I am really not arguing that hb, but its nice to finally see someone not talking out of their ***. Since you seem intelligent enough let me run this by you.

While I might agree that I shouldn't have been A+ to begin with, if that is how the current system works for everyone, then so be it. If you'd like another example of it, take a look at Duke in Knight. So, if that is the way its working its hard for me to believe that in a 4 year span a NT game and an E8 with 2 PI would not equal A+ if some of these do (in order)

Duke A+, 13-15 PI 1, NT1, F4, E8

Wisc A+ NT2, NC, PI 1, Nothing

BC moves up to A+ with E8, NT2, NT2, S16

Hello WIS Users of this thread,

I would like to say that you're all wrong and you're all right.

1. Its insane that one can goto the elite 8 and have their prestige get worse.
2. Its insane that one can miss the NT and remain a A+
3. Its insane that in a down you can only drop 1/3 of a letter grade no matter how bad you do.
4. Its insane that the last 4 years are the only ones considered
5. Its insane that everyone in this thread ignores everything thats wrong about their argument and only states the things that are right. You're just saying the same points over and over.

I could go on but that would be insane. BAHAHAHAHAHAHHAA

See what I did there?

Point 4 is the key one. D1 needs a much longer sample size to normalize prestige. Heck we just had a guy in one of our leagues go to an A- with only a SS in the last 9 years, and a PI champ... but people with NC's and EE's are considered only one grade ahead of them if they have one down year.

I sent a ticket about that, and was told they recognize that the 4 year window's a bit too narrow, and they're considering widening it in the future -- but no distinct plans are currently being considered, as all their attention is on the new engine...

Quote: Originally Posted By jeffdrayer on 5/31/2010
I sent a ticket about that, and was told they recognize that the 4 year window's a bit too narrow, and they're considering widening it in the future


I currently have A+ and D+ teams so I can see both arguments.

I like it at 4 years. In DII and DIII, it's challenging to improve a C- or D+ program because of the recruiting disadvantage of prestige. I took over a DII D+ program recently and the first 20 centers I contacted rejected me. Many of those would've considering an A+ or A team. Yet, you have to get good recruits in order to consistently win and build your prestige.

If the window's longer than 4 years, it'd be discouraging to coaches that have lower prestige.

I agree with orrdc that there is no way an E8 team should drop in prestige IRL. In WIS however, I assume the determination had to do with the value of players drafted decreasing had the most to do with it. I don't know if the conference prestige dropped, but that could contribute too. The last 4 seasons actually improved over the previous season, so that shouldn't be the answer. The math behind prestige needs to be reworked. A low prestige team with 6 seniors can make a lucky run to the Final Four and all of a sudden they have an elite prestige? I don't think so. Does real life Butler have the same prestige as Duke or even Georgetown?

I will concur with much of the above, nice to see some intelligent opinions and not the same crap from the 3 blind mice