Posted by shoe3 on 9/29/2017 2:45:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mullycj on 9/29/2017 2:39:00 PM (view original):
What are his potentials?

Green defense and ft, blue bh and passing. Black speed, stamina and durability. Everything else is orange.

On my more advanced Rutgers and UV teams, no way do I offer a start. I probably still get him without the start, but I wanted to wrap it up in the first session.

So he'll be like this guy

Only a little worse.

Posted by Benis on 9/29/2017 3:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 9/29/2017 2:45:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mullycj on 9/29/2017 2:39:00 PM (view original):
What are his potentials?

Green defense and ft, blue bh and passing. Black speed, stamina and durability. Everything else is orange.

On my more advanced Rutgers and UV teams, no way do I offer a start. I probably still get him without the start, but I wanted to wrap it up in the first session.

So he'll be like this guy

Only a little worse.

Your senior would be an asset off the bench for many D1 teams. Maybe one of them should have recruited him, although he certainly would have been redshirted.

I probably wouldnt have recruited him as a freshman at Big 6 D1, but you never know. I occasionally put a few APs on that kind of player.

But no, Davis won't be worse. He'll be different, for sure. He'll end up a bit over 700 OVR, will be a better defender and scorer, though not quite as good of a distributor.

Do I have better players on my ACU squad? Yep. Did I have better players on my championship Carleton team? Yep. As you like to point out, one of the major differences is in how good the starting ratings are now. If I don't recruit the guy, maybe he falls to D2. Isn't that the kind of thing you're saying is bad, requiring some structural change?

I appreciate you taking mediocre D1 players so they don't fall to D3. Super nice of you.

Posted by Benis on 9/29/2017 3:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 9/29/2017 2:45:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mullycj on 9/29/2017 2:39:00 PM (view original):
What are his potentials?

Green defense and ft, blue bh and passing. Black speed, stamina and durability. Everything else is orange.

On my more advanced Rutgers and UV teams, no way do I offer a start. I probably still get him without the start, but I wanted to wrap it up in the first session.

So he'll be like this guy

Only a little worse.

I would bring that guy off the bench for Wisconsin

Posted by mullycj on 9/29/2017 5:33:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 9/29/2017 3:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 9/29/2017 2:45:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mullycj on 9/29/2017 2:39:00 PM (view original):
What are his potentials?

Green defense and ft, blue bh and passing. Black speed, stamina and durability. Everything else is orange.

On my more advanced Rutgers and UV teams, no way do I offer a start. I probably still get him without the start, but I wanted to wrap it up in the first session.

So he'll be like this guy

Only a little worse.

I would bring that guy off the bench for Wisconsin

No way. Def is too low for you.

Posted by Benis on 9/29/2017 3:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 9/29/2017 2:45:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mullycj on 9/29/2017 2:39:00 PM (view original):
What are his potentials?

Green defense and ft, blue bh and passing. Black speed, stamina and durability. Everything else is orange.

On my more advanced Rutgers and UV teams, no way do I offer a start. I probably still get him without the start, but I wanted to wrap it up in the first session.

So he'll be like this guy

Only a little worse.

The problem Shoe is that you do not win D1 with these players. They will be serviceable for 10 min as seniors and off the bench.

Posted by zorzii on 9/29/2017 8:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 9/29/2017 3:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 9/29/2017 2:45:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mullycj on 9/29/2017 2:39:00 PM (view original):
What are his potentials?

Green defense and ft, blue bh and passing. Black speed, stamina and durability. Everything else is orange.

On my more advanced Rutgers and UV teams, no way do I offer a start. I probably still get him without the start, but I wanted to wrap it up in the first session.

So he'll be like this guy

Only a little worse.

The problem Shoe is that you do not win D1 with these players. They will be serviceable for 10 min as seniors and off the bench.

Sure you do. When they're developed and have good IQs, they can absolutely contribute.

Are they as good as primary targets? No. That's why they're backups. They're not as good as the guys you want, but they're better than walk-ons. If you don't think they're better than walk-ons, then don't take them. Take the walk-on and the scholarship next year. Cool. But don't blame the system, that's you making a choice. This is a multi-player commodity game, and intelligent people are trying to get the best commodities they can find, too. The game shouldn't be easy for anyone.

Posted by l80r20 on 9/29/2017 11:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 9/29/2017 12:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by crabman26 on 9/29/2017 11:57:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 9/29/2017 11:29:00 AM (view original):
Unless you're talking about changing jobs, which is another topic, you absolutely can get backups lined up. But the users who come to the forums to complain choose not to play that way. That's a gameplay and expectations issue.

I agree to an extent, you can get back ups lined up if you are battling for guys that have an early signing...but for the late signers it is more difficult to have backup options if you are in a battle.

You can have backups lined up for late guys too, but it starts early in the first session. It can get complicated, if you have a bold D2 or D3 deciding to reach up and invest, and especially if the prime guy is taking his time in the second session, but usually if you're on a guy from the start, the lower level teams move on early. Trying to move in *after* those lower level teams have already invested is not the way to do it. It's like trying to buy life insurance after 50. Now the price is much higher.

