1. So the 6-8th seeds are inflated and should not get rewarded for being in a tough conference many times those 6-8 best teams would be top teams in a lot of other conferences, should they be punished? Do you just want more teams going 26-2 in sim conferences is that better for you?

2. So a team that is expected to be middle of the pack in conference should either a) schedule 10 terrible sims or b) schedule really tough non conf to prove themselves? why not schedule what helps them out best, making sure they get 10 wins and maximizing rpi/sos? you think coaches should actively go aganst themselves just because it might help them and conference mates out?

3. Oh so they just get handed cash and seedings?

4. I don't even run a 6-6. If we call 6-6 a cheesy strategy why don't we just label any class structure 6-0-6. 4-4-4, 3-3-3-3, 5-5-2 4-2-4-2 4-4-2-2 a strategy and require all coaches to not be allowed to run them and run unbalanced classes to make sure that everyone is playing fair. Oh yeh I forgot they just get all that cash again for nothing in return they are just handed it, they don't have to rely on recruit generation hoping that their 1 big year is a good year of recruits, they can't recruit juco's, they can redshirt, they have to give up seasons and focus on 1-2 making any upsets hurt more, mistakes in recruiting are more costly

5. what you consider "loopholes" or "mistakes" may not be mistakes or loopholes to everyone and would be punishment to those because a few people think they are.

6. It's much much harder without it, what I expect you guys routinely bring in 7K at worst in Tark, thats a whole lot of states to recruit, I'm specifically talking about recruiting in your full cali conference without that bonus cash.

7. So I guess you enjoy the game will now come down to luck and who has the most action points ;) And yes there is no downsides to anything you keep thinking there is nothing but advantages for those things and don't want to think about the downsides because you might think there isn't any

I think superconferences get to much of a reward. I am not saying they don't deserve any of it, I think they just get to much.

I come from a RPG background where building characters have many options. In those games there are always OPTIMAL choices and often there are synergistic choices that create imbalances in power level.

What I really like about HD is there isn't really an optimal build for a team meaning there isn't only one way to win. I do feel that the synergy of superconference, RPI padding, and superclasses create an unbalance for those teams. I feel that the alleged downsides to this isn't a big enough risk to warrant the reward. It isn't huge but I think it's worth correcting.

I think there is a big difference in being able to identify players and game plan well (skill) and being able to figure out ways to get more recruiting cash (gaming the system). I am aware that others may not share the opinion and nothing you have said has changed my opinion.

A ****** coach with a ton of cash is still a ****** coach.

Knight D3 past national champs:

CMHMS Super conference, not a super structure, looks like some non conf rpi inflation

Becker, empty conference non super structure, non rpi inflation

Franklin Supe conference, 2-5-5 structure no rpi inflation

Dickinson, empty conference, non super structure no rpi inflation

NYU weak conference non super structure no rpi inflation

Piedmont super conference non super structure (I don't think kbc inflates his rpi)

Capitol empty conference non super structure (again I don't think cmac inflates his rpi)

La Grange super conference super structure 6-6 (somewhat inflation)

Manchester super conference non structured (i believe no inflation)

Becker empty conference non structured and no inflation

So past 10 seasons 5/10 have come from power conferences, 2 structured classes, and 2 coaches with possible rpi inflation


oh the horror of this super conference rpi inflation superclass teams!!! the horror!!! I can't live!!! seble save us from the horror!!!

Do Phelan and your precious USAS.

Phelan

Shenandoah super conference 6-0-6 slight inflation

William paterson empty conference non structured no inflation

Cal Tech empty conference non structured non inflation

Cal Tech empty conference non structured non inflated

PBAU super conference non structed inflated rpi

La Grange super conference structured(6-3-3) inflated

Greensboro super conference non structured(unless you want to count 3-3-3-3) I dont think ab inflated but he might've

La Grange super conference structured(6-0-3-3) inflated

Oglethorpe super conference structured (5-0-5-2 I believe) probably inflated

Greensboro super conference non structured probably inflated by fungunn

so 7/10 super conference(all from the same conference) 4/10 structured(and only 1 6-0-6 and no 6-6) 5/10 inflated 2 more probably

We are also the 2nd best D3 conference there is right now might just be we also have the best group of coaches outside the Naismith UAA ;) you guys had a superconference inflated your rpis(oh lets all aim for 10-0 remember) and didn't win a NC

Give me a list of the past 10 tark NC and I'll do them too, but you might not care about Tark D3 since you didn't get negatively impacted by them like you did the USAS.

