I agree it's a problem...I'll start sending in examples as well.  Last season I had a DIII team with three players with 90+ REB rating, playing in a conference with 8 SIMS, and we were outrebounded for the season

I actually disagree.  I think they fixed, for the most part, whatever the rebounding issue was before.

My three teams: 

http://whatifsports.com/hd/TeamProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=3795

http://whatifsports.com/hd/TeamProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=7249

http://whatifsports.com/hd/TeamProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=3012

All seem to be where they should.  I have a dominant D3 rebounding team, and it showed with 8 more boards per game.  I have a good D2 rebounding team, and I had 5 more.  I have a mediocre/above average D2 rebounding team, and I outrebounded teams by 2+.  Seems right to me.

Are you talking about your Texas Tech team?  I'll give you, that Baylor game seems odd, but Texas, at least at first glance, has a lot more ath.

No isack - this goes back for the past several seasons with the WVAST team and other games in that conference where I've looked at box scores. I probably have 5-10 tickets with box scores as examples over that time.

Gotcha.  Yeah, I think there was a period when rebounding way WAY off, but it's been better since whenever the rebounding update came out, in my opinion.  But maybe it's just me.

It seems fine to me. M2M teams will outperform press/zone teams. So if a pressing team has superior ath/reb to a M2M team the M2M could still win the rebound battle just based off the better positioning they will have on a missed shot.

Last season in Tark I had a zone team where I had 3 80+ rebounders in the starting lineup, I ended up top 5 in rebounding margin and I really don't remember 1 game where I was left scratching my head about the rebounding.

Not even close.  End of game subsitution logic.  I'm down by 2 with 60 seconds to play, and the game engine subs out my 93 LP player (who comes off the bench due to less than ideal rebounding numbers) for my defence-first 24 LP front court player, solely because he is the starter.  In what game does that ever happen?

Posted by kmasonbx on 7/20/2011 12:06:00 PM (view original):
It seems fine to me. M2M teams will outperform press/zone teams. So if a pressing team has superior ath/reb to a M2M team the M2M could still win the rebound battle just based off the better positioning they will have on a missed shot.

Last season in Tark I had a zone team where I had 3 80+ rebounders in the starting lineup, I ended up top 5 in rebounding margin and I really don't remember 1 game where I was left scratching my head about the rebounding.

Lol, I make this post and my very next game I get outrebounded by 15 against a team that was less athletic and worse on the boards. I went into the game with a +6 per game they were at +2.5 and I even outrebounded my West Virginia team in an exhibition game. Still don't think it's a big deal, there are some abberations, but these same abberations exist in real life.

Posted by mullycj on 7/20/2011 10:54:00 AM (view original):
No isack - this goes back for the past several seasons with the WVAST team and other games in that conference where I've looked at box scores. I probably have 5-10 tickets with box scores as examples over that time.

5-10 games over several seasons sounds like a reasonable amount of games in which the inferior rebounding team might win the batte of the boards.  There is still some degree of luck/randomness associated with the RNG.  I don't think anybody wants the game to be entirely deterministic.  5-10 games in 1 season would be pushing it, but even 2-4 per season with somewhat weird results on rebounding don't bother me...

if I got my bell curve in order, out of 30 games, 10 should be average, 7 should be good, 2 should be great, 1 should be remarkable while 7 should be bad,  2 should be terrible, 1 should be worst nightmare, more or less.

the thing that i hate most...and i acknowledge that i have benefited from it as well as been hurt by it...is that EVERY single close game (or at least a disproportionately high % relative to real life) that comes down to the last possession seems to have a foul in the last 5-8 seconds that ends up deciding the game since it is apparently impossible to get off anything better than a halfcourt shot with 4 seconds or less on the clock

In fairness, they did miss 42 shots.  They only got 33% of the rebounds on that end, and a good percentage was their guards.

Anyway, if it's coin flip rebounding, why are there teams, a vast majority of whom have fantastic reb ratings, who consistenty dominate on the glass?  (serious question)

I'm not saying your opinion is wrong, I'd be all for reevaluating if you could show me actual proof (not hyperbole or single-game anecdotes).  It seems to me that your assertion can't be correct when the teams at the top of the rebounding margin lists are almost always very good rebounding teams (or played a super easy schedule), but I'm open to listen (not that you care).