Posted by dacj501 on 1/28/2011 8:58:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cheeznsweet on 1/28/2011 8:08:00 AM (view original):
No, I know what you meant, it was just an exaggeration of how things used to be.  And its really far from how things are now.

I think of the top teams in three tiers:  1) the awesome squads usually at high baseline schools that, when they have a bad year, only make the 2nd round of the NT (about 8-10 of them), 2) the 2nd tier which generally make the NT but need a little luck to make a deep run (maybe 20 of them), and 3) the fringe teams that are either up-and-coming or had a big class of seniors (say another 30 or so) and are high seed cannon-fodder in the NT.

Back in the day everyone had a guard that was 99/99 in bh/pass.  That's totally true - but it was only one guy for the 2nd tier and the fringe teams.  The top teams may have had 2 or 3.  Now, the top teams may have a guy that's something like 95/95 or so.  The 2nd tier has guys that are like 85/85.  And the fringe guys are battling with guys in the 75/75 range.

You can at least compete if you're not one of the top teams when you have similar talent.  But the gap has gotten massive these days.  Which means that if you entertain any hope of being competitive you have to go all-in on the few guys that have a chance at getting to 85/85 by their senior year.  

No doubt, we can all change our recruiting strategies to not take walk ons but in doing so, the teams not in the top tier are forfeiting any chance they have to realistically compete.  

I don't have data saved from back then, so I cannot disprove anything you say, but it sure seems like there were more. And it wasn't just 99 in bh/pas, it was 95+ in ath, spd, def, bh, pas, per for guards and 95+ ath, reb, def, sb, lp for bigs...the top teams in the big 6 conferences were lousy with these guys. Having fewer of them is ok with me. Maybe we need more 85 guys to fill out everyone, I don't know...

Posted by cheeznsweet on 1/28/2011 1:08:00 PM (view original):
Dac said: "I don't have data saved from back then, so I cannot disprove anything you say, but it sure seems like there were more. And it wasn't just 99 in bh/pas, it was 95+ in ath, spd, def, bh, pas, per for guards and 95+ ath, reb, def, sb, lp for bigs...the top teams in the big 6 conferences were lousy with these guys. Having fewer of them is ok with me. Maybe we need more 85 guys to fill out everyone, I don't know..."

Sorry, the quote function is making these too long

I wasn't meaning they were only 99 in bh/pass, i was using that as an easy example.  I don't think anyone is going to argue that going back to that is the right thing.  My issue isn't that we should return to that or anything approaching that - regardless of whether it was 10+ guys or 5+ guys or whatever.  What I'm saying is that the recruit generation has swung so far the other way that there its going to be extremely difficult to field a team that doesn't totally suck for an awful lot of coaches.  And a few coaches will find it easy and increasingly easier over time to monopolize the few really strong recruits.

And Moy, before you go pontificating about how this means "I can't stand the heat" or "I'm going up to the plate already expecting to strike out" or some other tired throw-away phrase like that...I'm doing just fine and will continue to do just fine.  I'm just not interested in seeing D1 become a vast wasteland of Sim coached team because that game will be a lot less fun than one where worlds are 50+ percent full.

Posted by creilmann on 1/27/2011 12:44:00 PM (view original):
I see the point.  There are definitely a lot more 3-4 walkon teams out there, at least in Iba.  I don't think the answer is that we need more blue chips, but more high potential players in the 500 to low 600 range would work.  

Posted by ohyesyouwill on 1/28/2011 4:01:00 PM (view original):

33	ohyesyouwill	30-2	12-0	13-1	5-1	16-0	14	17	-	Conf Champion CT Champion NT (Sweet 16)
32	ohyesyouwill	23-7	11-2	9-4	3-1	12-4		42	C	Conf Champion CT Champion NT (1st Round)
31	ohyesyouwill	24-6	12-1	10-4	2-1	15-1		90	D+	Conf Champion PI (1st Round)
30	ohyesyouwill	16-11	9-4	7-6	0-1	9-7		200	D-
29	Sim AI	11-16	6-6	5-9	0-1	8-8		281	D-

This is from Phelan and is all from the new generation. Took D- FAMU to a 5 point loss to 1 seed Duke in the Sweet 16 in four years, even switching defenses my first year. 4 seniors and 5 juniors in the fourth season. Now I probably won't stick around longer than one more year...but I could. The idea that's it's not possible is simply a fallacy.

Posted by car_crazy_v2 on 1/28/2011 4:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by creilmann on 1/27/2011 12:44:00 PM (view original):
I see the point.  There are definitely a lot more 3-4 walkon teams out there, at least in Iba.  I don't think the answer is that we need more blue chips, but more high potential players in the 500 to low 600 range would work.  

This is 100% on the spot. In RL, when you see a team like San Diego State, who has been an NIT team (one NCAAT appearance) for the past few years, and all of a sudden they are a top ranked team, it is because they have a bunch of solid seniors contributing. These guys weren't highly recruited, but it takes a great coach to find the guys with potential (like those guys) who will help your team be great down the road. So higher potential for low level guys makes a whole lot of sense, and will add so much realism.

