Posted by ettaexpress on 2/21/2014 2:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Trentonjoe on 2/21/2014 12:44:00 PM (view original):
It's actually easier to steal players that people pulled down.   If team A has pulled down a player that drops down to team B, team b doesn't have to "waste" the money involved in pulling down the guy.

The same effort team A put in can be duplicated by team B with roughly a HV and scholarship.

This is why I'm reluctant to do it as a lower-prestige program. My resources are thin as it is without doing someone else's work for them.

You're not doing anyone elses work.   If you pull him down, he is only pulled down for you.    If he drops down, then everyone at your prestige and higher can recruit him.


The problem lies when you are a B prestige team, pull a player down, and he drops to the A's before signing.  Of course, the other problem is when higher division teams decided they want the player.

Both of these can be overcome but are expensive.   I generally only pull guys down if the player is an absolute stud, local (roughly less than 2k to pull down), and I am willing to commit 80% + of my budget to him.   

My philosophy is real conservative.  Other coaches use pull downs liberally.   

"It's actually easier to steal players that people pulled down."   

The opposing coach has reduced resources. St s used to pull a player down are worth less credit.

Dammit, I'm going to try to be helpful, but First let me say that I'm aware that since you posted this you may have gone back and re read the thread. So, at this point you may already know the answer, but......

Pull downs are exclusive to your team. You put in the *mandatorily accepted* (scouting trips and/or letters) effort and the player will then accept further effort and be willing to play on your squad. What may be easier is to *steal* a player that you suspect another team has put in the effort to pull down. By this I mean you make note that player A is considering a school that you believe is below his initial level of play. But be careful that said player is not within 70 miles of the other school because that player may be directly recruitable in that instance. Now you wait, and wait, and panic that he won't drop to you, and wait another cycle, and then you get the email saying that the player loves you, well not you, but your school. Now that this player dropped to you you can start sending him effort to try to get him to consider you knowing that the other school had to spend money on scouting trips (which he will still get some partial credit for towards signing effort) . Essentially, you haven't *wasted* any money trying to pull him down and since it is effort and not money that wins battles you will be in a better position to win this battle

So it's not any *easier* to recruit a person that someone else has pulled down vs. someone that just dropped because they weren't getting the interest. Seems like it might actually be harder because you still have to put in the points to get the player. It might also be quite rare for a dropdown to be available cheaply, I don't know.

But the previous poster was probably talking comparatively to being the person pulling down the player (and taking the risk and putting in the resources). If that's the case, I think that's a better description of my concern with the thing. 

Add me to the "attempt to be helpful" list.

At D3 (and D2) prestige works 2 ways. First is in head to head battles. At D3 and D2, this prestige has relatively little effect in recruit decision making, once both (or more) teams are on the players considering list. Before this, it is possible to recruit a division up, hence "pulldowns" and "dropdowns."

A player within 70 miles, may be a "recruitable" because of proximity to a school. That same player is a pulldown/dropdown candidate to every other possible school in the same division. That means a D3 is able to recruit a D2 player as if the player were a D3 (or less effort required). These types of battles you want to be careful engaging in because the close proximity school has expended less money to get on the player considering list.

As for the rest of the "pulldown/dropdown" pool, they are basically the same just a matter of when the school decides to begin recruiting the player. "Pulldowns" happen before the player has "droppeddown." The accepted manner of "pullingdown" is to flood the recruit with Scouting Trips (or letters) because this effort cannot be refused by the player (imagine a RL scenario where  the player cannot keep a coach from showing up and watching his games). Eventually the player "might" get interested in you because of the number of games you keep scouting. While Scouting Trips can get expensive, they get less considering value. So a coach who spends $2K (10-20 trips) to finally get considered, has spent 2/3 of a D3 recruit budget but has gotten the minimum considering effort from the recruit.

Meanwhile, another school has been watching this recruit waiting to get the "I love your school" email (signalling the player has "droppeddown"). Since the player has "dropped" to that schools level (i.e. now a recruitable D3), that coach can spend on Home Visits or Campus Visits (there is a formula in past threads written by your good colleague gillespie at what distance which provides more "value"), which have more considering value than Scouting Visits. Or for the same $2K Coach 2 will spend on HV or CV, will get more bang than Coach 1 did on $2K in Scouting Trips.

The final effect of prestige at the lower level, is the order in which a player drops -- A+ --> C+. So while you can compete head to head battle with a higher prestige school, the higher prestige school has an advantage in they "saw" the player first.

But low prestige (rebuilding) provides a great incentive to be patient. I will send D2 player feeler letters just based on an initial screen of attributes. I will not buy FSS or actively recruit until after signings have already occurred.

Posted by ettaexpress on 2/21/2014 4:54:00 PM (view original):
So it's not any *easier* to recruit a person that someone else has pulled down vs. someone that just dropped because they weren't getting the interest. Seems like it might actually be harder because you still have to put in the points to get the player. It might also be quite rare for a dropdown to be available cheaply, I don't know.

But the previous poster was probably talking comparatively to being the person pulling down the player (and taking the risk and putting in the resources). If that's the case, I think that's a better description of my concern with the thing. 

if you are recruiting a drop down after signings have begun, you can recruit for $1200-$1500.

And because of Supply (large player pool) and Demand (most HD worlds and divisions are pretty thin), late dropdowns (even post-signing dropdowns) are as good or better than early recruits.

Right, it was just meant comparatively.  Team A can more easily steal a player from team B if team B has already used some of their limited resources on SVs that won't count for much in a battle..relative to a situation where team B just normally recruited the player and team A later did the same after he dropped to them.  Team B is in a better position to defend in the 2nd instance.

In terms of team A's ease getting on the player's list, I don't think there is much difference.  Team A will not have much trouble getting on the list for a player that was previously pulled down by B and has now dropped to A.  Team B is just barely on the list there.

Hopefully all of that makes sense.