I've mentioned it off and on for 2-3 years now, but the ability of walk-ons as it relates to their level is just ridiculous.  There's no reason that a D1 walk-on shouldn't be as talented as an above average D2 starter.  And of course, not much reason why a D2 walk-on shouldn't be on par with an average D3 starter.  A D3 walk-on would simply be the remaining sub-par D3 talent assigned to D3 teams, so they are still viable as a backup as well. 

Of course the amazingly talent 191 OVR kid that I posted earlier is what got me to thinking about this again, but with the recruiting going like it is in D1, we're seeing a lot of teams take 2+ walk-ons.  It makes no sense that their roster is filled with 100% useless players.  The kids that come on as walk-ons should at least be sub-par backup quality and every once in a while give us a reason to 'think' about offering them a scholarship.  (maybe because they fill a specific role?)

I thought it'd be fun if, when you have to take a walkon, you got to have some kind of a tryout.

Say, for example, the last cycle runs and you're left with 2 walk-on spots.  From the time that last cycle ran to the time of your first exhibition game, you'd get a grid of 5 or so walk-ons who tried out for your team.  Maybe you'd only get to see 50% of their categories and none of their potential or something along those lines and you'd get to pick between those players. 

There wouldn't ever be a starter-caliber player in there, but you could potentially land a decent role player rather than just taking the luck of the draw and wind up with a 191 OVR kid.

I'm sure it won't happen - but seems like a fun idea.

a walkon at a DI program ought to be able to do something useful -  most walkons should have pretty good shooting skills - your average walkon can shoot - just is missing other skills at the level needed to play at the relevant level......good PER but slow or whatever

Posted by metsmax on 2/9/2011 5:53:00 PM (view original):
a walkon at a DI program ought to be able to do something useful -  most walkons should have pretty good shooting skills - your average walkon can shoot - just is missing other skills at the level needed to play at the relevant level......good PER but slow or whatever

Low ATH/SPD, low DEF possibly.  I would think that only about 10% (+/-) of walk ons ever ought to be scholarship-worthy.

Another possibility:  last season I recruited a guy I didn't end up signing.  Nobody signed him, in fact, and he's showing up on my scouting lists again this year as a soph-to-be.   It would have been nice to be able to offer him a walk-on spot to at least get him into the program.

yeah I have thought for a while that maybe instead of the last 12 hours of recruiting, making it walkon recruiting?  Offer walkon spots to people that went unsigned?  After the sims finish all their recruiting of course, so there is a pretty good penalty for not filling your scholarships.

Well, and have people decide if the go JUCO first as well.

I'm fine with the walk-on process. You should be punished for not filling up your schollies.

I agree with uping the level of Walk-Ons. Not a WHOLE bunch, and I don't know about tryouts or whatever. But like 5% or so be scholarship worth, and the rest at least have a niche. It seems like You here about players in real life going from walk-on to starter. I know this happens in football quite a bit, don't watch a whole lot of basketball though.

Even just making it so that each walkon is at least remotely competant at SOMETHING - at least enough oif a level of competance at some factor to describe why they even played high school ball.
 

Posted by stinenavy on 2/9/2011 8:25:00 PM (view original):
I'm fine with the walk-on process. You should be punished for not filling up your schollies.

+1

Posted by hitman1979 on 2/9/2011 10:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by stinenavy on 2/9/2011 8:25:00 PM (view original):
I'm fine with the walk-on process. You should be punished for not filling up your schollies.

+1

+2

if only walkons could shoot like this...... bleacherreport.com/articles/603882-ray-allen-destiny-calls-breaking-the-nba-record-for-three-pointers-made

oh and btw... +3

I agree that you should be punished for not filling scholarships, but the walkons right now just are not realistic. at all. And I think that it could turn into a really cool facet of the game.

I'm with the OP. walk-ons should be, on average, about as good as the worst recruits at any given level, with an outside chance at a scholarship-worthy player.  that IS a punishment, and is realistic.  the situation as is is artificial extreme punishment that absolutely kills the worst teams.

of course, if you corrected the situation you would have all the anti-variance guys whining in the forum about how whether or not you get a decent backup as a walk-on is all luck.

Posted by stinenavy on 2/9/2011 8:25:00 PM (view original):
I'm fine with the walk-on process. You should be punished for not filling up your schollies.

Punished for what reason?

If a coach has to battle for his top targets and loses, why is that necessarily his fault?  He could have been poached for all we know.

And the system right now seems to reward under-recruiting, giving you more cash to recruit fewer players.  Is that the coach's fault or the system's?