Posted by thewizard17 on 10/27/2018 4:31:00 AM (view original):
I'm not going to go back an forth on this, you're entitled to your opinion, but I strongly disagree.

Choosing to go -5 0 or +5 is a choice. Selecting your player distro is a choice. Selecting what type of O/D you're going to run and other game setting is a choice. Who you decide to recruit is a choice. Putting a bunch of APs on two players and having a D-1 human coach team jump in 2-3 days into recruiting(not even putting an AP point on him), because he was busy or whatever the reason he didn't recruit for the first 2-3 days and then losing out on that player, is most definitely not a choice. There was also a second team that jumped in 3 days in with no previous APs on him and will end up getting that player, unless I foolishly try to battle for him, that is most definitely not a choice on my end. It wasn't my action, it was the opposing coach that jumped in, therefore it becomes his choice, not mine.

That’s prioritization. You are choosing to go after players who higher level teams end up wanting enough to overcome your effort credit. It’s not luck when it happens, it’s something you can reasonably foresee most times, if you’re evaluating your players properly. Sometimes higher level teams do strange things, but it isn’t random or luck. It’s just a function of playing a competitive game with other people, and you’re not in control of everything. Your choices function together.

This is why with the folks I mentor, one of the earliest things I stress is how important prioritization is in recruiting. You need to understand your geography, and the coaches in it when you’re thinking about how high you can reach. If you’re a D2 coach, and there are low or mid major D1 humans in your region, you will need to be careful, because chances are good you will be looking at a lot of the same players. A big with green ath, reb, and def starting over 50 is going to be very attractive to D1 low and mid majors in your region, at least as a backup. The better he is, the more others are going to want him, too. This will be an issue at every level with capped divisions. We’re still going to be playing a commodity game.

Posted by thewizard17 on 10/27/2018 4:37:00 AM (view original):
You make the claim that it was my choice to go after certain players.....ok.

Should I next time look into my crystal ball and try to guess which D-1 teams are going to jump my players, 2-3 days in? And these players that I'm targeting aren't anywhere near the Top 250 ranked overall. Keep aiming lower, using Coach Spud's strategy and never getting more than 20 wins or past the 1st round?

As a D-1 coach as well, trust me, I feel for the D-2 and D-3 coaches in this game. I'm amazed at the amount of tolerance some of those coaches have.

You don’t need a crystal ball. Those of us who have been very successful at D2 in 3.0 don’t have crystal balls. We just understand the risks involved in trying to get the best talent available to us. Navigating those risks is part of the game, and a big part of what should separate good coaches from great coaches.

I agree with shoe on this. It is very possible to look at a players ratings a potentials and be able to judge the likelihood that a D1 school will want him. Not a sim but an actual player because it's not that difficult to beat a lot D1 sim as a D2 team. Obviously nothing is guaranteed but when you are recruiting at that level you need a backup plan in case another team does come in. Also if I'm going after a high ranked player that I think someone might come in on late I'm going to spend early and make it harder for them to get involved.

The last big key is signing preference. If a player has an early signing preference you wil never beat a D1 team unless you have an overwhelming amount if effort. Late signing preferences give you much more of a chance to not get poached since you have time to build effort.

Posted by blackdog3377 on 10/27/2018 9:36:00 AM (view original):
I agree with shoe on this. It is very possible to look at a players ratings a potentials and be able to judge the likelihood that a D1 school will want him. Not a sim but an actual player because it's not that difficult to beat a lot D1 sim as a D2 team. Obviously nothing is guaranteed but when you are recruiting at that level you need a backup plan in case another team does come in. Also if I'm going after a high ranked player that I think someone might come in on late I'm going to spend early and make it harder for them to get involved.

The last big key is signing preference. If a player has an early signing preference you wil never beat a D1 team unless you have an overwhelming amount if effort. Late signing preferences give you much more of a chance to not get poached since you have time to build effort.

I am surprised you guys think that: I have three D2 teams and this is one place where I can’t never guess. If I don’t try on players flirting with D1 as a back-up or a starter on new program, I am not putting myself in contention to have the best team possible. Even in D1, it’s impossible to know what others are going to do. It’s a surprise every recruiting session. I would say that almost all coaches don’t have a predictable recruiting pattern.

