Posted by npb7768 on 7/19/2015 8:17:00 AM (view original):
The old guard here in HD has been extremely helpful to new players, sharing many of their best HD strategies.

"Having said that" (Larry David), there is a *small* portion of the old guard that has a sense of entitlement to recruits and championships that can irritate people.

These things are annoying in HD:

Threads that count titles are pretty annoying... "title number 57 arrived last night like a freshly born colt"...

Threads that belittle titles won via superclasses are annoying... "I'm entitled to championships... and championships must be won within the framework of play that i have rigged and gamed in my favor... and your superclass disturbed that... how dare you... i said good day!"...

Threads that rank quality of titles are annoying... "i won a title coming out of X conference in Y world.... your title sucks because it came out of a ghost town conference..."

Posts that belittle other owners accomplishments in trying to move up... "you clearly need more than 7 NT's to coach at Sacred Heart... in fact anything short of a Sweet -16 should disqualify you from the NEC"... this is annoying because many old guard Div-1 owners qualified by jumping on an A+ Div-2 team and running it into the ground 60 seasons ago.

Threads that give recruiting and player advice to Div-3 owners, from people who haven't coach Div-3 in 55 seasons... "simply send 20 scouting trips and the guy will pull down to you"... or... "I never recruit a guard with less than 140 total for Ath and Speed"... uh, ok... you do realize that D-3 teams get squattrini for recruiting money, so 20 scoutings will destroy their bank account... and that no Div-3 recruit has ever totaled 140... or, no high prestige D-3 team would ever allow a newbie to even get a 140 guy on his consider list...?

Posts that freak out at the use of the term "poaching"... i mean, sheesh... "you have a player lined up to sign, and I'm going to come in at 7:59 and dump $90k without warning on the guy... I'm entitled to the guy because I'm a Big Six team... don't like it?, then earn a place in the Big Six... oh yeah, don't call it poaching you ungrateful little bastard..." i mean, we need a term for this... "advanced cherry-picking?"... "the 7:59 treatment?"... "vulturing?"... "the Vulture Technique?"... someone come up with something, please... "the hyena process"...?

Posts that call out specific teams' supposed undeserved wins or supposed undeserved advancement... a thread that comes to mind was when Hartford made a Final Four... the owner i think was a freakin genius, and gameplanned to perfection... people came on here and trashed him about gimmicky gameplanning and so on... that was annoying... the Hartford owner should be in the HD Hall of Fame.

Now, on the topic of this thread...

I've never played against either of the owners that are part of the discussion. If the accuser wasn't such a loose cannon half the time, his claim might have more strength... but anyway, based on the highly competitive atmosphere in HD, which is a good thing, there is no question that the sort of recruiting technique that this thread describes *does* occur... one guy looks to poach... oops, i mean cherry-pick... at 7:59... a conference-mate runs interference on a different recruit... conference loyalty can run deep around here... it means HD money, prestige, more NT bids...

I mean, all of us are pretty aware of what our conference mates are doing during recruiting... many coaches corners have pages of recruiting re-caps... with admissions of backing-off recruits, etc, etc...

Anyway, HD is a very enjoyable game, and it's much like real life... the posturing, the politicking, the intimidation, the poaching i mean cherry-picking at the last minute, the sense of entitlement from coaches and fanbases... i think the arrogance is good for the sport and good for this game, and I'm enjoying the ride.

And i think i still hold the record for most HD wins or most NT appearances *without* an NT win... 0-8...!

I agree with all of your annoyances except, perhaps predictably, the one about the superclass threads.  Please show posts that fit what you describe:

"I'm entitled to championships... and championships must be won within the framework of play that i have rigged and gamed in my favor... and your superclass disturbed that... how dare you... i said good day!"

I don't think you'll find more than a couple.  I think a case could be made that your quote more accurately describes the arguments in favor of superclassing.  Anyway, that became a legitimate discussion of how postseason cash is handled under certain circumstances, and the tone of the thread doesn't match up with your interpretation.

Obviously, you have the right to be annoyed by whatever annoys you.  I just think you're off the mark on this one.

Posted by llamanunts on 7/19/2015 1:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by npb7768 on 7/19/2015 8:17:00 AM (view original):
The old guard here in HD has been extremely helpful to new players, sharing many of their best HD strategies.

