Posted by tampafla on 1/27/2016 11:04:00 PM (view original):
Posted by cjsweat on 1/27/2016 10:24:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tampafla on 1/27/2016 9:44:00 PM (view original):
Posted by cjsweat on 1/27/2016 9:22:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tampafla on 1/27/2016 8:13:00 PM (view original):
Posted by vikesrule69 on 1/27/2016 6:26:00 PM (view original):
They really don't need scholarships raised unless they brought back injuries and stamina actually worked correctly.
This. 60 is way to much. 50 is the perfect amount as it forces you to set up your team correctly.
I disagree. I think this game is becoming more and more about depth. If they bring back injuries and stamina, I think they absolutely need to increase the roster size. But with just 50 scholarships, if I miss out on even just an average player, it can throw off my depth. Last season, I had to work with just 5 DL because I was poached twice just before signings. Right now, a 1AA recruiting class can take a drastic turn for the worse if a 1A program decides to recruit a 1AA player. With expanded rosters and a larger recruiting pool, 1AA teams would be able to recover from a recruiting loss. 50 scholarships is just bare bones, 60 would give us some meat.
The same thing happens in real life. Everyone wants more scholarships. Where does it end? Teams are dominating right now only having 50 scholarships. Increasing it to 60 is not going to change that. All that it's going to do is allow the better teams to become more dominate. You think I wouldn't have loved to have 10 more scholarships to play with at NE? Of course I would've, but its not fair to everyone else. Why should I be allowed to just stock pile talent? 50 makes me pick and choose who I want, meaning a talented player can go to a build team. The only way this makes sense is if injuries are brought back. The recruit distro would also have to be turned completely back on. I can create great depth right now with 50 scholarships if I set my team up correctly.
It's not about creating more or less parity. Coaches are going to dominate no matter how large or small the roster size is.
It's about sophisticating the game. If you look at the trend of the engines, each engine has given the coach more customization. If/when the engine is updated or if they release a new engine, we're going to get more customization. With that customization, you're going to want a deeper roster. I do believe that injuries and stamina will be brought back eventually. If that is in the works, and if were going to get more customization eventually, then we're going to need more scholarships anyway.
To me, 60-65 scholarships with 5-7 redshirts would be amazing.
You don't need more scholarships with more custom formations. We aren't going to ever agree on this my friend. I see where you are coming from, but I don't agree. 55 is the highest it should ever go. That would be with distro set to at least 85% of where it used to be. I don't need a deeper roster with no injuries no matter what the formation is. That will make the game way to easy. If they bring back injuries, give us five more spots and up redshirting to 5. That's the only changes I see anywhere close to necessary. 60-65 would be like stealing candy from a baby for elites and top teams. The unintended consequence my friend. So you're going to give me and extra 5 schollies a class at an elite...BRING IT ON. You're going to up my budget by 75k...ha please please please do...but only if you want to make this game super unbalanced between the haves and the have nots.
The parity level in this game is at the highest I've seen it. I'm not trying to mess with that, I'll just deal with my 50 and make it work. Sure some teams are dominating, but that's because those coaches are the best of the best. You start giving to many coaches that much of a talent advantage with 10-15 more elite players they can pull and you'll lose the small base we are clinging to to the moment.
Actually, it's much easier for elites to recruit and win with just a 50 scholarship limit. This is for a few reasons.
One being post season money. If there were 60 scholarships, you would average 15 scholarships per class. So, if you receive $40,000 in post-season money, you only receive an extra $2,666 per scholarship. With the current 50 scholarship limit, you average 12.5 scholarships per class. So, if you receive $40,000 in post-season money, you receive $3,200 per scholarship.
Two, having a higher scholarship limit DOES allow for more customization. If you feel that you don't need to take advantage of that customization, that's your prerogative. I however would use the extra scholarships to build a much deeper roster built around two formations.
Lastly, if I miss on a recruit, I won't have to worry about depth issues. With the current 50 scholarship limit, I'm essentially having to start half of my team. If I'm using a 3/4 and I'm down to 5 LB's before recruiting starts and I only sign one while missing on another, I'm now having to start more than half of my LB's. That creates an enormous amount of depth problems, especially for any 1AA program looking to make a deep playoff run. With 60 scholarships, I'd likely enter recruiting with closer to 7 LB's on the roster. So, if I miss on recruiting for a season, it isn't as big of a deal.
An elite really shouldn't have to sign walk-on's. And if they do, it really shouldn't be more than one per season. Because non-elites are at a recruiting disadvantage, it's very possible you could take on 2 to 3 walk-on's in a bad recruiting season. Although recruits should continue to avoid walk-ons under the new system, the playing field still remains 11 on 11. Thus, if you only have 58 scholarship players on your team and they have 60, the disadvantage is much smaller.