Posted by phalla on 9/5/2013 1:07:00 PM (view original):
Posted by stevejones16 on 9/5/2013 12:13:00 PM (view original):And that's where it gets tricky.
I'd vote for scouting reports that cover all the ratings, but which include inaccuracies of varying degrees. That would introduce a bit more uncertainty into the recruitment process, which I think we benefit the game.
Get more or more specific information, but have the possibility of it not being entirely correct (more realistic).
Or get less information but have it (perhaps unrealistically) being always spot-on.
I think I prefer the latter.
And I prefer the former, because it's far more realistic. And with that type of report, you would HAVE to send your scout out more than once, because the more you sent him out, the more accurate his info becomes, just like in real life. For instance, when I was coaching HS basketball, we sent one of our Jr High coaches out as an advance scout on a team we were set to play in the second round of the playoffs. His first report was fairly detailed, but as he went to their next two games, he was able to fill in some areas that hadn't been apparent in the first game. After his third report on that team, we had them down cold. We destroyed that school, and made a run all the way to the finals that season. I think recruiting scout trips should be similar. The first report should cover all the bases, with some areas where the scout indicates he's not as certain about. As you send out a second, third, and even fourth scout trip, those "foggy" areas should become clear, eventually giving the same clarity of detail that the current scout trips give, but over all of the categories.