"Having said that" (Larry David), there is a *small* portion of the old guard that has a sense of entitlement to recruits and championships that can irritate people.

These things are annoying in HD:

Threads that count titles are pretty annoying... "title number 57 arrived last night like a freshly born colt"...

Threads that belittle titles won via superclasses are annoying... "I'm entitled to championships... and championships must be won within the framework of play that i have rigged and gamed in my favor... and your superclass disturbed that... how dare you... i said good day!"...

Threads that rank quality of titles are annoying... "i won a title coming out of X conference in Y world.... your title sucks because it came out of a ghost town conference..."

Posts that belittle other owners accomplishments in trying to move up... "you clearly need more than 7 NT's to coach at Sacred Heart... in fact anything short of a Sweet -16 should disqualify you from the NEC"... this is annoying because many old guard Div-1 owners qualified by jumping on an A+ Div-2 team and running it into the ground 60 seasons ago.

Threads that give recruiting and player advice to Div-3 owners, from people who haven't coach Div-3 in 55 seasons... "simply send 20 scouting trips and the guy will pull down to you"... or... "I never recruit a guard with less than 140 total for Ath and Speed"... uh, ok... you do realize that D-3 teams get squattrini for recruiting money, so 20 scoutings will destroy their bank account... and that no Div-3 recruit has ever totaled 140... or, no high prestige D-3 team would ever allow a newbie to even get a 140 guy on his consider list...?

Posts that freak out at the use of the term "poaching"... i mean, sheesh... "you have a player lined up to sign, and I'm going to come in at 7:59 and dump $90k without warning on the guy... I'm entitled to the guy because I'm a Big Six team... don't like it?, then earn a place in the Big Six... oh yeah, don't call it poaching you ungrateful little bastard..." i mean, we need a term for this... "advanced cherry-picking?"... "the 7:59 treatment?"... "vulturing?"... "the Vulture Technique?"... someone come up with something, please... "the hyena process"...?

Posts that call out specific teams' supposed undeserved wins or supposed undeserved advancement... a thread that comes to mind was when Hartford made a Final Four... the owner i think was a freakin genius, and gameplanned to perfection... people came on here and trashed him about gimmicky gameplanning and so on... that was annoying... the Hartford owner should be in the HD Hall of Fame.

Now, on the topic of this thread...

I've never played against either of the owners that are part of the discussion. If the accuser wasn't such a loose cannon half the time, his claim might have more strength... but anyway, based on the highly competitive atmosphere in HD, which is a good thing, there is no question that the sort of recruiting technique that this thread describes *does* occur... one guy looks to poach... oops, i mean cherry-pick... at 7:59... a conference-mate runs interference on a different recruit... conference loyalty can run deep around here... it means HD money, prestige, more NT bids...

I mean, all of us are pretty aware of what our conference mates are doing during recruiting... many coaches corners have pages of recruiting re-caps... with admissions of backing-off recruits, etc, etc...

Anyway, HD is a very enjoyable game, and it's much like real life... the posturing, the politicking, the intimidation, the poaching i mean cherry-picking at the last minute, the sense of entitlement from coaches and fanbases... i think the arrogance is good for the sport and good for this game, and I'm enjoying the ride.

And i think i still hold the record for most HD wins or most NT appearances *without* an NT win... 0-8...!

I agree with all of your annoyances except, perhaps predictably, the one about the superclass threads.  Please show posts that fit what you describe:

"I'm entitled to championships... and championships must be won within the framework of play that i have rigged and gamed in my favor... and your superclass disturbed that... how dare you... i said good day!"

I don't think you'll find more than a couple.  I think a case could be made that your quote more accurately describes the arguments in favor of superclassing.  Anyway, that became a legitimate discussion of how postseason cash is handled under certain circumstances, and the tone of the thread doesn't match up with your interpretation.

Obviously, you have the right to be annoyed by whatever annoys you.  I just think you're off the mark on this one.

