We all complain that recruiting session 2 is a wasteland. I have one small tweak to maybe make it better.

No player will sign with a team until 5 am on Day 2 of RS2. Two full cycles (5 p.m. Day 1, 11 p.m. Day 1) will process before any player signs.

Part of the reason that RS2 is so difficult/useless is that any good player that is available at the start of RS2 quickly signs with a team. There is a huge rush of signings at 5 p.m. on Day 1. We've all had the experience where we invest a ton of APs in a guy to try to unlock scholly/HV/CV at the start of RS2; at 5:04, we get the emails that he is ready for those things, only to click on his profile and see that he already signed with someone. RS2 turns into an exercise in investing APs in guys who will sign during the same cycle that you finally unlock actions.

The players usually have a late recruiting preference, which is why they waited until RS2 to sign. From a player's perspective, the entire reason for a late signing preference is because they want to get as many offers as they can and have all options open. This type of player doesn't care if they were Coach K's fourth choice, because they just want the chance to go to Duke (as opposed to a guy with an early preference, who wants the process to be over quickly and values being a team's first choice). So wouldn't a player like that want to play the field, see if a big time team is going to swoop in and make them an offer?

By giving other teams two cycles to invest APs, scholly, HV, CV, etc., the player can go to the best situation possible and this creates more recruiting battles and opportunities for coaches to recruit quality players. If you don't want to be caught in the situation where someone is trying to steal your player at the start of RS2, don't recruit guys with a late signing preference. A late signing preference should be a huge neon sign of "I will sell you out at the last minute if I get an offer from a school I like more."

Makes sense if you change it to “no player with a late preference” ....

if players fell fell through the cracks in recruiting cycle one then I have no sympathy if they sign first cycle of session two.

Ugh. This is not new idea.

There is a huge rush of signings at 5 p.m. on Day 1. We've all had the experience where we invest a ton of APs in a guy to try to unlock scholly/HV/CV at the start of RS2; at 5:04, we get the emails that he is ready for those things, only to click on his profile and see that he already signed with someone. RS2 turns into an exercise in investing APs in guys who will sign during the same cycle that you finally unlock actions.

Essentially you're forced to invest a ton of AP because you did nothing in RS1. We know what you suggest essentially screws the D2s who chased said player the entire RS1.

If I am a DI and I planned ahead and invested a bunch in a guy who is late, why is bad if he signs with us in the first or second cycle of phase 2?

It is a true statement that lots of folks sign on those cycles, but why is that bad?

I have some problems with phase 2, but whats the problem this is designed to solve?

I feel like I’ve said this once or twice before today, but I love RS2. It’s realistic, strategic, and emphasizes planning and prioritization. And, of course, it bugs Benis. Overall, very positive.

I have often advocated for tweaking players with the late preference to begin signing 2 cycles later than they currently do. I’ve also brought up adding a number (maybe roughly 30) 600-650 caliber, B IQ level jucos for the late session. Call them late bloomers. The big reason i support these changes, even with my appreciation for RS2, is that I think it would make for a better experience for coaches changing jobs, to be able to have a pool of players that will at least consider their intended effort before they sign. And of course it would ease the EE pain a bit for coaches who lost players unexpectedly.

Posted by fd343ny on 2/2/2018 3:38:00 PM (view original):
If I am a DI and I planned ahead and invested a bunch in a guy who is late, why is bad if he signs with us in the first or second cycle of phase 2?

It is a true statement that lots of folks sign on those cycles, but why is that bad?

I have some problems with phase 2, but whats the problem this is designed to solve?

Existing design is a lollipop for everyone who used to whine about poaching.

This system prematurely locks up a lot of players who common sense says should still be receptive to effort.

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/2/2018 3:25:00 PM (view original):
Ugh. This is not new idea.

There is a huge rush of signings at 5 p.m. on Day 1. We've all had the experience where we invest a ton of APs in a guy to try to unlock scholly/HV/CV at the start of RS2; at 5:04, we get the emails that he is ready for those things, only to click on his profile and see that he already signed with someone. RS2 turns into an exercise in investing APs in guys who will sign during the same cycle that you finally unlock actions.

Essentially you're forced to invest a ton of AP because you did nothing in RS1. We know what you suggest essentially screws the D2s who chased said player the entire RS1.

You're assuming that the coach was at the same school for RS1 and RS2. Under the current system, a coach at a new school has virtually no chance to battle for a quality player in RS2 unless the previous coach or simmy put in effort in RS1. Having a two cycle waiting period gives new coaches a chance to battle.

That's the price of admission to switching schools. Just did it. I managed to get one serviceable player, on a bad team, and ran into the roadblocks you mentioned.

But what you suggest really helps the guy who showed no interest in a player, lost his primary target and desperately needs to be bailed out.

It's just a bad idea because it's more insurance for the "all in, lose, need a back-up" guy.

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/2/2018 7:02:00 PM (view original):
That's the price of admission to switching schools. Just did it. I managed to get one serviceable player, on a bad team, and ran into the roadblocks you mentioned.

But what you suggest really helps the guy who showed no interest in a player, lost his primary target and desperately needs to be bailed out.

It's just a bad idea because it's more insurance for the "all in, lose, need a back-up" guy.

Having players poached is the price of admission for recruiting a player with a late signing preference.

Posted by grimacedance on 2/2/2018 7:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/2/2018 7:02:00 PM (view original):
That's the price of admission to switching schools. Just did it. I managed to get one serviceable player, on a bad team, and ran into the roadblocks you mentioned.

But what you suggest really helps the guy who showed no interest in a player, lost his primary target and desperately needs to be bailed out.

It's just a bad idea because it's more insurance for the "all in, lose, need a back-up" guy.

Having players poached is the price of admission for recruiting a player with a late signing preference.

I liked your other argument better. Mike is correct here. Changing schools is supposed to be difficult.

It's dumb for late-deciding players to jump on offers early in RS2, but that's a different argument from giving poor-planning coaches sanctuary.