I've been stuck at 2 mid majors for a while.  Hopefully in Knight I'll move up my prestige enough to get into a big conference.  I have done my scheduling designed to win games.  I've thought that winning more games will be better in the long run than a better rpi.  If I win the CT, I'm going to the NT anyway.  Not that I want to be stuck at the mid-major, but that's what I've done and now I've made 3 straignt NT's.  Recruiting is tricky since the top players will go to big schools, and some big schools will take chances with players who have good projections that would normally go to your school.  I always stay out of recruiting battles and then just recruit normally (better for your system, and better projections).

northstorm I have some of the same feelings about underdogs & mid majors.  Was also thinking that I was having more fun when I coached at Bucknell.  Thinking about  moving back to a mid major but not 100% sure.  Just curious if other coaches prefer mid's to BCS. 

Posted by kspoorman on 2/29/2012 6:05:00 PM (view original):
I wouould like to hear some comments from coaches who prefer to coach Mid major programs instead of Major conference schools. 
Why You prefer?
How do you approach recruiting?
How do you schedule?

Posted by northstorm on 2/29/2012 11:37:00 PM (view original):
I prefer the mid majors in real life... I like underdogs.  In HD, I like the "What if" aspect.... can I build up my Monmouth team into a program that can annually make the NT, the top 25, and challenge for a national title.  The game is set so that the BCS conference teams have a SIGNIFICANT inherent advantage over all other schools..... it's rare that any of their coaches even get fired in HD, when similar performance (if done in real life) would get a RL coached the bum's rush.  So, even relatively incompetent HD coaches who somehow manage to stagger into a BCS conf position, are almost embedded there..... so the challenge is in taking a mid or low major past those sorts of programs.  Just about any dumbass can (mis)manage a HD BCS program into mediocrity, and still hang on to his position; not much challenge in that.

Also, I just like the wide variety the smaller programs offer.... I am force fed BCS school results and TV programming on ESPN and the network games; not often I get to watch a Big Sky or Patriot League game, but in HD I can coach those schools!

Posted by trobone on 3/1/2012 4:05:00 AM (view original):
in phelan the MWC is about as close to big 6 as you can get without being a big 6... mostly human coaches and utah is a monster program....

it's fun building a program - but there are disadvantages, especially in recruiting. if you have patience and an attachment to the school it's well worth it.

Posted by northstorm on 3/1/2012 12:20:00 PM (view original):
I am now the proud owner/coach/fill-in-position here at six schools in HD; three one game per day worlds, three two game per day worlds.  I will try my luck at a BCS school (hopefully) in the near future in one or two worlds, most likely the one-game-per-day worlds since they move slower.  But I am even more inclined to stay at low/mid-majors in the two-per-day worlds since you can advance or move to another school so much more quickly (27 day v 45 day length for each season)  .  For me, my UW-Milwaukee school is probably a destination "job"; I will be moving to Milwaukee in mid May, and if all goes well, will be living within a few blocks of that campus, walking my dogs there, etc.  Plus, I have an aunt who graduated that school, and still has some of her artwork hanging in the galleries and admin buildings of the school; so for me, a distinct connection.  I have no connections to any real-life BCS schools, and that probably influences my point of view substantially.

In answer to scheduling, if I take over a weak program, I schedule for wins-wins-wins the first season or two, even if it means all or almost all Sim AI opponents in non-conference.  Get that win total up to 20 ASAP, then you will see at least  a little prestige and recruiting advancement, even if you don't make the PI or NT.  Once established, if you are at a  low or mid major, you probably have a bunch of Sim AIs in your conference, so I try and start upgrading my non-conf for improved SOS, while trying to go at least 4-6 or 5-5 in non-conf; that way, with a good conference W-L record and a win or three in the conf tourney, I can still get to my 20 wins.  Overscheduling in non-conf doesnt help that much, at least in my experience; any SOS increases are wasted if you go 1-9 or 0-10.