Some don't like to play this way - which is fine - because they'd rather invest all their APs on their top targets, to maximize their chances. Totally valid. But then you can't complain about the consequence, which is that if you strike out, you are behind the eight-ball.

Those extra 3-5 APs per cycle don't really move the needle much at all on a recruit you're going to go all in on anyway. Sure it matters, maybe a couple of percentage points at the end. But there's not a lot of value there. They are far more valuable on recruits that are not going to get a ton of attention, or visits from high prestige teams. That's why siphoning off 3-5 APs per cycle from your top target to cultivate a backup over the course of a recruiting session can pay off for people who, for whatever reason, don't want to take a walk-on in that slot.

Superior advice, shoe. Only the blind could argue with that.

Of course, there is a lot of that going around.

I don’t get the logic behind this honestly. Why start the habit for of recruiting sub par backups who will only be useful 4 SEASONS from now? Like take the walk-on and attempt getting better players the next season.. I don’t get how Big Six D1 teams compete with #200 ranked players.

Posted by zagsrulez on 9/30/2017 4:33:00 AM (view original):

Posted by l80r20 on 9/29/2017 11:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 9/29/2017 12:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by crabman26 on 9/29/2017 11:57:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 9/29/2017 11:29:00 AM (view original):
Unless you're talking about changing jobs, which is another topic, you absolutely can get backups lined up. But the users who come to the forums to complain choose not to play that way. That's a gameplay and expectations issue.

I agree to an extent, you can get back ups lined up if you are battling for guys that have an early signing...but for the late signers it is more difficult to have backup options if you are in a battle.

You can have backups lined up for late guys too, but it starts early in the first session. It can get complicated, if you have a bold D2 or D3 deciding to reach up and invest, and especially if the prime guy is taking his time in the second session, but usually if you're on a guy from the start, the lower level teams move on early. Trying to move in *after* those lower level teams have already invested is not the way to do it. It's like trying to buy life insurance after 50. Now the price is much higher.

Some don't like to play this way - which is fine - because they'd rather invest all their APs on their top targets, to maximize their chances. Totally valid. But then you can't complain about the consequence, which is that if you strike out, you are behind the eight-ball.

Those extra 3-5 APs per cycle don't really move the needle much at all on a recruit you're going to go all in on anyway. Sure it matters, maybe a couple of percentage points at the end. But there's not a lot of value there. They are far more valuable on recruits that are not going to get a ton of attention, or visits from high prestige teams. That's why siphoning off 3-5 APs per cycle from your top target to cultivate a backup over the course of a recruiting session can pay off for people who, for whatever reason, don't want to take a walk-on in that slot.

Superior advice, shoe. Only the blind could argue with that.

Of course, there is a lot of that going around.

I don’t get the logic behind this honestly. Why start the habit for of recruiting sub par backups who will only be useful 4 SEASONS from now? Like take the walk-on and attempt getting better players the next season.. I don’t get how Big Six D1 teams compete with #200 ranked players.

That's what people do.

Posted by zorzii on 9/30/2017 6:50:00 AM (view original):

Posted by zagsrulez on 9/30/2017 4:33:00 AM (view original):

Posted by l80r20 on 9/29/2017 11:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 9/29/2017 12:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by crabman26 on 9/29/2017 11:57:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 9/29/2017 11:29:00 AM (view original):
Unless you're talking about changing jobs, which is another topic, you absolutely can get backups lined up. But the users who come to the forums to complain choose not to play that way. That's a gameplay and expectations issue.

I agree to an extent, you can get back ups lined up if you are battling for guys that have an early signing...but for the late signers it is more difficult to have backup options if you are in a battle.

You can have backups lined up for late guys too, but it starts early in the first session. It can get complicated, if you have a bold D2 or D3 deciding to reach up and invest, and especially if the prime guy is taking his time in the second session, but usually if you're on a guy from the start, the lower level teams move on early. Trying to move in *after* those lower level teams have already invested is not the way to do it. It's like trying to buy life insurance after 50. Now the price is much higher.

Some don't like to play this way - which is fine - because they'd rather invest all their APs on their top targets, to maximize their chances. Totally valid. But then you can't complain about the consequence, which is that if you strike out, you are behind the eight-ball.

Those extra 3-5 APs per cycle don't really move the needle much at all on a recruit you're going to go all in on anyway. Sure it matters, maybe a couple of percentage points at the end. But there's not a lot of value there. They are far more valuable on recruits that are not going to get a ton of attention, or visits from high prestige teams. That's why siphoning off 3-5 APs per cycle from your top target to cultivate a backup over the course of a recruiting session can pay off for people who, for whatever reason, don't want to take a walk-on in that slot.

Superior advice, shoe. Only the blind could argue with that.

Of course, there is a lot of that going around.

