2) you'd be totally screwed, take a bunch of walkons or crap players (i'd go walkons myself) and come back to replace them the following year.

this is the most obvious problem in today's game, in d1 at least, but seble thinks it will work itself out as with more spread of great players, folks should rarely have multiple EEs. i think that is a dumb solution, but hey, i figure it will be addressed before i come back to play again ;) so, your guys problem for now!

The Spuds of the world would say that it's your own fault and maybe you should have planned for all these EEs. Or you should be happy to have players that good to go to the draft and if you don't want them then my D3 Chestnut Hill team will be THRILLED to take them off your hands.

Yeah, doesn't make sense to me- just have them declare at the beginning and give the budget just like any other player leaving. That's my vote.

Well, some percentage of good (top 100) players are available to sign in the 2nd recruiting period.

If you assume someone put attention points on them on the first day of recruiting and that team also has done the max home visits and got one of the five campus visits the recruit can do, then the initial team would have an advantage. BUT, if you pick a player and put all your attention points on them, and do the max home visits on them then you can likely get into their very high group. If you do get in, then you have a chance of signing them (possibly close to 50%).

If you are a really good team with good prestige and find a recruit that matches up with your offensively and defensively and has very good on some other preferences, I think you will be able to sign a good recruit who is unsigned. I guess we will see soon enough in Wooden.

Posted by hughesjr on 9/12/2016 6:37:00 PM (view original):
Well, some percentage of good (top 100) players are available to sign in the 2nd recruiting period.

If you assume someone put attention points on them on the first day of recruiting and that team also has done the max home visits and got one of the five campus visits the recruit can do, then the initial team would have an advantage. BUT, if you pick a player and put all your attention points on them, and do the max home visits on them then you can likely get into their very high group. If you do get in, then you have a chance of signing them (possibly close to 50%).

If you are a really good team with good prestige and find a recruit that matches up with your offensively and defensively and has very good on some other preferences, I think you will be able to sign a good recruit who is unsigned. I guess we will see soon enough in Wooden.

I think the thing that makes it tough is that you need to unlock the actions and then do the HVs before he signs. So if you have 5 openings, there's no way you can get that many players to have actions unlocked before they sign. Probably 2 or 3 is max.

Someone suggested that you have a day or half day of no signings when 2nd session starts. That could help with this.

A few different strategies, some of them can coexist.

1) Plan to leave at least one, maybe two scholarships open every season. That gives some cushion in case 2 of the 4 elite players you are hypothetically lucky enough to sign in this final old-style season ditch you before your dream season comes to fruition. Elite D1 teams can operate pretty well with 10 (or fewer) contributors, and that will still be true in 3.0.

2) Instead of targeting only elite players, target a role player and/or project, or two. Mix some certified 4-year players in to your classes.

3) Go for broke, and manage expectations; get used to having to rebuild if you are A) lucky enough to land 4-5 early entry caliber commodities in a season, and B) unlucky enough to lose them when you have no or few graduating seniors to help cover for them. High reward tactics should have high risk, and that's exactly what you'll be undertaking if you target only elite players with your extra scholarship war chest this season.

4) Starting next year, use your base attention points to target primarily late preference players early on. You can get to CVs without offering a scholarship. But obviously don't waste that on players who are going to make an early decision. Then when you do have early entries, you can use those extra scholarship resources as a weapon, as you've always been able to do.

Posted by lakevin on 9/12/2016 2:06:00 PM (view original):
I just had a great season. NT run with no seniors (technically, I brought in a one-season bench guy in the 12th spot). I'm thrilled. My first NT in 31 seasons so while I've been good, I haven't owned the league or anything....

Then, a few minutes after looking at the box score and getting happy, I see I have FOUR early entries -- three juniors and a frosh. The frosh was staying until the CT (when he jumped from 28 and staying to 2 and likely going on the big board literally overnight) and only one of the juniors was likely going.

So now I need five guys. OK, I have this last season to recruit some talent. But I'm flashing ahead for two reasons:

1) Do I recruit my 5 best or do I lie down to make sure I don't suffer EEs; and

2) I'm envisioning what would have happened a year from now. Would have had one scholie's assets to use. And now would have four guys who don't belong at UCLA added to the roster.

