At least I think it's new -- I don't recall having seen it anywhere. To me, the major EE gameplay issue is when a player has few scholarships available (0 or 1), then has multiple EEs go, forcing the player to scramble for lots of players at a very significant AP deficit. What above a regime where the users who have players on the big board get extra APs? 15 bonus APs for likely going, 10 for on the fence, 5 for likely staying, and 0 for staying or graduating. So if I have 1 scholly open, 1 player likely going, and 2 on the fence, I would get 75 APs in session 1. Haven't completely thought this through, but it seems to at least partially solve the issue. Thoughts?

I think that's a pretty good idea, definitely a step in the right direction.

MikeT, you have no experience with this, what do you think? :-)

I think we need more EE threads. Can't ever have enough of those.

Honestly, and it's probably because it was my idea, a limit of 1 EE per season solves the problem quickly and efficiently.

Then, with any luck, we would never have another EE thread.

BTW, JSS, that was a "suggestion" you posted. If you need me to, I can bump a "complaint" thread about EE so you can see the difference.

Posted by MikeT23 on 3/31/2017 2:05:00 PM (view original):
I think we need more EE threads. Can't ever have enough of those.

Honestly, and it's probably because it was my idea, a limit of 1 EE per season solves the problem quickly and efficiently.

Then, with any luck, we would never have another EE thread.

I don't always agree with what you say, but if that was your suggestion it's a good one that I wish WIS would consider.

I've also said anything WifS does will not be enough for everyone. The next EE complaint would be "I had a PG and a C as "likely to leave". I know only one will go but how am I supposed to recruit for that?"

Posted by MikeT23 on 3/31/2017 2:05:00 PM (view original):
I think we need more EE threads. Can't ever have enough of those.

Honestly, and it's probably because it was my idea, a limit of 1 EE per season solves the problem quickly and efficiently.

Then, with any luck, we would never have another EE thread.

Hey, at least it's a new EE idea -- and again, no one makes you read them, or especially comment on them. As for your suggestion, as someone who tries to recruit multiple EE candidates per year, your proposal would certainly be helpful to me and a few others if adopted. The problem is that if we're doing an artificial cap, why have EEs at all? EEs were presumably added to the game to make it more like "real life" -- which in my view, should be WIS' goal -- a cap of 1 per year isn't particularly realistic.

Posted by MikeT23 on 3/31/2017 2:05:00 PM (view original):
I think we need more EE threads. Can't ever have enough of those.

Honestly, and it's probably because it was my idea, a limit of 1 EE per season solves the problem quickly and efficiently.

Then, with any luck, we would never have another EE thread.

I like that one better because say you have nobody declaring and you had the free ap?

Posted by zorzii on 3/31/2017 2:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 3/31/2017 2:05:00 PM (view original):
I think we need more EE threads. Can't ever have enough of those.

Honestly, and it's probably because it was my idea, a limit of 1 EE per season solves the problem quickly and efficiently.

Then, with any luck, we would never have another EE thread.

I like that one better because say you have nobody declaring and you had the free ap?

Then you've unlocked a bunch of guys that you can't recruit. I doubt the smart coaches would use the extra APs to just load up on one player -- more likely, they'd keep themselves from having to overcome a huge AP lead on the late signers (at least, that's what I would do).

Posted by johnsensing on 3/31/2017 2:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 3/31/2017 2:05:00 PM (view original):
I think we need more EE threads. Can't ever have enough of those.

Honestly, and it's probably because it was my idea, a limit of 1 EE per season solves the problem quickly and efficiently.

Then, with any luck, we would never have another EE thread.

Hey, at least it's a new EE idea -- and again, no one makes you read them, or especially comment on them. As for your suggestion, as someone who tries to recruit multiple EE candidates per year, your proposal would certainly be helpful to me and a few others if adopted. The problem is that if we're doing an artificial cap, why have EEs at all? EEs were presumably added to the game to make it more like "real life" -- which in my view, should be WIS' goal -- a cap of 1 per year isn't particularly realistic.

