It's posts like this that honestly make me feel sorry for Seble.  First it was.....it's too hard to move up, humans are better than SIMS, change the process, etc..............so he makes a fix, which we now know was .......shall we say............less than stellar.   However, after some review, he goes back and makes a new fix which seems to make the process of moving up easier, like we all wanted in the 1st place and what happens............a moderately successful D3 coach with a mediocre resume grabs a job at a dismal D1 school that according to our old way of thinking should be looking for ANY human to take it over, cause any human is better than a sim right??  And what does he get now, more grief. 

There is no perfect advancement system.   Yes mid majors and Big 6 schools should have elevated requirements, but the botom of the D1 barrel is barely better than an elite D2 school, some would argue an A+ D2 school is a better job than a D- D1 school.    It was said earlier "This resume should qualify for any D2 job.  No D1 jobs".  I disagree.  I actually think an A+ D2 school should take a better resume to get than a D- D1 team.  I'd rather see the mediocre resume have to work to succeed at the D1 job than get handed a D2 powerhouse where he can recruit all studs in his first couple years.  Which really shows a coaches' skill more???

I guess that all simply means I have no problem with someone who'se made 8 straight postseason appearances getting to try coaching a D- school.

Posted by bow2dacowz on 1/9/2012 12:27:00 PM (view original):
If a coach puts 12 seasons into the game and wants to move up, then so be it.  As you said D3 is a ghost town so if getting to D1 makes the game more enjoyable for him/her then that is their decision to make, not ours.  If they get there and aren't happy then they can always move back to D2 or D3...but after 12 seasons it's not like they are completely unaware as to what they are getting into.

I also don't buy the thing about cheapening D1 moves when this person is going to a D or D- team.  First of all, it's a bad team that this person is moving to, big deal.  Second of all, at the end of the day we are all paying to play this game, not the other way around.  It's not the real world, and none of us are really Dean Smith or Mike Krzyeysyzyeyakdsfkajasdfaski no matter how badly we want to be or how great our WIS resume.  If someone puts in 10+ seasons of their own time and money and wants to take a shot at an awful D1 team to see what they can do, then so what.  It doesn't hurt any of us and it's not like they are leaving D3 hanging.

I totally agree! And the resume was not that bad. If he rarely made the NT, then no. But I am sure Yale would probably be glad to replace their scrub coach with this person, who at least has demonstrated some measure of success.

That's never, ever been how promotions were approached in HD.

That said, it's good to know this is viewed as a two-sided issue, that's why I wanted to solicit opinions. Personally, I still believe that this resume is not at all deserving of being able to jump straight from D3 to D1. But others obviously disagree, and I understand the reasoning. Good to know.

I think that it should just be a rule you have to go through D2 to get to D1. I don't care if you spend one year or 20 there, you just need to pass through. That way the jump wouldn't be an issue.

I also know many disagree with this, but in my perfect world, thats the way it would be.

Posted by caesari on 1/9/2012 7:52:00 PM (view original):
I think that it should just be a rule you have to go through D2 to get to D1. I don't care if you spend one year or 20 there, you just need to pass through. That way the jump wouldn't be an issue.

I also know many disagree with this, but in my perfect world, thats the way it would be.

so a team with 15 seasons worth of a D3 experience with 5 NCs in the last 5 seasons can't take a D- D1 team, while a D2 team that has never won more than 5 games is more qualified!?!?

Posted by tianyi7886 on 1/10/2012 9:22:00 AM (view original):

Posted by caesari on 1/9/2012 7:52:00 PM (view original):
I think that it should just be a rule you have to go through D2 to get to D1. I don't care if you spend one year or 20 there, you just need to pass through. That way the jump wouldn't be an issue.

I also know many disagree with this, but in my perfect world, thats the way it would be.

so a team with 15 seasons worth of a D3 experience with 5 NCs in the last 5 seasons can't take a D- D1 team, while a D2 team that has never won more than 5 games is more qualified!?!?

nope. neither would be qualified using his standards. however, i'm more inclined to agree with you - if a team has super success @ d3, why not allow the jump? of course limiting it to a lower tier school, unless the 5 nc's (or @ least 3) were back to back to back, etc.

Posted by milkamania on 1/9/2012 2:43:00 PM (view original):
It's posts like this that honestly make me feel sorry for Seble.  First it was.....it's too hard to move up, humans are better than SIMS, change the process, etc..............so he makes a fix, which we now know was .......shall we say............less than stellar.   However, after some review, he goes back and makes a new fix which seems to make the process of moving up easier, like we all wanted in the 1st place and what happens............a moderately successful D3 coach with a mediocre resume grabs a job at a dismal D1 school that according to our old way of thinking should be looking for ANY human to take it over, cause any human is better than a sim right??  And what does he get now, more grief. 

