are from big 6 conferences. 

I know I'm beating a dead horse........but this gap is not very realistic. 

and the only mid-major  remaining, Santa Clara, advanced solely by  defeating another mid-major

Smith World had 5 of 32 from non-BCS confernces but only 2 of them beat one of the 'big schools'.  Only one, Utah, made the Sweet 16.

Compared to recent NCAA tournaments:

2011-  Eight mid-majors advanced with 5 of them defeating BCS schools
2010-  Seven mid-majors with 4 of them defeating BCS schools
2009- Ten mid-majors with 4 of them defeating BCS schools
2008-  Seven mid-majors with 4 of them defeating BCS schools
2007-  Six mid-majors with  3 of them defeating BCS
2006- Nine mid-majors with 6 of them defeating BCS

This is why I'm liking Rupp more and more. I don't remember the exact figures from last season, but it was something like 14 non-BCS teams in the second round, and maybe half a dozen in the S16. I'm estimating those #'s, but I remember they really stood out to me and showed it was possible.

I was going to see how it was last season but the season 50 NT seeding shows up blank. I know it was at the very least two as I won a game and so did UNLV. Two seasons ago UNLV made the Final Four as well.

I checked last year in crum. No non-BCS teams made the sweet 16. I don't do d-1 so no idea if it is a too few coaches at mid-majors issue or a recruit generation, game excessively favors bcs conf's, etc... issue

I would like the game to mirror real life more, 1/32 is too low but 14/32 is not realistic either. I like somewhere between 7-10 would be realistic in my opinion.

One huge difference:  What proportion of big six schools have human coaches as opposed to the proportion of mid majors that do?

 

Yeah, I feel like coaches based on the gut feeling that coaching at mid-majors is too hard continue to ignore the human coaching factor.  OF COURSE there is a larger proportion of Big 6 schools going deep in the tournament in HD than in RL.  The coaching gap between even a below-average human coach and simmy is dramatically bigger than the gap between the best RL coaches and the worst mid-major coaches.

Posted by salag on 3/3/2012 12:36:00 PM (view original):
I would like the game to mirror real life more, 1/32 is too low but 14/32 is not realistic either. I like somewhere between 7-10 would be realistic in my opinion.

Honestly, I find the notion that we/WIS should be artificially shooting to mirror the same amount of teams that they have in real life to be repugnant.

That's the great part about this game -- some worlds may end up looking like real life, and others may skew significantly in one direction or the other. In some worlds the ACC is great, in others it's weak. The abiltity to plot your own course -- as a team, a conference, etc. is the great part about WIS, and there should be more of it, not less.

Posted by girt25 on 3/3/2012 2:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by salag on 3/3/2012 12:36:00 PM (view original):
I would like the game to mirror real life more, 1/32 is too low but 14/32 is not realistic either. I like somewhere between 7-10 would be realistic in my opinion.

Honestly, I find the notion that we/WIS should be artificially shooting to mirror the same amount of teams that they have in real life to be repugnant.

That's the great part about this game -- some worlds may end up looking like real life, and others may skew significantly in one direction or the other. In some worlds the ACC is great, in others it's weak. The abiltity to plot your own course -- as a team, a conference, etc. is the great part about WIS, and there should be more of it, not less.

Repugnant seems like an awfully strong word there Daalt.

Simply gearing the engine towards real life w/o considering the ingame element is a bad idea. GD did this and had the engine mirror real life in its 2010 update. The result was terrible, with top tier RB against terrible defense, breaking out runs like 1yrd, 2yrd, -1 yrd, 3yrd, 0 yrd, 2yrd, then out of nowhere, a long td for 70 yards. They did so to mirror the real life distribution, without any consideration for the talent on the field. 

Mirroring RL just for the sake of it is bad. 

Would anyone be in favor of making D1 sims slightly more better. Would likely help to create more interest in the lesser populated leagues. I'm not saying a ton better, but just make it so that D1 sims at least consider potential a little bit. Always thought it was strange that a 100 RPI D2 team can beat  15-20% of D1 teams. 

Rupp has had 3 final fours 6 elite 8s and 12 sweet 16s from non big6 schools in the past 4 years. Only 2 different schools have had more than one s16 or better in that time frame, so its really spread out as well.