To be honest, if this goes live, I might just end up leaving UCLA because I've never used the baseline aspect of my school in my 50+ seasons and all this does is make my job harder than the other schools around me.

I can likely go to a different school, raise that schools prestige to A+ (like I did at OSU consistently) and not have the onerous requirement tied to me. Maybe if A+ prestige would mean a lot more than it does today, but I routinely lose 5 star recruits to B prestige schools every season (even doing 20 HVs/CV) so even a full grade of prestige isn't very helpful in this present environment.

Posted by buddhagamer on 5/27/2021 3:04:00 PM (view original):
To be honest, if this goes live, I might just end up leaving UCLA because I've never used the baseline aspect of my school in my 50+ seasons and all this does is make my job harder than the other schools around me.

I can likely go to a different school, raise that schools prestige to A+ (like I did at OSU consistently) and not have the onerous requirement tied to me. Maybe if A+ prestige would mean a lot more than it does today, but I routinely lose 5 star recruits to B prestige schools every season (even doing 20 HVs/CV) so even a full grade of prestige isn't very helpful in this present environment.

Very good point.

Posted by A_B_G on 5/27/2021 2:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 5/27/2021 1:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by A_B_G on 5/27/2021 12:44:00 PM (view original):
I like the changes a lot, like others have said I may have minor quibbles with the exact criteria but I think the overall spirit of it is great.

The minor edit I'd make: I think the windows should be pushed to 5 seasons, personally. That gives you one rebuilding year to clear out the garbage Sim AI or inactive coach left behind and then that next season in Recruiting Period 1 you'll recruit your first full Freshman class. If you can't get that class/team to where it needs to be by the time they are Seniors, then I think firing is totally justified.

All in all I love this change though. Also I've noticed while skimming this thread that nobody has said "if these rules were in place now I'd be fired from my school" just a lot of hypothetical "Oh I took over this school and now I'm worried" which is a fine, rational complaint and worry but I truly wonder how many people are going to lose jobs over this. I think the number will be quite low.

I would have been fired at UConn, twice, before it got to the sweet 16 after taking over a team in shambles. New England recruiting had been totally dominated by some no-named yahoo coach in Vermont (just kidding joey) and the Big East was mostly full, with UConn at or near the bottom at the time, had undergone a bunch of coaching changes after the 3.0 release and was sim run. Rebuilds in full power conferences are *very hard* and you’d have to be insane to try it under these conditions, knowing you’ll probably just be wasting 4 seasons and all the money you’ve spent on them just to get your #1 ranked, #1 seed slowdown-negative5-doubleteamed out of the second round in season 4 (even if everything else goes perfectly). So in the end, you’re basically just building the team for the next guy (probably ab90, let’s be honest).

This is going to be such a fun, collegial atmosphere, once live.

Do you think in real life that an AD at a school that has Top Tier prestige would wait around 8 years for a team to get to a S16? I don't.

And I'm not saying you're a bad coach, you're a great coach. It is a challenge to be sure, but baseline prestige exists to help those big-name schools. So basically to me, it seems like a handful of coaches are suggesting they want to reap the benefits of baseline prestige but not have to deal with any consequences or expectations that baseline prestige may bring.

I think the concept would be more palatable, if it was reasonable. A reasonable concept would be floating expectations based on actual prestige, rather than baseline. That still factors in the baseline, since high baseline prestige teams tend to eventually move toward A anyway (that’s the point, right?). But Illinois in Phelan for example, which had been ghosted and is now at basically the same spot UConn was for me, shouldn’t have any expectations until they get to the B level. And at that point, then the AD comes in and starts the ball rolling along 3rd tier, moving the goals up as the team gets better. Expecting them to go from 0-27 in a full B10 to making the S16 in year 4 is downright absurd - it is here, and it would be in real life.

Posted by fd343ny on 5/27/2021 2:23:00 PM (view original):
I've just posted a link to this thread in lots of conference chats in Crum and Naismith. Urge others to post in other words

Thanks fd, I had the same thought, and started doing that, too.

