Re-Implement Post-Season Cash Topic

Posted by zorzii on 3/11/2017 6:44:00 PM (view original):
Teams still have multiple ees, check tark and phelan.
I think a break in between signing's will solve EE's. More clarity, letting the projection players report to the head coach that they are leaving in the break period. Results in Ee's fixed.
3/11/2017 7:32 PM
Posted by CoachWard95 on 3/11/2017 7:32:00 PM (view original):
Posted by zorzii on 3/11/2017 6:44:00 PM (view original):
Teams still have multiple ees, check tark and phelan.
I think a break in between signing's will solve EE's. More clarity, letting the projection players report to the head coach that they are leaving in the break period. Results in Ee's fixed.
Boom. EEs solved, thanks ward.
3/11/2017 8:09 PM
Posted by tkimble on 3/11/2017 8:09:00 PM (view original):
Posted by CoachWard95 on 3/11/2017 7:32:00 PM (view original):
Posted by zorzii on 3/11/2017 6:44:00 PM (view original):
Teams still have multiple ees, check tark and phelan.
I think a break in between signing's will solve EE's. More clarity, letting the projection players report to the head coach that they are leaving in the break period. Results in Ee's fixed.
Boom. EEs solved, thanks ward.
no problem. I just wanted to debate...
3/11/2017 8:10 PM
Postseason cash is a bad idea.

Don't want more late signings. That would just be a nightmare trying to find multiple positions if you lose out that late. I only go after 1-3 late signers a season because of the late EE money. Couldn't imagine having to wait on 4-6 of them then lose out...Then if you don't fill them the Sim signs you a couple scrubs on scholarship...No thanks. I would rather have a choice of the scrubs that I have to take on or take my 1-3 walkons.
3/11/2017 10:39 PM
Posted by shoe3 on 3/11/2017 6:20:00 PM (view original):
No break is necessary if there are more late players, and if those players specifically don't sign until the final 5-6 cycles. I'd keep the start of the second session as is, except for late players, personally.
Compressing chaos into the last few cycles, when there is no recovery from a bad break ... how does that help the game?
3/11/2017 11:08 PM
Posted by CoachSpud on 3/11/2017 11:08:00 PM (view original):
Posted by shoe3 on 3/11/2017 6:20:00 PM (view original):
No break is necessary if there are more late players, and if those players specifically don't sign until the final 5-6 cycles. I'd keep the start of the second session as is, except for late players, personally.
Compressing chaos into the last few cycles, when there is no recovery from a bad break ... how does that help the game?
It helps the upper echelon D1 while putting the screws to lower D1 and D2/D3.
3/12/2017 12:09 AM
Posted by supersloth33 on 3/12/2017 12:09:00 AM (view original):
Posted by CoachSpud on 3/11/2017 11:08:00 PM (view original):
Posted by shoe3 on 3/11/2017 6:20:00 PM (view original):
No break is necessary if there are more late players, and if those players specifically don't sign until the final 5-6 cycles. I'd keep the start of the second session as is, except for late players, personally.
Compressing chaos into the last few cycles, when there is no recovery from a bad break ... how does that help the game?
It helps the upper echelon D1 while putting the screws to lower D1 and D2/D3.
Yeah, exactly, which isn't helping the game.
3/12/2017 3:29 AM
Posted by CoachSpud on 3/12/2017 3:29:00 AM (view original):
Posted by supersloth33 on 3/12/2017 12:09:00 AM (view original):
Posted by CoachSpud on 3/11/2017 11:08:00 PM (view original):
Posted by shoe3 on 3/11/2017 6:20:00 PM (view original):
No break is necessary if there are more late players, and if those players specifically don't sign until the final 5-6 cycles. I'd keep the start of the second session as is, except for late players, personally.
Compressing chaos into the last few cycles, when there is no recovery from a bad break ... how does that help the game?
It helps the upper echelon D1 while putting the screws to lower D1 and D2/D3.
Yeah, exactly, which isn't helping the game.
Don't have to sell me on that, Spud. Some appear to operate under the illusion that this game is meant to cater to D1 coaches. While originally the game was designed for coaches to move up the ranks, customers have changed the paradigm. My lowly D3 money means just as much as D2 coaches' and D1 coaches'. I do not believe opening the floodgates to allow unfettered access to D1 recruits was probably wise, it's too late to turn back now. Too many D3 and D2 teams have benefited from that style of recruiting to go back to a much more restrictive system like we recently had. The bell has been rung. Putting limits on recruiting is liable to upset just as many lower division customers as the D1 coaches who are upset now. On top of that, you'll have an added group of D1 coaches who'll still be upset no matter what new recruiting system is implemented. It's the definition of a lose-lose situation.

