D1 needs to be "more", not "less" appealing. A D1 where good coaches cannot get in becomes less appealing when the few that do get in are playing a lot of Sim AI schools.

This change seems to have made the process way too difficult. Longevity and recent success should both be factors that count....but there's absolutely no point in penalizing coaches for a bad season. Overall winning percentage throughout the seasons, or average RPI over the seasons would be a better decider.

This WILL drive good coaches out of the game, and we need more coaches, not less.

Posted by hughesjr on 12/13/2011 7:03:00 PM (view original):
People asked for more than the last 4 seasons to count ... and for the last season not to mean so much.

They do EXACTLY what was asked ... now it is the end of the world as we know it?

Do we want more seasons to count or not?

lol, now it's ur turn to defend HD's problems? Guess the GD boards must have gotten boring.

There is clearly a problem here with the job process because coaches that have won the NT with all their players cannot move up to low end D1. How does that make sense?

My problem is the "Keep looking "category which now comprises the majority. No shot to get them. Below that is step backwards and its loyalty hit. Above is not qualified. I think if your a coach at a "X" level prestige you should be able to move to about any X level prestiege that would select you. I have never had the 2 back to back NT apperances and that is what is keeping me from a BCS job. 27 seasons and 500+ wins, come on surely there is a place for a "solid" coach. I have been stuck for several seasons. It just takes the fun out of it.

Posted by graham1 on 12/13/2011 10:52:00 PM (view original):
My problem is the "Keep looking "category which now comprises the majority. No shot to get them. Below that is step backwards and its loyalty hit. Above is not qualified. I think if your a coach at a "X" level prestige you should be able to move to about any X level prestiege that would select you. I have never had the 2 back to back NT apperances and that is what is keeping me from a BCS job. 27 seasons and 500+ wins, come on surely there is a place for a "solid" coach. I have been stuck for several seasons. It just takes the fun out of it.

Agreed to a point. If you're an A prestige at D2/3, I don't think you should qualify for A presitige D1 jobs. But if you are an A Prestige at D1, then I do think you should be able to move up to A prestige D1 jobs.

Posted by salag on 12/14/2011 10:08:00 AM (view original):

Posted by graham1 on 12/13/2011 10:52:00 PM (view original):
My problem is the "Keep looking "category which now comprises the majority. No shot to get them. Below that is step backwards and its loyalty hit. Above is not qualified. I think if your a coach at a "X" level prestige you should be able to move to about any X level prestiege that would select you. I have never had the 2 back to back NT apperances and that is what is keeping me from a BCS job. 27 seasons and 500+ wins, come on surely there is a place for a "solid" coach. I have been stuck for several seasons. It just takes the fun out of it.

Agreed to a point. If you're an A prestige at D2/3, I don't think you should qualify for A presitige D1 jobs. But if you are an A Prestige at D1, then I do think you should be able to move up to A prestige D1 jobs.

Yes I meant in D1. For example I'mcurrently at a  C+. I feel I should be able to move to almost any C+ job ,BCS or not with no hit to loyalty etc. As it is now I'm not qualified or Keep looking(which is no chance) or step backwards.  This after 27 seasons 500+ wins. It just takes much of the fun out of the game if your stuck. So the jobs compnenet of the game seems broken.

First I think that the goal of this whole process needs to be clearly defined.

Is it to try and get more coaches to DI?
Is it to try and make the job process "more fair" to allow coaches who have been good over a long period of time but not elite the opportunity to get a top BCS job?

By taking into account a coaches last 10 seasons and spreading out the weight of those seasons more evenly it seems to be causing as many problems as it is attempting to fix. By lengthening it to 10 seasons having some bad seasons early before growing a monster program (like Chapellhill at delta state) should not exclude you from low level DI jobs. Conversely it should prohibit you from being able to jump directly to a top DI job.

Why can there not be a hybrid system. One that is based on Conference and school prestige. The current job process already takes those factors into account when determining what jobs you are eligible for. So, a school that has a low conference and school prestige should maybe only take into account the last 4 seasons. However, as conference and school prestige increases then so do the number of seasons that are taken into account, so that by the time to get to North Carolina you need a very impressive resume to get the job.

I do wonder though in the long run how is this going to effect good non BCS jobs, and lower BCS jobs when coaches leave or get fired. If the requirements are too stringent is it going to be even more difficult to fill those jobs until the SIM destroys them to a point that humans are again able to fill them.

Posted by bbunch on 12/13/2011 8:13:00 PM (view original):
D1 needs to be "more", not "less" appealing. A D1 where good coaches cannot get in becomes less appealing when the few that do get in are playing a lot of Sim AI schools.