Posted by zorzii on 10/27/2018 1:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by blackdog3377 on 10/27/2018 9:36:00 AM (view original):
I agree with shoe on this. It is very possible to look at a players ratings a potentials and be able to judge the likelihood that a D1 school will want him. Not a sim but an actual player because it's not that difficult to beat a lot D1 sim as a D2 team. Obviously nothing is guaranteed but when you are recruiting at that level you need a backup plan in case another team does come in. Also if I'm going after a high ranked player that I think someone might come in on late I'm going to spend early and make it harder for them to get involved.

The last big key is signing preference. If a player has an early signing preference you wil never beat a D1 team unless you have an overwhelming amount if effort. Late signing preferences give you much more of a chance to not get poached since you have time to build effort.

I am surprised you guys think that: I have three D2 teams and this is one place where I can’t never guess. If I don’t try on players flirting with D1 as a back-up or a starter on new program, I am not putting myself in contention to have the best team possible. Even in D1, it’s impossible to know what others are going to do. It’s a surprise every recruiting session. I would say that almost all coaches don’t have a predictable recruiting pattern.

Almost all coaches aren’t championship level coaches. The ones who are aren’t getting lucky in having championship caliber teams on a consistent basis.

I'm relatively new to the game, about to finish out my third season, but I think the fact that a D1 or D2 school can swoop in and take your recruit right away adds more strategy.

Recruiting in the D1 pool is always a dangerous game doesnt matter how talented the recruit is. I frequently lose players who would be useless at the D1 level to D1 human coaches.

https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/RecruitProfile/Ratings.aspx?rid=4472504

potentials: Blue ATH & Green LP.

At least if you're at a C prestige with a bunch of APs put in and the preferences matched up at D-1 you have a fighting chance vs an A prestige school.

D-2 vs D-1. Forget it. Not worth the effort, IMO. It should be that way, but I would probably make a rule where a D-1 school would have to put in at least 1 AP within a certain amount of time to be eligible for that recruit. Or as mentioned earlier keep the recruiting divisions separate.

I'm guessing most of the people that would've have agreed with this are long gone out of frustration as you can tell by the dwindling numbers, especially at D-3.

I'll probably end up dropping my D-2 team. Don't really have the patience or the temperament for that kind of game. Guess it works for some that are still here. Not throwing a ***** fit because of the way my last recruiting period went, but something that really doesn't appeal to me going forward.

I noticed no one addressed what I said. That's because I'm correct. Again, no other explanation than luck, when Team A has a D1 snatch their mediocre recruit. And Team B gets lucky and has no D1s come for his recruit that is much much better. And sure there are variables. But the biggest is that no D1 coaches looked at Team Bs recruit as time was passing. But they did look at Team As recruit. Neither team reached to high, nor did anything wrong. Proven by the fact that Team B signed his player.

i've signed the #33 PG at D2 with no humans in sight. (And he is a player that lives to to his rank. Not a player that the game ranked too high). And i've had players ripped away that aren't ranked, and shouldn't be ranked. There's no pattern. And anyone who can't see this big picture, confuses me. Because if you play D2 and D3, you've seen this all unfold. You've lost less talented players while your conference mates sign players that were better. It just is what it is

Posted by topdogggbm on 10/28/2018 9:48:00 AM (view original):
I noticed no one addressed what I said. That's because I'm correct. Again, no other explanation than luck, when Team A has a D1 snatch their mediocre recruit. And Team B gets lucky and has no D1s come for his recruit that is much much better. And sure there are variables. But the biggest is that no D1 coaches looked at Team Bs recruit as time was passing. But they did look at Team As recruit. Neither team reached to high, nor did anything wrong. Proven by the fact that Team B signed his player.

i've signed the #33 PG at D2 with no humans in sight. (And he is a player that lives to to his rank. Not a player that the game ranked too high). And i've had players ripped away that aren't ranked, and shouldn't be ranked. There's no pattern. And anyone who can't see this big picture, confuses me. Because if you play D2 and D3, you've seen this all unfold. You've lost less talented players while your conference mates sign players that were better. It just is what it is

Most aren't seeing the big picture and all of the scenario's involved at play here. A huge amount of luck is involved. And I did have backup options, just in case. But that doesn't change the fact that I had 3 recruits jumped on right before 1st period signings, 3 not great, but players that could've significantly benefited my team. And very possibly John Doe, having a D-2 team on the west coast never has that issue of a D-1 team jumping on recruits, especially if you aren't in an area where there aren't a lot of mid majors. That's the one thing I've noticed, if you're going to pick a D-2 team, do it in an area where there aren't a lot of D-1 low to mid major teams that can pick you off. And I know, I used to be that team on the west coast where no D-1 team would bother me.

