Posted by shoe3 on 6/21/2017 5:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by zorzii on 6/21/2017 2:37:00 PM (view original):
I think people should stay on topic. It proves overall rating is a lot higher, Trenton 5 per stats is probably a good assumption, but it does not touch durability or WE.

I said all along that a cap is needed. And we need to be able to draft from the first session til the end of the second in every division.

I also said that location has become more important because, you won't have access to these players if you are in a surrounded area while other teams, pretty much left alone, will.

The difference between divsions has shrinked. Either you get rid of D3 altogether and make a good D2 division or you go ahead with caps. Some D3 are already top D2 teams.

It's on topic (at least what the topic should be), but the cart is before the horse. This is classic question begging. Why is it a problem? Who is harmed by top D3 teams now having higher overall ratings? Are you beating sims by more points? Why is that bad? Are you beating new players by more points? If that's a real problem, what are you doing to help those new players understand that they have access to the same players you're getting?

The gap between top veteran D3 dynasties and the teams available to completely new players has always been very wide. Instituting division caps isn't going to fix that. It's just going to decrease the pool of recruits available for everyone at that level, forcing new players to try to compete with veterans for the same recruits, thereby putting a premium on experience and location - which is only going to help established dynasties.

I am telling the gap has increased, location is more important than it was before and the difference between D2 and D3 has shrinked. It is intuitive but the difference shown by Benis is a starting point, one data that will be one of many that will prove what I have been telling everyone for six months. It's not good for the game and it gives gamin' the game an importance it should not have. Before a new player figures this out, he will have quit. We went from fixes to D1 and D2, D3 relatively healthy to 3.0 - D1 being the less ****** level.

Posted by zorzii on 6/21/2017 6:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 6/21/2017 5:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by zorzii on 6/21/2017 2:37:00 PM (view original):
I think people should stay on topic. It proves overall rating is a lot higher, Trenton 5 per stats is probably a good assumption, but it does not touch durability or WE.

I said all along that a cap is needed. And we need to be able to draft from the first session til the end of the second in every division.

I also said that location has become more important because, you won't have access to these players if you are in a surrounded area while other teams, pretty much left alone, will.

The difference between divsions has shrinked. Either you get rid of D3 altogether and make a good D2 division or you go ahead with caps. Some D3 are already top D2 teams.

It's on topic (at least what the topic should be), but the cart is before the horse. This is classic question begging. Why is it a problem? Who is harmed by top D3 teams now having higher overall ratings? Are you beating sims by more points? Why is that bad? Are you beating new players by more points? If that's a real problem, what are you doing to help those new players understand that they have access to the same players you're getting?

The gap between top veteran D3 dynasties and the teams available to completely new players has always been very wide. Instituting division caps isn't going to fix that. It's just going to decrease the pool of recruits available for everyone at that level, forcing new players to try to compete with veterans for the same recruits, thereby putting a premium on experience and location - which is only going to help established dynasties.

I am telling the gap has increased, location is more important than it was before and the difference between D2 and D3 has shrinked. It is intuitive but the difference shown by Benis is a starting point, one data that will be one of many that will prove what I have been telling everyone for six months. It's not good for the game and it gives gamin' the game an importance it should not have. Before a new player figures this out, he will have quit. We went from fixes to D1 and D2, D3 relatively healthy to 3.0 - D1 being the less ****** level.

I see your point, zorzii. I do not care for the blurring of DII and DIII that 3.0 has created and I do believe it is not positive for the game. I still contend that the gap increases are not due to location but to a reduction of human players. Palm Beach Atlantic would not be a good location if there were human players in DII Sunshine State conference and humans at DI Florida schools...as an example. However, the exodus of human players after 3.0 was released has, as an unintended consequence, caused a situation where geographic isolation has now become a huge advantage at all levels. THAT is bad for the game. Instituting a cap would only tackle the symptom without addressing the actual cause. The cause, IMHO, is a lack of players.

Posted by gomiami1972 on 6/21/2017 6:49:00 PM (view original):

Posted by zorzii on 6/21/2017 6:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 6/21/2017 5:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by zorzii on 6/21/2017 2:37:00 PM (view original):
I think people should stay on topic. It proves overall rating is a lot higher, Trenton 5 per stats is probably a good assumption, but it does not touch durability or WE.

I said all along that a cap is needed. And we need to be able to draft from the first session til the end of the second in every division.

I also said that location has become more important because, you won't have access to these players if you are in a surrounded area while other teams, pretty much left alone, will.