I like this change. Put some pressure on people. Four thoughts/suggestions:

1. I think it should be made more challenging for Tier I and Tier II baseline programs. Like for Tier I, an E8 every 4 years. A Tier II, a S16 every 4 years. You want to be at UNC? You'd better win. A lot.
2. If you get to an A+ (or maybe even A) current prestige at any point, you get treated like a Tier I school as long as you are at the school. Win a natty at LSU, LSU is now Tier I until you leave LSU. This would fix the baseline prestige issue -- I'm at LSU in Knight and Texas in Naismith now, I can stay there forever if all I have to do is make 1 NT every 4 years.
3. All big 6 conference schools, including B- baseline, should be in Tier III.
4. The "total rebuild" point is fair. One way to solve that is that the 4-year clock shouldn't start until the school's current prestige is at B (or maybe B-, I could be convinced either way).

Why isn't conference titles, etc. factored in?

I think people need to remember that some of us only coach one team and don't have credits flying in from 10 different teams and we pay for our one team and have a good time. But to start losing our teams because we get unlucky in the NT or on dice rolls for recruiting?

This is a great idea to have coaches held accountable for success at the D1 level long term....but where are the fixes to recruiting?

I like changes but as some have mentioned would there be a buffer time for taking over schools in the tier list where the sim has 7 PFs and tank the prestige to D-? Because taking over one of those school in a loaded conference expected battle to top talent recruits and to make it to the requirement listed could cause some issues and frustration.

Posted by adlorenz on 5/26/2021 3:03:00 PM (view original):
So with the D1 jobs process opening up, we would like to create some accountability for the top jobs and baseline prestige schools to ensure these jobs aren’t just camped. The goal of this change is to start with what might seem like easy requirements, but we used average data of the tiers to generate these initial requirements, so while these should be attainable there will inevitably be folks that don’t hit the objective. If this doesn’t create the desired result we then can ramp the requirements up or down based on how it goes. Because there is no smooth way to integrate this, teams will have the full 4 seasons from today to attain these goals and the patch will go live which may result in some firings in either the November or December patch.

Teams in 2 games a day worlds will get a little bit of a longer leash since the code cannot be versioned between worlds which means the coaches in these worlds will have to ensure the goals are hit in their last 4 seasons, until the November/December timeline to attain the goal as well.

The requirements will be postseason tournament based, RPI & rank will have no impact on this, (meaning yes you could be at Syracuse be ranked #1 and lose in the 2nd round, 4 straight years and get fired. At the end of the day the ranking systems can be manipulated so we would rather focus on postseason performance and this will create some additional pressure in the tournament.

The tiers are based on baseline prestige and even in some of the dire rebuild projects are attainable.We my eventually add some smarter logic and adjust some school's baseline prestige, but I wanted these to be as black and white as possible so there is no confusion or debate, and so we can continue to gather more information.

Requirements:

Highest Tier: For the following teams, they will be expected to make the Sweet Sixteen once every four seasons.

Arizona
UCLA
UConn
Duke
Illinois
Kansas
Kentucky
Michigan State
UNC
Syracuse
Maryland

Next Tier: For the following teams, they will be expected to make the Round of 32 once every four seasons.

NC State
Oklahoma
Stanford
Indiana
Florida
Georgetown
Georgia Tech
Cincinnati
Boston College
Wake Forest
Wisconsin
Villanova
Virginia
Arkansas
Tennessee
Pittsburgh
Purdue
Ohio State University

Last Tier: For the following teams, they will be expected to make the National Tournament once every four seasons

Oregon
Oregon State
Oklahoma State
Notre Dame
UNLV
Marquette
Memphis
Miami
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Mississippi State
Missouri
Providence
Seton Hall
South Carolina
University of Southern California (USC)
Texas A&M
Texas Tech
Texas
Temple
St. John’s
St. Joseph’s
Arizona State University
Auburn
Alabama
Dayton
Depaul
Cal
Clemson
Gonzaga
Georgia
Florida State
Iowa
Iowa State
LSU
Utah
Washington
Washington State
Vanderbilt
Virginia Tech
West Virginia
Xavier

