This is what I got at midterm:

o

Hambright, Timothy

So.

2.3

2.6

o

This is what I got at finals:

o

Hambright, Timothy

So.

1.9

2.5

o

He got a 1.5 in the 2nd semester? I didn't change anything in study hall (I didn't up because 2.3 is in no danger of failing).

When I have someone who is in danger of failing (unless he's a redshirt), I boost SH minutes as a matter of course now. The variability in GPA is too great for me to risk losing the guy otherwise. I've still lost a couple with the boost, but I figure it's worth it to increase the odds of keeping them on them floor.

Looks like your guy got lucky early on and really could have benefited from the extra SH time.

They changed SH in the last update. The relationship is pretty much purely linear now, with variability greatly reduced. This is why I'm confused.

I don't know that it's "pretty much linear."

"Reduced the amount of variance on player grades, so study hall minutes will have more impact on the resulting grades."

As I read it, they "reduced" variance, they didn't eliminate it.

This variance is huge though, to go from 2.3 to 1.5, for a So.*

Posted by tianyi7886 on 3/10/2012 1:39:00 PM (view original):
This variance is huge though, to go from 2.3 to 1.5, for a So.*

I don't see what the sophomore has to do with it. The cumulative GPA won't change as much, but a senior can experience the same swings as a freshman in any given semester (unless I missed a big difference from RL).

Also, do we know whether GPAs are actually calculated to only one decimal spot? Or could that 2.3 actually be a 2.25?

This is why I like my players to have 2.5+. It's just not worth the risk

Posted by tianyi7886 on 3/10/2012 1:29:00 PM (view original):
This is what I got at midterm:

o

Hambright, Timothy

So.

2.3

2.6

o

This is what I got at finals:

o

Hambright, Timothy

So.

1.9

2.5

o

He got a 1.5 in the 2nd semester? I didn't change anything in study hall (I didn't up because 2.3 is in no danger of failing).

I disagree...2.3 is very much in danger of failing.  Especially if he was 'yellow-lined'.

Posted by zbrent716 on 3/10/2012 1:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tianyi7886 on 3/10/2012 1:39:00 PM (view original):
This variance is huge though, to go from 2.3 to 1.5, for a So.*

I don't see what the sophomore has to do with it. The cumulative GPA won't change as much, but a senior can experience the same swings as a freshman in any given semester (unless I missed a big difference from RL).

Also, do we know whether GPAs are actually calculated to only one decimal spot? Or could that 2.3 actually be a 2.25?

From what I gathered, it has always been harder for upperclassmen to have gpa fluctuation like this. 

They yellow line up to a 2.4. Since the Nov update, I have never changed anyone's SH unless the midterm gpa was 2.2 or lower, and not single one was close to failing. This looks weird to me, but maybe it isn't from the response I'm getting. 

Posted by tianyi7886 on 3/10/2012 1:51:00 PM (view original):
They yellow line up to a 2.4. Since the Nov update, I have never changed anyone's SH unless the midterm gpa was 2.2 or lower, and not single one was close to failing. This looks weird to me, but maybe it isn't from the response I'm getting. 

I've been boosting anyone who gets the yellow line. Even that doesn't always work. Last season I lost Donald Ford due to grades even after a boost.

I'm always puzzled when people complain about long-shots coming home.  i mean this isn't even really a long-shot, but i get that you expected him to be fine.  but if long-shots never came home they wouldn't be long-shots, right? they'd be no-shots. and no-shots aren't very fun to evaluate/gamble on and therefor wouldn't make for much of a game.

the way i see it, you made a good gamble and lost.  part of the game.

I certainly think it's the exception, so to that extent I think you're right, it's weird.

But I don't know that I'm super shocked that it happened at all. 

Posted by zbrent716 on 3/10/2012 1:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tianyi7886 on 3/10/2012 1:39:00 PM (view original):
This variance is huge though, to go from 2.3 to 1.5, for a So.*

I don't see what the sophomore has to do with it. The cumulative GPA won't change as much, but a senior can experience the same swings as a freshman in any given semester (unless I missed a big difference from RL).

Also, do we know whether GPAs are actually calculated to only one decimal spot? Or could that 2.3 actually be a 2.25?

You haven't noticed that you need less SH as players get older?  I think that's what the sophomore part has to do with it.  I've never put SH minutes into a SR and rarely into a jr...even the ones that get horrible grades as freshmen.

But I do bump anyone in the yellow line quite a bit, and usually add a point or 2 to anyone in the mid 2's.  But keep in mind that I hardly invest in SH minutes at all the 1st semester (5 for frosh, 3 for soph's, 0 for the rest).