I wasn't negatively impacted by USAS, I did just as well there as I did in other conferences. I would have done better if I had ever scouted below CT but I decided I wanted to try something new.

And I think we had the runnerup 3 or 4 years in a row before it folded...

Posted by zorzii on 7/13/2016 1:26:00 PM (view original):
4. You can laugh all you want about people being uptight about your 6-6 strategy. It's cheesy and I am not alone feeling that way. In and of itself, it's fine I guess, you are giving up a year (or two) of being good to be REALLY good for one or two years. The real issue, and again you know this, is that you carry over two years of tournament cash, so that first crop you have SO much money you have such a significant advantage. Again it's unbalancing. It isn't a guarantee success, it's unbalancing and it is certainly gaming the system, IMO.

I agree with this. I think BETA fixes it, I hope it does.

I am definitely one who thinks this is a cheesy way to set up a team but where do you draw the line? When I first started playing some teams had 12 seniors on their roster. Yep, the old 12-0-0-0 set up. Happened an awful lot and if you think 6-6-0-0 teams are tough to play and beat, try facing THOSE monsters. There was one season where I made the Final Four with Post in Rupp and the other three teams there were all 12-0-0-0 teams. Then there I was with my 5-3-2-2 (or whatever the hell it was, doesn't really matter).

There became such an outcry over teams like set up like that so Seble (could have still been Tarek, I honestly can't remember at this point) limited teams to having six players in a class, which brings us to the current 6-6-0-0 teams. But my point is, where do we stop? Do we go to the old 5/8 rule like college tried years ago? Do we limit it to 4 in a class so we see 4-4-4-0 "super classes" or do we make it complete balanced and go 3-3-3-3 so everyone has an equal chance? Unfortunately, with all the ******** and whining going on by coaches like those whose names rhyme with Dud, attempting to make everyone and everything a level playing field, it wouldn't surprise me a bit of there was another change to the 6-6-0-0 rule.

It might BE unbalancing and it might be "gaming" the system but is there some problem with having a little variety in the game? With giving coaches a different way to coach and manage their teams? Or are we going to just say to hell with it and make every team exactly the same so one coach doesn't have an advantage of some kind over another? Yes, the 6-6-0-0 coach is getting extra money to recruit with because of the rollover rule and as you said, that first crop of recruits is tough to win battles for but what about the TWO seasons that those coaches are recruiting NO ONE? Doesn't that give everyone else an advantage over them for both those seasons?

I'm sorry for the language in advance but this mindset of making everyone equals is bullshit. The mindset of no coach having an advantage over another is bullshit. The mindset that D1 schools shouldn't have advantages of D2/D3 schools is bullshit. The mindset that the game needed an update for recruiting is bullshit. The game was fine as is, until a couple new coaches signed up and realized that they were clearly overmatched and cried to the admins that life wasn't fair and now we start hearing about potential changes to even out the playing field. Well guess what? The playing field is what it is and the coach at the top had to overcome those same obstacles that the FNG's are ******** about now, ******** that they aren't fair. ******** because they're entitled by goodness, so somebody owes them something and damn actually having to work to get there.

Don't take this the wrong way Zorzii, none of this is directed at you, not one bit. You're playing the game as it's supposed to be played. It's the other crying *** babies that this is directed towards. In the olden days of the forums those coaches would be termed an "HD apologist". They know who they are.

The simple fact that we are getting the update that we are shows just how out of touch those in charge really are in regards to this game. As has been stated ad nauseum, there are far more important issues about the game that needed fixed than what we are getting fixed (which wasn't even broken in the first place) . Stopping now before I really get myself in trouble. But I will add this last little bit. The game that I signed up for and used to love is being destroyed piece by piece, run into the ground, and managed into a slow, ugly death.

I have a superclass set up at CNU. I just had 37 grand to recruit with at D3. I'm all for eliminating the roll over cash. Makes sense for me.

Edit: this sounds sarcastic but its not.

There's a difference between no advantage and to big an advantage.

I don't know who gets to decide what's too big an advantage

or too big an advantage

Posted by emy1013 on 7/13/2016 3:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by zorzii on 7/13/2016 1:26:00 PM (view original):
4. You can laugh all you want about people being uptight about your 6-6 strategy. It's cheesy and I am not alone feeling that way. In and of itself, it's fine I guess, you are giving up a year (or two) of being good to be REALLY good for one or two years. The real issue, and again you know this, is that you carry over two years of tournament cash, so that first crop you have SO much money you have such a significant advantage. Again it's unbalancing. It isn't a guarantee success, it's unbalancing and it is certainly gaming the system, IMO.

