It's now reached the point where Don Meyer cites alblack as one of his inspirations.

Quote: Originally Posted By daalter on 2/11/2010It's now reached the point where Don Meyer cites alblack as one of his inspirations.

LOL...that's a good one~

I personally am playing for the free seasons. I earned a couple with my NT, which I earned while playing on a free season. I currently have 2 free seasons ahead of me.
I will play one more season in D2 because I think I can earn an additional free season (and have a shot at another F4) and I don't want to face a higher marginal tax rate the following season.
So, after next season I will jump to D1 and hopefully have at least 2 free seasons to play with there. My plan is to start earning free seasons again soon afterward. I personally get a lot of satisfaction knowing that the people in D-III and D-II are subsidizing those in D-I. I think Tarek created a great system there.

So I think the best solution would be to simply increase the amount of award points progressively from D3 to D1 and eliminate the tax on them at the lower levels. The reward for winning at higher levels has to be higher than at the easier levels (and D3 is provably easier). But those playing at the lower levels shouldn't be penalized more greatly for playing at D3 in season 10 than in season 1.

Quote: Originally posted by cthomas22255 on 2/11/2010I personally am playing for the free seasons. I earned a couple with my NT, which I earned while playing on a free season. I currently have 2 free seasons ahead of me.
I will play one more season in D2 because I think I can earn an additional free season (and have a shot at another F4) and I don't want to face a higher marginal tax rate the following season.
So, after next season I will jump to D1 and hopefully have at least 2 free seasons to play with there. My plan is to start earning free seasons again soon afterward. I personally get a lot of satisfaction knowing that the people in D-III and D-II are subsidizing those in D-I. I think Tarek created a great system there.

such uninformed comments. the reason you can earn free seasons is because Phelan is an utter ghost town. a chimp with a keyboard could join Phelan and make the 2nd round of the NT right now. so getting to the E8 isn't really a task

this proposal would increase the competitiveness of DIII/DII. Thus making deep NT runs MUCH harder.

I'd bet you $1000 that if you were to join Wooden DIII or Rupp DII, you would not be playing for free.

I didn't say anything about the difficulty of Phelan relative to any other world, did I? What "uninformed" comment are you referring to?

sorry, misread. theres a difference between earning free seasons (as you are doing) . . . . and the complaint that coaches will continually "play for free"

reward points are meant to be for free seasons. but many coaches and even admin say that tons of coaches would play for free, and this is absolutely untrue.

Quote: Originally posted by cthomas22255 on 2/11/2010I didn't say anything about the difficulty of Phelan relative to any other world, did I? What "uninformed" comment are you referring to?

no, sorry, i misinterpreted you initial point

and geez, STOP editing your post, you're confusing the sh*t outta me!!!

all meant in fun. i get what you were saying now. sorry.

Quote: Originally Posted By alblack56 on 2/11/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By doomey on 2/10/2010
I, on the other hand, have no problem with it. The whole point of the game is to create a D1 dynasty and having empty or near-empty D1 conferences is contrary to that goal, IMHO.

I have 8 teams, all at DII and DIII. The RL coaches I most admire are those that have spent their entire careers in the lower divisions, often at the same school. 'Big House' Gaines at Winston-Salem St. and Don Meyer at Lipscomb and Northern St. come to mind.

It's never been my intention to be a DI coach. I rather enjoy DII and DIII and have just finished my 40th season with my first team, Transylvania (DIII Iba)

That's great, al, and I have zero problem with coaches sticking it out their entire careers in lower divisions, but to argue that that entitles them to the same rewards as D1 is what I take issue with. There are great coaches in their divisions who, for whatever reason, don't want to play the full game. Great, but I think it is difficult to rationalize equal treatment in regards to rewards when the game IS geared toward progression. I'm great with giving them smaller rewards, but to make it equal because they choose to stay in the lower divisions doesn't make sense. You are making a conscious decision to go contrary to what you know to be the natural game progression and that may entail suffering some consequences in regards to how the game rewards success, just as Don Meyer probably does every time he's offered a job at a higher division school with higher pay.

Again, this is in no way meant to disrespect those who want their careers in the lower divisions, just my opinion on how the rewards are distributed.

Before they ditched rewards points, there were many, many top coaches with DII/DIII dynasties, probably the vast majority of vet coaches had at least one. And that made those lower levels extremely competitive. I used to play HOF coach after HOF coach in every non-con game. (Seriously, my non-con each year looked something like: OR, bluespruce, joelhall, rails, etc. Just brutal.)

And again, you just have to stop the argument that rewards points should be lower because it's not as difficult. That is a rationale made up in your own head that is completely different than WIS's rationale for the move.

To be intellectually honest in this discussion, we have to look at WIS's stated reasons for the change to determine whether it was a good idea or not.

And it's clearly been a disaster.

I don't get why people blame it on reward points, but are the same who say the price isn't the issue. That 12.95 or 2 months is a fair price or whatever. If the price isn't an issue, whats the big deal? Its not like you don't get any rewards - its just not free seasons as fast. I get that it is nice to save money and possibly get a 5 pack for free, but if they never offered free seasons to begin with would you guys never had more then 1 team?

Furry, it's largely because you weren't around when it happened, so you don't understand the furor.

People were very upset because they felt as though the rug was pulled out from under them, and it was basically a declaration of war against WIS's most loyal customers. People were ******.

At this juncture, the more important point is that restoring rewards points would greatly help rescucitate DIII. The other part isn't even worth debating. But if it has the ability to help restore the lower levels, it's a good idea, period.

Quote: Originally posted by furry_nipps on 2/11/2010I don't get why people blame it on reward points, but are the same who say the price isn't the issue. That 12.95 or 2 months is a fair price or whatever. If the price isn't an issue, whats the big deal? Its not like you don't get any rewards - its just not free seasons as fast. I get that it is nice to save money and possibly get a 5 pack for free, but if they never offered free seasons to begin with would you guys never had more then 1 team?

its not the free seasons. its the chance to "win" something. or get something back.

and its also psychological. i (and most other users) will never play for free over the long term. But the "allure" of possibly playing for free is what the draw is.

i go to vegas and lose $4k. But my $100 room is comped. Its not much, but it sure as hell makes me feel better.

you do bring up a valid point though. if there never were reward points it wouldn't be an issue...

but that not so. and i know when reward points were cut, so were many teams. coaches with 6 teams dropped to 4. coaches with 3 teams dropped to 2. etc.. . .

Yeah, I wasn't here. I have accepted the way it works and have no problem with it. The problem is, even if rewards were put back the same 20 teams who are always dominating now would still hog up the reward points. The users that are not me, you, or, gil, lost, rails etc who joined up would still be paying to play and wouldn't notice a difference. The "full" rewards for them wouldn't mean much because they wouldn't get out of the 2nd round if all of us signed up there. So while it helps about 3% of the users get extra free teams, I don't see it helping overall. Coaches get frustrated and go to a weaker world, leave, or move up.