The difference between divsions has shrinked. Either you get rid of D3 altogether and make a good D2 division or you go ahead with caps. Some D3 are already top D2 teams.

It's on topic (at least what the topic should be), but the cart is before the horse. This is classic question begging. Why is it a problem? Who is harmed by top D3 teams now having higher overall ratings? Are you beating sims by more points? Why is that bad? Are you beating new players by more points? If that's a real problem, what are you doing to help those new players understand that they have access to the same players you're getting?

The gap between top veteran D3 dynasties and the teams available to completely new players has always been very wide. Instituting division caps isn't going to fix that. It's just going to decrease the pool of recruits available for everyone at that level, forcing new players to try to compete with veterans for the same recruits, thereby putting a premium on experience and location - which is only going to help established dynasties.

I am telling the gap has increased, location is more important than it was before and the difference between D2 and D3 has shrinked. It is intuitive but the difference shown by Benis is a starting point, one data that will be one of many that will prove what I have been telling everyone for six months. It's not good for the game and it gives gamin' the game an importance it should not have. Before a new player figures this out, he will have quit. We went from fixes to D1 and D2, D3 relatively healthy to 3.0 - D1 being the less ****** level.

I see your point, zorzii. I do not care for the blurring of DII and DIII that 3.0 has created and I do believe it is not positive for the game. I still contend that the gap increases are not due to location but to a reduction of human players. Palm Beach Atlantic would not be a good location if there were human players in DII Sunshine State conference and humans at DI Florida schools...as an example. However, the exodus of human players after 3.0 was released has, as an unintended consequence, caused a situation where geographic isolation has now become a huge advantage at all levels. THAT is bad for the game. Instituting a cap would only tackle the symptom without addressing the actual cause. The cause, IMHO, is a lack of players.

What do you think of D3 not signing anyone until session 2 or the last day?

Posted by mbriese on 6/21/2017 5:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/21/2017 5:26:00 PM (view original):
Too long.

I know I know, you want quick and punchy things that you can actually process and try to argue with. Womp womp, maybe next time!

I read shoe's soliloquy. He's usually interesting or informative.

Posted by zorzii on 6/21/2017 6:51:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 6/21/2017 6:49:00 PM (view original):

Posted by zorzii on 6/21/2017 6:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 6/21/2017 5:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by zorzii on 6/21/2017 2:37:00 PM (view original):
I think people should stay on topic. It proves overall rating is a lot higher, Trenton 5 per stats is probably a good assumption, but it does not touch durability or WE.

I said all along that a cap is needed. And we need to be able to draft from the first session til the end of the second in every division.

I also said that location has become more important because, you won't have access to these players if you are in a surrounded area while other teams, pretty much left alone, will.

The difference between divsions has shrinked. Either you get rid of D3 altogether and make a good D2 division or you go ahead with caps. Some D3 are already top D2 teams.

It's on topic (at least what the topic should be), but the cart is before the horse. This is classic question begging. Why is it a problem? Who is harmed by top D3 teams now having higher overall ratings? Are you beating sims by more points? Why is that bad? Are you beating new players by more points? If that's a real problem, what are you doing to help those new players understand that they have access to the same players you're getting?

The gap between top veteran D3 dynasties and the teams available to completely new players has always been very wide. Instituting division caps isn't going to fix that. It's just going to decrease the pool of recruits available for everyone at that level, forcing new players to try to compete with veterans for the same recruits, thereby putting a premium on experience and location - which is only going to help established dynasties.

I am telling the gap has increased, location is more important than it was before and the difference between D2 and D3 has shrinked. It is intuitive but the difference shown by Benis is a starting point, one data that will be one of many that will prove what I have been telling everyone for six months. It's not good for the game and it gives gamin' the game an importance it should not have. Before a new player figures this out, he will have quit. We went from fixes to D1 and D2, D3 relatively healthy to 3.0 - D1 being the less ****** level.

I see your point, zorzii. I do not care for the blurring of DII and DIII that 3.0 has created and I do believe it is not positive for the game. I still contend that the gap increases are not due to location but to a reduction of human players. Palm Beach Atlantic would not be a good location if there were human players in DII Sunshine State conference and humans at DI Florida schools...as an example. However, the exodus of human players after 3.0 was released has, as an unintended consequence, caused a situation where geographic isolation has now become a huge advantage at all levels. THAT is bad for the game. Instituting a cap would only tackle the symptom without addressing the actual cause. The cause, IMHO, is a lack of players.

What do you think of D3 not signing anyone until session 2 or the last day?

