Sick and tired of being sick and tired Topic

zhawks
Posts: 881 (0)
Hall of Famer
208 66 38
Pro
Moy how can you make an argument based on TV deals? Coverage? Really? Its the top prestige conferences that get the most coverage IRL, agreed? So since I have gotten a non-BCS conference to the #2 conference prestige, that would mean they were getting the #2 coverage, correct? So how is what we are saying not make sense? If you are going to make arguments that we can (somewhat) reflect in terms of HD then your argument breaks down there. You are going to argue NT bids as well ? Well that is something else we can track in HD and if that isn't the case why does the team / conference deserve to be propped up?
3/21/2010 12:16 PM
dalter
Posts: 71 (0)
All Star
25
Prospect
Your upper management point is totally weird and befuddling to me. I have no idea what you're trying to say there. I guess your message is that you think BCS teams should have large, inherent perks?

There have been plenty of changes since 2003 (Big East comes to mind, Memphis coming in as a power, etc. etc.) But the landscape of college hoops is constantly evolving -- in 2015 and 2020 and 2025 it will be more and more different -- and we're going to be tethered to 2003 forever. It doesn't make sense.
3/21/2010 12:19 PM
moy23
Posts: 13754 (0)
Hall of Famer
2 57 251 112
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 3/21/2010Moy how can you make an argument based on TV deals? Coverage? Really? Its the top prestige conferences that get the most coverage IRL, agreed? So since I have gotten a non-BCS conference to the #2 conference prestige, that would mean they were getting the #2 coverage, correct? So how is what we are saying not make sense? If you are going to make arguments that we can (somewhat) reflect in terms of HD then your argument breaks down there. You are going to argue NT bids as well ? Well that is something else we can track in HD and if that isn't the case why does the team / conference deserve to be propped up
It does and it is... they have raised their conf to higher prestiges individually and collectively. Not as high as UI, Stanford, UK, Florida etc. On a macro scale - has Montana's conf outperformed the ACC, SEC, etc for 20 seasons?

lets roll with a 20 year baseline in HD. Montana still does not have any NCs and still very few NBA draft picks. they have had success but even going back 20 years they are not an A+ like the 6 teams I showed you in Rupp. Prestige is only good for recruiting in HD - so why would a top recruit consider Montana over schools with long histories of NCs and NBA selections?
3/21/2010 1:16 PM
moy23
Posts: 13754 (0)
Hall of Famer
2 57 251 112
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 3/21/2010

Your upper management point is totally weird and befuddling to me. I have no idea what you're trying to say there. I guess your message is that you think BCS teams should have large, inherent perks?

There have been plenty of changes since 2003 (Big East comes to mind, Memphis coming in as a power, etc. etc.) But the landscape of college hoops is constantly evolving -- in 2015 and 2020 and 2025 it will be more and more different -- and we're going to be tethered to 2003 forever. It doesn't make sense.




From an HD gaming perspective and how its users think about the game - the NCAA is the same as it was in 2003 on a macro level - only 7 years ago. The BCS confs get all the glory in 2010. If you want newbies to join and work their way up I believe its best to somewhat simulate this despite the 40 seasons some worlds have played. Changing this would seem to beg "Whats the point of getting a Duke job when it's the same or worse than a Montana job?"

While we are at it since only success matters in HD and RL doesn't - lets just name the schools whatever we want. I'll be the Mighty Keggers - no city needed.

My point about management is yes - there are perks to the BCS schools - there are also downsides. Why ***** about the perks in order to take them away when you can just work to get to one of those schools? If you want floating baselines regardless of preset confs then play in DII. Its not like Montana is a dream school for you. I could be Bemidji St and you'd have what you are looking for.
3/21/2010 1:22 PM
zhawks
Posts: 881 (0)
Hall of Famer
208 66 38
Pro
Moy, how often would Montana be better then Duke? 1 out of 10 worlds? The big schools will still attract the best coaches, just like in real life.
3/21/2010 1:24 PM
moy23
Posts: 13754 (0)
Hall of Famer
2 57 251 112
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 3/21/2010
Moy, how often would Montana be better then Duke? 1 out of 10 worlds? The big schools will still attract the best coaches, just like in real life.
Not always true - Why would you leave a Montana at A- to go to Duke as a C when you know they have no inherent perks due to baseline or conf? The best coaches may not be at the Elite 8 teams anymore.

Also - Its not like my Marquette A- prestige or combalts Delaware A- filled when we . I bet you Montana doesn't either when dalt leaves.
3/21/2010 1:26 PM
dalter
Posts: 71 (0)
All Star
25
Prospect
First, people are inherently drawn to the big name/BCS schools regardless of how crappy they are. You'll see a sim-ravaged, C prestige BCS school get grabbed 10x before a B prestige low/mid is grabbed once. The notion that leveling the playing field a bit more would take away the attractiveness of the power conferences is pretty much a joke.

