Posted by npb7768 on 1/9/2017 4:49:00 PM (view original):
First, I was proud to be a bumped off by UCLA in their march to a Crum 86 championship! Glad to be part of history.

This should be a helpful thread, and I'm really curious to hear others' opinions and angles on this...

I think I agree with the posters who advised:
- pursue RS-2 guys that are closer geographically.
- drop 20 home visits (and the campus visit) as soon as possible (which is made affordable by targeting locals).

I think I would also add:
- at the start, pursue and unlock 2 additional guys early on.
- generally, if I saw Crum UCLA on any player from Southern California, I would be very reluctant to pursue the player... last season I did pursue a target of yours from Desert Hot Springs (looked it up-- Gannon), but I was banking on your EE Duncan Robinson to possibly stay in school... I put in just enough to unlock some actions, but I bailed on the guy once Robinson left.

"f I saw Crum UCLA on any player from Southern California, I would be very reluctant to pursue the player" I would be too.

Posted by CoachWard95 on 1/9/2017 5:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by npb7768 on 1/9/2017 4:49:00 PM (view original):
First, I was proud to be a bumped off by UCLA in their march to a Crum 86 championship! Glad to be part of history.

This should be a helpful thread, and I'm really curious to hear others' opinions and angles on this...

I think I agree with the posters who advised:
- pursue RS-2 guys that are closer geographically.
- drop 20 home visits (and the campus visit) as soon as possible (which is made affordable by targeting locals).

I think I would also add:
- at the start, pursue and unlock 2 additional guys early on.
- generally, if I saw Crum UCLA on any player from Southern California, I would be very reluctant to pursue the player... last season I did pursue a target of yours from Desert Hot Springs (looked it up-- Gannon), but I was banking on your EE Duncan Robinson to possibly stay in school... I put in just enough to unlock some actions, but I bailed on the guy once Robinson left.

"f I saw Crum UCLA on any player from Southern California, I would be very reluctant to pursue the player" I would be too.

Except I just lost a kid 15 miles from me (A+ UCLA). I was maxed on the kid in start, 25 mins, cv, and 20 HV's. Preferences were great. But I couldn't keep up with Arizona's or Cal's AP's - so I was stuck at high. Stupid.

I still consider this game to be winner ball.

Posted by CoachWard95 on 1/9/2017 5:15:00 PM (view original):
I still consider this game to be winner ball.

Well put, probably.

"Except I just lost a kid 15 miles from me (A+ UCLA). I was maxed on the kid in start, 25 mins, cv, and 20 HV's. Preferences were great. But I couldn't keep up with Arizona's or Cal's AP's - so I was stuck at high. Stupid."

I find this really odd. If they maxed out AP's they had twice as many as you which is worse case scenario, what a 1000? That's like what 7-10 HVs? So it would be something like 35-25 worse case scenario? That should still be VH to VH.

IF it's 3 way, it would be 35-35-25 which gives you right around 28% which is VH, VH, H. Honestly, I think battles like that are interesting and good for the game. BAd for the A+ programs but good for the game.

Posted by Trentonjoe on 1/9/2017 5:32:00 PM (view original):
"Except I just lost a kid 15 miles from me (A+ UCLA). I was maxed on the kid in start, 25 mins, cv, and 20 HV's. Preferences were great. But I couldn't keep up with Arizona's or Cal's AP's - so I was stuck at high. Stupid."

I find this really odd. If they maxed out AP's they had twice as many as you which is worse case scenario, what a 1000? That's like what 7-10 HVs? So it would be something like 35-25 worse case scenario? That should still be VH to VH.

IF it's 3 way, it would be 35-35-25 which gives you right around 28% which is VH, VH, H. Honestly, I think battles like that are interesting and good for the game. BAd for the A+ programs but good for the game.

The high won't win the battle will be between the two VH.

Posted by Trentonjoe on 1/9/2017 2:39:00 PM (view original):
How much recruiting cash did you have?

Even with one scholarship you should have had enough to do the 20 and 1 for 2 local guys right? You were at a disadvantage on the LA guys against Kansas and it doesn't sound like you did more than a few HV and CVs on him but how much did you sink into the AZ guy who was only a few hundred miles away?

Also, what is Denver's prestige?

Denver was a B+.

Didnt have enough for 20/1, more like 12/1.

Posted by johnsensing on 1/9/2017 3:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by lakevin on 1/9/2017 2:17:00 PM (view original):
Last season in Crum I had one graduating senior and three guys who were a significant risk of leaving early.

At the very outset, I spread around my AP, and I unlocked three guys I thought I would be good with in case two left. One was an "early" signer. Two were "late."

BEFORE signings started, I offered all three scholarships, did a couple of HVs, and did a campus visit with the early signee. I'm leading on all three, and am in fact the only VH on all three.

SIGNING DAY! It worked, the early signee (in my backyard) signed immediately.

All of a sudden, I'm down to 20 AP. I split them between the two other guys.

Now, Denver (5 scholies) and Kansas start pouring AP into my two other guys. I'm chasing but end up falling behind. Nothing to work with, except for promises, I make minutes promises. I'm still trailing.

