Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 1/29/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By dellhops69 on 1/29/2010
but come tournament time you run up against those schools and they ending up kicking your butt because they have better players at every position which makes your run for a dynasty moot

No, that's not how it has to work, and often it doesn't.

This year in the NT, I beat UNC, UConn and Clemson with poor little Montana. Over the last three seasons, I've beaten teams from the Big Ten, Pac-10, Big East and four teams from the mighty ACC in the NT.

Take a look at all the non-BCS teams that have made the Final Four and even won the NT in Allen alone over the last few seasons. Cleveland State, Yale and Boston U have all won titles. This year, Montana and Tennessee State made the Final Four, as have High Point and several other low/mid schools.

The fact of the matter is that non-BCS teams have it much, much, much better in HD than they do in real life. (But I still think their prestige should be more flexible.)

Like I said earlier, I've got no real problem with the inflexible prestige as long as someone gets fired from time to time at the BCS/Elite schools that underperform. But as it is now, good coaches at mid-majors aren't rewarded for their success because the prestige isn't flexible enough AND they can't move up to BCS schools b/c you really can't get fired.

Dalter's Montana team is well coached, but its also really talented. As is Cheez's Yale team. Don't know about the rest of the worlds, but in Allen non-BCS schools are doing just fine.

What is the debate here exactly? I still do not see the problem with the current system. There are TONS of things that are more important to "fix" then a couple fly by night owners who think that you should be able to turn Yale into Kentucky in 5-10 seasons.

Again, there are several examples of coaches taking lower baseline prestige schools and building them up to a B+/A-. If your complaint is that it is too easy for them to lose their prestige they built up, think about this. How do you think it would go in RL? Right now if a school from a lower division (Think VMI) were to have sustained success then their prestige will go up. Just like HD. BUT if VMI has just one losing season where they miss the NT, their RL prestige will take a big hit. Just like HD.

I think the only thing this thread is saying is that firings are definitely broken. We are all in agreement there. As I have ALWAYS contended, if a coach of a B- or better baseline prestige school cannot make the postseason in any 4 year span they should be fired. I do not think any coach would have a reason to cry if that were the set up.

Just this simple 4 year rule would cure all of the complaining from coaches who cannot move up to a big 6 job (Even though there are several schools open every season). Once fired you should have to take a job at a mid-major and move up from there. Put the mid majors on a 6 year rule (Prestige of C-, C, C+) that they have to make the postseason and do not fire anyone from a Low D1 team unless they are blatantly not trying (Like 6 straight losing seasons).

I have petitioned for a firing system like this for 2 years now, but they fear that they will alienate the coaches who have spent more money on HD then any fly by night whining poster. I see their point, but I do not think it is correct. When a coach like vandydave at Vanderbilt in Allen still has their job, something is obviously broken.

Anyone else have a similar opinion? Do you agree that this is the bigger problem then what a schools baseline prestige is when a world opens?

And btw you look very silly questioning my opinion because I only coach at high level schools now. I have made the NT with schools from every division/prestige level. I won the NT at Long Beach St. before Lizak had ever heard of HD.

Also, I just sent in a ticket about South Florida's prestige. I think it is wrong in my current list. Seems like I remember them being like a C-

Quote: Originally posted by porkpower on 1/29/2010What is the debate here exactly? I still do not see the problem with the current system. There are TONS of things that are more important to "fix" then a couple fly by night owners who think that you should be able to turn Yale into Kentucky in 5-10 seasons.

Again, there are several examples of coaches taking lower baseline prestige schools and building them up to a B+/A-. If your complaint is that it is too easy for them to lose their prestige they built up, think about this. How do you think it would go in RL? Right now if a school from a lower division (Think VMI) were to have sustained success then their prestige will go up. Just like HD. BUT if VMI has just one losing season where they miss the NT, their RL prestige will take a big hit. Just like HD.

I think the only thing this thread is saying is that firings are definitely broken. We are all in agreement there. As I have ALWAYS contended, if a coach of a B- or better baseline prestige school cannot make the postseason in any 4 year span they should be fired. I do not think any coach would have a reason to cry if that were the set up.

Just this simple 4 year rule would cure all of the complaining from coaches who cannot move up to a big 6 job (Even though there are several schools open every season). Once fired you should have to take a job at a mid-major and move up from there. Put the mid majors on a 6 year rule (Prestige of C-, C, C+) that they have to make the postseason and do not fire anyone from a Low D1 team unless they are blatantly not trying (Like 6 straight losing seasons).

