I don't think the population will stay high if we merged two worlds together. I think it could possibly create a really tough competitive world. But if you put two worlds together with say 120 each, of those 240, 80 of them would bow out in 5 seasons because they can't win. The other 160 that stay would like the new competitive world and would be ok with a down year here and there for the sake of "fill the world" mission.

In the end, i think it's a tough sell

It would be a disaster to merge worlds. Worlds are populated now at the levels where users (as a general population) want them. Individuals users may want higher population, but in general can choose to play in conferences or areas where there is more competition, when desired. We’re already “voting” with our presence (and absence) in existing worlds.

The type of merge I have suggested and advocated is merging D2 and D3 into one giant division, with a restructured postseason format. I would not support any change that results in customers being forced to give up programs they have, and often continue to pay for.

Interesting thought for sure.

Here is a way that it would maybe work?

HD takes the two lowest populated worlds, World Y and World Z. World Z has the less coaches than Y, so Z is designated as the world being "killed".

Now all the coaches from world Z are presented with the one time option to merge there coach from Z to Y. If they chose to do so, so they will be allowed to apply for open jobs based on their world Z resume.

If a coach had a team in both worlds, they would be presented with the one time option to use coach Z's resume for that seasons job application process.



This would increase world population, however HD would still lose money since there will be coaches who do not merge.

100% bad idea. Opening up new worlds is better than closing current ones and ******* off even more existing users. There is zero upside long term.

I can go either way on merging worlds. On the D1 level it would be a nightmare. Like a lot of coaches it would depend on the worlds combined. Not enough teams in the right conference for certain players.

How it could be done? At D1 baselines prestige would have to be eliminated permanently. You don't want to trade your A+ baseline for a C/D baseline so to make it fair eliminate all baselines. Next you would have to wipe out everyone's current prestige and have people start from a C baseline to be fair. Carry over rosters to new team. Carry over recruits signed in the first cycle would be a must and all players in each worlds first cycle would be no later than end of first period signing. Recruits can sign as soon as a scholarship is offered. No guarantee they will but that depends on each recruit. First three days only D1 can sign D1 recruits. On day 4 the D2 teams can start signing D1 recruits. On day six D3 programs can start signing D1 recruits. All D2 and D3 recruits would be available to sign from day one for everybody. Day six would be the final day.

Second cycle recruiting-An new fresh batch of recruits is added for everyone to recruit in the combined world. No preferences would be given to any coach in second cycle recruiting. These new recruits would be all blank for preferences during second cycle recruiting when the worlds are put together into one world. Preferences could be added back in the next season with everyone getting the "wants success", "long term coach" and "rebuild" preferences until season five of the mashed world.

Coaches with a team in each world are given an exemption on the "no two teams in the same world" rule. As long as they keep both active they are allowed to keep this exemption indefinitely. If they don't renew one of the teams at any time they lose the exemption permanently.

Nonconference schedule is randomly generated for everyone. Conference schedules are randomly assigned.

There you go mlitney. The simplest way to combine worlds with minimum fuss. Sounds like a lot of work for someone.

Any coach with a top 6 conference would quit IMO and the cost of losing that much revenue isnt worth the dreaming. IMO if you merged worlds that would be the death knell to this game. If I had -Duke and someone else had duke one would lose it - and a TON of coaches would be ticked they would lose their program.

Yeah, it doesn't seem possible, but it's interesting to discuss. I can't imagine what the recruiting would be like with double the coaches.

Instead of merging 2 worlds, it would probably be more realistic to just close 1 world and let all the coaches apply to any job in any other world. That way the coaches would have more jobs to look at, and would be more evenly disbursed among the remaining worlds.

If Phelan was merged with another world and I lost UNC to a coach with a better UNC resume, i'd drive to WIS HQ and burn it down.

Posted by indiansrck27 on 5/7/2019 8:31:00 PM (view original):
If Phelan was merged with another world and I lost UNC to a coach with a better UNC resume, i'd drive to WIS HQ and burn it down.

I think they're at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Washington, DC 20500. God speed.

I think it would be best to give Every user a "ONE TIME" switch world option which they can bring in their coaching resume. So community coaches can gather if they want to and let the users who dont want the merge stay in their world. It would not close a world, It would make coaches stuck on a boring world be on a competitive one and alot more upsides.

But we should put a voting period for the world that would be open for switching if they are likely to accept "CROSS WORLD COACHES", coaches that didn't vote will automatically cast a "NO". If 3/4 of the users on that world agreed then the "ONE TIME" switch option for coaches to apply for that world as a coach would be open during job applications :) Hope my idea helps.

Posted by basoy6658 on 5/7/2019 11:17:00 PM (view original):
I think it would be best to give Every user a "ONE TIME" switch world option which they can bring in their coaching resume. So community coaches can gather if they want to and let the users who dont want the merge stay in their world. It would not close a world, It would make coaches stuck on a boring world be on a competitive one and alot more upsides.

But we should put a voting period for the world that would be open for switching if they are likely to accept "CROSS WORLD COACHES", coaches that didn't vote will automatically cast a "NO". If 3/4 of the users on that world agreed then the "ONE TIME" switch option for coaches to apply for that world as a coach would be open during job applications :) Hope my idea helps.

This reminds me of World of Warcraft.

For a $15 charge, a user may change the realm of their character in WoW.

Interesting thought in HD..

Posted by fluff_nasty on 5/8/2019 1:02:00 AM (view original):

Posted by basoy6658 on 5/7/2019 11:17:00 PM (view original):
I think it would be best to give Every user a "ONE TIME" switch world option which they can bring in their coaching resume. So community coaches can gather if they want to and let the users who dont want the merge stay in their world. It would not close a world, It would make coaches stuck on a boring world be on a competitive one and alot more upsides.

But we should put a voting period for the world that would be open for switching if they are likely to accept "CROSS WORLD COACHES", coaches that didn't vote will automatically cast a "NO". If 3/4 of the users on that world agreed then the "ONE TIME" switch option for coaches to apply for that world as a coach would be open during job applications :) Hope my idea helps.

This reminds me of World of Warcraft.

For a $15 charge, a user may change the realm of their character in WoW.

Interesting thought in HD..

Free on the first time, With pay on the succeeding time, both would still go for the voting period, charges apply when the coach has completed his cross.

I like the one time switch option as this also helps in cases where coaches joined 1/day and want to swap to a 2/day sim or vice versa as well. For those that want a more populated league, WIS should designate one as Hardcore and left folks join it.