Did a couple of quick checks on championship winning rosters and they average 9-10 players getting drafted in the NBA. One I just recently did a check had 6 picked in the first round and 3 in the 2nd. This check was also done on a 3.0 roster in a BIG6 conference.

Looked up the greatest college basketball rosters and the ranking puts the 68-69 UCLA bruins as the best ever that had 7 drafted in the NBA to include Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and 2 others that averaged 13 and 18 PPG in the NBA for 10 season. 3 of the players only played 1 season and the final player averaged 11.6 PPG over 8 seasons.

So what is my point? Is the talent too good? Is there an issue with a team requiring 9-10 NBA level players to win a championship in D1? Does anyone have an issue with this?

My personal philosophy is that the overall talent level should be lowered in HD as a whole. Players with ridiculous stats with 100 ATH REB and DEF should only come around every few seasons. If you lowered the average defense of the game by 10 points then you could see a lot more roster variety. You could see offensive specialist find starting roster spots. I don't believe any player should have 99 DEF 95 PER and 90+ BH and Pass. That player is a freak of nature in talent and probably goes on to be the next LeBron James or Michael Jordan.

Even in those cases every player has a flaw in there game. James Harden gets ragged on for Defense, in college would he be rated as a 60 or 70 DEF and be outstanding everywhere else? I can tell you in the current HD culture James Harden would be coming off the bench.

EDIT: With the poor defense he might even fall to D2

I think a lot of the talent hoarding would decrease if promises had to kept for all four seasons.* Right now, an A+ prestige team can promise a top 10 recruit a start +15 minutes, play him for a year and then make him a backup the next year to another top 10 recruit that has been promised playing time. In real life, the sophomore isn't going to stand for that. He will transfer or jump to the pros.

With the teams that had nine players drafted, I bet all 9 of those guys were promised starts and minutes when they were recruited. Forcing the coach to keep those promises will end that in a hurry.

* The rule should be that the coach who makes the promise is required to keep it for four years, but a new coach does not have to keep the prior coach's promises.

No opinion on the player ratings part. But i see your point.

Regarding the promises.... I agree with ALL of that. The promises are ridiculous in this game.

I've had cases on my team where sophomores complain, expecting a few more minutes. And juniors a few more than that. So a player that was promised minutes isn't going to expect a slight increase in playing time the following season? Of course he would.

That many transfers each season would be crazy.

It would stop after a season or two.

Posted by grimacedance on 12/19/2017 5:09:00 PM (view original):
I think a lot of the talent hoarding would decrease if promises had to kept for all four seasons.* Right now, an A+ prestige team can promise a top 10 recruit a start +15 minutes, play him for a year and then make him a backup the next year to another top 10 recruit that has been promised playing time. In real life, the sophomore isn't going to stand for that. He will transfer or jump to the pros.

With the teams that had nine players drafted, I bet all 9 of those guys were promised starts and minutes when they were recruited. Forcing the coach to keep those promises will end that in a hurry.

* The rule should be that the coach who makes the promise is required to keep it for four years, but a new coach does not have to keep the prior coach's promises.

I'm with you on this one.

Also, why don't promises carry through to the postseason? Changing this should be pretty easy to do (I'd think) and have some sort of impact.

I'd love to see more transfers due to broken promises. I wouldn't love to see them implemented arbitrarily like I feel EEs are done sometimes.

Would love to see the "FIX TRANSFERS!!!!!" threads.

Posted by bagger288 on 12/19/2017 4:54:00 PM (view original):
Did a couple of quick checks on championship winning rosters and they average 9-10 players getting drafted in the NBA. One I just recently did a check had 6 picked in the first round and 3 in the 2nd. This check was also done on a 3.0 roster in a BIG6 conference.

Looked up the greatest college basketball rosters and the ranking puts the 68-69 UCLA bruins as the best ever that had 7 drafted in the NBA to include Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and 2 others that averaged 13 and 18 PPG in the NBA for 10 season. 3 of the players only played 1 season and the final player averaged 11.6 PPG over 8 seasons.

So what is my point? Is the talent too good? Is there an issue with a team requiring 9-10 NBA level players to win a championship in D1? Does anyone have an issue with this?

I don't think you can really compare this type of stat to real life IMO. Too many differences in the way this game works versus RL.

Agreed ^^

For example -

Out of the 317 EEs that I've tracked over about 10 seasons - only 6 were FR. Not very much like real life.

Or where are the international players that get drafted who never played college ball in the US?

In 2016, 16/60 players drafted in real life were guys who never played college ball.

Posted by ftbeaglesfan on 12/19/2017 11:21:00 PM (view original):
That many transfers each season would be crazy.

Not necessarily. The fairest way to implement it would be to announce before the season that any promises made to players in the upcoming recruiting class will be effective as long as you are coaching that player at that school. It wouldn't be retroactively applied to prior promises.

Posted by grimacedance on 12/20/2017 10:57:00 AM (view original):

Posted by ftbeaglesfan on 12/19/2017 11:21:00 PM (view original):
That many transfers each season would be crazy.

Not necessarily. The fairest way to implement it would be to announce before the season that any promises made to players in the upcoming recruiting class will be effective as long as you are coaching that player at that school. It wouldn't be retroactively applied to prior promises.

I think it's a great idea. LOVE IT!

It should be applied to all levels too. It'd be awesome to see a stud D3 player transfer and get picked up by a D2 team.

I remember prior to beta Seble mentioned tinkering with transfers and making them sit out a season like in RL but it was never implemented. I love this idea too. Maybe you make it like an inel where they don't improve since otherwise you basically a RS season.

Posted by grimacedance on 12/20/2017 10:57:00 AM (view original):

Posted by ftbeaglesfan on 12/19/2017 11:21:00 PM (view original):
That many transfers each season would be crazy.

Not necessarily. The fairest way to implement it would be to announce before the season that any promises made to players in the upcoming recruiting class will be effective as long as you are coaching that player at that school. It wouldn't be retroactively applied to prior promises.

Uhmm Why?

Does not everyone play by the same rules? If this is such an advantage, then just do it as well. Don't understand the need to complicate something that doesn't need additional complication.