All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Knight > Mega-Ultra-Super-Duper-Uber Challenge
7/13/2013 11:56 AM
I'd be interested, but only if enough people from my conference participated that I didn't get an unduly high seed while I'm still rebuilding. 

Also, your seeding method seems very unkind for superclass teams. 

Also also, I don't know why it's important to prevent rematches. I figure it'd create rivalries if teams ended up facing each other year after year in the giant-mega-challenge-thing
7/13/2013 1:01 PM
Posted by tarvolon on 7/13/2013 11:56:00 AM (view original):
I'd be interested, but only if enough people from my conference participated that I didn't get an unduly high seed while I'm still rebuilding. 

Also, your seeding method seems very unkind for superclass teams. 

Also also, I don't know why it's important to prevent rematches. I figure it'd create rivalries if teams ended up facing each other year after year in the giant-mega-challenge-thing
tarvolon, those are some interesting points. I think the seeding method is unkind to super-class teams (except the year their super-class is mature and they are riding a low seed from the growing years - in which case its unfair to whomever they draw as an opponent that season and still not a great method of matching similarly skilled clubs). I've got 2 alternatives immediately and am open to suggestions.discussion of others.

#1 - Each conference determines the seeds themselves, based on projections by the participating coaches on how each team should be ranked for the upcoming season. The major drawback to this method is that IMHO not a lot of coaches are fond of creating these rankings and it is sometimes hard to get all (or even most) of the coaches to return their rankings in a timely fashion. 

#2 - This is the method I used while taking part in the Snowball Shootout (FKA The Gangbang I believe) in Wooden. I took the average rating of each class of a team times the number of players in that class (ignoring all walk-ons of course) then times a multiplier equal to their upcoming class (so x2 for current freshmen, x3 for current sophomores, x4 for current juniors). This method seemed better in a number of ways, and in fact I got near what the ultimate final standings were in the following season most of the time. The drawback to this is that it doesn't have any allowance for incoming jucos or transfers. 

Regarding rematches - I never looked at it like that. I've always just assumed rematches were a negative and tried to avoid them for variety sake. That is less of an issue in a format like this where you will play 7 other teams every season, so a rematch here or there would still allow for variety generally while indeed it may help in rivalry building. I'm happy to redact the bit about shifting seeds for rematch purposes if that's the consensus.


Overall I'm encouraged that folks are interested in this idea, but concerned that not enough are. There are 19 people that have either voted that they are interested or posted, while we need at least 48 to make this happen. 2 of the conferences that I've included have not even had anyone indicate interest (Central and Great NW). If anyone that IS interested happens to have any relationship with any other coaches in either those 2 missing conferences, or in your own, and really want this to happen maybe you could reach out and try to drum up interest, as I will be doing via sitemail to all the coaches that are eligible that I have had any interaction withover the years. 

Thanks for your interest, please weigh in on the issues brought up by tarvolon, and lets make this thing happen...
7/13/2013 4:40 PM
method #2 seems to require too much effort on your part dac.  i'm in favor of ranking the teams alphabetically, that should make things easier.
7/13/2013 4:50 PM
I'd be interested dac.  Hawaii at Hilo.
7/13/2013 5:58 PM
I'm in Dac!
7/13/2013 10:31 PM
Grand Canyon is in!
7/13/2013 11:49 PM
i would be interested. Chaminade in the Great NW
7/14/2013 3:29 AM
Kentucky State- Southern.-  Let me know what kind of competition. I have interest.
7/14/2013 10:33 AM
Why not, sounds like fun. Slick_Watts - Slippery Rock - North American Conference
7/15/2013 12:01 PM
I'm interested.  Tarleton State, Lone Star.
7/15/2013 12:34 PM
Posted by dacj501 on 7/13/2013 1:01:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tarvolon on 7/13/2013 11:56:00 AM (view original):
I'd be interested, but only if enough people from my conference participated that I didn't get an unduly high seed while I'm still rebuilding. 

Also, your seeding method seems very unkind for superclass teams. 

Also also, I don't know why it's important to prevent rematches. I figure it'd create rivalries if teams ended up facing each other year after year in the giant-mega-challenge-thing
tarvolon, those are some interesting points. I think the seeding method is unkind to super-class teams (except the year their super-class is mature and they are riding a low seed from the growing years - in which case its unfair to whomever they draw as an opponent that season and still not a great method of matching similarly skilled clubs). I've got 2 alternatives immediately and am open to suggestions.discussion of others.

#1 - Each conference determines the seeds themselves, based on projections by the participating coaches on how each team should be ranked for the upcoming season. The major drawback to this method is that IMHO not a lot of coaches are fond of creating these rankings and it is sometimes hard to get all (or even most) of the coaches to return their rankings in a timely fashion. 

#2 - This is the method I used while taking part in the Snowball Shootout (FKA The Gangbang I believe) in Wooden. I took the average rating of each class of a team times the number of players in that class (ignoring all walk-ons of course) then times a multiplier equal to their upcoming class (so x2 for current freshmen, x3 for current sophomores, x4 for current juniors). This method seemed better in a number of ways, and in fact I got near what the ultimate final standings were in the following season most of the time. The drawback to this is that it doesn't have any allowance for incoming jucos or transfers. 

