i think there's a lot of benefits for a real RS2... it gives d1 schools a chance to adjust after RS1, and kinda offsets the situation where d2 schools start taking the d1 backup options so early in the process, helping with backup options... it gives new coaches a chance to actually get some scholarships unlocked before players sign... gives unexpected EE folks a chance to unlock someone before they sign.... even if there are no new recruits generated, those things are a big help IMO. the 10 signing cycles in RS2 today is overkill anyway. just converting some to non-signing cycles would be a big benefit IMO

Posted by gillispie on 7/23/2021 12:12:00 PM (view original):
i think there's a lot of benefits for a real RS2... it gives d1 schools a chance to adjust after RS1, and kinda offsets the situation where d2 schools start taking the d1 backup options so early in the process, helping with backup options... it gives new coaches a chance to actually get some scholarships unlocked before players sign... gives unexpected EE folks a chance to unlock someone before they sign.... even if there are no new recruits generated, those things are a big help IMO. the 10 signing cycles in RS2 today is overkill anyway. just converting some to non-signing cycles would be a big benefit IMO

If we are worried about a full season being longer, take one of the days from the first recruiting period and put it in the second.

Posted by kubasnack on 7/23/2021 1:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gillispie on 7/23/2021 12:12:00 PM (view original):
i think there's a lot of benefits for a real RS2... it gives d1 schools a chance to adjust after RS1, and kinda offsets the situation where d2 schools start taking the d1 backup options so early in the process, helping with backup options... it gives new coaches a chance to actually get some scholarships unlocked before players sign... gives unexpected EE folks a chance to unlock someone before they sign.... even if there are no new recruits generated, those things are a big help IMO. the 10 signing cycles in RS2 today is overkill anyway. just converting some to non-signing cycles would be a big benefit IMO

If we are worried about a full season being longer, take one of the days from the first recruiting period and put it in the second.

Or just make the renewal deadline be the NT Championship game. Its kind of a waste to have a whole day after the NT championship for teams to renew.

there's probably enough wasted days in there to free up room for a whole third recruiting session ;)

but seriously, assuming there is time - would folks like the idea of RS2 having non-signing cycles to start it off?

Posted by gillispie on 7/23/2021 4:39:00 PM (view original):
there's probably enough wasted days in there to free up room for a whole third recruiting session ;)

but seriously, assuming there is time - would folks like the idea of RS2 having non-signing cycles to start it off?

Opening up RS2 with a non-signing cycle (or 2) has always been pretty popular among forum dwellers (at least the D1 coaches). In beta, I suggested moving up the opening of RS2 by 8 hours, letting us set AP at midnight as soon as the job period ends, with a non-signing cycle running at 11 AM, and then perhaps making that 5PM cycle non-signing as well. This could allow teams with new coaches, or new resources due to lost EEs, get effort in on at least one high priority target in the 2nd session, if they choose.

This would, of course, require D2 and D3 teams to adjust.

In Phelan #5, #10 and #15 stayed. Meanwhile #89, #94 left.

Smh

The better way to look at it is that the draft reached down to #94, because #5, #10, and #15 (and a bunch of others) stayed. Louisville lost a tough luck “likely staying” way down at #74, which is the only real tearjerker of the bunch.

We can resent URI, Tennessee, and Colorado for “luck”. Or we can let other people enjoy good luck once in a while, especially when the game requires us to make risk/reward decisions at every step.

Posted by shoe3 on 7/26/2021 3:43:00 PM (view original):
The better way to look at it is that the draft reached down to #94, because #5, #10, and #15 (and a bunch of others) stayed. Louisville lost a tough luck “likely staying” way down at #74, which is the only real tearjerker of the bunch.

We can resent URI, Tennessee, and Colorado for “luck”. Or we can let other people enjoy good luck once in a while, especially when the game requires us to make risk/reward decisions at every step.

