Benis, while that guy from NMSU may finish in the top 25 scorers, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's because of him versus playing sims.

Posted by Benis on 3/2/2017 7:09:00 PM (view original):
We've heard over and over and over how top D1 schools would just crush everyone and had no battles and had no competition. I'll agree with this. It was a problem.

Now you have a A+ D1 school losing to a D3 school.. Even after using 15 HVs (75% of the max for those keeping track at home). That was literally impossible in 2.0 and now it is possible, even though it will be VERY VERY rare.

If prestige, or "Big 6 advantage" was "neutered", that situation wouldn't be VERY VERY rare. It would be commonplace. You are suggesting that because an outlier exists, the system is broken. That's just a terrible idea in general. You don't base policy on very rarely occurring outliers.

I don't know exactly what happened in the UConn/Union situation, no one except the admins know exactly. I'm not worried about it, because it is not commonplace. I have had no problem, as a big 6 school with my other handle, beating back D2 and D3 even with their significant investment.

What are the advantages of being at a Big 6 school? Baseline prestige. More attractive conference, more likely to have more humans, meaning better RPI, SOS, tournament seeding. Better preference standing among better recruits. Yes, some of the outrageous advantages were mitigated. But this isn't parity, which is what we'd have if those advantages were "neutered". If you think it's parity, then take a D+ school and fight an A school for a recruit that they've prioritized highly. You will lose, unless you get lucky and they screw up. Every time.

Posted by supersloth33 on 3/2/2017 8:15:00 PM (view original):
Stamina 68 Blue
Durability 66 Blue
Ath 61 Red
Speed 81 yellow
Rebound 1 red
Defense 51 blue
Block 1 red
LP 1 red
PE 77 yellow
BH 68 green
P 51 green
WE 65
FT C+ Blue

That's a decent pg project. I'd recruit him with my big 6 team if I could get him cheap. But I probably wouldn't invest visits unless I was desperate, so I'd be vulnerable to a D3, especially if he wanted rebuild, and didn't care about success.

I think part part of the problem is still that people play with a 2.0 mindset and 2.0 expectations. You have to understand that when you let a lower prestige or division team set the price for the recruit, you may have to fight much harder than you expect. That's what happens in an effort and resource based system. That's an argument in favor of spreading your APs out a little more.

	2.0	3.0
Bonus Cash	Yes	No
Rollover	Yes	No
Recruit Level Cap	Yes	No
Baseline Prestige	Yes	Yes
Preferences not related to success	No	Several
Strong conference preference	No	One
Strong SOS (if full)	Yes	Yes

Posted by supersloth33 on 3/2/2017 8:15:00 PM (view original):
Stamina 68 Blue
Durability 66 Blue
Ath 61 Red
Speed 81 yellow
Rebound 1 red
Defense 51 blue
Block 1 red
LP 1 red
PE 77 yellow
BH 68 green
P 51 green
WE 65
FT C+ Blue

He is borderline D1, but on a new program. Otherwise, he rots on the bench and will not see playing time.

Benis you can't compare your guard to this one...

That's how I see how changes have affected D1 B6.

You have a couple benefits but the biggest advantages are completely gone. Adios. Prestige doesn't even mean as much as it did before because of

1) preferences
2) no caps

That guy can't play on my Clemson team. https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=0&pid=3539466

If he does not transfer, which is probably what will happen, I will find him minutes when he gets to 80 ath, spd, def and per.

Honestly, I think a 60 ath could very well be the difference between a win or a loss in close games. Say he misses a rebond, he fouls.. I'd be interested to see what difference he makes, in intangibles.

I guess I don't get how they can ever get to the proper balance between advantages and still having the talent spread around. I just don't see how it can be done.

His ath at pg doesn't concern me. His defense probably isn't good enough to be an elite starter, but by his senior season, he could probably start on a lot of legitimate D1 teams.

From a a couple days ago, that's the kind of player you throw a couple APs at to see if you can get him on the line for cheap as a plan B. If you can hide him for a couple years while he develops his green pg skills, he can help eventually. But he'd never be my first or second choice at Big 6 D1.

Posted by shoe3 on 3/2/2017 8:37:00 PM (view original):
His ath at pg doesn't concern me. His defense probably isn't good enough to be an elite starter, but by his senior season, he could probably start on a lot of legitimate D1 teams.

From a a couple days ago, that's the kind of player you throw a couple APs at to see if you can get him on the line for cheap as a plan B. If you can hide him for a couple years while he develops his green pg skills, he can help eventually. But he'd never be my first or second choice at Big 6 D1.

