Ridiculous inelligible... Topic

girt25
Posts: 2136 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 122 1 1
Rookie
Posted by grantduck on 1/31/2011 6:02:00 AM (view original):
Posted by fd343ny on 1/31/2011 5:53:00 AM (view original):
how many minutes did he have before and after doubling?
I had him at 4, which was enough to get him a 3.0 the previous year and semester, suddenly dropped to 1.7 so I bumped him up to 12 and it didn't move.

I realize that 12 isn't enough for some players and that some players require a larger increase, but a move from 4 to 12 minutes should at have SOME effect on his gpa, especially with a WE near 70.



WE has no effect on grades/study hall.
1/31/2011 7:29 AM
kujayhawk
Posts: 396 (0)
Hall of Famer
203 89
Rookie
I think the current forum fact is that an increase of 10 minutes is the minimum increase you need to make at midterms in order to avoid a decrease in grades at finals.  I couldn't find the thread but I had suggested 8 a few months ago and somebody posted an example where grades still dropped after increasing by 9.

And that's just to ensure maintaining the midterm GPA.  I've found myself giving 20 minutes (or more) way too often as of late when my players post 2.0 or worse at midterms.  It's probably too much but the volatility is high enough that there is a risk to not doing it and in most cases I can't afford the loss of the player.
1/31/2011 8:19 AM
metsmax
Posts: 1598 (0)
Hall of Famer
5 2 836 2
Pro
Posted by grantduck on 1/31/2011 6:02:00 AM (view original):
Posted by fd343ny on 1/31/2011 5:53:00 AM (view original):
how many minutes did he have before and after doubling?
I had him at 4, which was enough to get him a 3.0 the previous year and semester, suddenly dropped to 1.7 so I bumped him up to 12 and it didn't move.

I realize that 12 isn't enough for some players and that some players require a larger increase, but a move from 4 to 12 minutes should at have SOME effect on his gpa, especially with a WE near 70.



I think the answer to this situation is that to have high confidence in making the grade, you need to give more than 12.  The kid was in a downward trend on grades.  In that situation, I would have gone to 20.  Might have gone to 25 if he was a player I really had to have eligible.  Maybe 12 or 15 if I didnt mind losing him.
1/31/2011 8:29 AM
jwilli7122
Posts: 435 (0)
Hall of Famer
106 81 2
Prospect
Posted by grantduck on 1/31/2011 3:08:00 AM (view original):
Posted by jwilli7122 on 1/30/2011 6:37:00 PM (view original):
why is it stupid? why shouldn't random chance be part of the equation?  do you think that real life players never have sudden academic problems, or that it's always the coach's fault when they do?  the worst changes seble has made have to do with reducing variance, eliminating injuries etc.  more variance please!
I'd rather have him been injured for the season.

My issue is merely why have study hall if it literally has ZERO effect on gpa.
it did have an effect.  it drastically raised the chances of his GPA going up.  that his GPA happened to stay the same does not refute that.
1/31/2011 1:09 PM
jwilli7122
Posts: 435 (0)
Hall of Famer
106 81 2
Prospect
Posted by isack24 on 1/31/2011 12:55:00 AM (view original):
That seems odd.  From an athlete's perspective, it doesn't.  You go to class, you pass.  Pretty much end of story at any place I've ever heard of.  You have to (oxymoronically) actively avoid doing anything to be ineligible.  That's not "random" in the way we're using it.
we're not the athletes?  
1/31/2011 1:12 PM
isack24
Posts: 1566 (0)
Hall of Famer
81 19
Prospect
Posted by jwilli7122 on 1/31/2011 1:12:00 PM (view original):
Posted by isack24 on 1/31/2011 12:55:00 AM (view original):
That seems odd.  From an athlete's perspective, it doesn't.  You go to class, you pass.  Pretty much end of story at any place I've ever heard of.  You have to (oxymoronically) actively avoid doing anything to be ineligible.  That's not "random" in the way we're using it.
we're not the athletes?  

I'm confused.  I'm talking about real life.  In real life, academics aren't random.          

1/31/2011 1:30 PM
metsmax
Posts: 1598 (0)
Hall of Famer
5 2 836 2
Pro
academics are not random, but they also do not relate just to how many minutes of study hall an athlete has - there are factors in real life that the randomness is supposed to reflect - like

- dumped by girlfriend, grades plummet

- get hot new girlfriend, spend tons of time with her, grades plummet

- accidently get into class with grade hawk prof

- spend too much time on extracurricular, no energy left for studies, grades plummet

each of these happened to me in school

1/31/2011 2:16 PM
jwilli7122
Posts: 435 (0)
Hall of Famer
106 81 2
Prospect
Posted by isack24 on 1/31/2011 1:30:00 PM (view original):
Posted by jwilli7122 on 1/31/2011 1:12:00 PM (view original):
Posted by isack24 on 1/31/2011 12:55:00 AM (view original):
That seems odd.  From an athlete's perspective, it doesn't.  You go to class, you pass.  Pretty much end of story at any place I've ever heard of.  You have to (oxymoronically) actively avoid doing anything to be ineligible.  That's not "random" in the way we're using it.
we're not the athletes?  