And beyond that, why can't on-court performance decide who the power conferences are. Again, I still have yet to hear a legitimate argument as to why we should be tethered to 2003 real-life prestige and why it's more important than actual on-court performance.

And please stop with the NBA draft pick thing. Until they change the current system that takes the overwhelming percentage of draft picks from BCS schools, it's just not a fair comparison or point to even attempt to make.

What is a fair point imo is that recruits would be pretty damn excited about going to a school that makes the NT every season, consistently makes deep runs, plays a great non-con schedule and is in a top-notch conference. All else being equal, none of the other schools in our area should be as attractive to a recruit as we are right now.
3/21/2010 1:28 PM
moy23
Posts: 13754 (0)
Hall of Famer
2 57 251 112
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 3/21/2010

First, people are inherently drawn to the big name/BCS schools regardless of how crappy they are. You'll see a sim-ravaged, C prestige BCS school get grabbed 10x before a B prestige low/mid is grabbed once. The notion that leveling the playing field a bit more would take away the attractiveness of the power conferences is pretty much a joke.

And beyond that, why can't on-court performance di

And please stop with the NBA draft pick thing. Until they change the current system that takes the overwhelming percentage of draft picks from BCS schools, it's just not a fair comparison or point to even attempt to make.

What is a fair point imo is that recruits would be pretty damn excited about going to a school that makes the NT every season, consistently makes deep runs, plays a great non-con schedule and is in a top-notch conference. All else being equal, none of the other schools in our area should be as attractive to a recruit as we are right now.

tell that to the zaga's and George Masons etc of the world. The elite recruits usually end up in the BCS confs. The 4 stars would be delighted to go to Montana... and if you recruit well enough the 5 stars.
3/21/2010 1:30 PM
moy23
Posts: 13754 (0)
Hall of Famer
2 57 251 112
Prospect
I landed 3 of the top 10 OVERALL rated recruits at Marquette my first season there - I want to say I was a C prestige. It can be done.
3/21/2010 1:32 PM
zhawks
Posts: 881 (0)
Hall of Famer
208 66 38
Pro
This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.
3/21/2010 1:33 PM
dalter
Posts: 71 (0)
All Star
25
Prospect
George Mason? They literally had one good season, nothing before or since. They are not a part of this conversation.

Gonzaga, on the other hand, has signed alot of big-time talent and beat out Pac-10, Big 12 and Big Ten schools for the majority of the guys on their roster over the last few seasons.

And even with that said ... Gonzaga hasn't had anywhere close to the success that Montana has had. The real comparison would be teams that have been ***-kicking top 5 and 10 teams with numerous deep runs, like Memphis under Calipari. And yeah, I'd say they signed top-level talent.
3/21/2010 1:34 PM
zhawks
Posts: 881 (0)
Hall of Famer
208 66 38
Pro
Quote: Originally posted by moy23 on 3/21/2010I landed 3 of the top 10 OVERALL rated recruits at Marquette my first season there - I want to say I was a C prestige.  It can be done.

Again, moy i don't know what you are trying to argue, we all know that it can be done, we aren't saying the recruiting process is broken here at all we are speaking directly of the prestige system.
3/21/2010 1:35 PM
moy23
Posts: 13754 (0)
Hall of Famer
2 57 251 112
Prospect
This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.
3/21/2010 1:35 PM
lostmyth2
Posts: 2 (0)
Hall of Famer
191 3 2
Prospect
Quote: Originally posted by dalter on 3/21/2010P]And please stop with the NBA draft pick thing. Until they change the current system that takes the overwhelming percentage of draft picks from BCS schools, it's just not a fair comparison or point to even attempt to make.

The overwhelming percentage of draft picks comes from BCS schools because the overwhelming percentage of draft-worthy players come from BCS schools. The name or the conference a school is in has nothing, or close to nothing, to do with whether a player is drafted in WIS.
3/21/2010 1:36 PM
moy23
Posts: 13754 (0)
Hall of Famer
2 57 251 112
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 3/21/2010

George Mason? They literally had one good season, nothing before or since. They are not a part of this conversation.

Gonzaga, on the other hand, has signed alot of big-time talent and beat out Pac-10, Big 12 and Big Ten schools for the majority of the guys on their roster over the last few seasons.

And even with that said ... Gonzaga hasn't had anywhere close to the success that Montana has had. The real comparison would be teams that have been ***-kicking top 5 and 10 teams with numerous deep runs, like Memphis under Calipari. And yeah, I'd say they signed top-level talent.

better than duke, MD, UNC, UCLA, etc on a down year? I don't think so. And how many of those zaga or Memphis players are in the Pros now... compared with the teams I've mentioned.
3/21/2010 1:37 PM
◂ Prev 1...3|4|5|6|7...10 Next ▸
Sick and tired of being sick and tired Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.