I like this concept. Yes I would be willing to leave some of my teams to apply for those challenging jobs. Maybe just to accomplish it for a time then move on for someone else to try to keep it going. If coaches are struggling to make the grade then I highly recommend reaching out to some of the mentors. Chapel, cub, Oldwarrior, and others have helped me grow my game. They can do the same for you!

Another idea to solve the issue of taking over a complete rebuild that is on the list w/ expectations, is that the expectations are waived until the school prestige reaches C (or whatever an appropriate level is)

Posted by A_B_G on 5/27/2021 2:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 5/27/2021 1:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by A_B_G on 5/27/2021 12:44:00 PM (view original):
I like the changes a lot, like others have said I may have minor quibbles with the exact criteria but I think the overall spirit of it is great.

The minor edit I'd make: I think the windows should be pushed to 5 seasons, personally. That gives you one rebuilding year to clear out the garbage Sim AI or inactive coach left behind and then that next season in Recruiting Period 1 you'll recruit your first full Freshman class. If you can't get that class/team to where it needs to be by the time they are Seniors, then I think firing is totally justified.

All in all I love this change though. Also I've noticed while skimming this thread that nobody has said "if these rules were in place now I'd be fired from my school" just a lot of hypothetical "Oh I took over this school and now I'm worried" which is a fine, rational complaint and worry but I truly wonder how many people are going to lose jobs over this. I think the number will be quite low.

I would have been fired at UConn, twice, before it got to the sweet 16 after taking over a team in shambles. New England recruiting had been totally dominated by some no-named yahoo coach in Vermont (just kidding joey) and the Big East was mostly full, with UConn at or near the bottom at the time, had undergone a bunch of coaching changes after the 3.0 release and was sim run. Rebuilds in full power conferences are *very hard* and you’d have to be insane to try it under these conditions, knowing you’ll probably just be wasting 4 seasons and all the money you’ve spent on them just to get your #1 ranked, #1 seed slowdown-negative5-doubleteamed out of the second round in season 4 (even if everything else goes perfectly). So in the end, you’re basically just building the team for the next guy (probably ab90, let’s be honest).

This is going to be such a fun, collegial atmosphere, once live.

Do you think in real life that an AD at a school that has Top Tier prestige would wait around 8 years for a team to get to a S16? I don't.

And I'm not saying you're a bad coach, you're a great coach. It is a challenge to be sure, but baseline prestige exists to help those big-name schools. So basically to me, it seems like a handful of coaches are suggesting they want to reap the benefits of baseline prestige but not have to deal with any consequences or expectations that baseline prestige may bring.

the real life comparison breaks down because rebuilding in real life and HD are pretty different. HD does not have 1 and done caliber freshman, exceptional coaching holds less weight, the list goes on and on. the requirements for HD coaches should be based on what makes sense in HD.

in the old days, we used to say that a good coach can rebuild any program in 2 seasons. and it was true. but now its 3, due to RS2 and all that fun stuff (3.0), and its really a much less guaranteed outcome. for example, i took over a decent B prestige low major in a power low major conf (a significantly easier proposition than taking over a C prestige low end BCS school) and my team is squarely in rebuild mode for the first 3 seasons. i could have easily missed the NT the first 3 years, i didn't, but very possible, and the roster i took over was far from as bad as it gets. having my ability to stay at that school based purely on how things go that 4th season... is on its face a ridiculous proposition. it turns out, even if this was a school with requirements, i'd be fine - but that's part because i'm a top coach and part because i have a quality major battle dice roll record of 3-2 right now. *so* easily i could be still digging out in season 4, if the dice had rolled against me. just seems insane to fire someone else for failing to get it done in 4 seasons, from this end, when they could have twice the mountain to climb compared to what i just went through.

