I am against in general, it could be improved (5 rebounding PFs at D1 are dumb), but I think it will be nice to get to a point where there aren't 3 90+ rebounding players on every D1 team with a human coach.  That IS going to happen in 2-3 more seasons, and I think it is a good thing.

Value of recruits is relative, and before there wasn't enough difference between the top recruits and the 2 or 3-star recruits. 

Against.

Against.  Also, I'm pretty sure your problem isn't with recruiting but player generation.  Might be a better thread title...  I also think that your claim that college recruiters don't look at potential but only current ability is ludicrous.  That might be true of some of the elite schools and some coaches, but across the board I don't think it's even remotely close to the truth.  I think nearly all mid-majors and all D2 and D3 schools look for players with the ability to improve.   The uber-talented players are going straight to the big schools, so if the mid-majors want to compete they need guys who can develop to be as good by their junior and senior years.  My 2 cents; I don't really feel like debating the topic in-depth.  Ironic, eh?

Posted by dahsdebater on 8/14/2010 12:54:00 PM (view original):
Against.  Also, I'm pretty sure your problem isn't with recruiting but player generation.  Might be a better thread title...  I also think that your claim that college recruiters don't look at potential but only current ability is ludicrous.  That might be true of some of the elite schools and some coaches, but across the board I don't think it's even remotely close to the truth.  I think nearly all mid-majors and all D2 and D3 schools look for players with the ability to improve.   The uber-talented players are going straight to the big schools, so if the mid-majors want to compete they need guys who can develop to be as good by their junior and senior years.  My 2 cents; I don't really feel like debating the topic in-depth.  Ironic, eh?

Thanks for voting dehsbebater.  But just for the record, I did not say that colleges don't look at potential.  I said they look far more at a kid's ability than potential, that's all.  Anyway, thanks again for voting and voicing your opinion.  That's really all I'm asking for.

Against.

Against, of course. The new recruit diversity at D1 is, in my opinion the best thing that has happened to HD in a long time. I love it. It is why I am actually adding teams, after having dropped all of them.

Posted by girt25 on 8/14/2010 1:15:00 PM (view original):
Blazor, you're talking about a strictly DI issue. You definitely need to change the title of your thread to indicate that you're talking about a DI recruit generation problem. And I think you need to change part of your first post, that says things like "there aren't enough good players PERIOD". That's not your point. Your point deals with a very specific cross-section of the game, so let people know that without ambiguity.

dahs, you're bright, but you can't possibly have a good take on this issue without a good bit of DI experience where you're seeing first-hand what is and isn't happening. It may make me sound like a *****, but anyone without real DI experience has no business even responding on this one.

I'm for. It's a big problem, I've been telling seble this since the moment of the new roll-out.

You might be right Girt24, it has been so long since I have played DII or DIII, the only reference point I have is from a DI perspective.

Posted by cbriese on 8/14/2010 1:28:00 PM (view original):
Against, of course. The new recruit diversity at D1 is, in my opinion the best thing that has happened to HD in a long time. I love it. It is why I am actually adding teams, after having dropped all of them.

Cbriese, if you prefer the change, of course that's fine.  But remember, you may not think very much of it if too many of your fellow owners keep folding up shop and quitting.  Have you stopped to look at some of the other conferences in D1 other than your own?  Far too many of them are almost completely empty.  A trend that very well may not stop if a change is not made.  Just saying.

if they are getting the best players, and they are, then it does not matter what star rating they have.......the top programs get the top players.....no need for change

OMG, people just need to adjust. People are too caught up in comparing new recruits to the old recruits, you guys need to realize old recruits do not matter anymore. A good recruit in the old engine is not the same as a good recruit now. Lower your standards, 80 passing point guards in D1 are now not terrible, and you aren't at a disadvantage by having them because everybody else will have them also. Change your standards, I know people hate change but it's for the better. I remember when everybody complained that every top team had guys with 99 in every important category and now that that will no longer be the case people want to complain that the recruits aren't good enough. I guess instead of 99s people wanted the recruits to be 95s across the board. The fact is guys with 95+ ratings should be elite players not dime a dozen players and now we have that. People wanted the chance to have elite guys well now you do, if you're lucky enough to get a guy who ends up being 95+ in a few categories he will stand out rather then just be 1 of the guys on your team with great ratings.