From my understanding, there isn't currently any bonuses for recruiting players in states in which you have current players from on your roster.  I may be wrong about this, and if i am, can someone explain how much of a bonus you receive?  If I am correct, could something like this be implemented in a future update?  It'd make the game more realistic as a lot of high school players are drawn to schools that have players they grew up playing with in high school and AAU.  Maybe give each recruiting tool a certain % bonus that increases for more players on your teams current roster from that state. 

It would greatly help more of the smaller schools in D-1 and it would encourage a a more regional recruiting approach rather than a national recruiting approach each year.

This is a good idea that has been brought up many times. Unfortunately, I don't believe it is very high on the list of future improvements.

Could people PLEASE read the forums a little bit before posting?  I bet this is the 5th time this has been posted in the past 5 months.

Maybe that's a sign that it should be done...just saying.

I, too, sometimes post questions that I know have been answered and will continue to do so. But, if I still have questions after all the years I've played the game, surely newer coaches will have the same question. So I repost. 

Posted by 29707 on 12/14/2011 3:37:00 AM (view original):
Maybe that's a sign that it should be done...just saying.

BOOM. Listen to 29707. He knows something

if this were happening, the state would be an awkward unit to use - should it be the same for California as for Montana?

I think there would need to be a unit based on recruit population - some region that could be a state - like Montana - or a modest chunk of a state

likewise, I would have it apply to foreign countries - like when you get two kids from Latvia it should help getting another

and then, I would have a higher pipeline effect for the same high school....

it is mentioned now and then - I have mentioned it in the past - and I continue to think it would be both interesting and the sort of texture that could help mid majors compete with the BCS schools

I'm against this idea. My teams are generally in small states anyway. I'd hate for someone to get a 'pipeline' to my state for the good recruit I see every 3-4 seasons.

I think the way it would have to work is that you build up credit for each recruit from that state over, say, a four year period.  So if you were consistently recruiting from the state, al, even if it was just secondary recruits, you would almost certainly have a built-in advantage.  If someone else is recruiting your state better than you, then shouldn't that person have a small advantage?  Plus, it's not like it would eliminate the probable distance advantage you have.

To my knowledge, the high schools affiliated with recruits bear no relationship to the real-life size of the high school or strength of the program.

Assuming that is correct, I think a pipeline school affect would be better than a pipeline state (so you don't have to deal with the California vs. Montana issue) and it would also be more realistic for a player to follow another player from his same neighborhood that he (likely) played with at some point, instead of just someone else from the same (general, to a degree) large geographic region.

EDIT - Countries, however, would work more like people are thinking about states, as the relative similarities (culture, language, etc.) are more common there (as compared to the U.S.) than for individual states.

Posted by dahsdebater on 12/14/2011 3:33:00 AM (view original):
Could people PLEASE read the forums a little bit before posting?  I bet this is the 5th time this has been posted in the past 5 months.

nothing like some good old fashioned forum etiquette to encourage newbies to participate in the forums...keep up the good work!

I'm probably missing something obvious here, but how would this concept help small and mid-major schools better compete with the BCS schools? The big schools would be able to use pipelines to expand their reach just as easily (maybe moreso) as the smaller schools could try to make inroads somewhere. If I were at Arizona, for example, where it's often hard to find quality local recruits, I'd be trying to build pipelines to New Mexico, Utah, Nevada, Texas, etc., to try and minimize those distance advantages and put more states in play for me.

Posted by zbrent716 on 12/14/2011 12:25:00 PM (view original):
To my knowledge, the high schools affiliated with recruits bear no relationship to the real-life size of the high school or strength of the program.

Assuming that is correct, I think a pipeline school affect would be better than a pipeline state (so you don't have to deal with the California vs. Montana issue) and it would also be more realistic for a player to follow another player from his same neighborhood that he (likely) played with at some point, instead of just someone else from the same (general, to a degree) large geographic region.

EDIT - Countries, however, would work more like people are thinking about states, as the relative similarities (culture, language, etc.) are more common there (as compared to the U.S.) than for individual states.

Totally agree.  I've said this before.  I think it should be school-specific.  And maybe a small bump for city recruiting.

I should note that I hate this idea.  So I'm approaching it biased although I'm not sure it impacts my question.

But I'm curious to know what advocates are actually wanting to have happen.  With the disclaimer that I've not played at the D1 level, my impression is that Favorite School and Near to Home / Far from Home preferences mean little to nothing.

Would a pipeline be similar to a Favorite School?  Or would it be something that had a big multiplier effect that, for example, would allow a B level D1 school win a recruit from an A level D1 school when recruiting efforts are equal?

Pipeline is not a good idea. Suppose Duke signed 1 player per year from LA on some random choice just to fill the final spot, and end up with pipeline for Louisiana. That would really disadvantage other schools, such as LSU.