I know how it is in D1, where it is difficult for non-BCS teams to build up prestige and get good recruits.  So what is the best way to go to have success; season in and season out?
To have 1 good season every 3-4? Or try to balance out the classes and try to hang in there every season?
It seems it takes 2-3 seasons to get the IQ's and the players to be juniors/seniors before they start to become competitive in D1 (at non-BCS schools).

I know its all about recruiting and getting the best players but I still never get what would be the ideal class distribution. 
I hoping to create some discussion about these topics and learn some more from better coaches. 

Posted by Trentonjoe on 10/27/2011 6:47:00 PM (view original):
Depends on what your definition of success is.   My Princeton team is pretty balanced classwise (2-4-3-3), we make the NT tournament every season but haven't won a game in 5 or so years.   

I guess making the NT and being competitive in all of your games. 

http://whatifsports.com/hd/TeamProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=6201

I've been fairly consistant

3 goals:

Recruit the best players I can

Schedule the highest noncon RPI games I can win

Win conference tournament

Posted by bscoresby on 10/27/2011 7:42:00 PM (view original):
http://whatifsports.com/hd/TeamProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=6201

I've been fairly consistant

3 goals:

Recruit the best players I can

Schedule the highest noncon RPI games I can win

Win conference tournament

wow. that is a very good team. pretty tough schedule too. glad to know that is possible in the MWC :)

I'm interested to see how this year goes-  I think I was better last year, and I think I will be better next year... so I can officially call this a rebuilding year.     

I don't know that bad big six schools is the way to go.  Obviously that helps the opponents' opponents portion of RPI, but that is only 25% of the calculation.  50% is opponents' winning %, and having bad big six schools means having the opponents' % dip significantly in conference.  The more I think about that, the more I would really advise against that if you are trying to manipulate RPI.

Good mids are the way to go, because they should rack up nice conference records, ultimately helping you more.

Posted by childplease on 10/27/2011 6:27:00 PM (view original):
I know how it is in D1, where it is difficult for non-BCS teams to build up prestige and get good recruits.  So what is the best way to go to have success; season in and season out?
To have 1 good season every 3-4? Or try to balance out the classes and try to hang in there every season?
It seems it takes 2-3 seasons to get the IQ's and the players to be juniors/seniors before they start to become competitive in D1 (at non-BCS schools).

I know its all about recruiting and getting the best players but I still never get what would be the ideal class distribution. 
I hoping to create some discussion about these topics and learn some more from better coaches. 

generally speaking, the way i handled d1 was like this:

if its a school you want to stay at for a long time, build a semi-balanced set of classes. but not too balanced - you still want it a little slanted - like 4-4-2-2 or so, or 5-3-2-2. what ends up happening, say in the 5-3-2-2 case is, after 5 seniors graduate, you have your best year, your best prestige, and that lines up with your highest # of openings. due to the difficulty for lower schools in recruiting, making the most of your big classes is pretty valuable, so i would work for that.

however, if its a stepping stone school, you really want to have 1 good season followed by 1 great season. so a 3-5-3-1 type system works out nicely. it lets you have a good year (at least appear in the NT) followed by a better year (hopefully like a sweet 16). i always felt the game wanted you to have 2 NT appearances in a row, and you got a big boost for it. so if you get 2 NT appearances, with your best year most recent, i think you optimize your job potential (which is the whole point of a stepping-stone school).

im sure there are other ways to do it, but that is how i tried to handle it at least...

Posted by isack24 on 10/28/2011 11:15:00 AM (view original):
I don't know that bad big six schools is the way to go.  Obviously that helps the opponents' opponents portion of RPI, but that is only 25% of the calculation.  50% is opponents' winning %, and having bad big six schools means having the opponents' % dip significantly in conference.  The more I think about that, the more I would really advise against that if you are trying to manipulate RPI.

Good mids are the way to go, because they should rack up nice conference records, ultimately helping you more.

+1

i know trentonjoe agreed next post, but this is definitely the right analysis, bad big 6 school are about the worst possible team to schedule. hard to beat for their contribution to rpi (which is low). where as good mid majors (not great mid majors), as mentioned above, are easier to beat and also help you by racking up the nice records. good mid majors are ideal if you can beat those kind of teams (like if you are a middle of the road big 6 team).

if you are a lower team, like a struggling mid major, your best bet often is actually sim teams. you can go to the worst 5 or 10 conferences, and find a sim team with mostly juniors who will win like 11-14 games in conference, and those teams are usually the easiest teams to beat for their contribution to rpi. you can also find mediocre human teams in really bad conferences who will rack up similar records. basically, that is going to be your easiest team to beat for a solid contribution to rpi, good mid majors are your easiest teams to beat for a good contribution to rpi, so based on the quality of your team, you want some combination of teams from those 2 groups. the only time i would consider scheduling better is as a top 5 nationally team (and not to manipulate rpi at that point, good mid majors are still the way to go there, but often the tough game experience is very valuable when you are trying to win a championship).

Wait, billy ... I didn't thinkt that you actually scheduled non-con games.

Sorry buddy -- couldn't resist.

Posted by Trentonjoe on 10/28/2011 1:13:00 PM (view original):
If scheduling good mid-majors are the way to go, how come people aren't beating down my door to play me at Princeton then.

The other part- scheduling game you will win is probably your problem ;).

Posted by Trentonjoe on 10/28/2011 1:13:00 PM (view original):
If scheduling good mid-majors are the way to go, how come people aren't beating down my door to play me at Princeton then.

Because it doesn't do you much good to lose to them.  Scheduling good mid-majors you can BEAT is what they were talking about.