I'm very open to 3.0 and while I don't like most of what I've heard, I'd roll with it. BUT FREAKING FIX THE ISSUE WITH EARLY ENTRIES. PLEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAASSSSSSEEEEEE!!!!

Early entries is realistic you need to fix your class size to a better structure and stop whining. I would go 3/3/3/3 like i'm doing with miles but its a process.

Posted by CoachWard95 on 9/12/2016 7:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by lakevin on 9/12/2016 2:06:00 PM (view original):
I just had a great season. NT run with no seniors (technically, I brought in a one-season bench guy in the 12th spot). I'm thrilled. My first NT in 31 seasons so while I've been good, I haven't owned the league or anything....

Then, a few minutes after looking at the box score and getting happy, I see I have FOUR early entries -- three juniors and a frosh. The frosh was staying until the CT (when he jumped from 28 and staying to 2 and likely going on the big board literally overnight) and only one of the juniors was likely going.

So now I need five guys. OK, I have this last season to recruit some talent. But I'm flashing ahead for two reasons:

1) Do I recruit my 5 best or do I lie down to make sure I don't suffer EEs; and

2) I'm envisioning what would have happened a year from now. Would have had one scholie's assets to use. And now would have four guys who don't belong at UCLA added to the roster.

I'm very open to 3.0 and while I don't like most of what I've heard, I'd roll with it. BUT FREAKING FIX THE ISSUE WITH EARLY ENTRIES. PLEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAASSSSSSEEEEEE!!!!

Early entries is realistic you need to fix your class size to a better structure and stop whining. I would go 3/3/3/3 like i'm doing with miles but its a process.

Had I not wasted my Monday allotment of face palms on customer support's responses to mully, this response would assuredly have been worthy of a double.

Posted by CoachWard95 on 9/12/2016 7:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by lakevin on 9/12/2016 2:06:00 PM (view original):
I just had a great season. NT run with no seniors (technically, I brought in a one-season bench guy in the 12th spot). I'm thrilled. My first NT in 31 seasons so while I've been good, I haven't owned the league or anything....

Then, a few minutes after looking at the box score and getting happy, I see I have FOUR early entries -- three juniors and a frosh. The frosh was staying until the CT (when he jumped from 28 and staying to 2 and likely going on the big board literally overnight) and only one of the juniors was likely going.

So now I need five guys. OK, I have this last season to recruit some talent. But I'm flashing ahead for two reasons:

1) Do I recruit my 5 best or do I lie down to make sure I don't suffer EEs; and

2) I'm envisioning what would have happened a year from now. Would have had one scholie's assets to use. And now would have four guys who don't belong at UCLA added to the roster.

I'm very open to 3.0 and while I don't like most of what I've heard, I'd roll with it. BUT FREAKING FIX THE ISSUE WITH EARLY ENTRIES. PLEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAASSSSSSEEEEEE!!!!

Early entries is realistic you need to fix your class size to a better structure and stop whining. I would go 3/3/3/3 like i'm doing with miles but its a process.

Yeah. This team has graduated fewer than 10 four year guys in ten seasons. Almost all my guys leave early (say Kentucky IRL). And just like Kentucky IRL I should sabotage that. Oh. Wait. Go hang out with Spid.

seble, this one is all on you.

Posted by CoachWard95 on 9/12/2016 7:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by lakevin on 9/12/2016 2:06:00 PM (view original):
I just had a great season. NT run with no seniors (technically, I brought in a one-season bench guy in the 12th spot). I'm thrilled. My first NT in 31 seasons so while I've been good, I haven't owned the league or anything....

Then, a few minutes after looking at the box score and getting happy, I see I have FOUR early entries -- three juniors and a frosh. The frosh was staying until the CT (when he jumped from 28 and staying to 2 and likely going on the big board literally overnight) and only one of the juniors was likely going.

So now I need five guys. OK, I have this last season to recruit some talent. But I'm flashing ahead for two reasons:

1) Do I recruit my 5 best or do I lie down to make sure I don't suffer EEs; and

2) I'm envisioning what would have happened a year from now. Would have had one scholie's assets to use. And now would have four guys who don't belong at UCLA added to the roster.

