Posted by MikeT23 on 10/9/2017 1:33:00 PM (view original):
I don't know if you'd call the draft and budget constraints an "in-game mechanism" but it's pretty hard to keep a HBD team at the top for extended periods in good worlds.

Well its not like WIS instituted a "feature" where as you signed an elite HBD pitcher to a long-term contract and then decides that after he has an exceptional season, to hold out unless you pay him more.

I haven't played HBD at all but I'm guessing there is no mechanism where your team you've already assembled is affected by something completely outside of your control (does some player randomly decide to go FA on you)?

Yeah, FA is one of the "unknowns". It's a pretty common gripe. Player says he'll sign before budgeting then, once budgets are set, he tells you to take a leap. I always assume they'll leave so it doesn't bother me. I guess that could be semi-applied to EE.

Posted by zorzii on 10/9/2017 5:43:00 AM (view original):
I had the news, they all left. I lost in the first round. Three on the fence, one likely going.

Ridiculous. Broken. Impossible to prepare for. Got a letter from my AD : every team has to rebuild one day or another.

I concur on the part that is sucks and it needs to be fixed......but.....

However, for the time being, you have to kind of figure things out. If you recruit the #1 player overall, there is a chance he will leave by the end of his sophomore year and most definitely his junior year. I don't like the way it's set up either, but unfortunately it is what it is. I've only had 1 EE leave from the time I've been at Wake Forest and even that wasn't a big deal because my large senior class was gone.

In order to be a national championship caliber coach, especially at D-1, it takes a lot more time to invest into one team, you have to study what's going on with the draft board, figure out why players leave for the NBA early. Look at the coaches that have made the national championship game in Phelan often, epic, buddha, they just have 1 team. Even my last game that I lost in the Sweet 16, I put in 60-90 minutes preparing against Kansas.

Posted by thewizard17 on 10/9/2017 3:25:00 PM (view original):

Posted by zorzii on 10/9/2017 5:43:00 AM (view original):
I had the news, they all left. I lost in the first round. Three on the fence, one likely going.

Ridiculous. Broken. Impossible to prepare for. Got a letter from my AD : every team has to rebuild one day or another.

I concur on the part that is sucks and it needs to be fixed......but.....

However, for the time being, you have to kind of figure things out. If you recruit the #1 player overall, there is a chance he will leave by the end of his sophomore year and most definitely his junior year. I don't like the way it's set up either, but unfortunately it is what it is. I've only had 1 EE leave from the time I've been at Wake Forest and even that wasn't a big deal because my large senior class was gone.

In order to be a national championship caliber coach, especially at D-1, it takes a lot more time to invest into one team, you have to study what's going on with the draft board, figure out why players leave for the NBA early. Look at the coaches that have made the national championship game in Phelan often, epic, buddha, they just have 1 team. Even my last game that I lost in the Sweet 16, I put in 60-90 minutes preparing against Kansas.

Maybe you are right. With work, I tend to be casual, maybe cutting down is the solution but 4 ees is still idiotic.

I think the simplest solution is to have kids declare if and only if they will be a first round pick. That way you kinda know it's coming and the only the best players go. You'd lose a couple more sophomores and freshman though....

Posted by kcsundevil on 10/9/2017 12:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by zorzii on 10/9/2017 9:28:00 AM (view original):
I am not crying but where is the logic? I lost more than the NT finalists... Impossible to prepare for it. If I get lucky, with six schollies to fill now, even preparing for one leaving won't cut it. I will get lucky If I sign three, two maybe, one is more realistic...

My opinion: Every team should get the same # of APs every season regardless of how many openings you have. I'd start everyone at 80 and maybe take away 10 per signing.

The AP budgets were not well tested in the beta. It would be nice to be able to go back to the beta forums and revisit the discussions on this, but WIS locked the gates.

I think this is a great suggestion, except if you have six openings and only 80 points, it is going to be tough to compete with a team that only has one opening and can use all 80 on one player. But, conversely, right now if you only have one opening, it is hard to compete against a team with 6 openings that gets 4-5 pretty well sewn up and can put them all on one player. It should maybe be something like everyone gets 80, then you get 10 for each additional one.

Posted by chapelhillne on 10/9/2017 10:56:00 PM (view original):

Posted by kcsundevil on 10/9/2017 12:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by zorzii on 10/9/2017 9:28:00 AM (view original):
I am not crying but where is the logic? I lost more than the NT finalists... Impossible to prepare for it. If I get lucky, with six schollies to fill now, even preparing for one leaving won't cut it. I will get lucky If I sign three, two maybe, one is more realistic...

My opinion: Every team should get the same # of APs every season regardless of how many openings you have. I'd start everyone at 80 and maybe take away 10 per signing.

The AP budgets were not well tested in the beta. It would be nice to be able to go back to the beta forums and revisit the discussions on this, but WIS locked the gates.

