I can’t personally verify the accuracy, but it’s discussed in this thread.
https://www.whatifsports.com/forums/Posts.aspx?topicID=437533

thanks

Lol at seeing:
Boston College at A-minus.
Villanova at B+.

BC in real life has never made a Final Four.

i always thought that each individual conference should have the same base prestige for each of its teams.

Take the Top-6 conferences, and every team in each of those (72 teams) would all be A.
This would be for the:
ACC,
Big 12,
Big East,
Big Ten,
Pac-12 and
SEC.

The next 6 conferences would be at B...
A-10,
Mountain West,
West Coast,
Horizon,
Missouri Valley
C-USA.

The next 4 conferences would be at C...
MAC,
Colonial.
Ohio Valley.
Big West.

The remaining 11 conferences would be at D.

So groups of 6-6-4-11. And base prestige for all at A B C D.

Posted by mullycj on 3/29/2018 2:40:00 PM (view original):
So Kentucky and Vanderbilt with the same prestige..... yeah OK...... NOT

Yeah agree.

Michigan State and Rutgers. Same thing!

Posted by mullycj on 3/29/2018 2:40:00 PM (view original):
So Kentucky and Vanderbilt with the same prestige..... yeah OK...... NOT

So Boston Freakin College, Wake Forest, and Georgia Tech are at A-minus... and Miami (Fla), West Virginia, and Florida State at B... yeah OK... it's asinine.

VCU has a worse prestige than South Florida.

98% of teams have ups and downs... i'm old enough to remember Duke sucking.

Balance each individual conference by giving each team the same prestige.

Posted by npb7768 on 3/29/2018 11:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mullycj on 3/29/2018 2:40:00 PM (view original):
So Kentucky and Vanderbilt with the same prestige..... yeah OK...... NOT

So Boston Freakin College, Wake Forest, and Georgia Tech are at A-minus... and Miami (Fla), West Virginia, and Florida State at B... yeah OK... it's asinine.

VCU has a worse prestige than South Florida.

98% of teams have ups and downs... i'm old enough to remember Duke sucking.

Balance each individual conference by giving each team the same prestige.

Most people will agree that the prestiges need to be adjusted. But doing it by conference is a horrible idea.

Posted by Benis on 3/30/2018 12:11:00 AM (view original):

Posted by npb7768 on 3/29/2018 11:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mullycj on 3/29/2018 2:40:00 PM (view original):
So Kentucky and Vanderbilt with the same prestige..... yeah OK...... NOT

So Boston Freakin College, Wake Forest, and Georgia Tech are at A-minus... and Miami (Fla), West Virginia, and Florida State at B... yeah OK... it's asinine.

VCU has a worse prestige than South Florida.

98% of teams have ups and downs... i'm old enough to remember Duke sucking.

Balance each individual conference by giving each team the same prestige.

Most people will agree that the prestiges need to be adjusted. But doing it by conference is a horrible idea.

thanks for your opinion, but is your solution to adjust prestiges at the end of each college hoops season? that doesn't sound like it would work, cuz there's ups and downs each year. Or adjust every 3 years or something? not sure it's fair if your HD team is reliant on things beyond your control.

Seems like base prestige should be a set number.

Also, why would anyone want to take the Fresno, Hawaii, Rutgers or Virginia Tech jobs?

Posted by npb7768 on 3/30/2018 12:59:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 3/30/2018 12:11:00 AM (view original):

Posted by npb7768 on 3/29/2018 11:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mullycj on 3/29/2018 2:40:00 PM (view original):
So Kentucky and Vanderbilt with the same prestige..... yeah OK...... NOT

So Boston Freakin College, Wake Forest, and Georgia Tech are at A-minus... and Miami (Fla), West Virginia, and Florida State at B... yeah OK... it's asinine.

VCU has a worse prestige than South Florida.

98% of teams have ups and downs... i'm old enough to remember Duke sucking.

Balance each individual conference by giving each team the same prestige.

Most people will agree that the prestiges need to be adjusted. But doing it by conference is a horrible idea.

thanks for your opinion, but is your solution to adjust prestiges at the end of each college hoops season? that doesn't sound like it would work, cuz there's ups and downs each year. Or adjust every 3 years or something? not sure it's fair if your HD team is reliant on things beyond your control.

I say they should update them every 15 years.

hmm looks like we are due for an update.

Posted by Benis on 3/30/2018 1:00:00 AM (view original):

Posted by npb7768 on 3/30/2018 12:59:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 3/30/2018 12:11:00 AM (view original):

Posted by npb7768 on 3/29/2018 11:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mullycj on 3/29/2018 2:40:00 PM (view original):
So Kentucky and Vanderbilt with the same prestige..... yeah OK...... NOT

So Boston Freakin College, Wake Forest, and Georgia Tech are at A-minus... and Miami (Fla), West Virginia, and Florida State at B... yeah OK... it's asinine.

VCU has a worse prestige than South Florida.

98% of teams have ups and downs... i'm old enough to remember Duke sucking.

Balance each individual conference by giving each team the same prestige.

Most people will agree that the prestiges need to be adjusted. But doing it by conference is a horrible idea.

thanks for your opinion, but is your solution to adjust prestiges at the end of each college hoops season? that doesn't sound like it would work, cuz there's ups and downs each year. Or adjust every 3 years or something? not sure it's fair if your HD team is reliant on things beyond your control.

I say they should update them every 15 years.

hmm looks like we are due for an update.

I also like how your complaint is that good teams have worse prestiges than bad teams.

But in your suggested model, a team like Rutgers will have a better prestige than a team like Gonzaga.

So it doesn't even solve the issue that you are complaining about.

They’re both pretty bad ideas, to be honest, although I hate the thought of baseline prestige being assigned by conference a little less than periodic “updates” from real life interjected.

I would much prefer nothing is done in this regard to either of those ideas, but if seble or some other developer ever wanted to do another major update, I could get behind something like the following:
1. Remove baseline prestige for individual teams
2. Establish conference prestige that acts like a weaker and less influential version of current baseline prestige
3. Allow relegation and user realignment within individual worlds

It would be very tricky, and would need a ton of beta, especially if you allowed teams to move divisions - like allowing D3 powerhouses to replace sims in regional D2 conferences. But it would be a fun process.

Posted by pkoopman on 3/30/2018 9:19:00 AM (view original):
They’re both pretty bad ideas, to be honest, although I hate the thought of baseline prestige being assigned by conference a little less than periodic “updates” from real life interjected.

I would much prefer nothing is done in this regard to either of those ideas, but if seble or some other developer ever wanted to do another major update, I could get behind something like the following:
1. Remove baseline prestige for individual teams
2. Establish conference prestige that acts like a weaker and less influential version of current baseline prestige
3. Allow relegation and user realignment within individual worlds

It would be very tricky, and would need a ton of beta, especially if you allowed teams to move divisions - like allowing D3 powerhouses to replace sims in regional D2 conferences. But it would be a fun process.

Baseline prestige is a nice concept, it only needs to reflect the past 10 years 2008-2018. Then wait ten years, refresh.

I would like conferences to mirror reality as much as possible also.