I'm confused.  I'm talking about real life.  In real life, academics aren't random.          

huh? they are from the coach's perspective.  the current coach of my alma mater, tubby smith, had a core player (Al Nolen) go academically ineligible last season.  do you suspect that it was 100% due to tubby's actions? or do you think tubby was at least partially unlucky?
1/31/2011 2:30 PM
isack24
Posts: 1566 (0)
Hall of Famer
81 19
Prospect
Posted by jwilli7122 on 1/31/2011 2:32:00 PM (view original):
Posted by isack24 on 1/31/2011 1:30:00 PM (view original):
Posted by jwilli7122 on 1/31/2011 1:12:00 PM (view original):
Posted by isack24 on 1/31/2011 12:55:00 AM (view original):
That seems odd.  From an athlete's perspective, it doesn't.  You go to class, you pass.  Pretty much end of story at any place I've ever heard of.  You have to (oxymoronically) actively avoid doing anything to be ineligible.  That's not "random" in the way we're using it.
we're not the athletes?  

I'm confused.  I'm talking about real life.  In real life, academics aren't random.          

huh? they are from the coach's perspective.  the current coach of my alma mater, tubby smith, had a core player (Al Nolen) go academically ineligible last season.  do you suspect that it was 100% due to tubby's actions? or do you think tubby was at least partially unlucky?

Oh, I see what you're saying.

Of course it didn't have much to do with Tubby (I live in MN, by the way, and Nolen is an idiot).  But the point is that by upping study hall minutes, that should at least simulate how hard a player is working at school.  Unless we're back to personality tests, significant randomness shouldn't really be a factor in GPA.  Study hall + HS GPA should give you a good idea of what you're getting.  In real life, coaches know which players are going to risk eligibility when they recruit them.  We don't have that luxury.

1/31/2011 3:41 PM
jwilli7122
Posts: 435 (0)
Hall of Famer
106 81 2
Prospect
yeah we do. HS GPA

and i disagree wholeheartedly that study hall minutes should 100% simulate how hard a player is working.  like in real life, they should just give him an opportunity to do better, which they already do.  i don't get the hatred of variance that saturates this board. it's like poker players who would rather do away with the river.

variance makes the game so much better.
1/31/2011 4:00 PM
isack24
Posts: 1566 (0)
Hall of Famer
81 19
Prospect
Posted by jwilli7122 on 1/31/2011 4:00:00 PM (view original):
yeah we do. HS GPA

and i disagree wholeheartedly that study hall minutes should 100% simulate how hard a player is working.  like in real life, they should just give him an opportunity to do better, which they already do.  i don't get the hatred of variance that saturates this board. it's like poker players who would rather do away with the river.

variance makes the game so much better.
Variance is fine for certain things, not for others.  I agree, study hall minutes shouldn't 100% control, but it should be highly correlative.

In real life, you can see things going badly; see the kid partying too much; see the kid skipping class.  In real life, coaches have the ability to talk to their kids, and set them on the right path.  Or the kids can talk to their professors, get extensions, etc.  There are no such options in this game, and as such, we shouldn't be help to some absurd randomization of grades that is in any way unpredicatble. 

And I say that as someone who has never had an ineligible kid or graduated a player with less than a 3.0.
1/31/2011 4:30 PM
kujayhawk
Posts: 396 (0)
Hall of Famer
203 89
Rookie
Something I've been wondering as of late is the extent to which high school GPA matters beyond the four quadrants.  By that I mean if a player is "below average" in the classroom does it matter if the GPA is 2.96 or if it is 2.52?

I'm guessing it probably matters but I'm having a hard time seeing it as of late.  I pretty much am giving the same amount of minutes to those two players and also to an "above average" 3.02 compared to a 3.46.
1/31/2011 4:52 PM
grantduck
Posts: 290 (0)
Hall of Famer
73
Prospect
Posted by jwilli7122 on 1/31/2011 1:09:00 PM (view original):
Posted by grantduck on 1/31/2011 3:08:00 AM (view original):
Posted by jwilli7122 on 1/30/2011 6:37:00 PM (view original):
why is it stupid? why shouldn't random chance be part of the equation?  do you think that real life players never have sudden academic problems, or that it's always the coach's fault when they do?  the worst changes seble has made have to do with reducing variance, eliminating injuries etc.  more variance please!
I'd rather have him been injured for the season.

My issue is merely why have study hall if it literally has ZERO effect on gpa.
it did have an effect.  it drastically raised the chances of his GPA going up.  that his GPA happened to stay the same does not refute that.
1.7=1.7, I fail to see the effect.
1/31/2011 8:39 PM
a_in_the_b
Posts: 1653 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 18 667 3
Pro
Even if you increase the chance of something happening, it can still end up the same. . .

1/31/2011 8:50 PM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Does anyone else find it ironic that he's griping about poor academic scores, yet he spelled ineligible wrong?

May bee its duh coche
1/31/2011 9:34 PM
◂ Prev 123 Next ▸
Ridiculous inelligible... Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 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.