I have petitioned for a firing system like this for 2 years now, but they fear that they will alienate the coaches who have spent more money on HD then any fly by night whining poster. I see their point, but I do not think it is correct. When a coach like vandydave at Vanderbilt in Allen still has their job, something is obviously broken.

Anyone else have a similar opinion? Do you agree that this is the bigger problem then what a schools baseline prestige is when a world opens?

And btw you look very silly questioning my opinion because I only coach at high level schools now. I have made the NT with schools from every division/prestige level. I won the NT at Long Beach St. before Lizak had ever heard of HD.

Super class though. And BTW, Iba A-10 IS a BCS conf in that world. They are stronger then the big 6 and have been for a while now, so throwing those teams out isn't really an example. He was talking about doing it in a light weight conf.

All hail the mighty pork. Now that the ego has spoken I guess we should just close this thread and move on.

No one said you didn't advocate this before. And any of us can question your opinion whenever we want. Its a freaking message board. If you don't think us "fly-by-night" "whining" coaches are worth listening to, go start your own thread and talk to yourself. Or maybe all of the other owners from SEC-Allen who seem to love you so much would love to listen to even more of your condescending bullcrap.

LOL! I DID start this thread. Idiot.

Pork, you sound like my grandpa complaining about cell phones or cable TV. He's seen it all and knows (just like you) how things should be run.

combalt brough Selaware up to an A+ and won a NC before he retired in Rupp

And when I won at Long Beach St I did sign 8 players in one class. Just like tons of other schools did at that time. Back when you could "What if" more with your class sizes.

I really do not understand what your problem is with me, Lizak. Believe it or not, I HAVE seen about everything in HD and I do most certainly know MORE then you about how this game should be run. I have coached over 200 seasons compared to your 27. It is just that simple. I do not claim to smarter then you and do not want to start some sort of nerd fight over something so small.

Great example moy. It can be done in the current game if you are a good enough coach (He most certainly is!).

Pork, my problem is that you seem to feel that longevity makes you smarter and want to stiffle everyone else who doesn't agree with you.

Did you not read the thread? No one says you can't win it all at a small school. I won it at a small school - went to A-. Then next 4 years of NT 1st round, Elite 8, NT 1st round, Sweet 16, my prestige dropped to a B. You don't see a problem with that?

Pork I think that you and I are in agreement almost completely here. My question to you is this, would you like to see a Floating Baseline Prestige, where over years of continued success a schools Baseline Prestige could get better?

And don't get me wrong, I don't buy into the 5 year plan, my idea for FlBP is the last 20 years of a schools history + additional credit for Final Fours and National Titles, just like in real life those banners do mean something even if they were 25 years go. And use that along with a small portion of what is now the Fixed Baseline Prestige to come up with a more True Floating Prestige, because I think we all can agree that Floating Prestige as it is instituted now isn't really True Floating Prestige since it is dependent on many things that the coach of said school can not control.

Even if you don't see a problem with the current system (and I agree I don't think it is broken by any means) but I see room for improvement.

Quote: Originally Posted By Lizak on 1/29/2010
Pork, my problem is that you seem to feel that longevity makes you smarter and want to stiffle everyone else who doesn't agree with you.

Did you not read the thread? No one says you can't win it all at a small school. I won it at a small school - went to A-. Then next 4 years of NT 1st round, Elite 8, NT 1st round, Sweet 16, my prestige dropped to a B. You don't see a problem with that?

I don't see a problem with that. lots of lesser known teams rise for short periods of time. gonzaga, pennsylvania, GW, WVA.... to name some. I see these teams in the RL tourney all the time... do they deserve to be an A baseline prestige team just cause they get to the tourney often and occasionally advance... I don't think so... in RL its the big conf schools w/ the big names that seem to year in and year out bring in the best player talent... and ultimately prestige in HD only helps you during recruiting, as it does in RL (excluding TV contracts).

Look at my Marquette team before I it in Rupp:

season 30 - 1st Round NT - B-

season 31 - Championship Game PIT - B-

season 32 - Sweet 16 NT - B+

Season 33 - No Tourney - B

Season 34 - Elite 8 NT - B

Season 35 - Final 4 NT - A-

After this I and they fell off.

I think this is where they should have been looking back - although at the time I was angry. Seperating emotion from fact... I'm okay with the baseline prestiges. jmho.

Well said moy. I agree that the 5-10 years is way to short of a timeframe for a school's baseline to be changed that drastically, baring numerous Final Fours and National Titles.