Its all in the superclass thread. Most people don't like the superclass teams and clearly state that if you win a championship with a superclass than that is not as good as winning one with a balanced class. I can't post posts now cause I'm on my phone, but yes people say it's easier and not as aaccomplished as the "normal way".

absolutely people said superclasses don't count as much. i understand the attempt at humor (successfully, i might add), but what npb said about superclassing comments isn't that. i do think some people said "how dare you" as he mentions, like not exactly, but saying they don't think people should do it, that maybe there is some moral component. that wasn't the majority comment though, most people its simply not as impressive of an achievement. 

but really, my general thought is that while npb's post was enjoyable, because hes altering what others say, intentionally overstating and humorizing, its not worth really picking at the details of what is or is not wrong with his or other people's comments on those topics. if you view the extreme posts on any of those topics, people do say some pretty screwed up ****, but its not even clear if its those fringe comments hes against or a wider range of comments that are moderate in presentation but share some opinions with the satirized versions he presents. 

Posted by gillispie1 on 7/19/2015 8:22:00 PM (view original):
absolutely people said superclasses don't count as much. i understand the attempt at humor (successfully, i might add), but what npb said about superclassing comments isn't that. i do think some people said "how dare you" as he mentions, like not exactly, but saying they don't think people should do it, that maybe there is some moral component. that wasn't the majority comment though, most people its simply not as impressive of an achievement. 

but really, my general thought is that while npb's post was enjoyable, because hes altering what others say, intentionally overstating and humorizing, its not worth really picking at the details of what is or is not wrong with his or other people's comments on those topics. if you view the extreme posts on any of those topics, people do say some pretty screwed up ****, but its not even clear if its those fringe comments hes against or a wider range of comments that are moderate in presentation but share some opinions with the satirized versions he presents. 

Hey gillispie,
I think what you wrote here is pretty accurate. I tried to have fun with some general thoughts, tried to be humorous. Threw in some movie references. Embellished some quotes. Didn't expect or want to be taken too seriously, although i tried to touch on some things that people can relate to, and which i think contain some truths.

I truly enjoy the banter and rivalries in the Forum, and i also like to read random Coaches Corners. And i have really enjoyed playing HD in the 22 months since i started... a great and entertaining game.

Anyway, I'm glad you guys enjoyed my post.

Thanks for saving the thread npb.  This was going to be a trainwreck. 

I think making a superclass back to back might be a quick way to turn a team around. I'm not sure about 6-6-0-0. For one, that seems boring in those "bad" years. Second, do the 10th 11th 12th guys really play much at all? I think going 4-4-2-2 with one of those sophomores a redshirted player would give you an equally stacked team and not a complete bore the 2 seasons you don't have a big senior/junior group. 

This is in reference to D2 and D3 btw. At D1, the small schools should do as much as they can to make a run at all costs. I still don't think i'd go past 6-4-1-1 though. 

Posted by docmastermd on 7/20/2015 10:56:00 AM (view original):
I think making a superclass back to back might be a quick way to turn a team around. I'm not sure about 6-6-0-0. For one, that seems boring in those "bad" years. Second, do the 10th 11th 12th guys really play much at all? I think going 4-4-2-2 with one of those sophomores a redshirted player would give you an equally stacked team and not a complete bore the 2 seasons you don't have a big senior/junior group. 

This is in reference to D2 and D3 btw. At D1, the small schools should do as much as they can to make a run at all costs. I still don't think i'd go past 6-4-1-1 though. 

you make a valid point with the 4-4-2-2 - but its based on an assumption - which is that the theoretical coach in question is going to properly build his team. if you can mold your 4-4-2 into the perfect 10 man lineup, then those last 2 freshman being sophs or even juniors buys you very little to nothing. but that is a big assumption, a lot of coaches struggle with team composition, and even great coaches still have room for improvement on many of their teams, often because the assets just weren't available that time around. with 12 seniors/juniors, you just have more margin for error, you can be less exceptional of a recruiter and less exceptional of a team builder, and still get an experienced, excellent 10 man lineup.

also for press teams those 11/12 men do matter quite a bit.

Way to change the subject, guys...

Posted by colonels19 on 7/21/2015 7:28:00 PM (view original):
Way to change the subject, guys...

yeah it really made things better. lets just always do this from now on when crappy threads like this crop up.

I'll keep that in mind the next time you drum something up.