Posted by girt25 on 3/28/2011 11:51:00 PM (view original):

Posted by hoosierchap on 3/28/2011 9:31:00 PM (view original):
Recruit generation is definitely a large part of the problem, but not all of it.

hoosier, with the exact same setup for NT money, low/mid DI was awesome before the recruit generation changes. You and I know that as well as anyone, having both been coaches at awesome non-BCS programs (and conferences) in Allen.

So if low/mid DI was that robust and successful before with the same money structure that currently exists ... I don't think you have to be a super sleuth to figure that one out.

Girt, the money is fine if things were the same as before, but they are not the same and have not been the same for a long time.  As you know, the current system is great if you are in the top conference in a world or have an A+ prestige, but otherwise it is not working very well.  Frankly, I would prefer to play in full worlds vs. worlds that just consist of coaches in the big 6 which is basically where we are.

Before-

Human filled mid-majors that were able to compete with bigs.
More decent recruits.
Same money.

Current-

Mid-majors with fewer and fewer human coaches.
Lack of desire among coaches retired or in DII to return/move up to take over vacant mid-majors primarily because they cannot compete and the sim teams suck.
Lack of talent distribution in recruit generation (for the most part only the top players are worth recruiting).  We all seem to agree on this.
Same money

If you add that there is an unwritten rule of collusion among coaches in all conferences, i.e. few battles among mates, recruit generation that is determined by the number of schools in a given area, and a lack battles for top talent which is completely unrealistic.  I believe you have a big problem.

There is not really a good fix that will not take multiple seasons to implement unless the mid-majors receive some talent boost in the form of transfers or talented walk-ons.

Posted by hughesjr on 3/29/2011 8:25:00 AM (view original):
Why should it be as easy to win at Cleveland State as it is for Purdue?

Shouldn't it be easier to recruit from a Big 6 school than from a Mid Major?

Do we want the Div-1 game to be 324 teams where each team has the same chance to win / recruit ... or do we want it to model real life where the McDonalds All Americans congregate at teams like Kentucky, Duke, North Carolina, Kansas, Texas, etc.

I am just starting out in Div-1, but I do not expect my Dartmouth or IUPUI team to be able to recruit as well as Indiana or Syracuse.  Do we really want that to be able to happen?

This is "What If" sports.  I don't want model of real life unless that is how the owners of each team make it.  I want to know" What If" a group of guys decided to make a major powerhouse out of the Ivy league.  I want to be able to compete or fail at any school because of the choices I make and the choices that the other owners make that I am competing directly against.  Not because of what 10 other owners did to get that owner more money to spend or because his conference has more owners and mine has more Sim Ai coaches.  I can't control who plays and there is no incentive to stay in a conference where there are only a couple of owners.

The way I would like to see it is if I am a B prestige then I should be equal to any other B school, have a slight disadvantage to a B+ and a slight advantage over a B-.  If I choose the right prospect and spend more wisely than a B, B+ or even A- prestiqe school then I should get that recruit.  It should be determined on whether there is an underlying bias against my conference or for another conference.  I would like to see all schools on equal footing and let that team's owner decide their fate.   

would you like the game if the schools had names that were unrelated to real schools - just numbers?  and the conferences were just letters? 

check out what a great season team 286 is having in the BB conference!  got their prestige up to B-

Posted by johnmacdan on 3/29/2011 11:21:00 AM (view original):

Posted by hughesjr on 3/29/2011 8:25:00 AM (view original):
Why should it be as easy to win at Cleveland State as it is for Purdue?

Shouldn't it be easier to recruit from a Big 6 school than from a Mid Major?

Do we want the Div-1 game to be 324 teams where each team has the same chance to win / recruit ... or do we want it to model real life where the McDonalds All Americans congregate at teams like Kentucky, Duke, North Carolina, Kansas, Texas, etc.

I am just starting out in Div-1, but I do not expect my Dartmouth or IUPUI team to be able to recruit as well as Indiana or Syracuse.  Do we really want that to be able to happen?

This is "What If" sports.  I don't want model of real life unless that is how the owners of each team make it.  I want to know" What If" a group of guys decided to make a major powerhouse out of the Ivy league.  I want to be able to compete or fail at any school because of the choices I make and the choices that the other owners make that I am competing directly against.  Not because of what 10 other owners did to get that owner more money to spend or because his conference has more owners and mine has more Sim Ai coaches.  I can't control who plays and there is no incentive to stay in a conference where there are only a couple of owners.

The way I would like to see it is if I am a B prestige then I should be equal to any other B school, have a slight disadvantage to a B+ and a slight advantage over a B-.  If I choose the right prospect and spend more wisely than a B, B+ or even A- prestiqe school then I should get that recruit.  It should be determined on whether there is an underlying bias against my conference or for another conference.  I would like to see all schools on equal footing and let that team's owner decide their fate.   

 so pick up a DII or DIII team then

Recruit generation AND NT/PT bonus money. 

NT/PT bonus money NEEDS to be toned down at D1.

In Allen, the ACC has been AVERAGING over $50,000 a year for the last 5+ seasons.

With 2 openings and $85,000 and a A+ prestige, where is the skill to recruit?

Cut the amount in half.  Or at least get it closer in line with D3/D2 NT/PT money as a % of scholarship money.

Either increase scholarship money to $20,000 each or reduce each NT game to $15,000.

Thanks girt, but I believe I clearly stated that recruit generation is a large part of the problem already.  The other items I believe are related to the growing disparity in DI, none of which appear to making HD a better a game.  If you want to disagree or ignore the other issues that is fine with me.

