Posted by pdxblazerfan on 11/27/2021 10:55:00 PM (view original):
Posted by gillispie on 11/15/2021 1:49:00 PM (view original):
Posted by Qhadow123 on 11/15/2021 11:17:00 AM (view original):
I have a D2 program. Pursuing a D2 prospect who is 'Very High' on me, is a great match in every way except 'long-term coach', listed as wanting to sign 'Early', and who has no other offers or even much interest. Have gone through 6 offer periods now with the early signing window open and he still hasn't signed. What the heck? What am I missing?
Oh, and I have 4 scholarships available. Am I forgetting a setting somewhere?
this may be wrong, but probably its right at least materially (several mechanical schemes could lead to the same outcome). the way i look at it is this - every recruit has a pre-generated signing preference AND a pre-generated signing cycle which is generated probabilistically based on the signing preference. before the signing cycle, there is 0 chance of them signing. at the signing cycle, and every cycle there after, the player will sign with 100% probability if there is any qualified signer (high or very high, with a scholarship offer and an open slot).
in short, your actions (or other folks' actions) do not impact when that player is open to signing. just hold out for that pre-generated signing cycle.
I've never thought of it as a pre-generated and predetermined signing cycle. I guess that could defn be true. I always thought it was a dice roll each time but adjusted for prefs.
I.e. there are 10 signing cycles in session 1. A player who is early starts at 50% odds of signing right away, then 55.5ish % odds of signing 2nd chance (50% divided by 9 remaining cycles in session 1, added to the previous odds)...then 61.1ish % of signing on the 3rd chance (44.5% divided by 8 remaining cycles, added to 55.5) and so on...ultimately the player has a 100% cumulative chance of signing session 1.
Then a player with end of period 1 pref is the same way, but goes all the way from 0-100% in the 1st session instead of 50-100.
Whenever goes 0-100 more slowly over all 20 signing cycles, and late goes 0-100 in session 2.
well, if the above numbers were correct, half of eligible early signers would sign that first cycle, and then slightly more than half remaining the following, and that definitely isn't the case (eligible in the sense that there is a team with an open scholarship at high or very high, not academically). that doesn't mean such a model is impossible though, with lower figures. also, your model agrees with mine in that being alone on a player or in a battle, or with much effort or little, has no bearing - which is the main thing i was concerned with.
the issue with this overall question is, i'm not seeing a black and white way to determine if it is something like your model or mine. its all probabilistic. one season, when i was co-coaching a team, we tracked like 100 players and their signing prefs, along with when they signed, and got kind of a breakdown of the rough signing curve. this was after i already discarded most models where things like leading on a player alone, having lots or little effort, had an impact (but i was open to being proved wrong - still am - always - but it seems less likely now). and it seemed to me from that, and just general experience, its not the way you describe. i think a lot of players when they become eligible to sign partway through their signing period, seem to sign right away - which is a big driver of why i subscribe to the pre-destined cycle model (or something mechanically similar). see whenever d1 recruits going d2 for the most relevant example, perhaps? their distribution, over a decent sample size, seems to me should definitively point away from one of our models, or both? (we'd have to both formalize what we are saying but still). but all i'm really saying in any of this is, my pattern matching brain isn't buying the sort of model you describe, because there is a model it likes better, for whatever reason!