Under the current system it isn't impossible, or even that difficult, to create a team that can occassionally upset major schools -- whether you're in a Big 6 conference or a smaller one -- and that can make medium-depth tournament runs on a regular basis. Is D1 a level playing field? Of course not. But D2 and D3 are level playing fields, if you want that. In D1, I've coached Wichita State, Kentucky, Kansas and Kansas State in Wooden, and Northern Arizona and Texas Southern in Smith. I've taken every one of those school's to a Final Four except K-State, which has only completed 3 seasons.
I like the old system. I was very interested in seeing how long it would take to get K-State to a Final Four and if I could ever get TSU back to a Final Four, but with the massive change in recruiting, those challenges will shift so much that they won't mean the same thing. So I've lost interest, and won't be continuing in the game.
To me there are two great hindrances to success at these non-prime schools. One, many people are reluctant to learn what the engine values. They want to impose their own hierarchy of importance amongst the ratings, and then when their team doesn't succeed they blame the game for being wrong -- and they want changes. And, two, the low number of coaches currently playing. When elites go season after season without battles, it's a problem that no amount of creative coaching can overcome.