After I submitted the post, I realized I should've modified that to Longshot, not no chance.  But I didn't to it.  You and professor are right, it's equivalent to a Longshot.

Posted by mamxet on 12/21/2011 8:17:00 AM (view original):
I'm surprised that the good record and coming off a 34-1 season would be  a ticket anywhere but not good enough for Bama?

Did I mention that I coached at Bama in this world.  Yup.  before I got to my target school Maryland, I was at Alabama for seasons 18-41 or so.  Bama has become very choosy lately, eh?

Obviously you were so miserable there that they said they'll never stoop so low again! j/k

The new jobs logic is definitely harder to  move up. 

Here is my Rupp Resume. 

D2:

55	tianyi7886	32-2	9-0	16-1	7-1	16-0	3	2	A+	Conf Champion CT Champion NT (Final Four)
54	tianyi7886	31-2	9-0	16-1	6-1	15-1	5	2	A+	Conf Champion CT Champion NT (Elite 8)
53	tianyi7886	32-3	11-1	13-1	8-1	15-1	2	2	A+	Conf Champion CT Champion NT (Championship Game)
52	tianyi7886	32-2	10-1	15-0	7-1	16-0	4	2	A+	Conf Champion CT Champion NT (Final Four)
51	tianyi7886	33-2	10-0	14-2	9-0	15-1	1	1	A+	Conf Champion CT Champion National Champion

D3:

50	tianyi7886	35-0	11-0	15-0	9-0	16-0	1	4	A+	Conf Champion CT Champion National Champion
49	tianyi7886	32-3	10-1	14-1	8-1	15-1	2	6	A+	Conf Champion CT Champion NT (Championship Game)
48	tianyi7886	29-3	10-0	14-2	5-1	16-0	8	5	A	Conf Champion CT Champion NT (Sweet 16)
47	tianyi7886	20-9	13-2	6-5	1-2	10-6		58	B+	NT At-large Bid NT (1st Round)
46	tianyi7886	24-8	10-3	9-4	5-1	13-3	22	23	A-	CT Champion NT (Sweet 16)

I was qualified for every B- jobs at the end of last season, longshot for a couple of the B- Big 6 jobs. After the update, I'm only qualified for C prestige jobs in small conf, unqualified for all but 1 of the C prestige or lower Big 6 jobs. 

It is absolutely ridiculous that Tianyi is not qualified for the CUSA jobs in Rupp.

I love how they've added yet another layer of BS to the process of submitting a ticket when clicking customer support on the page bottom...tianyi, I sent a ticket complaining about this jobs thing - you should too...if someone can come in here and convince me how you shouldn't be eligible for C baseline CUSA gigs I'll eat my hat.

The thing that annoyed me is that I was fully qualified for C+/B- A10 jobs, and C-/C Big 10 jobs last season. After this update, I can barely land a C job in MAC. It seems to me that they didn't just lengthen the window from 4 seasons to 10 (my 10 season window still looks pretty good), it seems like seble lengthened the window while underweighting most recent seasons as well. 

Well, yeah. If you're giving seasons 5-10 weight then by definition you have to be reducing or diluting the weight of seasons 1-4.

Posted by antonsirius on 12/21/2011 9:24:00 PM (view original):
Well, yeah. If you're giving seasons 5-10 weight then by definition you have to be reducing or diluting the weight of seasons 1-4.

That's not what I meant. Suppose the weighting was done the following way:

Last season: x4
2 seasons ago: x3
3 seasons ago: x2
4 seasons ago: x1

It seems to me that the new weighting introduced season 5-10 into the picture, while simultaneously reducing the multiplier for seasons 1-4 as well, such that last season has a multiplier of 2, 2 season ago of 1.5, etc. So in a way, the most recent seasons value in job decision is reduced twice. I am saying this because if seble simply lengthened the window by adding seasons 5-10, while assigning a multiplier of 1 to each season, I don't think I should have had such a huge change in the kind of D1 jobs I qualify for. 

I am saying this because if seble simply expanded the window 

Sure it would. Under your old system, season 1 provides 40% of the resume's value. Even if you don't change the weights of seasons 1-4 at all, adding six more seasons with weight 1 to the formula suddenly reduces season 1's impact to 25% (4/16 instead of 4/10), and so on down the line.

But the thing is, seasons 5-7 are as strong as 1-4, if not stronger. Seasons 5 and 6 are back to back NC, season 7 is NC runner up, those should be helping land better jobs, not worse jobs. One possible explanation is that rather than weighting most recent seasons more heavily, it is now even weighting among all 10 seasons, which means my season 8-10 (2x S16, 1 1st round knockout) are holding me back.

If the system is still going by recent seasons with more weight, the NC seasons and NC runner up should have more weight than the S16s and 1st rounds, so I should be qualified for better jobs, not jobs that are worse by 2/3 of a letter grade. 

I'm sure it also gives less weight to lower divisions too

I see the frusterations- and the Bama case is baffling (maybe they added a "you ditched us" factor, lol), but I don't see what's wrong that you can't jump from DII to top half DI.  In my mind, there are really four levels in this game- DIII, DII, DIAA and Big 6- and you shouldn't be able to just skip a level.  It sucks since that's the way it's been for years, but I feel (and just my $.019) that if we're complaining that you can't go from DII to a Big 6 job, we have to take a step back and realize what we were getting away with in the past.

... edit:  And C-USA was the #2 conference last season in Rupp, and tied to be the 6th in the big 6 prestige-wise.

My frustration is that the open teams in CUSA are C baseline, with C prestige. It's a little frustrating that I was qualified for B- baseline teams before the update, and my 10 season window post update is just as strong. 

What also doesn't make sense is that my D3 teams in Wooden/Tark are both qualified for C- prestige teams. My Tark resume is pretty strong and fairly long, but my wooden resume is much weaker than my Rupp resume, and shorter as well, but pretty much qualifies for the same list of teams. 

When the changes first rolled out, I made a post saying that D1 will be more of a ghostland than before, with D2 coaches that want to move up unable to do so, D1 coaches unable to move into Big 6 conf, while other D1 coaches leave D1. That seems to be case so far. 

CUSA in Rupp is a special case - a bunch of excellent coaches have worked to make it a BCS conference.  Baselines of course remain, but the conference prestige is upppp way more than standard

Posted by asher413 on 12/22/2011 1:21:00 AM (view original):
I see the frusterations- and the Bama case is baffling (maybe they added a "you ditched us" factor, lol), but I don't see what's wrong that you can't jump from DII to top half DI.  In my mind, there are really four levels in this game- DIII, DII, DIAA and Big 6- and you shouldn't be able to just skip a level.  It sucks since that's the way it's been for years, but I feel (and just my $.019) that if we're complaining that you can't go from DII to a Big 6 job, we have to take a step back and realize what we were getting away with in the past.

... edit:  And C-USA was the #2 conference last season in Rupp, and tied to be the 6th in the big 6 prestige-wise.

Asher ... 1. It's not about c-usa  2. No need to seize on one example -- the body of evidence here is ridiculous. Even seble has admitted it's a problem. 3. The point of this change was never to make things harder, it was simply to have the process consider more than just a small window, but they massively screwed up the implementation.

This one just isn't a two-sided issue -- they made a colossal mistake that completely screwed up jobs and made it incredibly difficult for job movement.