But #5, #10 and #15 stayed. You're overlooking that. That shouldn't happen. When does a top 5 pick not declare?! Why should a top 5 pick not declare? Why does #89 and #94 get drafted as the last couple picks in round 2? (Sure once in a while. But every season? It's far too often)

there's so many dice rolls throughout the process, the potential rolls, recruit gen, recruiting itself, off season improvement, EEs, NT games... i don't think eliminating dice rolls is a justification for change. having these random events is generally speaking a good thing, to keep us on our toes and to keep some variety in there.

i would be fine with making those top 15-20 players declare 100%, and making the late 2nd round guys stay 100%, but its not on my wish list or anything. i do think its a slightly better game design to make it work that way.

Posted by gillispie on 7/28/2021 10:48:00 AM (view original):
there's so many dice rolls throughout the process, the potential rolls, recruit gen, recruiting itself, off season improvement, EEs, NT games... i don't think eliminating dice rolls is a justification for change. having these random events is generally speaking a good thing, to keep us on our toes and to keep some variety in there.

i would be fine with making those top 15-20 players declare 100%, and making the late 2nd round guys stay 100%, but its not on my wish list or anything. i do think its a slightly better game design to make it work that way.

I think that would be great. And it's definitely near the top of my wish list!

I wouldn't put firings anywhere near the top of things to change to improve the game but that's happening for some reason...

Posted by topdogggbm on 7/28/2021 3:07:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 7/26/2021 3:43:00 PM (view original):
The better way to look at it is that the draft reached down to #94, because #5, #10, and #15 (and a bunch of others) stayed. Louisville lost a tough luck “likely staying” way down at #74, which is the only real tearjerker of the bunch.

We can resent URI, Tennessee, and Colorado for “luck”. Or we can let other people enjoy good luck once in a while, especially when the game requires us to make risk/reward decisions at every step.

But #5, #10 and #15 stayed. You're overlooking that. That shouldn't happen. When does a top 5 pick not declare?! Why should a top 5 pick not declare? Why does #89 and #94 get drafted as the last couple picks in round 2? (Sure once in a while. But every season? It's far too often)

When does it happen? Well it doesn’t happen *often*, (less often now than when this game was designed, which is a consideration), and certainly not top 5 guys, but first round caliber players do occasionally stay 4 years. Besides the obvious Alonzo Mourning, Tim Duncan, and Steve Nash from way back, there’s the Danny Granger, David West, Tayshaun Prince, Roy Hibbert from the last couple decades. Damian Lillard and Jimmy Butler more recently.

I am fine saying lottery picks always go, but then I think the whole process needs to change. Instead of disclosing the exact rank, obscure the Big Board a bit. Have them show up as projected “Lottery,” “1st Round,” and “2nd Round” (maybe 20 players projected lottery, 30 more 1st round, and 100 2nd round) and hide the actual rankings until after the conference tournament. Then we retain that risk/reward choice coaches need to make, and the challenge of managing volatile and sometimes unpredictable assets. That part of D1 shouldn’t be lost, otherwise it’s not a D1 game.

I like EEs the way they are because there is no mathematical certainty.

If you want a certainty then why not make any junior/soph that decreases in two or more categories leaves the team because the coach is not helping them reach their potential. Also any junior/soph that has NBA draft potential gets moody and possibly leaves for NBA if they feel you are not maximizing their potential. Maybe you get a few emails like "Hey coach we need to talk. I need to develop my perimeter game to play at the next level. You aren't even giving me time to practice it" then later "Coach I talked to a scout the other day that said I will never reach my full potential with you as my coach. If I leave now I can get an NBA guy that knows how to develop a talent like me and be a star for my second contract". There you go, a mathematical certainty of who is leaving and who is not. (Que the laughter and outrage) LOL

Benis you are the best ever coach at Allen Michigan State. Make the adjustments to Syracuse. I know ypu are not a Tubby Smith going to Kentucky. You will adapt before you get fired.

Certainly not going to let me take over Syracuse from you and turn it into a perennial winner. ;) bahahaha

Posted by shoe3 on 7/28/2021 5:51:00 PM (view original):

Posted by topdogggbm on 7/28/2021 3:07:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 7/26/2021 3:43:00 PM (view original):
The better way to look at it is that the draft reached down to #94, because #5, #10, and #15 (and a bunch of others) stayed. Louisville lost a tough luck “likely staying” way down at #74, which is the only real tearjerker of the bunch.

