Omega Men and new engine’s recruits Topic

cthomas22255
Posts: 86 (0)
Veteran
20
Prospect
Remember when potential was released and for the next few seasons the pre-potential players were like gods? Does it look to anyone else that the same will be true of the new engine?

Only one SF in Phelan D1 with speed over 70 (and he's Polish). The #2 PG has LOW potential in every key category, he's already maxed out?

I see very few that will end up being remotely close in PER, BH, PA to the players on my team who were 2 star recruits w/high potential. It looks to me like stars and rankings have less relevance than before.

Am I wrong?
6/4/2010 10:46 AM
cornfused
Posts: 1492 (0)
Hall of Famer
2 235 11
Prospect
In Allen, at least, the opposite appears to be true.
6/4/2010 10:53 AM
arssanguinus
Posts: 1120 (0)
Hall of Famer
282 1
Pro
Well, there should be a number of VERY good recruits at the top, and the rest of the field a bit leveled. The thing I am wondering is, the gap between those elite prospects and the rest of the field. .perhaps that will effect early entries for the better? If there is more of a gap for the top to the rest, then the early entries might be a bit more condensed and make more sense?

Also, on an unrelated topic, I would think that if you were going to have 'complaining about playing time' it should almost solely be by talent compared to the rest of the roster rather than by class. If Carmello Anthony comes into a college and gets no playing time, he complains. If someone who isn't that talented is a junior and is behind Anthony, he won;t complain.



6/4/2010 11:04 AM
dalter
Posts: 71 (0)
All Star
25
Prospect
arss, I don't think that's accurate or realistic. Guys get ****** about lack of PT all the time, and very often they may have better players ahead of them. Guys want to play, plain and simple.
6/4/2010 11:26 AM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By arssanguinus on 6/04/2010
Well, there should be a number of VERY good recruits at the top, and the rest of the field a bit leveled. The thing I am wondering is, the gap between those elite prospects and the rest of the field. .perhaps that will effect early entries for the better? If there is more of a gap for the top to the rest, then the early entries might be a bit more condensed and make more sense?

Also, on an unrelated topic, I would think that if you were going to have 'complaining about playing time' it should almost solely be by talent compared to the rest of the roster rather than by class. If Carmello Anthony comes into a college and gets no playing time, he complains. If someone who isn't that talented is a junior and is behind Anthony, he won;t complain. I agree with this totally. I have my 3rd C getting ****** about not playing...he's a SOPH, the guy ahead of him is a SOPH with similar ratings but better cores and my starter is a SENIOR and was CPOY last year and is a relative stud. I'm trying to work him into the lineup more, but he's most likely gone at year's end. In HD, there's almost no sense in recruiting all 12 spots because there will ALWAYS be odd men out, and I personally find it a tad ridiculous.



6/4/2010 11:32 AM
wronoj
Posts: 893 (0)
Hall of Famer
179 1
Rookie
colonels, nobody ever leaves unless you break promises... at least not in my experience. I've tried to get some guys to leave by benching them when they *****, and it has never worked.
6/4/2010 11:49 AM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
I recruited a SOPH once...no promises...he played 82 minutes in the season, was ******** incessantly, and he ...never say never.
6/4/2010 11:57 AM
kmasonbx
Posts: 847 (0)
Hall of Famer
210
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 6/04/2010arss, I don't think that's accurate or realistic. Guys get ****** about lack of PT all the time, and very often they may have better players ahead of them. Guys want to play, plain and simple.
It's definitely realistic. You think guys that aren't getting PT at Duke are badgering Coach K about more PT? I went to a D2 school and even there the guys who weren't playing weren't constantly complaining about PT, I even lived with 1 of the guys who wasn't playing.
6/4/2010 12:08 PM
blackdog3377
Posts: 1691 (0)
Hall of Famer
190 2 1
Prospect
This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.
6/4/2010 1:07 PM
arssanguinus
Posts: 1120 (0)
Hall of Famer
282 1
Pro
Quote: Originally posted by dalter on 6/04/2010arss, I don't think that's accurate or realistic. Guys get ****** about lack of PT all the time, and very often they may have better players ahead of them. Guys want to play, plain and simple.

Perhaps not exclusive, but at any rate it should be more than 'he's a Junior so he wants 'x' minutes.
6/4/2010 1:13 PM
kmasonbx
Posts: 847 (0)
Hall of Famer
210
Prospect
This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.
6/4/2010 1:20 PM
arssanguinus
Posts: 1120 (0)
Hall of Famer
282 1
Pro
Perhaps make likelihood to complain a function of work ethic. . or something.
6/4/2010 1:23 PM
reinsel
Posts: 927 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 130
Rookie
Anyone ever been on a team where anyone with a scholarship or not a total walkon type talent DIDN'T want to play?
6/4/2010 1:24 PM
arssanguinus
Posts: 1120 (0)
Hall of Famer
282 1
Pro
Wanting to play and making a stink about it and threatening to transfer are not the same thing.
6/4/2010 1:28 PM
acn24
Posts: 1020 (0)
Hall of Famer
260 357 172
Rookie
This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.
6/4/2010 1:36 PM
12 Next ▸
Omega Men and new engine’s recruits 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.