This change seems to have made the process way too difficult. Longevity and recent success should both be factors that count....but there's absolutely no point in penalizing coaches for a bad season. Overall winning percentage throughout the seasons, or average RPI over the seasons would be a better decider.

This WILL drive good coaches out of the game, and we need more coaches, not less.

i have thousands of wins in this sim but since I had to drop back to D2 it is going to take too many great seasons to get back (my previous D1 seasons were not good).  I am one of the good coaches that is going to be gone in the two leagues that I am in D2.  I'll keep my D1 team.

I think the 10 year window is good. 

But maybe the minimum requirements for schools should shift.  I once was unable to apply at Texas after Sweet 16/2nd round /1st round /1st round NT seasons.  So maybe Texas is programmed to want an average of a Sweet 16.  THat was probably doable for 4 seasons, but its really really really hard to average a D1 sweet 16 every year for 10 years.  Unless you are already at a A level school.  I think Texas should take someone whoe has averaged a NT berth every year, maybe with a NT win every other year, but you won't have anyone qualified for these jobs if you keep the same standards and make people have to average them for 2.5 times as long.

yeah...the obvious problem is that hardly anyone is qualified to move up for any job. how does that make sense? it's going to be nearly impossible for big 6 schools to fill their vacancies (unless someone already in big 6 decides to move DOWN), despite an abundance of good coaches who want to fill them.

i mean i took a D- D1 school to B-, then got C+ job in big 6 and took it to B+. and with perfect loyalty/rep i can't get a C+ midmajor job? or C Nebraska?

hughesjr defending all things WIS?  I'm shocked that such a fierce WIS critic would take this turn in tact. 

Simplest fix I can see is move up to DI logic tied to conference prestige. The lower the prestige of a conference, the lower the standards. That would give us a shot at more humans coaching in DI and being willing to work their way up. Also, no firings if the conference is a D prestige (may already be the case). Iba is losing a net 6-8 DI coaches a year. The overall logic improvement looks fine but the devil is in the details.

Posted by tianyi7886 on 12/13/2011 8:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by hughesjr on 12/13/2011 7:03:00 PM (view original):
People asked for more than the last 4 seasons to count ... and for the last season not to mean so much.

They do EXACTLY what was asked ... now it is the end of the world as we know it?

Do we want more seasons to count or not?

lol, now it's ur turn to defend HD's problems? Guess the GD boards must have gotten boring.

There is clearly a problem here with the job process because coaches that have won the NT with all their players cannot move up to low end D1. How does that make sense?

tianyi, this is nothing new for hughes.

Hughes -- as billyg and others stated, the intent of the change (counting more than just four seasons) was good. But as so often happens in HD, they make a change and there is a significant (and negative) unintended consequence. In this case, that is making it far too difficult to move up -- coaches that clearly should be qualified to move up are not.

They just need to fix it so that the overall ease or difficulty of moving up is roughly the same as before, but it just incorporates a 10-yr window. That's all.

as the sim continues to keep the new way we get coaches to move up divisions we continue to lose coaches.  Can the sim afford to become ghost towns? (especially in the lower D1 programs.)  Why would I want to move up to D1 lower divison and play all sims in conf.  This game needs to be fixed immediately or I will be another coach to leave and try something else somewhere else. 

What I have a problem with is not the people who say there is a problem that needs to be fixed but the "Its a disaster and if its not fixed this instant, the moon will fall into the ocean, the oceans will turn to blood, and I'll quit!"

 

(Note;  An example of critical but NOT that is Girt)

Posted by a_in_the_b on 12/16/2011 8:29:00 PM (view original):

What I have a problem with is not the people who say there is a problem that needs to be fixed but the "Its a disaster and if its not fixed this instant, the moon will fall into the ocean, the oceans will turn to blood, and I'll quit!"

 

(Note;  An example of critical but NOT that is Girt)

are you an intellectual my friend?  I don't have a problem with people who see a problem and want to get it fixed as soon as possible.  I have a problem with people allow a problem to become a disaster because they were lazy a butt and didn't get on the problem when they knew said problem was a problem, especially one that could have been taken care of but didn't which allowed the disaster to occur.  My friend, this is not CHINATOWN.

(Note:  an example of a good businessman is a businessman that can see the future and avoid disasters in his business-hint Whatifsports-do your job, the natives are restless)

With the way the sim is set up now, you would be a fool to try to rebuid a D2 program if you ever wanted to go to D1.  The losing seasons in building a program is a killer for movement up.  Unrealistic in the least I may say.  You should be rewarded in the highest if you rebuild a program from a loser to a winner and counting the losing seasons is not only disrespectful to the coach but disheartening to him also.  Why do it if you are not fully rewarded for doing it.