I get walk ons that are playing basketball when I don,t think could handle the marching band....267 rated......how about awarding the crappy guys a walk on spot that contact you during recruiting if no one signs them? I say keep the walk on ratings above 350 atleast......I might as well have crash test dummies or a mannequin practicing with us

i think this makes sense.  those guys that are in close proximity that contact you at the end of recruiting that nobody wants.  If those guys become the walkons, they are still not good, seeing as how they wouldnt have been signed.  But it wont kill teams.  and every once in a while you might choose to keep a guy.

They used to every once in a while have walkons I'd actually give scholarships to. Those were usually my favorite players. This was pre-potential though, where if they had workable core stats and a high work ethic is was possible to turn them into something.

If you look at D1 Sim-coached teams, you'll see that some of the walk-ons look like generated recuits, rather than generated walk-ons.  I took over UNCW a long time ago and only had 2 scholarship athletes that were worth keeping, but there was a walk-on guard that I liked!  (Blue in a couple core categories, black in others.)  Of course, I couldn't offer him a scholarship and then keep him as my 3rd player, but he would have been a much more useful player to have kept on.  

I still feel that an incoming coach ought to be able to extend a scholarship offer to a walk-on before he disappears.  On the other hand, I think there would be unintended consequences to making walk-ons too much better.  You'd be giving a further incentive to coaches to take walk-ons.  That would really distort the recruiting market.  I like Sim-AI teams getting those guys as walk-ons, but not human coaches.

My buddy got a walk on who came in rated above 400, really solid player with some good core categories, but he had low potential in nearly every category so there was no reason to keep him. I would like to see them come in with better potential, even if it's just in a few of the core categories it might make me more inclined to keep a guy. And I think the added aspect of not knowing whether something is High-High or High-Low would make it still hit or miss for most guys because their ratings are so low, you really need at least 2 areas on those guys that will go up 30+. I think that would still keep a lot of veteran human coaches who are good recruiters from wanting to risk it, while it could be an added player for less experienced coaches that can help them build.

I think there would be unintended consequences to making walk-ons too much better.  You'd be giving a further incentive to coaches to take walk-ons.  That would really distort the recruiting market.

This is the post I would have made had rogelio not already embedded it within his.

All im saying is a guy with a 267 rating has no reason to be on an intramural court.....much less representing his school