SO if all the guys who have the most experience say something and happen to be all honest and upfront guys also i think i would believe them.  girt(dalt), emy(dcy), and OR have always been hoenst and consistent winners so that tells you whom you should believe.

I don't know details of the changes between D2 and D3, but I took some time away from HD, and when I left, you had to be pretty good in DIII (at least one good season, or multiple winning seasons) to get to D2, now I'm OVER qualified in Knight for some D2 teams with a team that I've only managed one winning record... two seasons ago.

Posted by dcy0827 on 11/7/2010 11:16:00 PM (view original):
Anyone else have thoughts/opinions?

I think you're spot on...of course I felt that the hiring process was messed up before anyone else really voiced it (not that that particularly matters in this instance), but it just seems to be weighted towards things that don't really matter all that much.  I know seble's in charge now, but reading what some of you said about TK's justifications back in the day are practically laughable.

Posted by oldresorter on 11/8/2010 5:05:00 PM (view original):
acn - I get what those things mean that you quoted, but random deny is something all together different, I have never had that happen, and I have applied for possibly more jobs than anyone at this game, to me the job hiring function has worked predictably and logically, no random deny function.

OR ... I did indeed mean that each school randomly values some things more than others.  So that one school, looking at 2 coaches would pick CoachA and the other would Pick CoachB, if CoachA and CoachB applied at the same time.  Effectively, School 1 likes A and school 2 likes B.

I also do believe that there is an element of chance in hiring ... just like there is an element of chance for blocking a shot.  If I have a 99 BLK Center on defense and a 1 LP Center taking a shot, there is a possibility that he can score.  I think if 2 people apply for a job, and one is more qualified, there is some probability that the lower guy can get the job too.  I could be wrong, of course.

Maybe a ticket is in order.

EDIT:  In fact, I did post a ticket and I will post the answer.

Posted by hughesjr on 11/9/2010 11:50:00 AM (view original):

Posted by oldresorter on 11/8/2010 5:05:00 PM (view original):
acn - I get what those things mean that you quoted, but random deny is something all together different, I have never had that happen, and I have applied for possibly more jobs than anyone at this game, to me the job hiring function has worked predictably and logically, no random deny function.

OR ... I did indeed mean that each school randomly values some things more than others.  So that one school, looking at 2 coaches would pick CoachA and the other would Pick CoachB, if CoachA and CoachB applied at the same time.  Effectively, School 1 likes A and school 2 likes B.

I also do believe that there is an element of chance in hiring ... just like there is an element of chance for blocking a shot.  If I have a 99 BLK Center on defense and a 1 LP Center taking a shot, there is a possibility that he can score.  I think if 2 people apply for a job, and one is more qualified, there is some probability that the lower guy can get the job too.  I could be wrong, of course.

Maybe a ticket is in order.

EDIT:  In fact, I did post a ticket and I will post the answer.

The answer from Customer support is this:

There is no randomness in the process at all. The best coach who meets the school's minimum requirements (which are the same for every coach) will always get the job. About the only fuzziness that enters into the process is how we determine a coach's success, but that is a standard formula that is the same for every coach.

hmmm. there is definitely some confusion on the subject, but i am guessing it very well may be on my part.

so, to me, "randomness" in the hiring process could refer to two different things.

the first is, given a school and two resumes, one resume could win out sometimes and other times the other. i don't know why exactly, but i have always pretty strongly believed this is not the case, and CS and the others posting here seem to confirm this.

the second is, given two resumes, one school could pick one resume and another school could pick the other. this is not exactly randomness, but its a similar effect. i am not sure where i got it from, but i have always believed this exists. i also don't believe CS's response rules out this possibility.

one piece of support for the above is that, well maybe this is wrong but i don't think so (can anyone confirm or deny), is that schools have different minimum requirements. for example, one d1 school might tolerate an a- rep or loyalty and another d1 school might not (or maybe none will at an a-, and its an a, but i thought there was a threshold somewhere where you might get one job and not another, i am pretty sure of that...). if they have different minimum requirements, that could easily be a result of different valuation functions which could not only affect minimum requirements but the way a coach's success is determined. i seem to remember talk about how one school might value a large number of wins more, another might not be so particular about the depth of the resume but instead the short term quality. 

anyone know if I am totally off or not? i have nowhere near the job process experience or analysis to have any idea if this is true from personal experience. its just the impression i got from everything i've read.

Quote post by coach_billyg on 11/9/2010 9:57:00 PM:hmmm. there is definitely some confusion on the subject, but i am guessing it very well may be on my part.

so, to me, "randomness" in the hiring process could refer to two different things.

the first is, given a school and two resumes, one resume could win out sometimes and other times the other. i don't know why exactly, but i have always pretty strongly believed this is not the case, and CS and the others posting here seem to confirm this.

the second is, given two resumes, one school could pick one resume and another school could pick the other. this is not exactly randomness, but its a similar effect. i am not sure where i got it from, but i have always believed this exists. i also don't believe CS's response rules out this possibility.

one piece of support for the above is that, well maybe this is wrong but i don't think so (can anyone confirm or deny), is that schools have different minimum requirements. for example, one d1 school might tolerate an a- rep or loyalty and another d1 school might not (or maybe none will at an a-, and its an a, but i thought there was a threshold somewhere where you might get one job and not another, i am pretty sure of that...). if they have different minimum requirements, that could easily be a result of different valuation functions which could not only affect minimum requirements but the way a coach's success is determined. i seem to remember talk about how one school might value a large number of wins more, another might not be so particular about the depth of the resume but instead the short term quality. 

anyone know if I am totally off or not? i have nowhere near the job process experience or analysis to have any idea if this is true from personal experience. its just the impression i got from everything i've read

The highlighted part is indeed how CS told me it works ... that different teams favor different aspects of a coaches performance differently.  So TeamA may favor experience more while TeamB may favor Loyalty more, etc.

They also told me that if a given job is run 1000 times in a row, the same coach would be picked every time.  There is no "chance/randomness" involved once the school's criteria is known, the coach who best meets the criteria is hired every time.