Posted by dacj501 on 3/1/2013 11:30:00 AM (view original):
(link)

now that just makes me sad... like im too young to be out of touch. i always miss these dumb internet trends like that rick rolled thing (as you can see, my entire knowledge of these things comes from HD forum posts). and those stupid viral videos i learn exist when drunk people imitate them at weddings. i guess im glad i miss them, because mostly that kind of stuff doesnt hit my sense of humor (maybe i just wasnt high enough when first exposed?). 

I like the idea of an extra red shirt.  One flaw with this game is that for the most part the best players on each team are seniors.  I realize that is the norm, but how often is the best player on a team a sophomore? I would like to see more randomness as to how a player progresses.  So if I recruit a D3 guy instead of him starting around 450 and gradually turning into a 610 maybe 1 in 20 jump by 100 points in there first year and slow down after that.  I would also like to see the scouting reports be "inaccaurate" randomly.  We all pretty  much know how good a guy will once he is on our roster and there aren't any surprises.  Every now and then it would be nice to see  a player that wasn't expected to get better on Defense to actually go up 10 points or something.

Funny, that is almost the EXACT same argument people used when they argued about how potential made the game better as opposed to the pre-potential days. 

Posted by uwrjl93 on 3/1/2013 5:36:00 PM (view original):
I like the idea of an extra red shirt.  One flaw with this game is that for the most part the best players on each team are seniors.  I realize that is the norm, but how often is the best player on a team a sophomore? I would like to see more randomness as to how a player progresses.  So if I recruit a D3 guy instead of him starting around 450 and gradually turning into a 610 maybe 1 in 20 jump by 100 points in there first year and slow down after that.  I would also like to see the scouting reports be "inaccaurate" randomly.  We all pretty  much know how good a guy will once he is on our roster and there aren't any surprises.  Every now and then it would be nice to see  a player that wasn't expected to get better on Defense to actually go up 10 points or something.

it might be nice for the player to get unexpected gains, but doesn't that system imply that sometimes players who are supposed to get 10 points don't get any? I'm not in favor of that...

Posted by emy1013 on 3/1/2013 7:46:00 PM (view original):
Funny, that is almost the EXACT same argument people used when they argued about how potential made the game better as opposed to the pre-potential days. 

Pre potential would be boring to me.

Funny thing is, "pre-potential" was almost exactly like it is now.  You had guys in the single digits and close to ninety that would hardly exhibit any growth.  Those would be the low potential categories now.  The ratings in the teens and say, mid-seventies, grew slowly.  Those would be considered the average potentials now.  The ratings between thirty and sixty grew very quickly, the high potentials now.

Potential has always been in the game, it's just that it wasn't "officially" called potential and most people were too stupid to grasp the concept of it anyway.  So........like everything else in this game, WIS dumbed it down for the masses so that more coaches could be spoonfed and not actually have to do any work.  Putting together a practice plan back then was not the paint-by-numbers way it is now.  You actually had to think and make decisions on where to put your practice minutes.  You had to pay attention.  Now, the damn game tells you exactly where to put your minutes based off of nice little, easy to follow colors.  It's a joke.

One of the nice things about the game back then was that you could actually work on molding a player's ratings to fit your system.  Now, whatever his potential is, and wherever his caps are, well that's what you're stuck with.  I'll tell you what's boring, knowing that when my guy's rating turns red, that I'm basically done with that category.  Nothing left to practice.  Oh sure, there's still six points before he hits his cap, but you know EXACTLY what his cap is.  When you go from high potential to average potential, you know EXACTLY how many ratings points he has left to gain.  And that's not boring?  Please.

You should be able to reshirt as many players as you want to, and can while staying in the 6 per class rule.  I have never understood why the case is as it is.  I doubt many would redshirt more than two a season, but it should be allowed.

Posted by uwrjl93 on 3/2/2013 9:00:00 AM (view original):

So we all agree that more randomness to the potential would be welcomed?

no. sorry if my last post was ambiguous. I do not want to recruit a player with high potential and have him gain 6 points. Not at all.

Potential in a good way. So like dac said, I don't want my guys to be recruited and then a High-High only gets 6 points of improvement. However, I think good randomness would be the odd player who is average or even low may actually be high or average. But then again, I think if this gets out of hand, like way too many players have these random golden nuggets of random potential, I think it bridges the gap between a poor coach and a talented coach.

Did that make sense?

We went from a suggestion to add more redishirts to the idea of changing how players improve altogether here.

I'm in favor of having two redshirts (perhaps more) because in a ten man rotation there are always two guys I don't use much (unless there is an injury or something). One of them usually gets the redshirt, but the other just gets minimal minutes unless I rotate him with someone else in the ten-man rotation, making it effectively 11 men. I'd just rather redshirt BOTH of the players who don't fit the rotation so I can use them more later.

I think adding another redshirt would help zone be more effective. I think everyone can agree zone is inherently the worst defense, but the one benefit is that you don't need as much depth. Most don't play beyond 10 deep. Allowing two redshirts would help zone more than any other defense, I would think, and would maybe allow zone teams to be just slightly more competitive. That said, this is not a burning issue for me.