Now we get to declaring and two of my three EE candidates leave. As predicted.

I look around and there's noone worth pursuing who isn't already the subject of high resource battles I can't get in on. So I'm with these two guys. I dump all my cash on them, all my AP, etc. And I end up losing to Denver and Kansas. And I never really get close to either one. I was never able to make up the difference from the long deficiencies in resources from Cycle 1.

Did I not prepare well? Was I overshooting? The guy Kansas beat me on was a PF in Louisiana with a top 15 rating. But the guy Denver beat me on, and who I dumped most of the resources on, was a top-60 guy in Phoenix.

Oh yeah, it's not that I was shooting above my head. I coach UCLA and had two of the last three NC championships.

It's almost like the game is designed to punish those of us who win games.

(And before you -- and you know who you are -- tell me something has been discredited, it's not discredited only because we are sick of you doing your Trump impression and loudly repeatedly screaming something that is demonstrably false. Take it elsewhere).

Leaving aside whether 3.0's methodology of handling EEs is the best thing for the game (I imagine you and I have similar opinions on this), I think your "mistake" was shooting for folks outside of your geographical region -- in my opinion, 3.0 forces you to stay closer to home than 2.0 did in your situation, because you're forced to save money as much as possible for plan Bs, etc. The Louisiana guy was probably tough/impossible to max out on, I am guessing, unless you got the LA guy for nothing at the outset. Yet another misfire in 3.0, which was explicitly claimed to be designed for more "national" recruiting.

I did get my local for nothing. And there were no decent second choices south of Oregon or anywhere close. It was a weird recruit generation year.

Posted by Trentonjoe on 1/9/2017 5:32:00 PM (view original):
"Except I just lost a kid 15 miles from me (A+ UCLA). I was maxed on the kid in start, 25 mins, cv, and 20 HV's. Preferences were great. But I couldn't keep up with Arizona's or Cal's AP's - so I was stuck at high. Stupid."

I find this really odd. If they maxed out AP's they had twice as many as you which is worse case scenario, what a 1000? That's like what 7-10 HVs? So it would be something like 35-25 worse case scenario? That should still be VH to VH.

IF it's 3 way, it would be 35-35-25 which gives you right around 28% which is VH, VH, H. Honestly, I think battles like that are interesting and good for the game. BAd for the A+ programs but good for the game.

I'm making an assumption that the power to unlock actions is the same as 'effort' but I got 1 HV to equal 50 APs.

Posted by Trentonjoe on 1/9/2017 5:32:00 PM (view original):
"Except I just lost a kid 15 miles from me (A+ UCLA). I was maxed on the kid in start, 25 mins, cv, and 20 HV's. Preferences were great. But I couldn't keep up with Arizona's or Cal's AP's - so I was stuck at high. Stupid."

I find this really odd. If they maxed out AP's they had twice as many as you which is worse case scenario, what a 1000? That's like what 7-10 HVs? So it would be something like 35-25 worse case scenario? That should still be VH to VH.

IF it's 3 way, it would be 35-35-25 which gives you right around 28% which is VH, VH, H. Honestly, I think battles like that are interesting and good for the game. BAd for the A+ programs but good for the game.

To be fair, I was trying to unlock other people since I may have 2-6 EE's depending on the breaks. So I was only in at 20ish APs per cycle (I had 60 to work with). Cal at A- was pretty much all in and got to very high. Zona definitely split AP's amongst multiple people, and they got back to very high at the end, and signed the kid (he had 5 openings so probably was able to keep up with Cal even with splitting APs around).

still, I find it asinine that the no 1 team in the country (at the time) offers a start, max mins, and max hv's/cv, and still can't past high.

It was a first cycle signing by the way

Posted by jpmills3 on 1/10/2017 8:57:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Trentonjoe on 1/9/2017 5:32:00 PM (view original):
"Except I just lost a kid 15 miles from me (A+ UCLA). I was maxed on the kid in start, 25 mins, cv, and 20 HV's. Preferences were great. But I couldn't keep up with Arizona's or Cal's AP's - so I was stuck at high. Stupid."

I find this really odd. If they maxed out AP's they had twice as many as you which is worse case scenario, what a 1000? That's like what 7-10 HVs? So it would be something like 35-25 worse case scenario? That should still be VH to VH.

IF it's 3 way, it would be 35-35-25 which gives you right around 28% which is VH, VH, H. Honestly, I think battles like that are interesting and good for the game. BAd for the A+ programs but good for the game.

To be fair, I was trying to unlock other people since I may have 2-6 EE's depending on the breaks. So I was only in at 20ish APs per cycle (I had 60 to work with). Cal at A- was pretty much all in and got to very high. Zona definitely split AP's amongst multiple people, and they got back to very high at the end, and signed the kid (he had 5 openings so probably was able to keep up with Cal even with splitting APs around).

still, I find it asinine that the no 1 team in the country (at the time) offers a start, max mins, and max hv's/cv, and still can't past high.