I think this is a great suggestion, except if you have six openings and only 80 points, it is going to be tough to compete with a team that only has one opening and can use all 80 on one player. But, conversely, right now if you only have one opening, it is hard to compete against a team with 6 openings that gets 4-5 pretty well sewn up and can put them all on one player. It should maybe be something like everyone gets 80, then you get 10 for each additional one.

Nope. No reward for unbalanced classes. You get what you get, and you don't get upset.

After the championship with New Mexico, I do see where it is possible to win a title without all of the EEs. But, it was almost like one of the superclasses, with 6 seniors that did have really high IQs. I practice 25 minutes on offense and defense. It does make me think a little about the overall strategy and whether it's better to have a stud that leaves after 2 years, or a good player that stays 4 years and gets to the high IQ level. Sometimes the studs stay. I think though that it would be impossible to build a dynasty with the type of team I had at New Mexico. But I guess we will see if we can do it. The location there really prevents me from getting a class of all 5 star guys because they are usually so far away. However in the last 5 years, we have had two Sweet 16s an Elite 8, a championship, and a first round exit. That's getting close to a dynasty, but I think to win the championships regularly you need at least a couple more top players regularly. I still think something needs to be done about the EE situation. At the very least, have players declare early so you know how many you will have. If that happened, and if the signings in the second session were delayed by a couple of cycles, this would help somewhat.

There is a lot of unrealistic aspects that contribute to the problem.

In real life schools have 13 scholarships unlike HD which has 12, 1 extra scholarship helps some in alleviating a large EE class. The less available scholarships the greater the impact of a EE.

In real life teams can over recruit in anticipation of filling spots of players leaving early, then when a player doesn't leave early, and a scholarship is not available then the recruit is forced to either take a medical waiver and sit out a season or transfer and sit out a season. . In HD you cannot do that because the system doesn't mirror real life. In HD your budget is dictated by your openings, but you don't get full credit for your openings until the player officially declares which is not how recruiting works in real life

Just like real life roster management is a real life problem except their rules are different.

Posted by chapelhillne on 10/9/2017 11:06:00 PM (view original):
After the championship with New Mexico, I do see where it is possible to win a title without all of the EEs. But, it was almost like one of the superclasses, with 6 seniors that did have really high IQs. I practice 25 minutes on offense and defense. It does make me think a little about the overall strategy and whether it's better to have a stud that leaves after 2 years, or a good player that stays 4 years and gets to the high IQ level. Sometimes the studs stay. I think though that it would be impossible to build a dynasty with the type of team I had at New Mexico. But I guess we will see if we can do it. The location there really prevents me from getting a class of all 5 star guys because they are usually so far away. However in the last 5 years, we have had two Sweet 16s an Elite 8, a championship, and a first round exit. That's getting close to a dynasty, but I think to win the championships regularly you need at least a couple more top players regularly. I still think something needs to be done about the EE situation. At the very least, have players declare early so you know how many you will have. If that happened, and if the signings in the second session were delayed by a couple of cycles, this would help somewhat.

I have also noticed that having a few players stay 4 seasons is a big help even if those players are not star players. I have been trying to recruit a few 3 or 4 star recruits on my team with the idea that they will be 4 season rotational players.

2 and 3 seasons ago both seasons I recruited the 2nd overall ranked player. One left after his soph season the other looks to be following the same path. Having players in back to back seasons leaving as Sophs looks to be devastating putting me into a likely rebuilding season.

Add to the unrealistic aspect of recruiting in HD is having to promise recruits starts to have a shot to win recruits is unrealistic. I have 4 freshmen starting this season with a top 20 player coming off the bench.

Posted by kcsundevil on 10/9/2017 11:05:00 PM (view original):

Posted by chapelhillne on 10/9/2017 10:56:00 PM (view original):

Posted by kcsundevil on 10/9/2017 12:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by zorzii on 10/9/2017 9:28:00 AM (view original):
I am not crying but where is the logic? I lost more than the NT finalists... Impossible to prepare for it. If I get lucky, with six schollies to fill now, even preparing for one leaving won't cut it. I will get lucky If I sign three, two maybe, one is more realistic...

My opinion: Every team should get the same # of APs every season regardless of how many openings you have. I'd start everyone at 80 and maybe take away 10 per signing.

The AP budgets were not well tested in the beta. It would be nice to be able to go back to the beta forums and revisit the discussions on this, but WIS locked the gates.

I think this is a great suggestion, except if you have six openings and only 80 points, it is going to be tough to compete with a team that only has one opening and can use all 80 on one player. But, conversely, right now if you only have one opening, it is hard to compete against a team with 6 openings that gets 4-5 pretty well sewn up and can put them all on one player. It should maybe be something like everyone gets 80, then you get 10 for each additional one.

Nope. No reward for unbalanced classes. You get what you get, and you don't get upset.

