where do D1 teams in the Real Life recruit from Topic

wronoj
Posts: 893 (0)
Hall of Famer
179 1
Rookie
getting rid of in-state preference is a very good solution in this proposed system. I like it.
7/17/2011 8:10 AM
girt25
Posts: 2136 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 122 1 1
Rookie
Posted by Iguana1 on 7/16/2011 8:14:00 PM (view original):
...kind of like the dumb luck of 3 top 10 recruits landing in your back yard in Idaho?
or no top 100 players within 200 miles.
Oh -- no doubt there's already dumb luck now and would be with this suggestion as well.

I just see no reason to add even more dumb luck to the mix.
7/17/2011 3:58 PM
girt25
Posts: 2136 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 122 1 1
Rookie
rails, you and I have long agreed that they need to make DI recruiting better. But I disagree with your premise that the same states are favored season after season.

If that were so clearly the case, we'd see the same schools and conferences dominant in every world. But in reality, it's nothing even remotely like that. In some worlds the ACC is dominant, in others it's the Big East or Big 12 or SEC ... and in other worlds, some of those same conferences are so weak that they would barely even qualify as being a legitimate BCS conference.
7/17/2011 4:04 PM (edited)
Rails
Posts: 263 (0)
Hall of Famer
21 193 13
Prospect
Apples to oranges imho because circumstances are not the same in every world...#of sims, coaches, etc, but of all things were equal I will stand by the statement.  Hawaii will never have an advantage over other teams in the Big 6. 
7/17/2011 9:20 PM
oldresorter
Posts: 646 (0)
Hall of Famer
1110 1
Prospect
Posted by Rails on 7/17/2011 9:20:00 PM (view original):
Apples to oranges imho because circumstances are not the same in every world...#of sims, coaches, etc, but of all things were equal I will stand by the statement.  Hawaii will never have an advantage over other teams in the Big 6. 
rails - I think you have been the most consistently vocal about recruiting shortcomings, do you have a proposal at all - I did not read all of this, so if you already have it out there, I apologize.

my quick and dirty fix, would be to extend the distance grids, so the cutoff at 200 might be at 300 instead, the one at 360 might be at 540, and the one at 1450 or so might be at 2000 or 2500, this would make recruiting more competitive - nationalized recruiting seems a little scary as the game is cut-throat enough, if we all had equal shots at everyone, I don't know how that would work, the distance grids do keep some of the bitterness out of the game.

my long term fix more involved priority, so my a+ school has an a+ presstige on it's #1 prospect, but only a B+ on its #2, this would spread recruits out, while still not making every recruit an absolute war - it has some kinks I know - it is a whiteboard issue at this point, but heck, it's not my job to figure out



7/17/2011 9:43 PM
kmasonbx1
Posts: 353 (0)
All Star
39
Prospect

I honestly just think there needs to be a total overhaul in how recruiting works, the auction system alone isn't a good one. I think players should have more of a personality, like some kids should really care about immediate playing time, others should care about prestige others should care about location while most would still be based on the auction system it adds some variables.

So maybe the #3 recruit is from Storrs and he's a big man and you have 2 stud upper classmen at PF and C and you SF is also great but your guards are only ok so you don't want to hurt your team by giving him a starting spot which could cost you games. And his biggest concern is starting right away so then Rutgers needs a big man this season and offers a starting spot which to this player means far more then it would to the majority of other players and it allows Rutgers to come in to UCONN's backyard and steal a recruit. Say in these examples where players personalities come into play the starting spot could be worth something enormous like 50 HVs, so while it's still essentially the auction system it's not entirely the same. But like I said the majority of recruits would still follow the current system but say 20-30% have wants based on their personality and when you can meet that you get a huge advantage.

7/18/2011 12:17 AM
girt25
Posts: 2136 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 122 1 1
Rookie
Posted by Rails on 7/17/2011 9:20:00 PM (view original):
Apples to oranges imho because circumstances are not the same in every world...#of sims, coaches, etc, but of all things were equal I will stand by the statement.  Hawaii will never have an advantage over other teams in the Big 6. 
Sure, that last sentence is a true statement. But Hawaii is a very extreme example, as you understand. Hawaii wouldn't be a better place to recruit from than the other Big 6 schools under your plan, either.
7/18/2011 6:57 AM
fd343ny
Posts: 2254 (0)
Hall of Famer
7 635 36
Veteran
Posted by kmasonbx1 on 7/18/2011 12:17:00 AM (view original):

I honestly just think there needs to be a total overhaul in how recruiting works, the auction system alone isn't a good one. I think players should have more of a personality, like some kids should really care about immediate playing time, others should care about prestige others should care about location while most would still be based on the auction system it adds some variables.