There is no perfect advancement system.   Yes mid majors and Big 6 schools should have elevated requirements, but the botom of the D1 barrel is barely better than an elite D2 school, some would argue an A+ D2 school is a better job than a D- D1 school.    It was said earlier "This resume should qualify for any D2 job.  No D1 jobs".  I disagree.  I actually think an A+ D2 school should take a better resume to get than a D- D1 team.  I'd rather see the mediocre resume have to work to succeed at the D1 job than get handed a D2 powerhouse where he can recruit all studs in his first couple years.  Which really shows a coaches' skill more???

I guess that all simply means I have no problem with someone who'se made 8 straight postseason appearances getting to try coaching a D- school.

i dont feel sorry for him at all. like you said, there is no perfect system. so, of course not everyone is going to like it. should those people be mute? i don't think so. its not like girt came out, "seble you SOB look what you let happen", so i dont see a problem. the goal, for any game creator, can never be to keep everyone happy. its something you can never catch and chasing it just leads to trouble.

My opinion is ... any human coach at Div-1 is better than any SIM coach there.

Any human coach should be able to compete for any Div-1 SIM team.  If someone else is more qualified then they can apply.  To me, this applies to D-III or D-II coaches moving up.

If one wants to put a minimum of 5 (or 7) seasons at D-III or 3 seasons at Div-II ... I guess I am fine with that.

People pay to play this game ... as far as I am concerned, they should be able to coach any SIM team regardless of their experience.  Its not like we are trying to fly airplanes or operate a nuclear reactor.  They can't be worse than SIM teams from the standpoint of recruiting or practice plans (assuming they recruit and do any practice plans at all).

Why would you try to restrict anyone who has the faintest idea how to play from taking over a SIM team?

hughes, here's the only case I have against your thought process- coach A and coach B are newer HD coaches.  They finished 5 seasons, 2 at DIII, 3 at DII, and they have never seen one of their players graduate.  They jump up to the 3rd and 4th team in Southwestern non-BCS conference of D1, which has 3 other coaches.  They abandon after getting butchered in the first season, recruiting and on the court (in no way saying this always happens, but examining this case), but had bought 10 packs.  For 5 seasons, the three humans in the conference have a drag down on their prestige, post-season money, RPI etc.

Sure, I have other qualms with your concept, but this is the one that scares me the most.  Heck, one of the programs (Alabama St, Allen),  I abandoned at DI due to life taking over (had no real home for 2 months... long story) has not EVER recovered or received a human coach (except one season) since.

Posted by jtt8355 on 1/10/2012 10:15:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tianyi7886 on 1/10/2012 9:22:00 AM (view original):

Posted by caesari on 1/9/2012 7:52:00 PM (view original):
I think that it should just be a rule you have to go through D2 to get to D1. I don't care if you spend one year or 20 there, you just need to pass through. That way the jump wouldn't be an issue.

I also know many disagree with this, but in my perfect world, thats the way it would be.

so a team with 15 seasons worth of a D3 experience with 5 NCs in the last 5 seasons can't take a D- D1 team, while a D2 team that has never won more than 5 games is more qualified!?!?

nope. neither would be qualified using his standards. however, i'm more inclined to agree with you - if a team has super success @ d3, why not allow the jump? of course limiting it to a lower tier school, unless the 5 nc's (or @ least 3) were back to back to back, etc.

I knew there would be disagreement, but why can't that guy just grab a A- or up prestige at D2, ride it for a year, and then move up? I can see that he may deserve to make the jump, but from what I've seen, that's the exception and not the rule.

Why should he when he's already extremely qualified for the job at a higher level? 5 consecutive D3 NCs isn't enough to skip D2? How about 15 consecutive NCs? Under your logic, no amount of NCs or accolades can get a coach to skip D2, which is absurd.

Think about this in terms of this game and in real life. In this game, the value of the 15x D3 NCs would have a numerical value that qualifies the coach to D1, and this numerical value will be greater than a middle of the road D2 coach with 1st/2nd round knockouts in the NT.

In real life, do you truly believe that if the coach of Trinity or Williams win 5-15 straight D3 NC, while sending players to the NBA (which is almost unheard of for D3; lone case is Devean George), a low tier D1 team looking for a new head coach wouldn't scoop him up? This coach has demonstrated that he can identify talent, recruit them to his school, create effective game plans to win championships, while mentoring under the radar talents and develop them to the professional level. Heck, if such a coach existed in RL, mid-majors in D1 probably would scoop them up. 

And as you said, skipping D2 is the exception, not the rule; it used to be that only the most qualified with extensive D3 resume and success can do it. So what's wrong with the leap in the scenario I mentioned above.

You HAVE to allow a d3-d1 jump. Some D3 coaches build up resumes that would only be a waste going to some petty stepping-stone d2 school. When we could just as well skip a step in the drive for a BCS school

I'm fine with the way it is, but I'd prefer it to be different. There's got to be a cutoff line somewhere, and so I'd prefer it just be set in stone. Obviously my opinion is not widely shared, but that is why we discuss them.

And yes, I see your points. But again, where is the cutoff line now? Does anyone know?