If this is what's happening in Beta and what's going to be trotted out in real HD, it's going to KILL HD, not even close to kidding. This is a horrible idea, and whoever backs it, I'm against, plain and simple.

They aren't D1 quality players, they are D1 labeled players.

It's probably been blown out of proportion. As trentonjoe mentioned, they are D1 labeled players. Some of the ones that are left over, I wouldn't want playing for me assuming I had a D-3 team.

Sounds like I might have to trot out colonelsketball...

Yes, keep in mind the new beta keeps in place the same horrid positional rankings that we have now. And that it occurred on the first run when few folks had any clue of what was going on. I'm very interested to see if such trends continue, but I certainly wouldn't call it the norm, even in the first run.

That said, I'll take a 653-rated freshman player for my D3 team any day of the week, especially if I get to keep him for four years. I don't care if 99 of those points are in durability and he's only got 50 points of growth on him. I'll still take that at D3 any time it wants to fall to me.

agreed, the prime example was a #17 pf who really wasn't a top 100 PF. i wouldn't have considered him on a D prestige d1 program - like, wouldn't even add him to my list - and that's in today's game, where supposedly you can reach higher in tomorrow's. really, he should have went to d2 or to a crappier low d1 coach, but people were pretty much experimenting and clueless and so i don't think it was really a big deal at all. the travesty is that the window dressing ranking system is such garbage, not that a high d1 recruit went d3 - because that absolutely, without question, did not happen.

You guys are missing the point... Did you ever see a 650 rated guy enter D3 as a frosh? I never seen a guy like this in D2, you get to 550 around and it's rare. It's more 520 ish or 530.

So don't tell me colonels is not right, he is. Stop with the label... It's not the label, can we be D3? Top coaches will have 700 rated teams... D3?

I agree with both parts

Yes guys like the #17 PF that were gotten weren't really good and had no business being at any D1 school, let alone ranked #17 or projected D1. So it's a fault that first off he was ranked and projected D1, and second off shouldn't the improved D1 sims taken this guy then especially when the D3 schools is C-? and barely puts anything into him?

Now thinking ahead what happens when the worlds are much more emptier now its just the overrated #17 PF who shouldn't be in D1 but what happens when it starts to become guys that midmajor/nonmajor coaches currently get and now we are seeing D2/D3 teams with elite coaches playing with 70+ ath/def and multiple good 700+ players or guys with 50 ath 90+ spd/per/bh/pas/sta. It makes it more of an incentive to be a D2/D3 coach than to be a mid/non major coach because it will probably be much much much easier to string together true dynasties at the lower levels instead of what make the S16 a little bit more often than current mid/non major teams do?

It might just be overranked guys now, but soon it will become high talent guys who are just not Big 6 worthy that are being taken by the remaining elite D2/D3 coaches furthering the gap between themselves and the rest.

And I always thought it was weird that to be a good team every single person had to have potential where's the high starting rating low potential guys that are good, would add more strategy too, take the consistent 4 year solid player or opt for the weaker player with a lot more potential.... but thats completely irrelevant.

Read the greatest ever D3 thread, that guy couldn't hold most of those dudes jocks.

I'm strongly in favor of caps especially since I play in one world with a low number of humans. No I don't think a d2 school will get a top 25 (I'm talking caliber not ranking) player now that scholarships have value (unless they are at one of the Alaska schools and a stud appears there), but I could definitely see top 200 guys going to d2. I tried it last time in the beta and was very high on the list at the time the player signed even after missing out on 24+ hours of attn pts. I'm going to try it with a 6 man class this go around again and see what occurs.

Posted by therewas47 on 6/22/2016 11:17:00 PM (view original):
I'm strongly in favor of caps especially since I play in one world with a low number of humans. No I don't think a d2 school will get a top 25 (I'm talking caliber not ranking) player now that scholarships have value (unless they are at one of the Alaska schools and a stud appears there), but I could definitely see top 200 guys going to d2. I tried it last time in the beta and was very high on the list at the time the player signed even after missing out on 24+ hours of attn pts. I'm going to try it with a 6 man class this go around again and see what occurs.

I have mixed feelings on this. I definitely think there's a certain level that automatically should go JUCO if not signed (maybe the top 200 ranked players, although that's a bit of a misnomer since we all know the rankings are a joke...see current case), but I do think the unranked players should filter down and be free for anyone who puts in the time and effort to find them. Absolutely this will create some monster teams, but, hey, it's called Hoops Dynasty, not Hoops Equality or Hoops Mediocrity. And it's not like those players won't be there for every human at the division to figure out how to find.

What I'm most eager to see is how the changes made for recruiting in beta season 2 change and impact the ability to get these players at lower divisions. Or, translated, to see how badly I either helped or screwed myself with the changes I made to my scouting strategies this time around.

I would prefer to play hoops dynasty and not hoops "gridiron 1 coach win 20 titles in a row dynasty" dynasty.

I don't know what the current "limit" is for a dynasty now, with what stew and gil have done, but I don't think anyone wants to see a game where someone can make 10-20 championships in a row, that means the game is broken and/or empty compared to what we have now where it takes superhuman skill effort in the right situation to pull it off and its been done 3-4 times of 5+ in a row compared to literally every GD world and division being dominated by 1 maybe 2 coaches.

Posted by colonels19 on 6/22/2016 6:36:00 PM (view original):
If this is what's happening in Beta and what's going to be trotted out in real HD, it's going to KILL HD, not even close to kidding. This is a horrible idea, and whoever backs it, I'm against, plain and simple.

To keep this in perspective from the beta - ONLY 1 recruit from the top 100 went to any DII or DIII school out of all the recruits in the beta. Did lower teams pick up better players than the vision restricted current version? Probably "Yes". But did a large number of top DI recruits fall to lower levels - "No".

Posted by katzphang88 on 6/23/2016 12:55:00 AM (view original):

Posted by colonels19 on 6/22/2016 6:36:00 PM (view original):
If this is what's happening in Beta and what's going to be trotted out in real HD, it's going to KILL HD, not even close to kidding. This is a horrible idea, and whoever backs it, I'm against, plain and simple.

To keep this in perspective from the beta - ONLY 1 recruit from the top 100 went to any DII or DIII school out of all the recruits in the beta. Did lower teams pick up better players than the vision restricted current version? Probably "Yes". But did a large number of top DI recruits fall to lower levels - "No".

Don't forget that the Beta has over 200 users at D1 while most worlds only have about 100.

I have yet to see an example of a D3 team (or d2) that signed someone who I was like "Jeepers! That guy should be playing at Michigan!"

Honestly, that's what it would take for me to get worried about this issues because there are like 10 guys in D3 every year, in every world, that probably should be playing at Fordham.

I couldn't care less that he started at 650 (or whatever), all I care about is how good he ends up and how quickly he gets there.