Posted by dconrod on 7/24/2012 1:07:00 AM (view original):
The game would be better with no elites. I had more fun in D1AA Than in d1a, making my own elite team in Hayes, at Liberty, knowing in the playoffs I would see the other d1aa elite programs, Dartmouth, Nichols state, Cal Poly, and Alcorn State every year. These teams were there purely by skill. I probably will not stay with gd too much longer unless Norbert gets rid of elites. gd is trying to get people to keep playing a game in which the vast majority of d1 coaches are at a distinct disadvantage to a few coaches who don't have to pay to play, but can largely play on reward points? In my world 35 of 47 national championships have been won by elites. Its virtually impossible to recruit against them. I just don't think it is as much fun playing at a disadvantage at the highest level.

Posted by gt_deuce on 7/24/2012 12:40:00 PM (view original):
A LOOOOONG time ago, I worked on a Dynamic Elite System (DES) on the forums. All input welcome.  And I think we did a really great job of spelling out how it would work. Alas, I can no longer find my spreadsheet that outlined how the system worked.

So when life settles down for me, maybe I'll fire up that effort again. While I don't remember the particular weights we used for various achievements, I remember the basic principles and I think we could easily recreate it. Then, I'll take it to the GD Council and try to sell norbert on it. But it's definitely not something that is going into this upcoming update, so we've got some time.

I think the idea of a DES is a solid one. It puts more of the "WhatIf" into GD. But it retains the concept of these historical elites, as currently determined.

I understand the nature of the post though. Everyone who plays GD should get his participation medal. conte listened to this and set this mess up where guys that screw up their teams in recruiting will still have their chance to knock off the guys that worked hard in building up their team.

Posted by bogalicious on 7/24/2012 2:16:00 PM (view original):
Doesn't Prestige eventually offset the recruiting advantage an Elite school has?
for example, if I was Baylor competing with Texas and I made the Cotton, Rose, Sugar and another level 5 bowl 4 years in a row while Texas struggled with level 4 bowls.  Does the prestige gained from Baylor from this example offset the games built in Elite advantage that Texas already has?

Posted by bogalicious on 7/24/2012 2:16:00 PM (view original):
Doesn't Prestige eventually offset the recruiting advantage an Elite school has?
for example, if I was Baylor competing with Texas and I made the Cotton, Rose, Sugar and another level 5 bowl 4 years in a row while Texas struggled with level 4 bowls.  Does the prestige gained from Baylor from this example offset the games built in Elite advantage that Texas already has?

Posted by bogalicious on 7/24/2012 3:20:00 PM (view original):
So Matt, what your really saying is that Im screwed at NW?  lol

Posted by caesari on 7/24/2012 1:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gt_deuce on 7/24/2012 12:40:00 PM (view original):
A LOOOOONG time ago, I worked on a Dynamic Elite System (DES) on the forums. All input welcome.  And I think we did a really great job of spelling out how it would work. Alas, I can no longer find my spreadsheet that outlined how the system worked.

So when life settles down for me, maybe I'll fire up that effort again. While I don't remember the particular weights we used for various achievements, I remember the basic principles and I think we could easily recreate it. Then, I'll take it to the GD Council and try to sell norbert on it. But it's definitely not something that is going into this upcoming update, so we've got some time.

I think the idea of a DES is a solid one. It puts more of the "WhatIf" into GD. But it retains the concept of these historical elites, as currently determined.

Can you find the thread? Or is that lost as well?

I'd really like to see that.

Having the same group of elites in every GD world doesn't make any sense.  Clearly, there are elite teams in the real world but they change...they are cyclical.  When GD started Tenn had just won the National Championship, thus they are a perinneal elite in every world.  That said, what has Tenn done since then?  Nothing.  The same is true for Notre Dame and many others.  There are other schools like Oregon and Boise State that have really come on in the past decade.  In real life elites come and go...some fall from grace due to NCAA issues such as Penn State...it should be the same in GD. 

There should be a rotating elite status based on coaching accomplishments.  If you keep winning, top level bowls, strong SOS, Nat ships from time to time, etc you keep your elite status.  If you have bad seasons, drop below a certain winning %, etc you lose elite status, which opens up an opportunity for another team to step in.  The current system makes no sense at all because it doesn't mirror reality.  It seems that is the goal of this game. 

Posted by scrodz on 7/1/2012 4:17:00 PM (view original):
I think a large part of the "elite" myth is the fact that nobody knows exactly what the buff is, so every time someone loses a recruit to an elite, it's because of the elite status. Nobody even considers rep, distance, or how much effort the elite coach might have put in. It's too easy to blame it on the elite status. It's a convenient excuse, like "their academic standards aren't as high as ours", or "we don't oversign".