There is not a fix to the current issues that plague the recruiting system. They wanted more battles, as before it boiled down to openings and prestige and very little strategy. Once you've allowed for lower division 1 teams to stand on closer footing to the big dogs, there will be battles. Many of them. The byproduct of that is there are going to be a great numbers of losers who are either left scrambling due to poor backup planning, or left with less than desirable players whom they never would have dreamed of accepting on their team under 2.0.

The suggestion has been made here is that more players should sign late, and on top of that they should wait a few periods before deciding. As has been mentioned many times before this suggestion is nothing more than a form of welfare for the coaches. Coaches who failed to either have backup plans ready, or have EE's (even though we've played this version long enough now that they know it's going to happen, yet have NO problem reaping the benefits from landing such players. Which leads me to ask why do they whine about EE's when they knew it was coming. Then, when recruiting opens up every season, the same guys go after EE players, much like Alzheimer's patients.) I don't understand why it's not possible to get players unlocked as backup options. It's been stated over and over and over again that it's almost impossible to knock a guy down enough to be the only one in the signing range. If this is true, how hard would it be to hold some AP out of a battle and get a few guys unlocked that have a late signing preference? It's been well documented that especially in 3+ team battles that it's basically a crapshoot, so can you tell me if you were in one of those it would cripple you to take some AP out to hedge your bets in the extremely likely event that you'll lose the guy when it's decided? No, it appears it's much simpler to complain afterwards than to try and find a solution that at least mitigates losing.

Maybe I'm just off base. I know, before it's said, that my perspective is only from Division 3 team standpoint. To that, I ask how many have recruited at D3 under the current system? Most, if not all that I have checked haven't been at D3 for many, many, many seasons. That doesn't stop them from telling us how things are. In fact, quite a few I've looked at haven't been down to D3 since potentials even came into play. Besides, I used to study sales in college. I had several professors who were in the actual sales world. They taught us sales techniques. They said, once you learned sales, if you can sell greeting cards, you can sell Boeing planes. The techniques don't change just because you're selling bigger items. Much like here, the mechanics don't change just because you go up a division. Recruiting is recruiting is recruiting...
3/12/2017 4:47 AM
"Much like here, the mechanics don't change just because you go up a division. Recruiting is recruiting is recruiting..."

No...not really. Once you go up divisions you will learn. DI is different from DII is different from DI
3/12/2017 9:04 AM
Changing the info to make it clear would help ees. Now, I have three probable ees. I have a likely staying so I figured he has 10-20%?chance of moving. I have two on the fence which is 50 %-50%, probably. I prepared to the best of my situation for one ee. Anyways, I feel it's impossible if you need to recruit also to prepare for more than one.
3/12/2017 9:38 AM
And some EEs aren't even on the big board! How do you plan for that? Magic?
3/12/2017 10:24 AM
If it's your contention that users who recruit top level talent have no idea who "might" declare early, you've got a point. But I have a lot of trouble believing that to be true.
3/12/2017 10:38 AM
BTW, cash bonuses are a terrible idea. For those who say "It wouldn't make much of a difference", why do it? For those who think it's a good idea, it's a "rich get richer" idea. And that's a return to 2.0 where teams "claim" a player and that's that. While that's less of an issue due to HV caps, you'd simply have more schools laying out 20 HV to more players with their extra cash so the "claim" would be on 2nd level players rather than the best.
3/12/2017 10:46 AM
Mike : we have no clue. I hope to lose one... but some have 5 or 6 on the draft board. Imagine... If they knew at least have a better idea, this would work better when it's time to prepare for it. As I said, you can prepare for one and it's not ideal since you do not have the resources.
3/12/2017 10:53 AM
I'm certainly not going to call bullshit but, look at it from my viewpoint, that's just hard to believe. The user is good enough at HD to be able to evaluate and recruit top level talent but is completely clueless on which guys will be EE. Say that out loud. Does it sound reasonable or even feasible?
3/12/2017 10:59 AM
◂ Prev 123456 Next ▸
Re-Implement Post-Season Cash Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.