Is it possible that Cal's preferences were better than yours? It just seems odd that say a 360 AP (60 for 6 cycles?) deficit restricted you to high. I don't know the #'s for 3 way races, I think the thresholds are 35 and 25 so it's possible it was something like a 36-36-28 chance but honestly, that doesn't even sound right.

Posted by Trentonjoe on 1/10/2017 11:27:00 AM (view original):

Posted by jpmills3 on 1/10/2017 8:57:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Trentonjoe on 1/9/2017 5:32:00 PM (view original):
"Except I just lost a kid 15 miles from me (A+ UCLA). I was maxed on the kid in start, 25 mins, cv, and 20 HV's. Preferences were great. But I couldn't keep up with Arizona's or Cal's AP's - so I was stuck at high. Stupid."

I find this really odd. If they maxed out AP's they had twice as many as you which is worse case scenario, what a 1000? That's like what 7-10 HVs? So it would be something like 35-25 worse case scenario? That should still be VH to VH.

IF it's 3 way, it would be 35-35-25 which gives you right around 28% which is VH, VH, H. Honestly, I think battles like that are interesting and good for the game. BAd for the A+ programs but good for the game.

To be fair, I was trying to unlock other people since I may have 2-6 EE's depending on the breaks. So I was only in at 20ish APs per cycle (I had 60 to work with). Cal at A- was pretty much all in and got to very high. Zona definitely split AP's amongst multiple people, and they got back to very high at the end, and signed the kid (he had 5 openings so probably was able to keep up with Cal even with splitting APs around).

still, I find it asinine that the no 1 team in the country (at the time) offers a start, max mins, and max hv's/cv, and still can't past high.

Is it possible that Cal's preferences were better than yours? It just seems odd that say a 360 AP (60 for 6 cycles?) deficit restricted you to high. I don't know the #'s for 3 way races, I think the thresholds are 35 and 25 so it's possible it was something like a 36-36-28 chance but honestly, that doesn't even sound right.

I doubt he had better preferences.

Playing Time
Recruit Pref: No Preference
Team Analysis:- (25 promised minutes)
Distance
Recruit Pref: Near Home
Team Analysis:Very Good (15 miles)
Success
Recruit Pref:Wants Success
Team Analysis:Very Good
Play Style
Recruit Pref:Strong Defense
Team Analysis:Good
Offense
Recruit Pref:Triangle
Team Analysis:Neutral
Defense
Recruit Pref.Fullcourt Press
Team Analysis.Neutral
Conference Strength
Recruit Pref:Strong Conference
Team Analysis:Very Good
Coach Longevity
Recruit Pref:No Preference
Team Analysis:-
Signing Preference
Recruit Pref:Whenever
Team Analysis:

Cal runs triangle man, so a positive on offense. But he was 14-15 this season, and I don't think the strong defense preference would have been great for him.

more information: I had 255 ap's for 14.1 avg. started lower and bumped after i fell behind.

Posted by mbriese on 1/9/2017 4:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mbriese on 1/9/2017 2:38:00 PM (view original):
Serious question, as I've never coached at D1 - what's the lowest OVR rating (I know individual ratings are the ones that matter, but humor me) player that would be a useful role player on a D1 team by the time he's a senior? If you can't put a 750 as your backup plan and get him, would it kill your team to sign a high potential 600 OVR guy that could eventually develop to an 800+?

About this question doe

mbriese..to try and answer your question. My current WVU team is ranked #3 in Knight, 10-0. It's been a steady build since way before the change to 3.0. I landed my first 5 star recruit before the changeover to 3.0, so the rebuild was gaining steam as the game transitioned.

My recruiting strategy has basically followed what you were asking about. When you're not a powerhouse in 2.0, you never really had a good chance to land the top tier players. That obviously changed in 3.0.

Each season since 3.0, I have targeted heavily 1-2 highly ranked players. My luck has been below average on these top guys. I've only landed one guy who was really top tier, my Soph. SG Black (#4 SG). I have lost a bunch of top guys to higher prestige programs. The key for me to build this current team has been to try and find those 2nd and 3rd tier players with huge upside. I think I've done a pretty good job with that. https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/TeamProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=13076

Seniors
Wells #23PG - 650-->815
Owens #39PF - 601-->881
Crume #11 SF (from WV) - 681-->884

Juniors
Zeno #15C - 664-->925
Grunewald #31PF - 635-->726 (recruited to be a backup until senior year when owens leave, if not replaced by a better player first)

Soph
Black #4SG - 761-->859 (finally got my top target)
Rizzo (international) - 660-->705 (recruited to be a backup role player)
Bradley #87SG - 563-->619 (athletic defender recruited to be a junior/senior backup)
Russo (international) - 535-->603 redshirted - currently serviceable at 9 minutes a game

Frosh
Lost out on top recruit (juco who would've played 20+ min)
Landed backup option #15 SF Harland from WV, who isn't very athletic.

This season's recruiting will make or break WVU for the next few years. 2 good players returning, but need to fill those senior holes with players who can play right away. Should be a challenge.