Posted by ohyesyouwill on 1/28/2011 4:01:00 PM (view original):

33	ohyesyouwill	30-2	12-0	13-1	5-1	16-0	14	17	-	Conf Champion CT Champion NT (Sweet 16)
32	ohyesyouwill	23-7	11-2	9-4	3-1	12-4		42	C	Conf Champion CT Champion NT (1st Round)
31	ohyesyouwill	24-6	12-1	10-4	2-1	15-1		90	D+	Conf Champion PI (1st Round)
30	ohyesyouwill	16-11	9-4	7-6	0-1	9-7		200	D-
29	Sim AI	11-16	6-6	5-9	0-1	8-8		281	D-

This is from Phelan and is all from the new generation. Took D- FAMU to a 5 point loss to 1 seed Duke in the Sweet 16 in four years, even switching defenses my first year. 4 seniors and 5 juniors in the fourth season. Now I probably won't stick around longer than one more year...but I could. The idea that's it's not possible is simply a fallacy.

Wow.  I just looked at the core ratings for FAMU and Duke.  Even with a walkon Duke has about a 100 point advantage Per Player.  Look at the differences.  Congrats on keeping the game close. 

Duke has 9 90+ ATH, FAMU has 1.  Duke has 8 90+ DE players, FAMU has 2.  FAMU had a few spd guys that were higher than Dukes.  The top end outliers for the other categories were about the same for both teams, however Duke had much higher ratings from those in the middle.  However, FAMU has 6 90+ stam guys, Duke has just 1!  Duke had 10 players that played at least 15 minutes.  FAMU also had 10 that played at least 14 mpg.  So I'd say team depth was about the same.

I wouldn't call this a ringing endorsement of equality, but certainly the end result contributed to a successful season.  Congrats.

Posted by dacj501 on 1/28/2011 5:31:00 PM (view original):
km, as a newly minted top 10 rpi  DII guy, I heartily say, SHUSHHH!

Posted by Rails on 1/28/2011 5:39:00 PM (view original):

Posted by ohyesyouwill on 1/28/2011 4:01:00 PM (view original):

33	ohyesyouwill	30-2	12-0	13-1	5-1	16-0	14	17	-	Conf Champion CT Champion NT (Sweet 16)
32	ohyesyouwill	23-7	11-2	9-4	3-1	12-4		42	C	Conf Champion CT Champion NT (1st Round)
31	ohyesyouwill	24-6	12-1	10-4	2-1	15-1		90	D+	Conf Champion PI (1st Round)
30	ohyesyouwill	16-11	9-4	7-6	0-1	9-7		200	D-
29	Sim AI	11-16	6-6	5-9	0-1	8-8		281	D-

This is from Phelan and is all from the new generation. Took D- FAMU to a 5 point loss to 1 seed Duke in the Sweet 16 in four years, even switching defenses my first year. 4 seniors and 5 juniors in the fourth season. Now I probably won't stick around longer than one more year...but I could. The idea that's it's not possible is simply a fallacy.

Wow.  I just looked at the core ratings for FAMU and Duke.  Even with a walkon Duke has about a 100 point advantage Per Player.  Look at the differences.  Congrats on keeping the game close. 

Duke has 9 90+ ATH, FAMU has 1.  Duke has 8 90+ DE players, FAMU has 2.  FAMU had a few spd guys that were higher than Dukes.  The top end outliers for the other categories were about the same for both teams, however Duke had much higher ratings from those in the middle.  However, FAMU has 6 90+ stam guys, Duke has just 1!  Duke had 10 players that played at least 15 minutes.  FAMU also had 10 that played at least 14 mpg.  So I'd say team depth was about the same.

I wouldn't call this a ringing endorsement of equality, but certainly the end result contributed to a successful season.  Congrats.

Posted by kmasonbx on 1/28/2011 5:15:00 PM (view original):
Ugh, I hate so much when my post gets ignored, lol. There are tons of the hi/hi guys with lowish begin ratings that you speak of jet but the problem is people don't bother recruiting the guys with low 500 overall or high 400s because they just look at begin ratings. There was a guy in Tark at E. Central in D2 who was an EE and would've been able to be a major contributor on nearly every BCS school. OR has a guy on his lone D2 team that's 791 overall and just wrapped up his RS sophomore season and isn't capped in anything and began this season low in nothing. Here's his profile: http://whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=0&pid=1703115. I actually did evals for this guy and he was hi/hi in just about everything.

You telling me a guy like this shouldn't have been picked up by a mid major? What about these 2 guys on SW Baptist in Tark http://whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=0&pid=1694574, http://whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=0&pid=1670620. Or this guy on billyg's D2 team http://whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=12166&pid=1694463.

Why aren't these guys on mid major D1 rosters? I've also recruited a few guys at my D2 schools that should've definitely filled up low-mid D1 rosters but I get them unopposed. These hi/hi guys are all over but like I said people just don't look hard enough. You see a guy with a lot of high areas throw a few evals at him you never know you might like the responses and end up with a diamond in the rough. On my Arkansas team this past season I signed a guy who wasn't even ranked at his position because he was hi/hi in a bunch of stuff and I plan on sitting him on the bench for a couple of seasons until he's ready to contribute.

If you guys really want to see how many mid majors, or low D1s miss the boat on a ton of guys who end up being D2 monsters that would've been really good D1 players go through the rosters ofthe top 10 RPI teams in any D2 world, I guarantee every team will have at least 1 or 2 players that could play and be productive at a low-mid D1 and some will even have guys that can play at a BCS school.