I hate it. Most of my teams were, prior to 3.0, in the lower divisions. I used to have PBAC and Colorado College on a regular basis. I loved those locations because they were challenging. BETA convinced me that my DIII career was over. Waiting for the last day is bad enough but having to commit to another season BEFORE I even know what any of my recruiting class will look like is a scam. If I drop my DII Grand Canyon team, which I am leaning towards doing, I will never play in DII or DIII again. That is a direct cause of 3.0.

Posted by zorzii on 6/21/2017 6:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 6/21/2017 5:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by zorzii on 6/21/2017 2:37:00 PM (view original):
I think people should stay on topic. It proves overall rating is a lot higher, Trenton 5 per stats is probably a good assumption, but it does not touch durability or WE.

I said all along that a cap is needed. And we need to be able to draft from the first session til the end of the second in every division.

I also said that location has become more important because, you won't have access to these players if you are in a surrounded area while other teams, pretty much left alone, will.

The difference between divsions has shrinked. Either you get rid of D3 altogether and make a good D2 division or you go ahead with caps. Some D3 are already top D2 teams.

It's on topic (at least what the topic should be), but the cart is before the horse. This is classic question begging. Why is it a problem? Who is harmed by top D3 teams now having higher overall ratings? Are you beating sims by more points? Why is that bad? Are you beating new players by more points? If that's a real problem, what are you doing to help those new players understand that they have access to the same players you're getting?

The gap between top veteran D3 dynasties and the teams available to completely new players has always been very wide. Instituting division caps isn't going to fix that. It's just going to decrease the pool of recruits available for everyone at that level, forcing new players to try to compete with veterans for the same recruits, thereby putting a premium on experience and location - which is only going to help established dynasties.

I am telling the gap has increased, location is more important than it was before and the difference between D2 and D3 has shrinked. It is intuitive but the difference shown by Benis is a starting point, one data that will be one of many that will prove what I have been telling everyone for six months. It's not good for the game and it gives gamin' the game an importance it should not have. Before a new player figures this out, he will have quit. We went from fixes to D1 and D2, D3 relatively healthy to 3.0 - D1 being the less ****** level.

This is horseshit and you know it. Stop saying "Before a new player figures it out, he will quit." There is absolutely no evidence that is true. A new player is going to be a new player. If you want them to compete, cap how good a team can be. Say "Team Overall of 540 and no more player improvement" and there you have it. Recruiting that potential 780 for D3 would be pointless unless you're taking 4x397 walk-ons. Then the new guys will have a fighting chance but I'd put my money on the 100 season veterans anyway.

However, that seems like a pretty stupid solution to a "problem" that doesn't really exist.

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/21/2017 6:57:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mbriese on 6/21/2017 5:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/21/2017 5:26:00 PM (view original):
Too long.

I know I know, you want quick and punchy things that you can actually process and try to argue with. Womp womp, maybe next time!

I read shoe's soliloquy. He's usually interesting or informative.

Shoe must be so proud to have your approval! I'll keep trying to work on making my posts short with small words that even you can understand and maybe, just maybe I'll get your approval. Dream big!

Posted by mbriese on 6/21/2017 7:05:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/21/2017 6:57:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mbriese on 6/21/2017 5:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/21/2017 5:26:00 PM (view original):
Too long.

I know I know, you want quick and punchy things that you can actually process and try to argue with. Womp womp, maybe next time!

I read shoe's soliloquy. He's usually interesting or informative.

Shoe must be so proud to have your approval! I'll keep trying to work on making my posts short with small words that even you can understand and maybe, just maybe I'll get your approval. Dream big!

Maybe you could just make them interesting, informative or funny. That would do it. There's your challenge.

Posted by mbriese on 6/21/2017 7:05:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/21/2017 6:57:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mbriese on 6/21/2017 5:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/21/2017 5:26:00 PM (view original):
Too long.

I know I know, you want quick and punchy things that you can actually process and try to argue with. Womp womp, maybe next time!

I read shoe's soliloquy. He's usually interesting or informative.

Shoe must be so proud to have your approval! I'll keep trying to work on making my posts short with small words that even you can understand and maybe, just maybe I'll get your approval. Dream big!

Hahaha

Posted by zorzii on 6/21/2017 6:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 6/21/2017 5:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by zorzii on 6/21/2017 2:37:00 PM (view original):
I think people should stay on topic. It proves overall rating is a lot higher, Trenton 5 per stats is probably a good assumption, but it does not touch durability or WE.

I said all along that a cap is needed. And we need to be able to draft from the first session til the end of the second in every division.

I also said that location has become more important because, you won't have access to these players if you are in a surrounded area while other teams, pretty much left alone, will.