I agree with this. I think BETA fixes it, I hope it does.

I am definitely one who thinks this is a cheesy way to set up a team but where do you draw the line? When I first started playing some teams had 12 seniors on their roster. Yep, the old 12-0-0-0 set up. Happened an awful lot and if you think 6-6-0-0 teams are tough to play and beat, try facing THOSE monsters. There was one season where I made the Final Four with Post in Rupp and the other three teams there were all 12-0-0-0 teams. Then there I was with my 5-3-2-2 (or whatever the hell it was, doesn't really matter).

There became such an outcry over teams like set up like that so Seble (could have still been Tarek, I honestly can't remember at this point) limited teams to having six players in a class, which brings us to the current 6-6-0-0 teams. But my point is, where do we stop? Do we go to the old 5/8 rule like college tried years ago? Do we limit it to 4 in a class so we see 4-4-4-0 "super classes" or do we make it complete balanced and go 3-3-3-3 so everyone has an equal chance? Unfortunately, with all the ******** and whining going on by coaches like those whose names rhyme with Dud, attempting to make everyone and everything a level playing field, it wouldn't surprise me a bit of there was another change to the 6-6-0-0 rule.

It might BE unbalancing and it might be "gaming" the system but is there some problem with having a little variety in the game? With giving coaches a different way to coach and manage their teams? Or are we going to just say to hell with it and make every team exactly the same so one coach doesn't have an advantage of some kind over another? Yes, the 6-6-0-0 coach is getting extra money to recruit with because of the rollover rule and as you said, that first crop of recruits is tough to win battles for but what about the TWO seasons that those coaches are recruiting NO ONE? Doesn't that give everyone else an advantage over them for both those seasons?

I'm sorry for the language in advance but this mindset of making everyone equals is bullshit. The mindset of no coach having an advantage over another is bullshit. The mindset that D1 schools shouldn't have advantages of D2/D3 schools is bullshit. The mindset that the game needed an update for recruiting is bullshit. The game was fine as is, until a couple new coaches signed up and realized that they were clearly overmatched and cried to the admins that life wasn't fair and now we start hearing about potential changes to even out the playing field. Well guess what? The playing field is what it is and the coach at the top had to overcome those same obstacles that the FNG's are ******** about now, ******** that they aren't fair. ******** because they're entitled by goodness, so somebody owes them something and damn actually having to work to get there.

Don't take this the wrong way Zorzii, none of this is directed at you, not one bit. You're playing the game as it's supposed to be played. It's the other crying *** babies that this is directed towards. In the olden days of the forums those coaches would be termed an "HD apologist". They know who they are.

The simple fact that we are getting the update that we are shows just how out of touch those in charge really are in regards to this game. As has been stated ad nauseum, there are far more important issues about the game that needed fixed than what we are getting fixed (which wasn't even broken in the first place) . Stopping now before I really get myself in trouble. But I will add this last little bit. The game that I signed up for and used to love is being destroyed piece by piece, run into the ground, and managed into a slow, ugly death.

A well-written post. I agree with everything here. +1

Well one way would to eliminate carryover which would get rid of 6-6 classes, they would still have post season money and they could choose to run 6-6 and ignore it or incentive them to run a more balanced class

Barring making everyone run the same structure there will always be a super class make the limit 4 or 5 and you'll see 4-4-4 and 5-5-2 variations

You could also limit the impact of large classes by making IQ a non linear progession and treat it like a normal attribute you would just give each player a rating of say 37 blue potential and its treated like before(I think having potential not mean caps but rather growth speed would be better so a 37 red doesn't mean limited to 37-44 but rather there is no limit to their IQ it just won't get high because it will grow slowly) makes a bit more sense because not everyone can reach A+ irl and somewhat impacts the super classes because now their not running 12 players A+/A- IQ you'd have to get slightly unrealistic to implement it, juco's would be more valuable since they would always come in knowing your offense/defense, and you would have to implement strong penalties for switching off/def so teams don't just switch game to game, I think it makes a lot more sense

Banning post season cash just because it gives people an advantage is dumb and IS a punishment in my mind

Instead of banning postseason cash and as a side effect busting up these super conferences, what about splitting the difference? Let the teams that actually earn the postseason money keep a percentage (say 75%) and put the other 25% in the pot to be split among the rest of the conference. That way the team that actually earns the money keep the lion's share of it but it also keeps the incentive to stay in full conferences as well.