 coach is ready to recruit at BCS level d1, without a little time in the trenches & quite honestly, many are not up to gameplanning against top flight HD competition every night - I don't think I was at least.

Won't this premature moving up, only exasperate the problem with people leaving the game due to frustration?

Wouldn't it make more sense to make more capable recruits available at the low and mid level d1 ranks, such that while these coaches are learning, they at least have a shot at a decent roster? But to do that, you sacrifice what we now have at the top, and make for more parity there. I made this point during beta testing vs the argument that top coaches will kill each other off making recruiting easier for mid level coaches. Top coaches will find the best recruits, no matter how you disguise them, they will spend their money wiser, they will make better decisions, and the harder recruiting gets, the more they will be rewarded. I think the lesson has been learned, I am near positive seble now knows this, but the key question left is what to do about it, if anything?

9/10/2011 6:39 PM (edited)

girt25

Posts: 2136 (0)

Hall of Famer

1 122 1 1

Rookie

Posted by mmt0315 on 9/10/2011 6:13:00 PM (view original):
Girt --- no offense --- but the only thing you use to prove your point it the numbers in DI --- The bottom line is the conferences that have humans, compete and thats the bottom line...I think initially there was an abandonment based on fear of change that is always natural --- that being said the conferences with humans do well and thats a fact go take a look...you are living in a dream land if you think battles arent going on in the upper level DI conferences in ways weve never seen...go check out DI Naismith this period for the most recent example, where virtually every conference is fighting over that very thing.

I can only speak first-hand right now of Allen and Rupp, but there are way less battles then there were before.

(Not that more or less battles is the primary concern here, or a sign that things are good or bad. I was simply responding to your contention.)

There have been many, many changes in HD over the years. None of them caused people to head for the hills from DI like this.

If you don't realize that it is now much, much harder to build a really strong program at non-BCS schools -- not impossible, but much harder -- then you don't have a strong grasp on the machinations of DI.

9/10/2011 8:06 PM

mmt0315

Posts: 450 (0)

Hall of Famer

1 323 4 7

Prospect

Posted by oldresorter on 9/10/2011 6:39:00 PM (view original):
Posted by mmt0315 on 9/10/2011 5:16:00 PM (view original):
Or --- I think you hit it on the head...and IMO...if youre going to play DI...things shouldnt be handed to you...weve all been given our share of "lumps" and they shouldnt have to change recruiting simply to make things easier...they need to change the job hiring process...and if at that point DI mid majors are still empty and/or have problems competing so things should be reevaluated...however, things have never been better at DI in terms of recruiting and battles and whatnot...DII and DIII is no challenge to recruit which is why people dont complain...there are so many options that people can pick and choose who they want...DI should not be the same.
MMT - I sort of have lost my interest in this debate, but from the little I recall / and from reading this thread, are you an advocate of relaxing the standards to fill d1? If so, isn't that making the d1 game easier? In theory, I don't really have a problem with that suggestion per se, but my fear would be 90% of those coaches who would come under relaxed standards would not be ready for d1 in some way shape or form.

When I moved into d1, the standards were much tougher to get in. By the time I was moving up, I had won multiple d3 national titles, and some thought of me as one of the best coaches in the game, yet, I am pretty sure I had to go thru 2 or 3 different low level d1 jobs to get BCS level jobs. Also, I seem to recall blogging on a 'team' thread at the time, that I was surprised at how little I knew about the game, or how much I learned in d1. I don't think any d2 coach is ready to recruit at BCS level d1, without a little time in the trenches & quite honestly, many are not up to gameplanning against top flight HD competition every night - I don't think I was at least.

Won't this premature moving up, only exasperate the problem with people leaving the game due to frustration?