Posted by johnsensing on 5/27/2021 3:23:00 PM (view original):
I like this change. Put some pressure on people. Four thoughts/suggestions:

1. I think it should be made more challenging for Tier I and Tier II baseline programs. Like for Tier I, an E8 every 4 years. A Tier II, a S16 every 4 years. You want to be at UNC? You'd better win. A lot.
2. If you get to an A+ (or maybe even A) current prestige at any point, you get treated like a Tier I school as long as you are at the school. Win a natty at LSU, LSU is now Tier I until you leave LSU. This would fix the baseline prestige issue -- I'm at LSU in Knight and Texas in Naismith now, I can stay there forever if all I have to do is make 1 NT every 4 years.
3. All big 6 conference schools, including B- baseline, should be in Tier III.
4. The "total rebuild" point is fair. One way to solve that is that the 4-year clock shouldn't start until the school's current prestige is at B (or maybe B-, I could be convinced either way).

You, sir, are a masochist. Lol. I think your last point has a few possible flaws. For example, I just took over a school that currently has a B prestige but also 8 walk-ons. We're going to win 1 game this season (no idea how that 1 win happened), and the prestige will surely take a nose dive. Does the clock reset when it goes below B?

What if a coach takes over a lower P6 (Like Fresno, Notre Dame, etc) school and never makes it to B? Or it takes 20 seasons for them to get there? They probably shouldn't be rewarded for their lack of success with an extra long leash.

There have been a lot of good suggestions, but I think a simple 6 seasons might be the best answer. Or maybe 6 seasons for tier 1 and 2, and 8 seasons for tier 3? Any way you slice it, some jobs are now going to be more attractive than others. It's going to be much easier to meet that 1 NT requirement at mid-majors like Dayton rather than Fresno St.

i am honestly fine with john's point - a sweet 16 every 4 seasons is on average a **** poor performance for an established A+ baseline program. its just that 4 seasons is a short time from a luck / dice roll standpoint. and that its insane to apply those same standards to fresh coaches at rebuilds.

Posted by snewell12 on 5/27/2021 8:51:00 AM (view original):
I am not completely against job firing; However, this has several flaws people have pointed out already - the most glaring is taking on a rebuild of one of these schools. I've always welcomed a challenge of building a program and I am a huge Razorback fan so I took over Arkansas in Naismith, Wooden, and Iba all as major rebuilds with stacked competition and it took me 10 and 7 seasons respectively to meet this criteria in Naismith and Wooden. I am in season 6 in Iba and have not met the criteria yet...who will want to take on a major rebuild in the major conferences without some longer grace period? As someone pointed out, you are asking for your own death sentence. So you can count me out under these rules!!

This problem is easily solved. If State University drops below its baseline prestige (likely operated by Sim AI) and you take State U to rebuild it, the firing criteria takes effect from the 1st season the program is leveled back to baseline prestige.

If you want to rebuild, great. But the program expectations don’t disappear once built.

Posted by gillispie on 5/27/2021 4:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by A_B_G on 5/27/2021 2:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 5/27/2021 1:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by A_B_G on 5/27/2021 12:44:00 PM (view original):
I like the changes a lot, like others have said I may have minor quibbles with the exact criteria but I think the overall spirit of it is great.

The minor edit I'd make: I think the windows should be pushed to 5 seasons, personally. That gives you one rebuilding year to clear out the garbage Sim AI or inactive coach left behind and then that next season in Recruiting Period 1 you'll recruit your first full Freshman class. If you can't get that class/team to where it needs to be by the time they are Seniors, then I think firing is totally justified.

All in all I love this change though. Also I've noticed while skimming this thread that nobody has said "if these rules were in place now I'd be fired from my school" just a lot of hypothetical "Oh I took over this school and now I'm worried" which is a fine, rational complaint and worry but I truly wonder how many people are going to lose jobs over this. I think the number will be quite low.

