Will everyone still worked up about this look at the class USC just signed in Crum. Had 1 walk-on, 4 seniors (but one stayed for a 5th year) and 3 EEs. So had 7 spots and money for 6. He just signed the greatest class I have ever seen, includnig one JC Jr.

You can do this, it just requires a little creativity, particularly sicne you are unlikely to get creamed by EEs unless you also get a big prestige bump.

Four years back I had an awful recruiting class where I missde on 4 of my 5 targets and I didn't have enough saved to take leser guys (my mistake). The next year I had 8 scholies. I shouldn't get rewarded for being an idiot.

For those of us who were around before this rule went into effect, superclasses were the norm for champions. It wasn't working. This is a good rule and Seble should be commended for the quick fix, at least as much as we trash him for the process.

Quote: Originally Posted By jbasnight on 2/18/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By isack24 on 2/18/2010

Dalt - isn't the penalty of having less depth, less developed players, and the practice penalty for taking three walkons enough?

Honestly, how many teams are successful taking three or four walkons?

Also, how many teams does this affect? How many would legitimately benefit (EEs) versus how many benefit from taking walkons? And why should that matter?




Are we even sure this exists? The Smith world is nine games in. Kansas in Smith has 6 walk-ons. They have a soph PG whose ratings are up 21 points so far, and a junior SG who's up 39 points. Washington State in Smith has seven walk-ons, and they have a soph SF up 33 points. So unless the practice penalty applies only to O/D IQs, it doesn't seem to be affecting them very much.

One point on the broader subject I haven't seen anyone make is that one team's irrational recruiting doesn't hurt just them, but the teams they're recruiting against. If someone wants to take three or four walkons in return for the chance to sign one or two 5-star guys--which I have seen people do--the resulting carnage doesn't just hurt their teams, it hurts a lot of other teams in their recruiting region. And what I'm most opposed to is giving someone that irrational any further incentive to try it again.

I am 100% not sure.

Quote: Originally posted by lakevin on 2/18/2010Will everyone still worked up about this look at the class USC just signed in Crum.  Had 1 walk-on, 4 seniors (but one stayed for a 5th year) and 3 EEs.  So had 7 spots and money for 6.  He just signed the greatest class I have ever seen, includnig one JC Jr.  You can do this, it just requires a little creativity, particularly sicne you are unlikely to get creamed by EEs unless you also get a big prestige bump.  Four years back I had an awful recruiting class where I missde on 4 of my 5 targets and I didn't have enough saved to take leser guys (my mistake).  The next year I had 8 scholies.  I shouldn't get rewarded for being an idiot.  For those of us who were around before this rule went into effect, superclasses were the norm for champions.  It wasn't working.  This is a good rule and Seble should be commended for the quick fix, at least as much as we trash him for the process.

If you think that is the 'greatest class ever' then you must not have been around long.

The practice penalty does still exist... But it is practically nothing since FSS.

It was a fantastic class, ratings-wise, even if a couple of them were mildly overrated. Not the best class ever, but definitely the best class in Crum this season. More importantly, whether or not it was the best ever doesn't change his overall point, which is a valid one.

Dalt you and I both know that geography plays a crucial role in recruiting and, just like EE's, it is another thing that is completely out of the coaches hand, which is yet another reason why capping 'ship monies is unfair at best.

HD is chasing it's tail.

The fact that geography can play a significant role in recruiting and whether or not to cap schollie money don't really have any direct correlation, as far as I can tell.

Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 2/18/2010

Quote: Originally posted by lakevin on 2/18/2010

Will everyone still worked up about this look at the class USC just signed in Crum. Had 1 walk-on, 4 seniors (but one stayed for a 5th year) and 3 EEs. So had 7 spots and money for 6. He just signed the greatest class I have ever seen, includnig one JC Jr.

You can do this, it just requires a little creativity, particularly sicne you are unlikely to get creamed by EEs unless you also get a big prestige bump.

Four years back I had an awful recruiting class where I missde on 4 of my 5 targets and I didn't have enough saved to take leser guys (my mistake). The next year I had 8 scholies. I shouldn't get rewarded for being an idiot.

For those of us who were around before this rule went into effect, superclasses were the norm for champions. It wasn't working. This is a good rule and Seble should be commended for the quick fix, at least as much as we trash him for the process.

If you think that is the 'greatest class ever' then you must not have been around long.

it doesn't matter if it isn't the best ever but it is a very good class. He has a very good post and i agree with him.

Quote: Originally posted by daalter on 2/18/2010The fact that geography can play a significant role in recruiting and whether or not to cap schollie money don't really have any direct correlation, as far as I can tell.

How do they not? If you have an unlucky draw with the recruit generation coupled with a mass exodus leaving you with more then 6 ships they are very much so related.

From a brief skimming of this increasingly large thread, most of the discussion is regarding the cap as it applies to D1 (and mostly EE's). As If I may quote zhawks... this is not HD D1 Dynasty. I personally think that this cap will render the current sim teams with more than 6 in one class at the D3 and D2 levels (and possibly up to D1) doomed to an eternal sim fate. It is just another thing to deter coaches from sticking with or picking up lower teams, an area that desperately needs revitalization in most worlds. Just my two cents. I'd definitely be interested in hearing some of the older vets thoughts on this.

I hope he changes it back. The 6 cap thing is insanely stupid. I don't care if classes are capped, but if you need to sign 10 guys give them money to sign 10 guys. Does seble even know what hes doing anymore? I skimmed over the beta test section and wow does this update look like it is going to fail when it comes live. I really hope he doesn't try to hard and just sticks with minor updates because what I am seeing from him so far (yeah, its early BUT beta testing should be a nearly FINISHED project) is a very half-assed, horrible unworking product. When he rushes it out in a few weeks have fun with the next 6-12+ months of hell while he tries to fix it on the fly, cus obviously it won't be fixed in time in beta test. Once it is rolled out, he better be offering refunds/free seasons and begging people to stick around. Changing/unchanging things just to say he changed things isn't going to make anyone happy.




Anyways, its late. I ranted a bit off topic.

Beta testing is not a 'finished product' by any means. If it were there would be no need for the testing.

beta testing is the final stage. Its when your project is at its most finished staged and ready to go live, but want them to test it for any minor bugs that fell threw the cracks. This isn't even close to being done, but will be released likely in a few weeks because it sounds like it already has a time frame that is out of his hands.

was busy today and not in the forums.

this change then reversal is so sadly indicative of the state of HD...