I think the saying is

"You get what you get and don't throw a fit."

or maybe its an accent thing.

Posted by chapelhillne on 10/9/2017 10:56:00 PM (view original):

Posted by kcsundevil on 10/9/2017 12:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by zorzii on 10/9/2017 9:28:00 AM (view original):
I am not crying but where is the logic? I lost more than the NT finalists... Impossible to prepare for it. If I get lucky, with six schollies to fill now, even preparing for one leaving won't cut it. I will get lucky If I sign three, two maybe, one is more realistic...

My opinion: Every team should get the same # of APs every season regardless of how many openings you have. I'd start everyone at 80 and maybe take away 10 per signing.

The AP budgets were not well tested in the beta. It would be nice to be able to go back to the beta forums and revisit the discussions on this, but WIS locked the gates.

I think this is a great suggestion, except if you have six openings and only 80 points, it is going to be tough to compete with a team that only has one opening and can use all 80 on one player. But, conversely, right now if you only have one opening, it is hard to compete against a team with 6 openings that gets 4-5 pretty well sewn up and can put them all on one player. It should maybe be something like everyone gets 80, then you get 10 for each additional one.

I'd prefer either of these versus current. Although the current system is still better than previous version.

Posted by chapelhillne on 10/9/2017 11:06:00 PM (view original):
After the championship with New Mexico, I do see where it is possible to win a title without all of the EEs. But, it was almost like one of the superclasses, with 6 seniors that did have really high IQs. I practice 25 minutes on offense and defense. It does make me think a little about the overall strategy and whether it's better to have a stud that leaves after 2 years, or a good player that stays 4 years and gets to the high IQ level. Sometimes the studs stay. I think though that it would be impossible to build a dynasty with the type of team I had at New Mexico. But I guess we will see if we can do it. The location there really prevents me from getting a class of all 5 star guys because they are usually so far away. However in the last 5 years, we have had two Sweet 16s an Elite 8, a championship, and a first round exit. That's getting close to a dynasty, but I think to win the championships regularly you need at least a couple more top players regularly. I still think something needs to be done about the EE situation. At the very least, have players declare early so you know how many you will have. If that happened, and if the signings in the second session were delayed by a couple of cycles, this would help somewhat.

It also helps if your'e an elite coach-coach like chapel.

Posted by cubcub113 on 10/10/2017 8:27:00 AM (view original):

Posted by chapelhillne on 10/9/2017 11:06:00 PM (view original):
After the championship with New Mexico, I do see where it is possible to win a title without all of the EEs. But, it was almost like one of the superclasses, with 6 seniors that did have really high IQs. I practice 25 minutes on offense and defense. It does make me think a little about the overall strategy and whether it's better to have a stud that leaves after 2 years, or a good player that stays 4 years and gets to the high IQ level. Sometimes the studs stay. I think though that it would be impossible to build a dynasty with the type of team I had at New Mexico. But I guess we will see if we can do it. The location there really prevents me from getting a class of all 5 star guys because they are usually so far away. However in the last 5 years, we have had two Sweet 16s an Elite 8, a championship, and a first round exit. That's getting close to a dynasty, but I think to win the championships regularly you need at least a couple more top players regularly. I still think something needs to be done about the EE situation. At the very least, have players declare early so you know how many you will have. If that happened, and if the signings in the second session were delayed by a couple of cycles, this would help somewhat.

It also helps if your'e an elite coach-coach like chapel.

Perhaps the chronic complainers could take note and adjust.


But they won't. Whining is easier.

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/10/2017 8:42:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cubcub113 on 10/10/2017 8:27:00 AM (view original):

Posted by chapelhillne on 10/9/2017 11:06:00 PM (view original):
After the championship with New Mexico, I do see where it is possible to win a title without all of the EEs. But, it was almost like one of the superclasses, with 6 seniors that did have really high IQs. I practice 25 minutes on offense and defense. It does make me think a little about the overall strategy and whether it's better to have a stud that leaves after 2 years, or a good player that stays 4 years and gets to the high IQ level. Sometimes the studs stay. I think though that it would be impossible to build a dynasty with the type of team I had at New Mexico. But I guess we will see if we can do it. The location there really prevents me from getting a class of all 5 star guys because they are usually so far away. However in the last 5 years, we have had two Sweet 16s an Elite 8, a championship, and a first round exit. That's getting close to a dynasty, but I think to win the championships regularly you need at least a couple more top players regularly. I still think something needs to be done about the EE situation. At the very least, have players declare early so you know how many you will have. If that happened, and if the signings in the second session were delayed by a couple of cycles, this would help somewhat.

It also helps if your'e an elite coach-coach like chapel.

Perhaps the chronic complainers could take note and adjust.


But they won't. Whining is easier.

I'm not sure how you decided that my statement was telling Zorzii to become better at coaching so he could recruit the 63rd PG and win titles.