Strange upside: the BCS conferences will only be half full. This is magically going to benefit the game?

The way WIS could go is to make it easier to get to BCS conference positions, but also far easier to be fired from them. Many, many posts suggesting that have been made. Still, here's an example of the issue with EE:

I had a guard that was likely going...He didn't. I had a stud C that was likely staying...He left. Another guard on the fence...He left. The strategy I chose was to recruit a C and a guard. With only 3 openings and an A prestige, I went all in on effort for 2 recruits (including promises) Had to split AP a little. Lost the C (@VH) to a B prestige ivy (@H). Still ahead on the guard...Both were whenever/late, but the whenever signed in period 1.

Entering period 2, I have not quite the right fit at guard, but he's OK. However, as I lost the C and my C went EE, a little unexpectedly, I am short handed in the post. Will I be able to find a post player in cycle 2, unlock actions and spend funds in time to get on his considering list? Seems unlikely. I'll be behind the lock wanting to offer a start or at least 20 minutes, but whatever I do, there is a strong chance that he'll sign at a lower prestige school, maybe lower division, before I can even spend my budget. Not sure why that's great game design.

What you are saying is that we need more predictability. I agree.

Posted by zorzii on 1/8/2017 4:27:00 PM (view original):
What you are saying is that we need more predictability. I agree.

I'm not necessarily saying that, but if there are going to be surprise departures, then the user needs to be able to find someone that is at least adequate to play minutes in period 2. The actual choice of how to make that happen can be different.

Certainly, one way would be to announce the EE before period 1. That way I wouldn't be guessing at what I'm replacing. That makes resource allocation extremely difficult and subject to chance.

"adequate to play minutes"? I'm sure that can be accomplished now. I don't think that's what the EE whiners want. They want more EE.

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/8/2017 5:26:00 PM (view original):
"adequate to play minutes"? I'm sure that can be accomplished now. I don't think that's what the EE whiners want. They want more EE.

I don't think that's true. That's a straw argument that makes it impossible to have a reasonable discussion about EE concerns. Now, I'm sure there are a few that feel that way, and they probably ought to just leave.

For most, this is the point where your lack of experience actually attempting to sign a recruit starting in period 2, or while having to divide effort during period 1, and thus be forced to play catch-up against others that have had full resources, is telling.

Do you think success at D1 should be easy?

You can ramble on about "lack of experience" all you want. That makes it impossible to have a reasonable discussion. Would you just like to call one another "*******" and move on?

Option 1: My viewpoint-Success are D1 should be difficult. It will keep the n00bs from coming in and instantly having success. It allows the experienced, successful owner to keep an advantage. He's simply better at the game. Sustained success should be even more difficult for the same reason. I've asked, repeatedly, "Is everyone playing the same game at D1?" and no one answers. Because they are. The cream will always rise to the top. Everyone is playing the same game. You have a great player and he leaves early. You may not get the same quality as a replacement. You most likely will not. But the guy you're competing against will have the same problem. It's a level playing field.

Option 2: You're an *******.

Seriously, this is an internet game. One doesn't have to be a MENSA member to play and understand the mechanics of it.

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/8/2017 5:26:00 PM (view original):
"adequate to play minutes"? I'm sure that can be accomplished now. I don't think that's what the EE whiners want. They want more EE.

agree fully - anyone who wants to replace EE with EE and complains that he cant is a whiner

the valid debate is whether it is too often too hard to replace an EE with a serviceable player - especially EE's that are for various reasons hard to predict

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/8/2017 7:29:00 PM (view original):
Do you think success at D1 should be easy?

You can ramble on about "lack of experience" all you want. That makes it impossible to have a reasonable discussion. Would you just like to call one another "*******" and move on?

Option 1: My viewpoint-Success are D1 should be difficult. It will keep the n00bs from coming in and instantly having success. It allows the experienced, successful owner to keep an advantage. He's simply better at the game. Sustained success should be even more difficult for the same reason. I've asked, repeatedly, "Is everyone playing the same game at D1?" and no one answers. Because they are. The cream will always rise to the top. Everyone is playing the same game. You have a great player and he leaves early. You may not get the same quality as a replacement. You most likely will not. But the guy you're competing against will have the same problem. It's a level playing field.

Option 2: You're an *******.

I thought I was fairly concise. You don't know what you're talking about *******!

Good talk.

So it's your contention that one can only understand HD if they have a lot of experience and possess superior intelligence?

Yeah, OK.

Add your HD success to your resume'. I'm sure you'll be head fry cook in no time.

Posted by fd343ny on 1/8/2017 9:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/8/2017 5:26:00 PM (view original):
"adequate to play minutes"? I'm sure that can be accomplished now. I don't think that's what the EE whiners want. They want more EE.

agree fully - anyone who wants to replace EE with EE and complains that he cant is a whiner

the valid debate is whether it is too often too hard to replace an EE with a serviceable player - especially EE's that are for various reasons hard to predict

It's not really a debate. Of course they can get a "serviceable" player. What they may not be able to get is a 22 minute guy who'll produce as FR/SO. He's a back-up and, honestly, that's what they should get.

Jesus Christ Mike ... get a life...

Shouldn't you be following spud around and commenting on anything but HD?

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/8/2017 10:34:00 PM (view original):

Posted by fd343ny on 1/8/2017 9:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/8/2017 5:26:00 PM (view original):
"adequate to play minutes"? I'm sure that can be accomplished now. I don't think that's what the EE whiners want. They want more EE.

agree fully - anyone who wants to replace EE with EE and complains that he cant is a whiner

the valid debate is whether it is too often too hard to replace an EE with a serviceable player - especially EE's that are for various reasons hard to predict

It's not really a debate. Of course they can get a "serviceable" player. What they may not be able to get is a 22 minute guy who'll produce as FR/SO. He's a back-up and, honestly, that's what they should get.

"of course" isnt much in the way of analysis and "of course" isnt much of a debate

it is incredibly hard to get a serviceable player to replace an EE IF one has 2 or 3 who might go, each of whom plays different positions - especially if the less likely one actually goes. It is pretty darn hard to get a serviceable player - a player who one would ever want to use - to replace an expected EE even if one tries hard in phase one to open up late signing players. In my experience. But thats just anecdotal so others may have seen better success - what has been your experience replacing EE's - have you been able to do so?

I know that many have whined about how hard it is to replace an EE if you start trying in phase 2 - they should recognize that that wont work and isnt the prudent path.

WIS decided to do nothing to adjust the balance in the transition period. We'll see as EEs become more dispersed how it plays in a mature 3.0