Easy to see potential caps, instead of the current email system (I think Joe Bloe is spending too much time practicing X). It could be as simple as coloring the minutes in each box of practice time, red if within 1/2 points of max.

Quote: Originally Posted By jskenner on 10/16/2009Get rid of early entries. This would fall under daalter's motto of, "It's not what is most realistic, but what is best (most satisfying) for HD (the customer)."

Of course, this would effectively guarantee that lostmyth2 would win every single NT in Phelan, from now until . . . ever. But I'm willing to accept that if it means knowing a stud Jr will be the same stud Sr.

FTFY, cuz he isn't gonna be getting any better as a Sr (unless you count 3-4 points in WE being 'better')

Make it easier to send mass emails. For example, if you want to send 1 call to 100 different players, make it so you can select your entire set of players on your recruit board, then check 1 call to all selected, then confirm. Done. Much quicker, and exact same result.

z, the fact he's on your team another year is a huge difference. He's much better than the best freshman. Better IQ and fully developed ratings. You must realize the ratings increase between Jr/Sr years is not what I'm talking about.

By the way, what does "FTFY" mean?

Quote: Originally Posted By jskenner on 10/16/2009z, the fact he's on your team another year is a huge difference. He's much better than the best freshman. Better IQ and fully developed ratings. You must realize the ratings increase between Jr/Sr years is not what I'm talking about

No arguing there, just pointing out that potential still has a ways to go to reach its full potential.

Quote: Originally Posted By jskenner on 10/16/2009By the way, what does "FTFY" mean

Fixed that for you.

Ah, thanks. No worries. You're right about potential. I think too many players reach it in pretty much all categories. I would say any player with 20 WE or higher does that. After all, potential is the best a player can ever be, which by definition, is a very tough thing to reach. I would think players would need (for instance) 60-70 WE or higher to reach full potential. Those with extremely high WE would reach it by end of Jr year (so the Sr year would be played entirely with those maxed ratings). Those with lower WE could reach it in the cores by end of career, and those with very low WE would never reach even core potential. This is just a general idea, and I think you and I pretty much agree.

My idea has always been some players shouldn't hit big improvement until their senior years, some their junior years and sure some huge growth freshmen. I think the easiest way for them to program it would be after x minutes of pt the player hits their big growth. Of course not all players should have this, some should just be on the linear path and some should be the ones that max out fairly quick. The info could be incorporated into Evals (that are now pretty useless other then using them to get players to take hv and cvs) with "Player has a lot of potential but it might take him a while to get there" or "This kid is ready to touch the sky once we get him into our program".

Also if it was done by x minutes played it would leave it somewhat up to the coach also, get your younger guys pt while they are young, it would help those that had this get their quicker. It wouldn't be hard to do, if they want a player to hit their development in their sophomore year, well then just do the simple math (let's use the average of 12 mpg for an 'average' fr and we will use 27 games, since that is also all anyone is guaranteed.) (also this would be a small added bonus to making the postseason is more pt for your younger guys, since I have always thought it is such bull that player growth stops once you finish the ct) So with that math (12x27) once the player has played 324 minutes he would hit his 'super growth' and would start to reach his potential quicker. If you wanted it to be his Junior year ( ((17x27)+324) = 783 ) so around 800 minutes the player would hit his super growth. (by the way these average minutes are totally made up numbers) Then as a coach if I wanted to get my player there quicker or had a bad team and had to play younger guys and my freshmen sg played 22 mpg he would hit his super growth stage after about 15 games into his freshmen season.

I know that i mentioned it early , there is a bigger picture thought.

Not a bad idea, z.

Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 10/16/2009My idea has always been some players shouldn't hit big improvement until their senior years, some their junior years and sure some huge growth freshmen. I think the easiest way for them to program it would be after x minutes of pt the player hits their big growth. Of course not all players should have this, some should just be on the linear path and some should be the ones that max out fairly quick. The info could be incorporated into Evals (that are now pretty useless other then using them to get players to take hv and cvs) with "Player has a lot of potential but it might take him a while to get there" or "This kid is ready to tough the sky once we get him into our program".

Also if it was done by x minutes played it would leave it somewhat up to the coach also, get your younger guys pt while they are young, it would help those that had this get their quicker. It wouldn't be hard to do, if they want a player to hit their development in their sophomore year, well then just do the simple math (let's use the average of 12 mpg for an 'average' fr and we will use 27 games, since that is also all anyone is guaranteed.) (also this would be a small added bonus to making the postseason is more pt for your younger guys, since I have always thought it is such bull that player growth stops once you finish the ct) So with that math (12x27) once the player has played 324 minutes he would hit his 'super growth' and would start to reach his potential quicker. If you wanted it to be his Junior year ( ((17x27)+324) = 783 ) so around 800 minutes the player would hit his super growth. (by the way these average minutes are totally made up numbers) Then as a coach if I wanted to get my player there quicker or had a bad team and had to play younger guys and my freshmen sg played 22 mpg he would hit his super growth stage after about 15 games into his freshmen season

this idea has potential

One change? Eliminate the coin flips and have the better team win in the NT.

I would somehow or other return the game to giving coach's a great deal of flexibility / discretion in practice planning vs player improvement, this would be a nice fix when / if ratings are lowered, thereby allowing coaches to pick what they will improve to a far greater degree than now - this also takes some of the pressure off of recruiting and returns balance to the game, right now it is recruiting dynasty, more so the the coin flip dynasty of the early 2009 timeframe

one clarification, I know I am in the minority here, but I also think the engine right now is working much better than it had been the last calendar year to year and a half.