Regarding rematches - I never looked at it like that. I've always just assumed rematches were a negative and tried to avoid them for variety sake. That is less of an issue in a format like this where you will play 7 other teams every season, so a rematch here or there would still allow for variety generally while indeed it may help in rivalry building. I'm happy to redact the bit about shifting seeds for rematch purposes if that's the consensus.


Overall I'm encouraged that folks are interested in this idea, but concerned that not enough are. There are 19 people that have either voted that they are interested or posted, while we need at least 48 to make this happen. 2 of the conferences that I've included have not even had anyone indicate interest (Central and Great NW). If anyone that IS interested happens to have any relationship with any other coaches in either those 2 missing conferences, or in your own, and really want this to happen maybe you could reach out and try to drum up interest, as I will be doing via sitemail to all the coaches that are eligible that I have had any interaction withover the years. 

Thanks for your interest, please weigh in on the issues brought up by tarvolon, and lets make this thing happen...
I love the idea of conferences determining their own seeds. Maybe each conference has its own "commissioner" that is in charge of getting their invites in order.
7/15/2013 5:48 PM
Posted by jetwildcat on 7/15/2013 12:34:00 PM (view original):
Posted by dacj501 on 7/13/2013 1:01:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tarvolon on 7/13/2013 11:56:00 AM (view original):
I'd be interested, but only if enough people from my conference participated that I didn't get an unduly high seed while I'm still rebuilding. 

Also, your seeding method seems very unkind for superclass teams. 

Also also, I don't know why it's important to prevent rematches. I figure it'd create rivalries if teams ended up facing each other year after year in the giant-mega-challenge-thing
tarvolon, those are some interesting points. I think the seeding method is unkind to super-class teams (except the year their super-class is mature and they are riding a low seed from the growing years - in which case its unfair to whomever they draw as an opponent that season and still not a great method of matching similarly skilled clubs). I've got 2 alternatives immediately and am open to suggestions.discussion of others.

#1 - Each conference determines the seeds themselves, based on projections by the participating coaches on how each team should be ranked for the upcoming season. The major drawback to this method is that IMHO not a lot of coaches are fond of creating these rankings and it is sometimes hard to get all (or even most) of the coaches to return their rankings in a timely fashion. 

#2 - This is the method I used while taking part in the Snowball Shootout (FKA The Gangbang I believe) in Wooden. I took the average rating of each class of a team times the number of players in that class (ignoring all walk-ons of course) then times a multiplier equal to their upcoming class (so x2 for current freshmen, x3 for current sophomores, x4 for current juniors). This method seemed better in a number of ways, and in fact I got near what the ultimate final standings were in the following season most of the time. The drawback to this is that it doesn't have any allowance for incoming jucos or transfers. 

Regarding rematches - I never looked at it like that. I've always just assumed rematches were a negative and tried to avoid them for variety sake. That is less of an issue in a format like this where you will play 7 other teams every season, so a rematch here or there would still allow for variety generally while indeed it may help in rivalry building. I'm happy to redact the bit about shifting seeds for rematch purposes if that's the consensus.


Overall I'm encouraged that folks are interested in this idea, but concerned that not enough are. There are 19 people that have either voted that they are interested or posted, while we need at least 48 to make this happen. 2 of the conferences that I've included have not even had anyone indicate interest (Central and Great NW). If anyone that IS interested happens to have any relationship with any other coaches in either those 2 missing conferences, or in your own, and really want this to happen maybe you could reach out and try to drum up interest, as I will be doing via sitemail to all the coaches that are eligible that I have had any interaction withover the years. 

Thanks for your interest, please weigh in on the issues brought up by tarvolon, and lets make this thing happen...
I love the idea of conferences determining their own seeds. Maybe each conference has its own "commissioner" that is in charge of getting their invites in order.
that theoretically does make it easier on me, unless I just end up having to cajole the commissioners...
7/15/2013 9:50 PM
easier than cajoling everyone and nobody at the same time
7/16/2013 9:40 PM
There are at least a few members of the Central that would be glad to jump in, but not at 7 games; more like 3 or 4.  One big concern is that the top teams would just end up with an impossible schedule with 7 games against other top teams and then head into a tough conference schedule.   Could the challenge work on a 4 game basis rotating through alternate seasons?
7/17/2013 12:13 AM
Posted by rogelio on 7/16/2013 9:40:00 PM (view original):
There are at least a few members of the Central that would be glad to jump in, but not at 7 games; more like 3 or 4.  One big concern is that the top teams would just end up with an impossible schedule with 7 games against other top teams and then head into a tough conference schedule.   Could the challenge work on a 4 game basis rotating through alternate seasons?
It might, and it might not be 8 conferences as well since there might not be that many that have 6 interested coaches. Not to try to dismiss your suggestion, I thought about that scheduling thing too and I figured that it would work itself out if all of the top teams (or nearly all) were involved they'd all have the same-ish tough schedules so it would sort of normalize... I probably oversimplified it in my head, but I did think about that many games. 4 could work, 5 might be better if folks would go that far. I think with 5 and by contracting a bit to 6 conferences (maybe have the bottom one relegated out and let a new one in if they are qualified and interested) and we could still do the whole thing in one season. 

Like I said, I'm glad you guys are interested it just wouldn't be the same without you.
of 15
All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Knight > Mega-Ultra-Super-Duper-Uber Challenge

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.