Posted by topdogggbm on 10/28/2018 9:48:00 AM (view original):
I noticed no one addressed what I said. That's because I'm correct. Again, no other explanation than luck, when Team A has a D1 snatch their mediocre recruit. And Team B gets lucky and has no D1s come for his recruit that is much much better. And sure there are variables. But the biggest is that no D1 coaches looked at Team Bs recruit as time was passing. But they did look at Team As recruit. Neither team reached to high, nor did anything wrong. Proven by the fact that Team B signed his player.

i've signed the #33 PG at D2 with no humans in sight. (And he is a player that lives to to his rank. Not a player that the game ranked too high). And i've had players ripped away that aren't ranked, and shouldn't be ranked. There's no pattern. And anyone who can't see this big picture, confuses me. Because if you play D2 and D3, you've seen this all unfold. You've lost less talented players while your conference mates sign players that were better. It just is what it is

I agree there is some luck involved...however most (prob above 90%) of lower division coaches have absolutely NO idea about which mid major D1 schools are in the region with human coaches and what off/def they play and how that affects recruiting preferences. The most successful D2 coaches do a TON of research every recruiting season and select targets that will most likely minimize the potential for bad luck. Yes there is luck involved, but many who complain about it simply don't understand or don't have the time in real life to mitigate it.

Posted by pdxblazerfan on 10/29/2018 10:32:00 AM (view original):

Posted by topdogggbm on 10/28/2018 9:48:00 AM (view original):
I noticed no one addressed what I said. That's because I'm correct. Again, no other explanation than luck, when Team A has a D1 snatch their mediocre recruit. And Team B gets lucky and has no D1s come for his recruit that is much much better. And sure there are variables. But the biggest is that no D1 coaches looked at Team Bs recruit as time was passing. But they did look at Team As recruit. Neither team reached to high, nor did anything wrong. Proven by the fact that Team B signed his player.

i've signed the #33 PG at D2 with no humans in sight. (And he is a player that lives to to his rank. Not a player that the game ranked too high). And i've had players ripped away that aren't ranked, and shouldn't be ranked. There's no pattern. And anyone who can't see this big picture, confuses me. Because if you play D2 and D3, you've seen this all unfold. You've lost less talented players while your conference mates sign players that were better. It just is what it is

I agree there is some luck involved...however most (prob above 90%) of lower division coaches have absolutely NO idea about which mid major D1 schools are in the region with human coaches and what off/def they play and how that affects recruiting preferences. The most successful D2 coaches do a TON of research every recruiting season and select targets that will most likely minimize the potential for bad luck. Yes there is luck involved, but many who complain about it simply don't understand or don't have the time in real life to mitigate it.

I guess the one thing that I've learned that I can take blame for is researching which low to mid major programs were in my area. I just ended up looking at the Big 12 and noticed there weren't a lot of Texas teams in the Big 12, so just assumed those mid majors would fill in the gap, not thinking the area schools from other states would snatch up those top recruits and the low to mid major teams would end up targeting the same players, as if the Big 12 were filled with Texas schools. I admit it was some lazy researching.

Posted by thewizard17 on 10/29/2018 1:33:00 AM (view original):

Posted by topdogggbm on 10/28/2018 9:48:00 AM (view original):
I noticed no one addressed what I said. That's because I'm correct. Again, no other explanation than luck, when Team A has a D1 snatch their mediocre recruit. And Team B gets lucky and has no D1s come for his recruit that is much much better. And sure there are variables. But the biggest is that no D1 coaches looked at Team Bs recruit as time was passing. But they did look at Team As recruit. Neither team reached to high, nor did anything wrong. Proven by the fact that Team B signed his player.

i've signed the #33 PG at D2 with no humans in sight. (And he is a player that lives to to his rank. Not a player that the game ranked too high). And i've had players ripped away that aren't ranked, and shouldn't be ranked. There's no pattern. And anyone who can't see this big picture, confuses me. Because if you play D2 and D3, you've seen this all unfold. You've lost less talented players while your conference mates sign players that were better. It just is what it is

