Looking at the game in question, I believe what whitey was trying to say was that given the players' IQ, the press should not have been as effective as it was. From my experience, albeit limited, is that of all the defenses, the press seems less relient on IQ to determine the overall effectiveness than the other defenses played.

He shot 41 free throws... I'd say the low press IQ of his opponent had a little something to do with that.

You shot 50%, and they commited 31 fouls. The stamina issue was mitigated by John Carroll going 12 deep versus Wartburg going 10 deep. I don't think the press was as much of a factor as 3-point shooting and Wartburg's distro. Fleshman and Mason should get the ball more than Buffington. In general, I think the team that has higher ATH and DE will win regardless of defense, unless the other team has some sort of advantage, like high PE.

"Only" 50%?!  That's a pretty nice percentage, especially when your offensive game plan is easy to figure out (you shot zero 3's out of your offensive set, you only shot halfcourt heaves at the end of each half).  You ran basically the same offense in your exhibitions, so I'm actually surprised he only came out in a -2 positioning.

You had a huge IQ advantage due to your 8 upperclassmen (six of which are seniors with A/A+).  He had an arguably bigger advantage with his ATH/DE.  If these two teams played 100 times it'd probably come out fairly close to even... I just don't think this is the game to point to as the example of the engine being totally out of whack regarding press IQ.  And yes, his offensive IQ's are equally bad, but your defensive ratings aren't good enough to really take advantage of that.  IQ isn't the whole battle, you have to take a step back and look at the core ratings as well.  

There are a lot of ways you can look at this game and find totally justifiable reasons as to why you lost that one.

You shot 41 FTs and was 50% from the field...what's wrong with those numbers besides you lost? His FR have D defense, but they only played 47min out of 200 possible minutes. 

Maybe you should look into things like getting a couple of 3 point shooters, or maybe...going uptempo against them?!?

WAKE UP, SHEEPLE!

Posted by whitey34 on 8/13/2012 4:26:00 PM (view original):
That actually says nothing. All it says is you learned and accepted the many inaccuracies of the game. You paid the money and dealt with it. Some of us watch college basketball and want it more realistic. Obviously the game is doing well enough to pay the bills but if it wants to really grow it needs to make improvements. Many don't stay because they don't want to pay for BS. It's cronies like you who aren't an honest thinker but would rather die for this game the way it is in it inaccuracies

You don't think people complain about this game?  Do you actually read the forums?  I could go through the first page and find a handful of valid, thought out complaints.  People that do in depth analysis and provide statistics to support their argument, then fully accept and debate about differing views on the issue.  Go read any of the hundreds of posts by billy_g where he dissects the engine or dozens of other posters who actually bring valid discussions to the table.

You're ****** off you lost a game you feel you should have won.  Ok.  So do you want realism, where there are possibilities of an upset?  Or do you want set in stone rules where the team that should win always wins?  What's the point in even playing the games in that case?  The season should be over after recruiting and the National Champion just decided based on who has the "best" team.  You want upsets when they favor you and everything else to go the way the numbers say they should.

If you can build a perfect game with zero inaccuracies, go do it.  But don't come here with generic claims and calling people cronies or dishonest thinkers (whatever the deuce that is) just because we don't see it the way you do.  You've been given reasons why your team lost and all you keep saying is "Nuh uh... my teams' IQ was better, la la la la la I can't hear you."  It's ridiculous.