I'm not saying everyone should think that way, but I've had a little bit of success now, and I don't want to be sitting in an empty or dead conference forever quietly winning games on autopilot...I want the back and forth of an active CC, and not everywhere has that...until very recently I never really gave it a lot of thought either, but I will going forward...

It's a senseless shakeup though...I say if you create any new worlds, then make changes, but don't risk changing what you have right now for bugs/problems that can be avoided entirely.  The "what happens if/when they get it wrong" question is what irks me...it's just not even close to worth it.

The benefit isn't worth the cost.

Posted by agentverde on 2/13/2011 10:22:00 AM (view original):
@girt25: Did you read the post? The conference numbers stay even. I wasn't trying to break the 12 team conference, just make it accurately reflect real life as much as possible.

Your concern over coaches choosing conference because of who's in the conference has been raised a few other times. Honestly, I don't get it. I pick teams based on the team (I like Oregon, for instance, so I coach them, and I would choose other schools based on the coaching experience they provide). I don't think I'd ever choose a conference based on who's coaching there, and I don't think I'm in the minority.

Either way, it's not as if the conferences would be entirely shook up. The most a conference would changes would be by two schools.

I have encouraged a lot of my friends to sign up for WIS and join the conference I am in.

Because you grow to enjoy the banter and relationships and rivalries with other coaches in conference.  And believe it or not, the number who go for that sort fo thing is very significant.

This wasn't really a debate about being in a conference with your friends. As far as I can tell, that's all still very possible. As I mentioned before, conferences wouldn't change all that much.

I appreciate the banter and the folks in my conference, too, it's just that's not the driving force behind my WIS experience. As to whether I'm in the majority or minority there, I guess none of us have actual data to back it up.

So i'll go back to my first point: realism. That's what the game aspires to, and that's how I think it should stay.

I think this is a well meaning idea, and I think a good one. But there seems to be quite a few more pressing issues that should be taken care of before something like this is addressed.

Posted by coach_billyg on 2/13/2011 2:17:00 PM (view original):

Posted by salag on 2/13/2011 12:50:00 PM (view original):

It's not a bad idea, I don't think its necessary. I believe you would have to ask all the coaches who currently own those teams and get their permission in each of the worlds to prevent any bad blood and to make sure they wouldn't mind being moved.

People need to relax though, he didn't say he hated the game. Girt, actually read his post before getting angry please, his proposal would keep conferences at 10 teams and you would have known this if you took two minutes to read the post before making yourself seem ignorant.

It's a good suggestion, may be hard to implement because of the coaches involved, but at least the scheduling would stay the same and it would reflect real life a little more as the NCAA changes in the next season or two.

second paragraph is a bit ironic... its 12 teams per conference, hehe :)

but anyway beyond that nitpick, i think what girt said is 100% valid. what about the big east? as he said, mimicking real life here is essentially impossible, because we are limited to having 12 teams per conference. the OP gets you part of the way there... but its not going to get it close, so i really fail to see the advantage.

You beat me to it Billy.  Funny to say someone seems ignorant when they can't even get a basic thing like the number of teams in a conference correct.  You're right, oh the irony!