Most aren't seeing the big picture and all of the scenario's involved at play here. A huge amount of luck is involved. And I did have backup options, just in case. But that doesn't change the fact that I had 3 recruits jumped on right before 1st period signings, 3 not great, but players that could've significantly benefited my team. And very possibly John Doe, having a D-2 team on the west coast never has that issue of a D-1 team jumping on recruits, especially if you aren't in an area where there aren't a lot of mid majors. That's the one thing I've noticed, if you're going to pick a D-2 team, do it in an area where there aren't a lot of D-1 low to mid major teams that can pick you off. And I know, I used to be that team on the west coast where no D-1 team would bother me.

Well yeah, it’s geography. Knowing geography and who is in your area is the biggest part of determining how high you can reasonably reach. If you’re just guessing, you really shouldn’t be blaming “luck”.

Posted by shoe3 on 10/29/2018 10:49:00 AM (view original):

Posted by thewizard17 on 10/29/2018 1:33:00 AM (view original):

Posted by topdogggbm on 10/28/2018 9:48:00 AM (view original):
I noticed no one addressed what I said. That's because I'm correct. Again, no other explanation than luck, when Team A has a D1 snatch their mediocre recruit. And Team B gets lucky and has no D1s come for his recruit that is much much better. And sure there are variables. But the biggest is that no D1 coaches looked at Team Bs recruit as time was passing. But they did look at Team As recruit. Neither team reached to high, nor did anything wrong. Proven by the fact that Team B signed his player.

i've signed the #33 PG at D2 with no humans in sight. (And he is a player that lives to to his rank. Not a player that the game ranked too high). And i've had players ripped away that aren't ranked, and shouldn't be ranked. There's no pattern. And anyone who can't see this big picture, confuses me. Because if you play D2 and D3, you've seen this all unfold. You've lost less talented players while your conference mates sign players that were better. It just is what it is

Most aren't seeing the big picture and all of the scenario's involved at play here. A huge amount of luck is involved. And I did have backup options, just in case. But that doesn't change the fact that I had 3 recruits jumped on right before 1st period signings, 3 not great, but players that could've significantly benefited my team. And very possibly John Doe, having a D-2 team on the west coast never has that issue of a D-1 team jumping on recruits, especially if you aren't in an area where there aren't a lot of mid majors. That's the one thing I've noticed, if you're going to pick a D-2 team, do it in an area where there aren't a lot of D-1 low to mid major teams that can pick you off. And I know, I used to be that team on the west coast where no D-1 team would bother me.

Well yeah, it’s geography. Knowing geography and who is in your area is the biggest part of determining how high you can reasonably reach. If you’re just guessing, you really shouldn’t be blaming “luck”.

that's assuming that these coaches are recruiting locally. My D3 school is located in a congested New England area, I try to recruit as far away from home as possible to avoid battles. My favorite spots are California, Florida, and INTL recruits because of the sheer number of recruits available in the D1 pool. It really comes down to luck in my opinion. The last cycles of RS2 is when the desperate D1 coaches start flocking to any and every available body to fill their roster. Research as much as you want but that's not going to help when the low D1's like Pepperdine or San Jose State need anything resembling a PG during RS2.

Posted by topdogggbm on 10/28/2018 9:48:00 AM (view original):
I noticed no one addressed what I said. That's because I'm correct. Again, no other explanation than luck, when Team A has a D1 snatch their mediocre recruit. And Team B gets lucky and has no D1s come for his recruit that is much much better. And sure there are variables. But the biggest is that no D1 coaches looked at Team Bs recruit as time was passing. But they did look at Team As recruit. Neither team reached to high, nor did anything wrong. Proven by the fact that Team B signed his player.

i've signed the #33 PG at D2 with no humans in sight. (And he is a player that lives to to his rank. Not a player that the game ranked too high). And i've had players ripped away that aren't ranked, and shouldn't be ranked. There's no pattern. And anyone who can't see this big picture, confuses me. Because if you play D2 and D3, you've seen this all unfold. You've lost less talented players while your conference mates sign players that were better. It just is what it is

This is absolutely correct.

Or you have to battle sims for mediocre players but then there are ZERO sims on really good players. I've experienced both many times.