Posted by uglyskunk3 on 1/24/2011 10:03:00 PM (view original):
i still don't think you should imply d3 titles are below your d1,d2 titles. even as coach billy you never got past the 2nd round of the nt in d3. its the only division you haven't had success in, seems a tad odd to knock it.
i won three championships in d3, so im not sure what you are talking about. sounds like you are just judging wesley, my first school ever who also ran fb. maybe an example will help. i quit d3, never intending to play again, when i realized i had an extra season on this account. so i picked up a total **** team in d3 tark's top conf, because i knew and liked a handful of coaches there. it was a lot of fun playing with those guys, so i stuck around. but, i was really into my d1/d2 teams in the world, and had no interest in d3, so i barely played them - i was there for the conference community.
d3 tark, at the time, had a few great coaches, including bing. but after the top 7-10 coaches/programs, there really weren't any long time programs run by high quality coaches, and the competition sharply cut off (tark d3 died off pretty bad, fell into double digits). so to me, consistently being a top 15 team appeared to be dramatically easier than anywhere i had played, including d3 tark before it largely died off. my resume there wasn't one of the great d3 resumes, but it was pretty damn good, and that is a reflection on the strength of the world, NOT me, because for the most part i didn't do **** with them (although i did run a 5-6 man class, which i would put a little effort into).
d3 tark has since improved, i think, and when i was building the dynasty list stuff, it looked like d3 tark dropped to about the worst point of any d3 out there, ever. some d3s were really good. but at least half were dramatically weaker on the world strength scale than d3 had been for a long time. i think d3 has recovered some, but i would be very surprised if the top d3 worlds weren't a lot better than the bottom ones, and that a handful of d3 world's titles are substantially easier to come by than titles in most other places.
i fail to see your problem with the above opinion? i am not knocking anybody in particular. besides, if you think my d3 resume makes me unable to adequately judge its difficulty... how do you reconcile that with your having 0 titles in d2 and d1? assuming that is the case...
edit: forget 0 titles in d2/d1. no NT appearance in d2/d1? not that there is anything wrong with it, and you've done good at your d2 school for how long you've been there. but really? and besides, i agreed there are hard d3 worlds out there from the beginning, so you having played in 1 doesn't really mean crap about some being hard and some being weak. i would bet the hardest d3 titles are harder than the hardest d2 titles too. so i think you are taking what i am saying a little out of context.
1/24/2011 10:21 PM (edited)