I would have been fired at UConn, twice, before it got to the sweet 16 after taking over a team in shambles. New England recruiting had been totally dominated by some no-named yahoo coach in Vermont (just kidding joey) and the Big East was mostly full, with UConn at or near the bottom at the time, had undergone a bunch of coaching changes after the 3.0 release and was sim run. Rebuilds in full power conferences are *very hard* and you’d have to be insane to try it under these conditions, knowing you’ll probably just be wasting 4 seasons and all the money you’ve spent on them just to get your #1 ranked, #1 seed slowdown-negative5-doubleteamed out of the second round in season 4 (even if everything else goes perfectly). So in the end, you’re basically just building the team for the next guy (probably ab90, let’s be honest).

This is going to be such a fun, collegial atmosphere, once live.

Do you think in real life that an AD at a school that has Top Tier prestige would wait around 8 years for a team to get to a S16? I don't.

And I'm not saying you're a bad coach, you're a great coach. It is a challenge to be sure, but baseline prestige exists to help those big-name schools. So basically to me, it seems like a handful of coaches are suggesting they want to reap the benefits of baseline prestige but not have to deal with any consequences or expectations that baseline prestige may bring.

the real life comparison breaks down because rebuilding in real life and HD are pretty different. HD does not have 1 and done caliber freshman, exceptional coaching holds less weight, the list goes on and on. the requirements for HD coaches should be based on what makes sense in HD.

in the old days, we used to say that a good coach can rebuild any program in 2 seasons. and it was true. but now its 3, due to RS2 and all that fun stuff (3.0), and its really a much less guaranteed outcome. for example, i took over a decent B prestige low major in a power low major conf (a significantly easier proposition than taking over a C prestige low end BCS school) and my team is squarely in rebuild mode for the first 3 seasons. i could have easily missed the NT the first 3 years, i didn't, but very possible, and the roster i took over was far from as bad as it gets. having my ability to stay at that school based purely on how things go that 4th season... is on its face a ridiculous proposition. it turns out, even if this was a school with requirements, i'd be fine - but that's part because i'm a top coach and part because i have a quality major battle dice roll record of 3-2 right now. *so* easily i could be still digging out in season 4, if the dice had rolled against me. just seems insane to fire someone else for failing to get it done in 4 seasons, from this end, when they could have twice the mountain to climb compared to what i just went through.

I mentioned in my earlier comment that 4 is too low and I think it should be 5 seasons to increase the time so we’re in agreement there.

I also think it would make more sense to have total NT appearances/wins versus making it to a certain round which feels a bit trickier and more arbitrary. But shoe was talking about not doing it in 8 seasons at UConn... 8 seasons is a decently long time. Again, shoe is a great coach and had some outside circumstances but if we want firings we gotta draw the line somewhere

Posted by craigaltonw on 5/27/2021 4:35:00 PM (view original):

Posted by snewell12 on 5/27/2021 8:51:00 AM (view original):
I am not completely against job firing; However, this has several flaws people have pointed out already - the most glaring is taking on a rebuild of one of these schools. I've always welcomed a challenge of building a program and I am a huge Razorback fan so I took over Arkansas in Naismith, Wooden, and Iba all as major rebuilds with stacked competition and it took me 10 and 7 seasons respectively to meet this criteria in Naismith and Wooden. I am in season 6 in Iba and have not met the criteria yet...who will want to take on a major rebuild in the major conferences without some longer grace period? As someone pointed out, you are asking for your own death sentence. So you can count me out under these rules!!

This problem is easily solved. If State University drops below its baseline prestige (likely operated by Sim AI) and you take State U to rebuild it, the firing criteria takes effect from the 1st season the program is leveled back to baseline prestige.

If you want to rebuild, great. But the program expectations don’t disappear once built.

I agree with this. Allow for the rebuild/clearing out of the sim trash then let this criteria kick in once you reach your base. As shoe stated it shouldn't take too long to get back to base with your recruits.