Problems is that they whine when they are sophomores... I wish they changed that 12 minutes rule they have where you need to play a guy 12 minutes or he transfers probably. When the guy is not ready, he should not whine as much as say a ready player not seeing the court.

Posted by Benis on 3/2/2017 8:27:00 PM (view original):

	2.0	3.0
Bonus Cash	Yes	No
Rollover	Yes	No
Recruit Level Cap	Yes	No
Baseline Prestige	Yes	Yes
Preferences not related to success	No	Several
Strong conference preference	No	One
Strong SOS (if full)	Yes	Yes

Bonus cash and rollover were ridiculous, and never should have been part of the process. Recruit level cap is a very minor issue, and the red light makes up for it in a much more intuitive and realistic way.

So we're down to preferences. There are two preferences related to success (wants success and strong conference) and they are likely the most important preferences except playing time and perhaps distance.

No one is arguing that big 6 advantages haven't been mitigated or lessened. But claiming it's been neutered is plain false.

I was referring to the recruit cap from D1 team to D1 player. So a D prestige D1 couldn't go for a 5 star. That's a HUGE advantage where you simply don't even need to think about battling a lower prestige team because the player won't accept effort.

Posted by shoe3 on 3/2/2017 8:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 3/2/2017 7:09:00 PM (view original):
We've heard over and over and over how top D1 schools would just crush everyone and had no battles and had no competition. I'll agree with this. It was a problem.

Now you have a A+ D1 school losing to a D3 school.. Even after using 15 HVs (75% of the max for those keeping track at home). That was literally impossible in 2.0 and now it is possible, even though it will be VERY VERY rare.

If prestige, or "Big 6 advantage" was "neutered", that situation wouldn't be VERY VERY rare. It would be commonplace. You are suggesting that because an outlier exists, the system is broken. That's just a terrible idea in general. You don't base policy on very rarely occurring outliers.

I don't know exactly what happened in the UConn/Union situation, no one except the admins know exactly. I'm not worried about it, because it is not commonplace. I have had no problem, as a big 6 school with my other handle, beating back D2 and D3 even with their significant investment.

What are the advantages of being at a Big 6 school? Baseline prestige. More attractive conference, more likely to have more humans, meaning better RPI, SOS, tournament seeding. Better preference standing among better recruits. Yes, some of the outrageous advantages were mitigated. But this isn't parity, which is what we'd have if those advantages were "neutered". If you think it's parity, then take a D+ school and fight an A school for a recruit that they've prioritized highly. You will lose, unless you get lucky and they screw up. Every time.

Just ultimately destroyed your whole concept Benis!

Posted by zorzii on 3/2/2017 8:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by supersloth33 on 3/2/2017 8:15:00 PM (view original):
Stamina 68 Blue
Durability 66 Blue
Ath 61 Red
Speed 81 yellow
Rebound 1 red
Defense 51 blue
Block 1 red
LP 1 red
PE 77 yellow
BH 68 green
P 51 green
WE 65
FT C+ Blue

He is borderline D1, but on a new program. Otherwise, he rots on the bench and will not see playing time.

Benis you can't compare your guard to this one...

I would take a PG like that every time. I have typically had bad luck getting solid guards and I prioritize PGs as my top player so for me as a typically good BCS team I would love to a guy like that every other yr.

Posted by shoe3 on 3/2/2017 8:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by supersloth33 on 3/2/2017 8:15:00 PM (view original):
Stamina 68 Blue
Durability 66 Blue
Ath 61 Red
Speed 81 yellow
Rebound 1 red
Defense 51 blue
Block 1 red
LP 1 red
PE 77 yellow
BH 68 green
P 51 green
WE 65
FT C+ Blue

That's a decent pg project. I'd recruit him with my big 6 team if I could get him cheap. But I probably wouldn't invest visits unless I was desperate, so I'd be vulnerable to a D3, especially if he wanted rebuild, and didn't care about success.

I think part part of the problem is still that people play with a 2.0 mindset and 2.0 expectations. You have to understand that when you let a lower prestige or division team set the price for the recruit, you may have to fight much harder than you expect. That's what happens in an effort and resource based system. That's an argument in favor of spreading your APs out a little more.

"I think part part of the problem is still that people play with a 2.0 mindset and 2.0 expectations."

I agree. Perhaps an even bigger problem is that people play the game they wish it were, and when it doesn't work it is the game's fault, of course.