Posted by Benis on 10/7/2017 8:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by davefilby on 10/7/2017 7:41:00 PM (view original):
So the player in question was the #50 ranked PG, outside the top 300 overall. The other players GA Tech recruited this cycle were two 5 stars and a 4 star, for the 15th ranked class so far. If I were a D-II team and familiar with the quality of players stewdog typically recruits, i might've made a run at the player. As the coach at Missouri, I DID make a run at him. 60 AP, a schollie, a CV and 20 minutes which got me ..... to Very Low.

The guy is a PG prospect, but isn't a flawless player.

Not much of a run..

I agree, I didn't get much into him before he signed (and I decided to allocate my resources elsewhere and shoot higher, my effort was basically my leftover money and you can't take it with you). But I wouldn't have tried at all if A+ GA Tech had gotten to High entering the second session. And I'd bet the D-II school would've bailed too.

In this situation, even if all that GA Tech had offered was a scholarship and nothing else, he should have been 95%+ favorites, regardless of how much the DII team had put in. You want to have some small chance of a DII winning a competition like that to account for the odd recruit who wants to play for his uncle or something weird like that, fine. With the amount of effort put in in this case, it should be 99.9%+.
It was bad enough how many players left after the switch - to some extent that will always happen with a major chance, but the top short beta and complete lack of support post beta made it much worse than it should have been. Now, though, even coaches who have given it a legit shot and had great success in 3.0 are leaving. I love this game and want it to continue. I have hope again now that it has been bought out, as seble does care about the game, but unless changes are made to fix some of the glaring issues, the populations will continue hemorrhaging. 2.0 had issues and definitely needed updating, and was slowly losing players, and many of the ideas and changes in 3.0 had merit and some were good. Overall though, the update has made the game much worse, if for no other reason than that the number of players and level of competition has been so drastically reduced.

Posted by mullycj on 10/7/2017 9:05:00 PM (view original):
This coming from the guy who says he wants human competition. LMAO
It's these empty worlds that make you mediocre coaches think you are the sh&t.

Feel free to look at my schedules. I play as many humans as possible and have never turned down a challenge.

As for "mediocre" or "the sh&t", I'm neither. I just play the game that's presented to me rather than ***** and moan that the game isn't what I want it to be. This forum is populated with entitled users who think their wishes should be granted without question.

Posted by chapelhillne on 10/7/2017 12:07:00 PM (view original):
I agree totally with Stewdog. I think this is really hurting the game. It's a big reason I am cutting down from a high of 10 teams (every world). For those that say it is not good for the game for a team to go to the final 4 75% of the time, it's not because the game is causing those teams to go there. It is because Stewdog is a great coach. So, he is basically being punished because he is a good recruiter. Every coach has the same chance to build a good program, and ones that are able to do it should not be punished. For those that have not been able to do it, the idea is to study how to be a better recruiter and game planner so that you can get to that level, not bring the successful coaches down. I still do not know what the solution is totally, but a start would be to make D1 teams much more powerful than D2 teams. It would not be nearly so frustrating to lose to a lower level D1 team.

Here is an easy change they could make to this game that would alleviate much of the problem discussed above plus help address the poor retention of new coaches that sign up to play this game: Make it so D2 teams cannot recruit players that are rated in the top 100 at their position. Make it so D3 cannot recruit D1 players at all.

D2 teams will still be able to get players much better than they got in the old 2.0 version. Sleepers studs can still slip down to D2.

The other big thing for D1 is that the top 100 by position players that do not get recruited by humans belong on D1 sim teams. Look at how bad some of the power conference D1 sim coached teams are. A lot of these teams have 3 or 4 walkons or more. These top 100 players belong on those teams and other D1 sim teams--not a D2 team.

Recruiting in D3 will not be as complicated as it is now having 3 levels of players lists to wade through when you first start and have no idea what you are doing. The D3 game is a joke right now where through 7 days of 2 recruiting sessions you can only sign the players you need to compete for a NT in the last 24 hours of the 168 hour recruiting marathon. I can totally see how somebody new signing up for HD would be easily discouraged and not feel like continuing to play the game.

It has now been a few months since seble and his group have taken over WIS. You should now have your new employees in place. It is time to start making some necessary SMALL changes to HD. Please consider this simple change above as well as allowing us to see ALL of the teams a recruit is considered by--not just the top 10 alphabetically. Simple changes. Not 1\2 year complex re-writing of the whole game that requires beta testing. Maybe I am naive to computer programming but it seems to me you could make those 2 simple changes in a week or less.

Not complaining - just another data point.

Just lost to the thewizard's D2 team on a dice roll with my D1 team. 58-42 . I blew my budget already and lost two other dice rolls this recruiting so I only had APs and promises.

Well said bofreedom. I agree with everything you said.

Posted by Benis on 10/8/2017 8:21:00 AM (view original):
Well said bofreedom. I agree with everything you said.

+1

Or you could remove D1/D2/D3 designations for prospects. Turns D3 into a "local" game(as it probably should be). At W Conn St-Smith, there are 398 recruits, D1-D3, in NY/CT. That's almost 6K just to find them. At $200 average to scout them up to L4, D3 schools are burning thru their money pretty damn quick.

D2 would have to tighten their range up as well.

That's probably a simple fix and should eliminate a lot of the D3/D2 vs D1 issues.

But wouldn't the D3 schools still continue to go after D1 recruits, since there would be no designation, or are you saying to put a cap on who the top recruits would talk to. I think that's a good idea. The designations might help new players. Or perhaps they could have designations like this
D3
D2-3
D1-2
D1

There would be no D1 recruits. The 398 I mentioned previously was all levels in NY/CT.

I've said for about a year that I'd like specific recruits to refuse recruiting from D2/D3 schools. That way the lower level schools aren't wasting resources. It would help n00bs as they would be incapable of "over-reaching". I forget exactly what I proposed but it was something like this:
Top 50 at all positions would be exclusively D1(D2/D3 cannot scout them)
Top 125 at all positions would be D1/D2(D3 cannot scout them)

All others are fair game.

That said, I imagine some D1 users would have a problem with it. First, they'd be using scouting money on players they'd never recruit. While it would take a D3 team almost 6k to scout those 398, it would also apply to D1 schools. They would have to fine tune how they scout and, judging from the forums, more than a few don't want to change how they do things. Second, that same group wants their fallback options available until the final gun. D2/D3 teams would be signing player in the first session and those special folks would not like that.

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/8/2017 9:45:00 AM (view original):
That said, I imagine some D1 users would have a problem with it. First, they'd be using scouting money on players they'd never recruit. While it would take a D3 team almost 6k to scout those 398, it would also apply to D1 schools. They would have to fine tune how they scout and, judging from the forums, more than a few don't want to change how they do things. Second, that same group wants their fallback options available until the final gun. D2/D3 teams would be signing player in the first session and those special folks would not like that.

D1 teams have more money than they could ever possibly need to scout, so no issue with that budget. It would, however, be a nuisance to have to sort through more players you have 0 interest in once you're done scouting, which really isn't a big deal.

A more palatable solution for the chronic complainers might be to remove the level designations and give D1 a day of exclusive recruiting. Then start D2 the next day and finally let D3 start the following day.

No idea why Seble dumbed down the recruiting by removing the pull downs and drop downs of the previous version.

The "previous version" was rotting on the vine.