Doomey, it bugs me that all of your complaints (and there are a lot of them) are always completely personal in nature -- i.e. "this happened to me" and "I was wronged".

I don't have a problem with a team losing in the F4 having more EE's than a team that made the championship game. I understand the notion that NT teams are the ones that should be more prone to losing players, but it is silly (and totally artificial) to have it so closely tied into postseason performance that a team that goes a round or two farther would be significantly more likely to lose players. (In fact, that aspect would be way more unrealistic than the things you're actually complaining about.)

There are two items at work here -- a random factor (i.e. no player is 100% to go ... a guy could be 90% and seem very likely to leave, but still stay; it's like getting your pocket aces busted in hold 'em), and player personalities factor in as well. Some kids are simply predisposed to go, and others to stay. So normally when you see something that looks a bit off in EE's, one or both of those items is the culprit.

All of that said, EE's are far from perfect. To me, by far the biggest fix would be to make it more difficult for teams to lose multiple EE's. That fix is easy (with each successive EE, simply make it less likely for that team to lose another one), and would prevent teams from being absolutely gutted by EE's. If you have six seniors -- meaning that you lost none of them early on an 846-rated team -- make the F4 and lose one more guy for a total of seven, sorry, that doesn't deserve sympathy. On the other hand, when a team loses seven EE's (like St. John's in Rupp last season), that's a ridiuclous injustice. (Oh, and St. John's made the F4 the following season, so please no bellyaching about how you can't possibly rebuild, etc.)

 

Posted by dahsdebater on 9/13/2011 6:27:00 PM (view original):
I feel like saying that once one guy leaves the others are less likely to leave, in spite of feeling potentially good for the game, is so diametrically opposed to reality that it's probably not a good option.  Buddies often decide together (Oden and Collison, for example), and the more good players that decide to bolt for the NBA the less the draw is for other NBA-caliber players to stick around for an extra year.

Posted by girt25 on 9/13/2011 5:39:00 PM (view original):

Doomey, it bugs me that all of your complaints (and there are a lot of them) are always completely personal in nature -- i.e. "this happened to me" and "I was wronged".

I don't have a problem with a team losing in the F4 having more EE's than a team that made the championship game. I understand the notion that NT teams are the ones that should be more prone to losing players, but it is silly (and totally artificial) to have it so closely tied into postseason performance that a team that goes a round or two farther would be significantly more likely to lose players. (In fact, that aspect would be way more unrealistic than the things you're actually complaining about.)

There are two items at work here -- a random factor (i.e. no player is 100% to go ... a guy could be 90% and seem very likely to leave, but still stay; it's like getting your pocket aces busted in hold 'em), and player personalities factor in as well. Some kids are simply predisposed to go, and others to stay. So normally when you see something that looks a bit off in EE's, one or both of those items is the culprit.

All of that said, EE's are far from perfect. To me, by far the biggest fix would be to make it more difficult for teams to lose multiple EE's. That fix is easy (with each successive EE, simply make it less likely for that team to lose another one), and would prevent teams from being absolutely gutted by EE's. If you have six seniors -- meaning that you lost none of them early on an 846-rated team -- make the F4 and lose one more guy for a total of seven, sorry, that doesn't deserve sympathy. On the other hand, when a team loses seven EE's (like St. John's in Rupp last season), that's a ridiuclous injustice. (Oh, and St. John's made the F4 the following season, so please no bellyaching about how you can't possibly rebuild, etc.)

 

Posted by bow2dacowz on 9/13/2011 7:38:00 PM (view original):
others may or may not agree, but i think it also absolutely kills a mid major to lose a guy to EE.  the odds of one of those players leaving should be significantly less than the odds of a similarly rated player at a big time program, even if the player at the big time program is a reserve.  right now it's less only in the sense that it happens way less often that a mid major gets a player of that caliber...but when they do i think it should be very, very unlikely for that player to leave, like 10% or less.  whether or not you believe that this is more in line with what happens in real life (i do), anything that helps keep the playing field remotely fair and interesting in the name of competition for non BCS coaches in D1 is a good move

Posted by girt25 on 9/13/2011 8:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bow2dacowz on 9/13/2011 7:38:00 PM (view original):
others may or may not agree, but i think it also absolutely kills a mid major to lose a guy to EE.  the odds of one of those players leaving should be significantly less than the odds of a similarly rated player at a big time program, even if the player at the big time program is a reserve.  right now it's less only in the sense that it happens way less often that a mid major gets a player of that caliber...but when they do i think it should be very, very unlikely for that player to leave, like 10% or less.  whether or not you believe that this is more in line with what happens in real life (i do), anything that helps keep the playing field remotely fair and interesting in the name of competition for non BCS coaches in D1 is a good move

I would tend to agree with this. Wouldn't say make it impossible, but reducing the risk sounds right to me.

Posted by doomey on 9/13/2011 11:15:00 PM (view original):
Man, dalt, it's been years, but you still got it. LOL. First post about something that affects me in literally years and you are right there. I really thought you'd put that pettiness behind you. Either way we both know this has been a problem, why don't we just focus on that, my friend.

I don't have a problem with a team losing in the F4 having more EE's than a team that made the championship game. I understand the notion that NT teams are the ones that should be more prone to losing players, but it is silly (and totally artificial) to have it so closely tied into postseason performance that a team that goes a round or two farther would be significantly more likely to lose players. (In fact, that aspect would be way more unrealistic than the things you're actually complaining about.)

Unfortunately it isn't a notion, it is a reality. You know that. The deeper you go the higher the likelihood you loose players. That is the primary reason some successful coachs have said to heck with it and left.  The fact that it isn't equitable is merely another flaw.

For the record, I agree with your idea at least part of the solution, decreasing the chance per per player after each EE. I think the other issue is the quality of the player in question. We've both seen other players who simply were not NBA worthy, infact inferior to some seniors who did not get drafted, go EE purely because the team went deep. It's like the EE formula feels it's more important to have a set number of EE's as opposed to finding out who are simply the best players in the pool. In this respect they ARE targeting successful teams to purposefully artificially "even the playing field".

I don't however believe in any mid-major exceptions. I don't see any reason they should play by differant rules than the big boys. If a guy is a stud at a mid-major, he's just as likely to bolt if he really is an AA as a guy from a BCS program. Even more so if they adjust the recruiting pool.

And dalt, I'm losing 2 to EE, btw but either way I never said it was going to ruin my team, merely that the situation was rediculous when comparing the player pools of the FF teams. Miami had the worst, losing 4 to EE. For what it's worth, I posted on the same EE issues when it happened to other coachs as well, this just happened in conjunction with the WIS announcement.