We can resent URI, Tennessee, and Colorado for “luck”. Or we can let other people enjoy good luck once in a while, especially when the game requires us to make risk/reward decisions at every step.

But #5, #10 and #15 stayed. You're overlooking that. That shouldn't happen. When does a top 5 pick not declare?! Why should a top 5 pick not declare? Why does #89 and #94 get drafted as the last couple picks in round 2? (Sure once in a while. But every season? It's far too often)

When does it happen? Well it doesn’t happen *often*, (less often now than when this game was designed, which is a consideration), and certainly not top 5 guys, but first round caliber players do occasionally stay 4 years. Besides the obvious Alonzo Mourning, Tim Duncan, and Steve Nash from way back, there’s the Danny Granger, David West, Tayshaun Prince, Roy Hibbert from the last couple decades. Damian Lillard and Jimmy Butler more recently.

I am fine saying lottery picks always go, but then I think the whole process needs to change. Instead of disclosing the exact rank, obscure the Big Board a bit. Have them show up as projected “Lottery,” “1st Round,” and “2nd Round” (maybe 20 players projected lottery, 30 more 1st round, and 100 2nd round) and hide the actual rankings until after the conference tournament. Then we retain that risk/reward choice coaches need to make, and the challenge of managing volatile and sometimes unpredictable assets. That part of D1 shouldn’t be lost, otherwise it’s not a D1 game.

You mentioned all players that aren't even in the league anymore besides like two. We're talking about what today's world looks like. And what's expected. We're not talking about the 70s!

I do like your idea about removing the actual big board rankings and making vague classifications tho

Posted by topdogggbm on 7/29/2021 7:44:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 7/28/2021 5:51:00 PM (view original):

Posted by topdogggbm on 7/28/2021 3:07:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 7/26/2021 3:43:00 PM (view original):
The better way to look at it is that the draft reached down to #94, because #5, #10, and #15 (and a bunch of others) stayed. Louisville lost a tough luck “likely staying” way down at #74, which is the only real tearjerker of the bunch.

We can resent URI, Tennessee, and Colorado for “luck”. Or we can let other people enjoy good luck once in a while, especially when the game requires us to make risk/reward decisions at every step.

But #5, #10 and #15 stayed. You're overlooking that. That shouldn't happen. When does a top 5 pick not declare?! Why should a top 5 pick not declare? Why does #89 and #94 get drafted as the last couple picks in round 2? (Sure once in a while. But every season? It's far too often)

When does it happen? Well it doesn’t happen *often*, (less often now than when this game was designed, which is a consideration), and certainly not top 5 guys, but first round caliber players do occasionally stay 4 years. Besides the obvious Alonzo Mourning, Tim Duncan, and Steve Nash from way back, there’s the Danny Granger, David West, Tayshaun Prince, Roy Hibbert from the last couple decades. Damian Lillard and Jimmy Butler more recently.

I am fine saying lottery picks always go, but then I think the whole process needs to change. Instead of disclosing the exact rank, obscure the Big Board a bit. Have them show up as projected “Lottery,” “1st Round,” and “2nd Round” (maybe 20 players projected lottery, 30 more 1st round, and 100 2nd round) and hide the actual rankings until after the conference tournament. Then we retain that risk/reward choice coaches need to make, and the challenge of managing volatile and sometimes unpredictable assets. That part of D1 shouldn’t be lost, otherwise it’s not a D1 game.

You mentioned all players that aren't even in the league anymore besides like two. We're talking about what today's world looks like. And what's expected. We're not talking about the 70s!

I do like your idea about removing the actual big board rankings and making vague classifications tho

“less often now than when this game was designed, which is a consideration”

In other words, the game is what it is because it was designed like 20 years ago. The code is a dinosaur, and the game design it supports is as well. Maybe it can be updated, but it probably isn’t a snap our fingers kind of thing. And anyway, I don’t think it will be great for gameplay. Also I don’t think the real world basketball universe has really improved much - at the amateur or professional level - in the last 20 years. So maybe our “what if” universe doesn’t need to follow real life down every path.

But like I said, if they decide to update, make the entire process more intelligent. Don’t update to make it simpler and less frustrating for benis, because that’s neither good gameplay, nor realistic.