So maybe the #3 recruit is from Storrs and he's a big man and you have 2 stud upper classmen at PF and C and you SF is also great but your guards are only ok so you don't want to hurt your team by giving him a starting spot which could cost you games. And his biggest concern is starting right away so then Rutgers needs a big man this season and offers a starting spot which to this player means far more then it would to the majority of other players and it allows Rutgers to come in to UCONN's backyard and steal a recruit. Say in these examples where players personalities come into play the starting spot could be worth something enormous like 50 HVs, so while it's still essentially the auction system it's not entirely the same. But like I said the majority of recruits would still follow the current system but say 20-30% have wants based on their personality and when you can meet that you get a huge advantage.

I have longed urged more texture in recruiting - BUT this is a hard thing to do, compared to a fix like reducing the gap between the elite recruits and the next layer....

texture could include

- how much starting matters

- warm v cold climate

- academics

- party school quality

- kid likes a certain conference

- increase importance of favorite school to a level where it matters

- pipeline effects - sign a kid from a certain town/city/area and it gets easier to recruit there for a season or two - sign a kid from a specific high school and it gets easier to recruit from there

With texture like this, there would be more ways to build a champion and hence likely more success for different schools
7/18/2011 9:14 AM
oldresorter
Posts: 646 (0)
Hall of Famer
1110 1
Prospect
the problem with texture, is the game becomes more intense, where time devoted becomes more demanding - this is great for the 5% who play the game that way and post on these boards, but success in this game is to make one that the 95% have a chance with minimal effort
7/18/2011 9:27 AM
girt25
Posts: 2136 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 122 1 1
Rookie
Posted by oldresorter on 7/18/2011 9:27:00 AM (view original):
the problem with texture, is the game becomes more intense, where time devoted becomes more demanding - this is great for the 5% who play the game that way and post on these boards, but success in this game is to make one that the 95% have a chance with minimal effort
I agree with this. I'm likely one of the more devoted people, and even I found myself thinking if I'd want to be spending the extra time required by the suggestions related to significantly increased texture.

At the very least (and maybe this is already implicit), I feel strongly those changes would be best only at DI (if at all).
7/18/2011 10:30 AM
dacj501
Posts: 4779 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 305
Pro
Am I just the pessimist in the room or does all of this talk really just seem like a waste of time? Does anyone have any indication anything is being done with this game right now? Why would HD be any real value to a multi- billion dollar corp like Fox?
7/18/2011 10:33 AM
acn24
Posts: 1020 (0)
Hall of Famer
260 357 172
Rookie
I think one thing that could be done would be to significantly increase the value of promises, especially of starts.  I don't think promises really mean that much at DI, since there is so much additional money to overcome them, but I think that realistically a recruit would go to a lower prestige school if they can start immediately. 

Of course, then the flip side is that you have to significantly up the penalties for breaking promises.
7/18/2011 11:06 AM
udm_mike
Posts: 603 (0)
Hall of Famer
109
Rookie
Posted by acn24 on 7/18/2011 11:06:00 AM (view original):
I think one thing that could be done would be to significantly increase the value of promises, especially of starts.  I don't think promises really mean that much at DI, since there is so much additional money to overcome them, but I think that realistically a recruit would go to a lower prestige school if they can start immediately. 

Of course, then the flip side is that you have to significantly up the penalties for breaking promises.
I love both sides of this idea.  That would really help with the disparity of the power conferences vs. the mid majors.
7/18/2011 11:15 AM
dacj501
Posts: 4779 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 305
Pro
Posted by udm_mike on 7/18/2011 11:15:00 AM (view original):
Posted by acn24 on 7/18/2011 11:06:00 AM (view original):
I think one thing that could be done would be to significantly increase the value of promises, especially of starts.  I don't think promises really mean that much at DI, since there is so much additional money to overcome them, but I think that realistically a recruit would go to a lower prestige school if they can start immediately. 

Of course, then the flip side is that you have to significantly up the penalties for breaking promises.
I love both sides of this idea.  That would really help with the disparity of the power conferences vs. the mid majors.
better eliminate the no play /= no start loophole then...
7/18/2011 12:17 PM
oldresorter
Posts: 646 (0)
Hall of Famer
1110 1
Prospect
one way the 'layered' approach could be incorporated,

1 - each player could have a minimum, money, starting, minutes, etc,
2 - 5 stars would have more requirements than 1 star,
3 - players going to A+ schools would require less than if a C school was courting them, but
4 - also, a few players would be more receptive, some less, hence the layers. 

This would eliminate A+ schools from reeling in 5 800 level players then bragging on their coaches corners that they have 80k unspent.  I am thinking a 800 level player would require around 25-35k and 15-25 minutes and usually start from even a A+ school and 35-50k and 20-30 minutes and always a start from a D- school, with layers in that some schools they would be more receptive to, some less.
7/18/2011 12:30 PM
◂ Prev 1234 Next ▸
where do D1 teams in the Real Life recruit from 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.