Do you guys feel in HD3.0 we see more competitive DI (say top 100) teams taking more, less or the same amount of walkons?

By by reading the forums and looking at the overall team ratings of the team in my world it fells as if walkons are more of a norm than the exception. It feels as if there are much less teams filling all 12 spots, especially at the top.

It seems as if getting to 10 players is about what most coaches are now calling filled, it also seems as if there are less redshirted players too. Am I just in a bubble or is actually happening

Happening

Common sense says it's happening. Talent is spread out and a lot of coaches accustomed to cherrypicking their recruits are actually posting "I'm not taking any player like that. I'd rather have a walk-on." So they're taking walk-ons.

The top D1 coaches either need to change their way of thinking or they'll continue to take walk-ons.

Not rocket science.

It's a completely viable strategy, and was in the previous version of this game as well. There aren't many top level FB/press teams in D1, and I'd say that's the only kind of team that really needs to be concerned about a walk-on or two. At the same time, if you concentrate only on top level talent for your rotation, you are sacrificing depth, and some flexibility in terms of dealing with unexpected early entries, or having a poor recruiting session. There's a trade off, and there are consequences for both strategies, as it should be.

FWIW, everyone knows where this thread was leading. "Should Top 25 teams even have walk-ons? That doesn't happen in real-life. Something is broken here."

Users are making choices. And, if making choices/decisions isn't what this game is about, I'm not sure what the game is.

Posted by all2matt on 1/25/2017 11:59:00 AM (view original):
It seems as if getting to 10 players is about what most coaches are now calling filled, it also seems as if there are less redshirted players too. Am I just in a bubble or is actually happening

It's been awhile since I've had less than 12 scholarship players so I need clarification on one point. Are you able to redshirt a player if you have any walk ons or ineligibles?

You are.

Posted by all2matt on 1/25/2017 11:58:00 AM (view original):
Do you guys feel in HD3.0 we see more competitive DI (say top 100) teams taking more, less or the same amount of walkons?

By by reading the forums and looking at the overall team ratings of the team in my world it fells as if walkons are more of a norm than the exception. It feels as if there are much less teams filling all 12 spots, especially at the top.

Yes, because fb/press combo isn't as viable as motion, and triangle, flex/ man to man, and zone. To the casual player who can't put in a whole lot of time this makes a lot of sense.

Posted by CoachWard95 on 1/25/2017 5:33:00 PM (view original):

Posted by all2matt on 1/25/2017 11:58:00 AM (view original):
Do you guys feel in HD3.0 we see more competitive DI (say top 100) teams taking more, less or the same amount of walkons?

By by reading the forums and looking at the overall team ratings of the team in my world it fells as if walkons are more of a norm than the exception. It feels as if there are much less teams filling all 12 spots, especially at the top.

Yes, because fb/press combo isn't as viable as motion, and triangle, flex/ man to man, and zone. To the casual player who can't put in a whole lot of time this makes a lot of sense.

Yes I can definitely see them fb/press teams going away at the upper levels but DII and DIII should still be easy enough to fill all 12 spots. I've generally had 9 or 10 man rotations at DI, I tried an 8 but couldn't make it work.

Posted by shoe3 on 1/25/2017 12:59:00 PM (view original):
It's a completely viable strategy, and was in the previous version of this game as well. There aren't many top level FB/press teams in D1, and I'd say that's the only kind of team that really needs to be concerned about a walk-on or two. At the same time, if you concentrate only on top level talent for your rotation, you are sacrificing depth, and some flexibility in terms of dealing with unexpected early entries, or having a poor recruiting session. There's a trade off, and there are consequences for both strategies, as it should be.

As long as I can keep 9 or 10 usable guys then I think I'll keep plugging away normally but once (cause we all know it will happen) I'm sitting on 8 or else slowdown mode with tired fatigue settings may be my only option. I just start wonder how many teams a yr we'll end up seeing on average that get struck down and have to employ the 8 man teams.

I'm thinking it's a combination of things. Bad recruiting sessions are a reason, I think, but not the whole reason. Maybe a reaction to having had a bad session or 2, and now you want to keep a few "extra" scholarships worth of resources on hand (for the extra AP, mainly) to help ensure that you GET to at least the 10 scholarship point.

Or, it could also signal a general change in mindset about how teams are structured going forward. It could be that having only1 or 2 scholarships open is starting to be viewed as a not so productive way of going about things. Recruiting strategy has changed, I think it's too early to really know if it's for the better or the worse, but it has changed.

Posted by all2matt on 1/25/2017 11:59:00 AM (view original):
It seems as if getting to 10 players is about what most coaches are now calling filled, it also seems as if there are less redshirted players too. Am I just in a bubble or is actually happening

I have said this a lot but I've always recruited to 10, anything more is a bonus.