Posted by lilspike0738 on 1/9/2016 10:57:00 AM (view original):
Posted by zorzii on 1/9/2016 10:41:00 AM (view original):
Posted by trophaeum on 1/9/2016 2:04:00 AM (view original):
Coach spud is dead on. When I was recently asked to join the new Smith power conference, I looked at that world. At first glance, I saw 3 full conferences and probably 90% of the rest were completely empty with not one human in it. The SoCal was 3/4th full and asking for coaches. When I looked at total openings, it was same as the other worlds, with almost 300 D3 openings. In short, I'd be playing the same 20-30 coaches every year, same as we all already do in all the other worlds. If someone wants a D3 or D2 job, plenty are to be had.
In fact, this is exactly why I'm dropping a D3 team. Despite being there for 30+ seasons, the rest of the conference has been transient.
There is no reason, none whatsoever to dilute the coach pool. In fact, they should contract. As far as the issue of not enough two a day worlds, I can't see this as a problem. There's simply not enough coaches to justify it. And more than two games a day? Coaches in those worlds complain they didn't get enough time to game plan, make the first period recruiting time, etc. 3-day would only make this worse.
+1
The game needs to be advertised. It should be on the Fox front page for two to three months... We'd get more owners.
You'd get more owners, that have no idea how to play the game, IE: more Sim teams...
I think more worlds wont really effect population much at all... Most owners seem to have teams in multiple leagues anyways... I'd not be opposed to a world being erased after 100 seasons, post the results for those 100 seasons somewhere, and then start up the world back at zero. The biggest reason people stop playing, is because at this point, you're so far behind the game, you don't wanna spend $50-$100 just to compete, and not win.
I'm just starting, and I'm very discouraged that I'll need to spend $100+ just to compete with some of you owners, and probably never win... I can think of $100 better spent. If things were replaced with an even field every now and again, I'd be more willing to start at a level field and drop that kind of money more often.
i definitely get where you are coming from, to compete with existing owners in d1, its definitely north of 100 dollars (assuming that gets you ~10 seasons). but to compete in d3, its a different story. i think you can start to compete with all but the absolute top coaches in the game, pretty quickly. im not saying you'll be 50/50 in your matches, but i think after a few seasons are under your belt, quick learners can recruit players that are roughly on par with the A prestige programs of the world. my 2nd season ever, i recruited a d3 class that was good for a 1 seed in their senior year, i felt that class was #3 in the whole country that year (i was new, so maybe it was a lot worse than 3, but we did get the 2nd 1 seed - lost in round 2 to a -5 slowdown DT of my only real 3 point threat - lesson learned!). i had a mentor but he wasn't a world beater, and plenty of other folks have walked into d3 and made sweet 16s or pulled 1-2-3 seeds in their first half dozen seasons.
i do think its harder today, FSS and potential added more, you can't just look at ratings, you have to project out and all that, and that is something it took experienced coaches a while to get used to when potential first came out. so i think that significantly adds to the learning curve. but i do think you can be making the NT pretty quickly if you are a sharp young coach who takes advantage of all the learning materials available to you (most important among those - studying the elite teams around you). so, i wouldn't despair just yet - d3 and d2 are a total blast, when you get into it. many coaches prefer them overall, i did for years, until i got too burnt out on the game planning side and just wanted to experience the competitive d1 recruiting.