For those of you saying recruit generation is the issue, at the risk of being called a WIS apologist, aren't we about one season into the latest tweak to recruit generation?  Shouldn't we reserve judgment to see if they have addressed the issue after a few seasons?

i dont think most players are close to their peaks at age 18-20. in whatif, most players are.

Possibly, but the way HD works there are a lot of rich get richer mechanisms in D1 (conference prestige, baselines, NT/PT money, etc) and a tiny change to recruit generation might not be enough to restore competitive balance before D1 is empty.

Posted by johnmacdan on 3/29/2011 11:21:00 AM (view original):

Posted by hughesjr on 3/29/2011 8:25:00 AM (view original):
Why should it be as easy to win at Cleveland State as it is for Purdue?

Shouldn't it be easier to recruit from a Big 6 school than from a Mid Major?

Do we want the Div-1 game to be 324 teams where each team has the same chance to win / recruit ... or do we want it to model real life where the McDonalds All Americans congregate at teams like Kentucky, Duke, North Carolina, Kansas, Texas, etc.

I am just starting out in Div-1, but I do not expect my Dartmouth or IUPUI team to be able to recruit as well as Indiana or Syracuse.  Do we really want that to be able to happen?

This is "What If" sports.  I don't want model of real life unless that is how the owners of each team make it.  I want to know" What If" a group of guys decided to make a major powerhouse out of the Ivy league.  I want to be able to compete or fail at any school because of the choices I make and the choices that the other owners make that I am competing directly against.  Not because of what 10 other owners did to get that owner more money to spend or because his conference has more owners and mine has more Sim Ai coaches.  I can't control who plays and there is no incentive to stay in a conference where there are only a couple of owners.

The way I would like to see it is if I am a B prestige then I should be equal to any other B school, have a slight disadvantage to a B+ and a slight advantage over a B-.  If I choose the right prospect and spend more wisely than a B, B+ or even A- prestiqe school then I should get that recruit.  It should be determined on whether there is an underlying bias against my conference or for another conference.  I would like to see all schools on equal footing and let that team's owner decide their fate.   

THe problem with that, John, is that if you take away the advantages that Duke, say, has over Princeton are you really fulfilling your 'Whatif"?  You are saying instead "What if Princeton had the Athletic budget of Duke and Duke had no advantages, and Duke wasn't really Duke and Princeton wasn't really Princeton"  If there is no relation to real life at all, then you aren't playing 'What if' with the real world but 'what if" with a world that bears no relationship whatsoever to reality.  Is turning Princeton into a powerhouse really anything special if there are no disadvantages to Princeton?

 

 

Posted by reinsel on 3/29/2011 12:59:00 PM (view original):
Recruit generation AND NT/PT bonus money. 

NT/PT bonus money NEEDS to be toned down at D1.

In Allen, the ACC has been AVERAGING over $50,000 a year for the last 5+ seasons.

With 2 openings and $85,000 and a A+ prestige, where is the skill to recruit?

Cut the amount in half.  Or at least get it closer in line with D3/D2 NT/PT money as a % of scholarship money.

Either increase scholarship money to $20,000 each or reduce each NT game to $15,000.

Reinsel, for you and hoosier this boils down to being tired of getting your ***** kicked by the ACC. If you coached FL in a world where the SEC was strong, you wouldn't be so jaded and your participation in this conversation would be very different. (And we've only been about $50K once during that time, lol.)

(And while it's true that I coach UNC-Allen, my other team is currently a D+ prestige C-USA school, so the current setup is just as bad for me as it is good.)

I'll say it again: The same NT money structure has been in place forever. It worked well before. So well, in fact, that low/mid DI teams FAR exceeded what their counterparts generally were able to accomplish in real life. If recruit generation had never changed, we wouldn't have an issue right now.

So we can either fix what's broken, or fix what's not broken.

Yeah I get my butt kicked by the ACC in Allen.  Maybe over $50k is wrong, but you haven't been below $40k for a long long time.

Agree that the root cause is recruit generation, but the baseline prestige/conference prestige/NT money structure I never really loved. 

I don't know that I wouldn't realize it was an issue if it was opposite.  I've pretty much kicked Florida States rear for 5 seasons, with more wins, better RPI, NT bids, etc every season, and due to these factors, my Florida team is still sadly weaker when it comes time to recruit.  If I was constantly being outmanuevered, taking multiple walkons and hadn't made the NT in 3 seasons and was stronger than a rival who had made the NT every year, I don't think that would be fair. 

The bottom feeders of the power conferences get way too much charity in terms of conference prestige and NT money, and limiting either of those would be a good thing.

It's all good, HD has been a work in progress for years...nothin's broken...just bent a litle,... play it where it lies or play another game

Dan, thanks for your concern, but we are doing fine against the evil empire in Allen.  While it would be nice for the HD gods to shine on Baton Rouge or Gainesville, that is not where the problem lies.  We just think that the continued imbalance is bad for DI HD as a whole.  If we were really concerned with the ACC in Allen, we would quit and play in the other worlds that exist.          

Everyone has noticed a decline in DI participation.  Conferences outside of the big 6 are basically all sim and for the most part void of talent.  I think that waiting half a year to see if the new recruits change anything is way too long.  There needs to be more bones thrown to encourage more to play at the mid-majors.   Right now there is no real reason to stay at a mid-major unless you like to recruit and play the regular season against a bunch of sims.  An increase in the recruiting pool would help, but I think more needs to be done.

As I have mentioned before the fact that you have a D+ school has little relevance.  Other than you like the challenge which I applaud you for.