I still think it would be weird for there to be no baselines.

The big ten is always going to dominate the midwest, no matter how many NTs butler and the horizon league win.

Quote: Originally Posted By reinsel on 5/18/2010
I still think it would be weird for there to be no baselines.

The big ten is always going to dominate the midwest, no matter how many NTs butler and the horizon league win.

Possibly, but if Butler pounded and outperformed Indiana and Purdue for 20 seasons and had more players get drafted to the NBA over that time period...don't you think that the best players in the Indiana would start looking at Butler as the place to go if you want to play ball? We're not talking about one season aberrations here, we're talking about mid-major programs outperforming their big conference counterparts over 20 seasons. It really bugs when a program has underperformed for 15 seasons, all of a sudden makes it to the 2nd rd of the NT and out of nowhere jumps from a B- to an A-. Meanwhile it's taken a midmajor coach 20 seasons of overperformance to build their program from a D- prestige to a B only to get leap-frogged because of one slightly better than mediocre season.

yeah, ok 20 seasons of dominance can move a baseline, but look at Indiana this year vs. Butler. I still think Indiana should and does have a better prestige, due to their tradition, facilities, tv exposure, conference etc.

Despite IU sucking and Butler almost winning the NT.

And it doesn't take 20 seasons of overperformance, only 4, since that is all the sim looks at. If you want to have prestige generated from a longer than 4 season window, that is fine with me, lets make it 8, and cut down on the value of baseline prestige by a little.

Quote: Originally posted by reinsel on 5/18/2010And it doesn't take 20 seasons of overperformance, only 4, since that is all the sim looks at.  If you want to have prestige generated from a longer than 4 season window, that is fine with me, lets make it 8, and cut down on the value of baseline prestige by a little. 

Ultimately, this is the conversation we SHOULD be having - how to make a system with a flexible baseline that makes sense.

Unfortunately, it's a debate that will accomplish nothing until someone convinces seble that it's a significant issue.

Quote: Originally Posted By reinsel on 5/18/2010And it doesn't take 20 seasons of overperformance, only 4, since that is all the sim looks at. If you want to have prestige generated from a longer than 4 season window, that is fine with me, lets make it 8, and cut down on the value of baseline prestige by a little.

No, 4 seasons of overperformance doesn't compensate. A B school will always slide quicker on one bad season no matter how many seasons 4 or 10 compared to an A+. And I'm not even talking about Butlerish teams, I'm talking teams in power conferences where prestige should be more fluxuant.

And for the record, the Big 12 rules the Midwest. =)

I think muredskin00 has it right though.

I think we could all be behind a system that at D1 looked farther back, and rewards teams that have had 9 good years out of 10 more than a team that has had 1 good year last year.

But I still think the power 6 conferences should always get advantages over the southland and summit leagues. If you don't want baselines, play D2.

5/18/2010 2:44 PM texrangers19
why should traditional powerhouse schools in real life have anything to do with whatifsports? I know it doesn't limit how high I can take a lower level school. However, it is much harder to raise and maintain correct? And you didn't answer why your using baselines from 2003 when its 2010? this is getting a ton of buzz on the messages boards, I really think it needs to be addressed.

5/18/2010 4:52 PM Customer Support
It's meant to make the DI-level somewhat recognizable for someone that knows real life college basketball.

Quote: Originally posted by mrpolo09 on 5/17/2010

Quote: Originally posted by doomey on 5/16/2010Make at least the EE in 4 of the last 6 seasons, have one bum rebuild season in the mix and drop in prestige after an Elite 8... During the same span Kansas (no offense to metsfan at all, good coach) has a NC and a 2nd round in the same timeframe and is an A+ (which is their baseline). There are much worse examples of A+ schools who maintain with mediocre performances. I suppose they may get fired eventually, but what's the point of doing well if you can't maintain it without a much greater effort.I get that we want to maintain some resemblance to the RL, and I know it's been discussed ad nausium, but hell...

you failed to mention that the season before you missed the post season entirely, yet prestige stayed at an A+.

maybe it should have dropped to an A last season, and then stayed at an A this season. But i really dont see too much wrong with this example.

I agree with all of this ... my thought exactly. I'm surprised it didn't drop to an A last season, and overall I'd expect you to be at an A.

That said, I also agree that there is too much tie-in to baseline prestige, and it's both frustrating and silly. As rails said -- who cares what happened in real life, it's what happened in HD that should actually carry the weight.

Nice work at ISU though, doomey. Heckuva job.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

My guess is MainContentPlaceHolder 14, but I'm probably biased.

Don't know what the example was, but I can guess. The worlds are riddled with overachieving B's and C's struggling to keep up with underachieving A's and A+'s. Silly really.

Thanks daalter, I was expecting a drop last season, but even if I did go to an A, I'd think and EE would get it back up there... Again, if I were Kansas or Duke, I'd be buried in deep A+ land by now.

Here is my solution for D1. Use baseline prestige for the first 10-15 seasons in a world. Then use 6-10 year samples to establish prestige from there. Use limiters to keep the conference structures in place: no big 6 conference school can drop below say C+, mids D+ and no limiters on entry level conferences. This way the conference power structure ensures some upward movement while still allowing for good coachs to take a mid or low school to Gonzagaland.

Let the users control what schools are dynasties, not some aribitrary point in time.

Quote: Originally posted by doomey on 5/19/2010Here is my solution for D1. Use baseline prestige for the first 10-15 seasons in a world. Then use 6-10 year samples to establish prestige from there. Use limiters to keep the conference structures in place: no big 6 conference school can drop below say C+, mids D+ and no limiters on entry level conferences. This way the conference power structure ensures some upward movement while still allowing for good coachs to take a mid or low school to Gonzagaland. Let the users control what schools are dynasties, not some aribitrary point in time.

I would agree with this in principle provided there are no upside caps and no individual schools with built-in advantages (i.e. Kentucky, Kansas).

My one remaining concern would be this - we agree that a rolling baseline makes sense for individual schools, but why does it not also make sense for conferences? If we let the coaches build their dynasties, shouldn't a conference full of like minded coaches who join, say, the Horizon league have an opportunity to develop it into a power conference? Sure, it should be hard as hell to do and take a long time to do it (both of which would be true even under my concept of a rolling baseline framework), but shouldn't it at least be possible?

I think in Doomeys model that could happen. If there were only prestige floors, kind of like at D3, for the big conferences, the big 10 could get dropped to a C+ overall, and the horizon would no longer be capped, but the gap would never be as great as if the big 10 was great the horizon sucked.

That seems reasonable to me to have a built in floor for the power schools and mid majors, and then float the rest. D3 has a C- floor for everyone, so it can be done in the current engine. Maybe instead of baselines we have different floors for different teams...like UNC can't get worse than a C+ and Gonzaga a C-, while Alcorn State can goto a D-.

I actually wouldn't mind seeing baseline be a mitigating factor, just a significantly smaller one than it currently is.