Wouldn't it make more sense to make more capable recruits available at the low and mid level d1 ranks, such that while these coaches are learning, they at least have a shot at a decent roster? But to do that, you sacrifice what we now have at the top, and make for more parity there. I made this point during beta testing vs the argument that top coaches will kill each other off making recruiting easier for mid level coaches. Top coaches will find the best recruits, no matter how you disguise them, they will spend their money wiser, they will make better decisions, and the harder recruiting gets, the more they will be rewarded. I think the lesson has been learned, I am near positive seble now knows this, but the key question left is what to do about it, if anything?

Not at all OR --- and frankly I dont understand how this point is lose on so many people...but lets say for example that Im at DII and I qualify for a DI job with a school that has a D+ or D prestige...I do well and build up the school to the point where its a B or a B+...I then decide to leave...that school never gets filled and it then hurts the entire conference...what Im saying is let the next guy at DII get hired using the same standards, the baseline prestige...that in no way is making DI easier as you suggest...it simply puts everyone trying to get to DI on the same level while not destroying the midmajor conferences that have built up by allowing them to be taken over by Sims...

There is NO "premature" moving up, there is no "making things easier" --- the current system actually makes it harder as there are fewer options available...

9/10/2011 10:28 PM

mmt0315

Posts: 450 (0)

Hall of Famer

1 323 4 7

Prospect

Posted by girt25 on 9/10/2011 1:51:00 PM (view original):
Posted by stinenavy on 9/10/2011 12:12:00 PM (view original):
If D1 non-BCS conferences are empty because of recruit generation, wouldn't D2 and D3 be filling to the brim? I haven't seen the updated numbers of coaches per division, but I would assume that D2 and D3 are becoming more barren as well.

I believe a big issue is with attracting more people that want to play the game. The forums for all of WIS are much less active across the board over the course of the last few years.
In the last numbers that were posted, DI participation was down and D2/D3 was not.

Since you never seem to support anything you say, where are these numbers?

9/10/2011 10:32 PM

mmt0315

Posts: 450 (0)

Hall of Famer

1 323 4 7

Prospect

Posted by girt25 on 9/10/2011 5:37:00 PM (view original):
Posted by mmt0315 on 9/10/2011 5:16:00 PM (view original):
Or --- I think you hit it on the head...and IMO...if youre going to play DI...things shouldnt be handed to you...weve all been given our share of "lumps" and they shouldnt have to change recruiting simply to make things easier...they need to change the job hiring process...and if at that point DI mid majors are still empty and/or have problems competing so things should be reevaluated...however, things have never been better at DI in terms of recruiting and battles and whatnot...DII and DIII is no challenge to recruit which is why people dont complain...there are so many options that people can pick and choose who they want...DI should not be the same.
No one is saying that they should be handed to you.

We're not saying change recruiting to make things easy.

They already made a change to recruiting that made things much harder; we're just saying tweak it back (probably a happy medium) to give non-BCS schools a better chance to compete in a relevant way.

Your assertion that "things have never been better at DI in terms of recruiting and battles" is ludicrous and unsubstantiated by fact. And again, no one is saying there shouldn't be battles. No one is saying you should be able to pick and choose players. No one is saying it shouldn't be a challenge. You are creating a straw man. We are just saying that there shouldn't be such an enormous gulf between the haves and have nots in recruiting. That has been plainly demonstrated to be horrendous for the health of DI.

You insulting me doesnt make you right, Im sorry but advantages are created by several things 1) Money; 2) Prestige; 3) Total seasons coaches...the big 6 conferences are always full or close to full and most team have had coaches who have been there 10+ seasons...Unless you can tell me that all things being equal mid-majors wouldnt be able to compete...then you are wrong...and right now several things are truths 1) Almost all mid-majors across the board are less than 50% full 2) Less than 20% of coaches at these schools have been there for more than 10 seasons 3) Mid-Major conferences that have 9 or more coaches (like a Big 6) compete like Big 6...Its about numbers not recruiting...those are all facts as opposed to nonsensical theories which continously try to represent like fact but have no support for.

9/10/2011 10:38 PM

Forums

Looks like change is coming! Topic

Search Criteria