The difference between divsions has shrinked. Either you get rid of D3 altogether and make a good D2 division or you go ahead with caps. Some D3 are already top D2 teams.

It's on topic (at least what the topic should be), but the cart is before the horse. This is classic question begging. Why is it a problem? Who is harmed by top D3 teams now having higher overall ratings? Are you beating sims by more points? Why is that bad? Are you beating new players by more points? If that's a real problem, what are you doing to help those new players understand that they have access to the same players you're getting?

The gap between top veteran D3 dynasties and the teams available to completely new players has always been very wide. Instituting division caps isn't going to fix that. It's just going to decrease the pool of recruits available for everyone at that level, forcing new players to try to compete with veterans for the same recruits, thereby putting a premium on experience and location - which is only going to help established dynasties.

I am telling the gap has increased, location is more important than it was before and the difference between D2 and D3 has shrinked. It is intuitive but the difference shown by Benis is a starting point, one data that will be one of many that will prove what I have been telling everyone for six months. It's not good for the game and it gives gamin' the game an importance it should not have. Before a new player figures this out, he will have quit. We went from fixes to D1 and D2, D3 relatively healthy to 3.0 - D1 being the less ****** level.

How has it increased? What's the data? Overall means little in how games play out, everyone whose played a few seasons knows that. So an increase in overall is not evidence of an increasing "gap", especially when new players do functionally have access to the same level of player now, which was not remotely true before, and wouldn't be true with caps.

So answer the questions. Are you beating sims by more than previously, and why is that bad? Are you beating new players by more than previously, and if you think that's a problem, what are you doing to help them understand that they can recruit the same level of player that you have access to?

I am a new player, FWIW.

"The gap between top veteran D3 dynasties and the teams available to completely new players has always been very wide. Instituting division caps isn't going to fix that. It's just going to decrease the pool of recruits available for everyone at that level, forcing new players to try to compete with veterans for the same recruits, thereby putting a premium on experience and location - which is only going to help established dynasties." I think that is true.

I would not want the cap zorzii is talking about, it would take away one of the ways I have to try to compete with established coaches.

As for the OP, HD3.0 is different from HD2.0 -- so what? I'm not playing HD2.0.

"Overall means little in how games play out, everyone whose played a few seasons knows that."

It means LITTLE? All right, now you're just being intentionally argumentative. Yes, it's not the best way to evaluate teams, everyone does know this. But to say it means little isn't accurate. If my team is 650 overall and your team is 520, then my team is A LOT better. It's not even close.

Teams coached by users who know how to play have better teams than before and therefore the gap is now wider.

Posted by Benis on 6/22/2017 6:04:00 AM (view original):
"Overall means little in how games play out, everyone whose played a few seasons knows that."

It means LITTLE? All right, now you're just being intentionally argumentative. Yes, it's not the best way to evaluate teams, everyone does know this. But to say it means little isn't accurate. If my team is 650 overall and your team is 520, then my team is A LOT better. It's not even close.

Teams coached by users who know how to play have better teams than before and therefore the gap is now wider.

Exactly. DeBeque : Do not worry, it would only enhance your experience. D3 recruiting is boring.

Or it would make the experience worse. Veteran users beat new users regardless of the rules/guidelines. FACT!!!

Posted by Benis on 6/22/2017 6:04:00 AM (view original):
"Overall means little in how games play out, everyone whose played a few seasons knows that."

It means LITTLE? All right, now you're just being intentionally argumentative. Yes, it's not the best way to evaluate teams, everyone does know this. But to say it means little isn't accurate. If my team is 650 overall and your team is 520, then my team is A LOT better. It's not even close.

Teams coached by users who know how to play have better teams than before and therefore the gap is now wider.

It means little in how games play out. That's accurate. What matters in how games play out are the core ratings of the players getting the bulk of the minutes; the matchups; and the game plans. A 520 team with 6 seniors sitting at 70+ cores and A IQ getting 75% of the minutes can be competitive with your 650 OVR team. A run of the mill new player led team isn't likely to be competitive with your team regardless of whether your OVR is 600 or 650. S/he isn't going to care whether you win by 40 or 50 points.

Right now, that new player can, if they are observant and clever (or if they have a mentor) figure out ways to start recruiting the same caliber player you have access to. And because that pool is huge, they can do it without bumping in to, or having to compete with you. Previously, an A+ team had access to a much larger pool of much better players than that new player. Instituting caps would effectively move us much closer to the old style. It reduces the pool by ~2/3. Who is that going to benefit? The established dynasties with large prestige advantages.