I don’t get the logic behind this honestly. Why start the habit for of recruiting sub par backups who will only be useful 4 SEASONS from now? Like take the walk-on and attempt getting better players the next season.. I don’t get how Big Six D1 teams compete with #200 ranked players.

That's what people do.

"Some don't like to play this way - which is fine - because they'd rather invest all their APs on their top targets, to maximize their chances. Totally valid. But then you can't complain about the consequence, which is that if you strike out, you are behind the eight-ball."

You aren't entitled to a team of future NBA players simply because that's the kind of team you'd like to field.

Posted by zagsrulez on 9/30/2017 4:33:00 AM (view original):

Posted by l80r20 on 9/29/2017 11:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 9/29/2017 12:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by crabman26 on 9/29/2017 11:57:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 9/29/2017 11:29:00 AM (view original):
Unless you're talking about changing jobs, which is another topic, you absolutely can get backups lined up. But the users who come to the forums to complain choose not to play that way. That's a gameplay and expectations issue.

I agree to an extent, you can get back ups lined up if you are battling for guys that have an early signing...but for the late signers it is more difficult to have backup options if you are in a battle.

You can have backups lined up for late guys too, but it starts early in the first session. It can get complicated, if you have a bold D2 or D3 deciding to reach up and invest, and especially if the prime guy is taking his time in the second session, but usually if you're on a guy from the start, the lower level teams move on early. Trying to move in *after* those lower level teams have already invested is not the way to do it. It's like trying to buy life insurance after 50. Now the price is much higher.

Some don't like to play this way - which is fine - because they'd rather invest all their APs on their top targets, to maximize their chances. Totally valid. But then you can't complain about the consequence, which is that if you strike out, you are behind the eight-ball.

Those extra 3-5 APs per cycle don't really move the needle much at all on a recruit you're going to go all in on anyway. Sure it matters, maybe a couple of percentage points at the end. But there's not a lot of value there. They are far more valuable on recruits that are not going to get a ton of attention, or visits from high prestige teams. That's why siphoning off 3-5 APs per cycle from your top target to cultivate a backup over the course of a recruiting session can pay off for people who, for whatever reason, don't want to take a walk-on in that slot.

Superior advice, shoe. Only the blind could argue with that.

Of course, there is a lot of that going around.

I don’t get the logic behind this honestly. Why start the habit for of recruiting sub par backups who will only be useful 4 SEASONS from now? Like take the walk-on and attempt getting better players the next season.. I don’t get how Big Six D1 teams compete with #200 ranked players.

If you don't care about consistently making the NT or ever having any deep runs then you can do this.

So it's up to you.

Posted by Benis on 9/30/2017 9:41:00 AM (view original):

Posted by zagsrulez on 9/30/2017 4:33:00 AM (view original):

Posted by l80r20 on 9/29/2017 11:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 9/29/2017 12:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by crabman26 on 9/29/2017 11:57:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 9/29/2017 11:29:00 AM (view original):
Unless you're talking about changing jobs, which is another topic, you absolutely can get backups lined up. But the users who come to the forums to complain choose not to play that way. That's a gameplay and expectations issue.

I agree to an extent, you can get back ups lined up if you are battling for guys that have an early signing...but for the late signers it is more difficult to have backup options if you are in a battle.

You can have backups lined up for late guys too, but it starts early in the first session. It can get complicated, if you have a bold D2 or D3 deciding to reach up and invest, and especially if the prime guy is taking his time in the second session, but usually if you're on a guy from the start, the lower level teams move on early. Trying to move in *after* those lower level teams have already invested is not the way to do it. It's like trying to buy life insurance after 50. Now the price is much higher.

Some don't like to play this way - which is fine - because they'd rather invest all their APs on their top targets, to maximize their chances. Totally valid. But then you can't complain about the consequence, which is that if you strike out, you are behind the eight-ball.

Those extra 3-5 APs per cycle don't really move the needle much at all on a recruit you're going to go all in on anyway. Sure it matters, maybe a couple of percentage points at the end. But there's not a lot of value there. They are far more valuable on recruits that are not going to get a ton of attention, or visits from high prestige teams. That's why siphoning off 3-5 APs per cycle from your top target to cultivate a backup over the course of a recruiting session can pay off for people who, for whatever reason, don't want to take a walk-on in that slot.

Superior advice, shoe. Only the blind could argue with that.

Of course, there is a lot of that going around.

I don’t get the logic behind this honestly. Why start the habit for of recruiting sub par backups who will only be useful 4 SEASONS from now? Like take the walk-on and attempt getting better players the next season.. I don’t get how Big Six D1 teams compete with #200 ranked players.

If you don't care about consistently making the NT or ever having any deep runs then you can do this.

So it's up to you.

"Some don't like to play this way - which is fine - because they'd rather invest all their APs on their top targets, to maximize their chances. Totally valid. But then you can't complain about the consequence, which is that if you strike out, you are behind the eight-ball."