Posted by jtt8355 on 5/21/2014 2:51:00 PM (view original):
Posted by rogelio on 5/21/2014 2:26:00 PM (view original):
Posted by jtt8355 on 5/21/2014 1:56:00 PM (view original):
Posted by gillispie1 on 5/21/2014 1:53:00 PM (view original):
Posted by jtt8355 on 5/21/2014 1:37:00 PM (view original):
very well put stinenavy.
it was terribly put, of 20 pages of comments, it might even be the worst put, given that it came after a PIT limit was put in place, when a full half of the people rejected the idea of a limit in the first place, which presumably would have killed it on the spot. you just can't please some people... encouraging those people is not going to help anyone.
not everyone wants to write a symposium on every (or any) issue. it perfectly summed up the issue, as seen by those of us who think its ridiculous to have a team with 16 losses in the post season solely by virtue of balancing a cupcake non-con with a terrible in-conference performance.
This debate doesn't require histrionics. We're talking about PI invitations, after all. My concern is that there are consequences to making the cutoff too high. No one is arguing that an 8, 9 or 10 win team should make it. The debate is between an 11 win or 12 win team that has been beaten up by great opponents getting left off in favor of a much worse team that has played a complete cupcake schedule.
I expect that jtt's example would probably be eliminated by that the projection rankings alone. The teams really at issue are the ones that didn't schedule a cupcake non-conference when, according the new rule, they should have. Perhaps that's not an unintended consequence, jtt and stine might believe that this will empty the bottom-end of big 6 or full (D2/D3) conferences in favor of less full conferences. My concern is that they might get their wish!
if you look at the conferences i'm currently in, this new rule should actually hurt me more than help me; my d2 conferences are arguably the best - at a minimum second best - in their respective worlds. my d1 conference now has 10 coaches...9 of whom are extremely competent (the 10th just wanted to be in a conference with his brother and can't stand having a d1 team). i am literally looking at this issue from having been in the most talented conferences and thinking, how on earth can a team that can't compete be rewarded? AND (as i've posted a number of times in this forum and others) there is the added benefit of rewarding the lesser conferences in prestige and recruiting cash, which should hopefully generate more interest in those conferences, making them more likely to be filled.
Tark is the World with which I am familiar, so I will speak to that. Your Tark D2 conference (Lone Star) is certainly the second-best conference this season, and is at least in that discussion most seasons (the Cal. CAA competes for it as well). I'm in a similar human-dominated conference in Tark. A good team in one of those conferences could "compete" at a high level with most of the Tark D2 conferences. In GLV or Long Star, they are middle-of-the-pack at best. But they're better than the team that will make it to the PIT instead (a team like
Alderson-Broaddus, for example, currently 98 on projection report).
As for the generation of interest in sim-filled conferences (at D2/D3), where do you think those owners are going to come from? There are few owners who will take the risk of taking over the Angelo St.s (the one sim-team in Lone Star) when the chances of *any* post-season play is so slim. Instead, those owners (and maybe some of the PIT regulars from the currently-human-dominated D2/D3 conferences) will go to those other conferences.
Now, whether that is better or worse is up for discussion, but just be aware that the interest generated in those other conferences is going to come at the expense of conferences that now already have interest/history/rivalries (barring an influx of new owners that isn't on the horizon).