I'm very open to 3.0 and while I don't like most of what I've heard, I'd roll with it. BUT FREAKING FIX THE ISSUE WITH EARLY ENTRIES. PLEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAASSSSSSEEEEEE!!!!

Early entries is realistic you need to fix your class size to a better structure and stop whining. I would go 3/3/3/3 like i'm doing with miles but its a process.

Is losing 57 consecutive games also a process?

I think I see what you're saying, OP. I think the way to go is get the best players you possibly can, then let the **** hit the fan before self-sabotaging the team. You probably run out 2 more seasons before that happens.

Maybe, when a battle happens, be more willing to bail out to a walk-on or two, but it seems like shooting yourself in the foot not to just take the best you can right now.

The strategy that might work for big # EE teams may be to plant AP on top tier "late" preference recruits. I actually see a bigger issue there with the CV limit at 5 per recruit. The EE victims might find it impossible to bring recruits to campus. If that happens...

Posted by shoe3 on 9/12/2016 7:06:00 PM (view original):
A few different strategies, some of them can coexist.

1) Plan to leave at least one, maybe two scholarships open every season. That gives some cushion in case 2 of the 4 elite players you are hypothetically lucky enough to sign in this final old-style season ditch you before your dream season comes to fruition. Elite D1 teams can operate pretty well with 10 (or fewer) contributors, and that will still be true in 3.0.

2) Instead of targeting only elite players, target a role player and/or project, or two. Mix some certified 4-year players in to your classes.

3) Go for broke, and manage expectations; get used to having to rebuild if you are A) lucky enough to land 4-5 early entry caliber commodities in a season, and B) unlucky enough to lose them when you have no or few graduating seniors to help cover for them. High reward tactics should have high risk, and that's exactly what you'll be undertaking if you target only elite players with your extra scholarship war chest this season.

4) Starting next year, use your base attention points to target primarily late preference players early on. You can get to CVs without offering a scholarship. But obviously don't waste that on players who are going to make an early decision. Then when you do have early entries, you can use those extra scholarship resources as a weapon, as you've always been able to do.

Just in case we can put the thread back on track, here is the place to start.

Posted by kcsundevil on 9/12/2016 9:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by CoachWard95 on 9/12/2016 7:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by lakevin on 9/12/2016 2:06:00 PM (view original):
I just had a great season. NT run with no seniors (technically, I brought in a one-season bench guy in the 12th spot). I'm thrilled. My first NT in 31 seasons so while I've been good, I haven't owned the league or anything....

Then, a few minutes after looking at the box score and getting happy, I see I have FOUR early entries -- three juniors and a frosh. The frosh was staying until the CT (when he jumped from 28 and staying to 2 and likely going on the big board literally overnight) and only one of the juniors was likely going.

So now I need five guys. OK, I have this last season to recruit some talent. But I'm flashing ahead for two reasons:

1) Do I recruit my 5 best or do I lie down to make sure I don't suffer EEs; and

2) I'm envisioning what would have happened a year from now. Would have had one scholie's assets to use. And now would have four guys who don't belong at UCLA added to the roster.

I'm very open to 3.0 and while I don't like most of what I've heard, I'd roll with it. BUT FREAKING FIX THE ISSUE WITH EARLY ENTRIES. PLEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAASSSSSSEEEEEE!!!!

Early entries is realistic you need to fix your class size to a better structure and stop whining. I would go 3/3/3/3 like i'm doing with miles but its a process.

Is losing 57 consecutive games also a process?

If you want to change your offense and defense to what your perfer its a process its called a rebuild.

The strategy will be totally different but Gil is right, Seble needs to address EES problem. I had three on ASU beta team, never could replace them even with a plan B. I ended up grabbing walk-ons or bench warmers.

It aint getting fixed any time soon. Given the decision not to fix it before launch, seems highly likely that any suggestion of change will now be met by - lets see how it plays out as the new game plays and people adjust.

I think it is a bad decision from both the perspective of reality and game play, but seble rejected various proposed fixes.