Posted by Benis on 3/2/2017 7:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 3/2/2017 6:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 3/2/2017 4:14:00 PM (view original):
B6 advantages have been neutered. Not a hyperbole at all. Its true. Night and day compared to 2.0.

No, complete hyperbole. The advantages have been mitigated, so it's no longer winner's ball. You do have to battle every year to stay on top, elite recruits are no longer routinely abdicated to the highest prestige team with the most open scholarships. The advantage to playing at a Big 6 program are not gone, or remotely "neutered". People still aspire to Big 6 schools, and the advantages I mentioned are built in to the game, and carry significant weight.

Some think it's gone too far. Others disagree. Those assessments are based in the gameplay preferences of the individual. But calling the advantages "neutered" is plain hyperbole by any proper understanding of the term.

What advantage is there to a B6 program now? And what were the advantages before? How do they compare?

They didn't change that concept Benis?

We've heard over and over and over how top D1 schools would just crush everyone and had no battles and had no competition. I'll agree with this. It was a problem.

Now you have a A+ D1 school losing to a D3 school.. Even after using 15 HVs (75% of the max for those keeping track at home). That was literally impossible in 2.0 and now it is possible, even though it will be VERY VERY rare.

Posted by Benis on 3/2/2017 7:09:00 PM (view original):
We've heard over and over and over how top D1 schools would just crush everyone and had no battles and had no competition. I'll agree with this. It was a problem.

Now you have a A+ D1 school losing to a D3 school.. Even after using 15 HVs (75% of the max for those keeping track at home). That was literally impossible in 2.0 and now it is possible, even though it will be VERY VERY rare.

I believe that is what they call the law of unintended consequences. A D3 beating a D1, while some call a travesty, although an extremely rare one, has to be a result that is possible for the new system. There is simply no way to program against it without altering the vision they had for the update.

Just opened a beer. Read the forum. It's interesting to see different point of views. Nonetheless, I still haven't seen a limit in people s mind when it comes to D3. Arguing the D1 should lose because of efforts is like arguing... fill in the blank

If a D3 is allowed to recruit said player, it should NOT be IMPOSSIBLE that they sign with the D3 school.

Zorzii, I seem to recall that when beta was unveiled and a D3 or two landed a top 100 recruit people started losing their minds. Now that it's been what, four recruiting seasons in 3.0 and how many of them have been snagged by a D3? I've looked in Iba and haven't seen any. I am left to assume that the same result has been observed in all the other worlds. Do I think that a D3 should be able to get a legitimate D1 player if a D1 school decides to go after them? No. However, I strongly disagree when the player isn't really a D1 caliber player and is only being recruiting as somewhat a last ditch effort by a D1 while a D3 has been recruiting them for possibly longer. I know the wisdom is that you take your chances with that being a D3. But the player in question is not a D1 player, so I'm sorry but I don't believe that comes into play here.

That was before Spud's Red Light supersloth.

And which player are you talking about?

The player that Union landed over both UCONN and WVU. In that thread talking about the biggest recruiting upset.

That guy is a solid D1 player. Why don't you think he is?

If ATH is so important to this game, explain to me how a guy with 61 Low ATH is good enough for D1? Seriously, not trying to be a smarty pants. And, if he was so solid, what was he doing there for the D3 to go after? Shouldn't the other two have destroyed him and been done with it?

Posted by supersloth33 on 3/2/2017 8:03:00 PM (view original):
If ATH is so important to this game, explain to me how a guy with 61 Low ATH is good enough for D1? Seriously, not trying to be a smarty pants. And, if he was so solid, what was he doing there for the D3 to go after? Shouldn't the other two have destroyed him and been done with it?

61 is low but can you link other stats. I have a 63 ath pf, back-up at Clemson but he has 100 reb and over 95 blk, 82 def and i like his 52 passing.

Posted by zorzii on 3/2/2017 8:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by supersloth33 on 3/2/2017 8:03:00 PM (view original):
If ATH is so important to this game, explain to me how a guy with 61 Low ATH is good enough for D1? Seriously, not trying to be a smarty pants. And, if he was so solid, what was he doing there for the D3 to go after? Shouldn't the other two have destroyed him and been done with it?

61 is low but can you link other stats. I have a 63 ath pf, back-up at Clemson but he has 100 reb and over 95 blk, 82 def and i like his 52 passing.

For Spud and Mike so they have an orgasm, he was actually, the pf I got, back-up plan grabbed with 5 ap... every cycle.

Supersloth. This guy has 54 ath on my D1 NMSU team. He will end up in the top 25 all time D1 scorers in Allen next season. Easily.

https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=0&pid=3494062

My PG has only 71 ath and currently leads D1 in Assists.

https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=0&pid=3446602

Ath is important sure. But it's not like all guys with low Ath are bad. Awhile back me, mike and turtle had a big discussion about ath/def. I found many really good D3 teams with <50 ath/def that have won titles.

Stamina 68 Blue
Durability 66 Blue
Ath 61 Red
Speed 81 yellow
Rebound 1 red
Defense 51 blue
Block 1 red
LP 1 red
PE 77 yellow
BH 68 green
P 51 green
WE 65
FT C+ Blue