There's "realism" and "gameplay". We know recruiting isn't "realism". Schools contact kids in their junior year in HS. Kids commit then de-commit. Coaches change jobs and the guys they were recruiting will follow them. There is little realism to what we're doing.

EE was probably designed to level the playing field. At least that's what I believe. Having 3 or more is hard to overcome. And that's the gameplay part. You recruit this great player. And you get two more the next season. Then all three leave at once. That's not fun, it sucks.

So, IMO, you keep as much realism as possible but you can't make the game not fun.


I comment on the EE threads because they need balance. I can't wait to have my first one so I can say "Look!! I had an EE!!!! What am I supposed to do??? I've never experienced it!!!!!!"

Posted by johnsensing on 3/31/2017 1:52:00 PM (view original):
At least I think it's new -- I don't recall having seen it anywhere. To me, the major EE gameplay issue is when a player has few scholarships available (0 or 1), then has multiple EEs go, forcing the player to scramble for lots of players at a very significant AP deficit. What above a regime where the users who have players on the big board get extra APs? 15 bonus APs for likely going, 10 for on the fence, 5 for likely staying, and 0 for staying or graduating. So if I have 1 scholly open, 1 player likely going, and 2 on the fence, I would get 75 APs in session 1. Haven't completely thought this through, but it seems to at least partially solve the issue. Thoughts?

I agree with zorzii here, it doesn't make any sense to give people APs for scholarships they won't necessarily have.

There isn't much wrong with EEs that doesn't get fixed with adjusting expectations and gameplay. My suggestion hasn't changed at all from the first mention of 3.0. Address the issue through intelligent player preferences, not through increased resource allocation. Most of the top players should want success and playing time. That's already been fixed. And going along with that, most of them should sign late, so they receive intended effort from teams with early entries. If more of the Top 300 OVR players had the late and whenever preferences, I'd say the issue would be just right.

Posted by MikeT23 on 3/31/2017 2:41:00 PM (view original):

Posted by johnsensing on 3/31/2017 2:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 3/31/2017 2:05:00 PM (view original):
I think we need more EE threads. Can't ever have enough of those.

Honestly, and it's probably because it was my idea, a limit of 1 EE per season solves the problem quickly and efficiently.

Then, with any luck, we would never have another EE thread.

Hey, at least it's a new EE idea -- and again, no one makes you read them, or especially comment on them. As for your suggestion, as someone who tries to recruit multiple EE candidates per year, your proposal would certainly be helpful to me and a few others if adopted. The problem is that if we're doing an artificial cap, why have EEs at all? EEs were presumably added to the game to make it more like "real life" -- which in my view, should be WIS' goal -- a cap of 1 per year isn't particularly realistic.

There's "realism" and "gameplay". We know recruiting isn't "realism". Schools contact kids in their junior year in HS. Kids commit then de-commit. Coaches change jobs and the guys they were recruiting will follow them. There is little realism to what we're doing.

EE was probably designed to level the playing field. At least that's what I believe. Having 3 or more is hard to overcome. And that's the gameplay part. You recruit this great player. And you get two more the next season. Then all three leave at once. That's not fun, it sucks.

So, IMO, you keep as much realism as possible but you can't make the game not fun.


I comment on the EE threads because they need balance. I can't wait to have my first one so I can say "Look!! I had an EE!!!! What am I supposed to do??? I've never experienced it!!!!!!"

Yeah, but there's a risk/reward balance. If I recruit 3 5-stars in a year, I know at the outset that they'll likely leave early (in your proposal, it is almost certain one stays all four years). It's when they all do at once (and I have very few open schollys with which to use APs to unlock recruits) that I am screwed. I think my proposal mitigates that, and keeps the more realistic possibility that sometimes, especially after a big NT run, multiple players go early together.

When you get an EE, you're supposed to **** and moan about him not staying all four years, like the rest of us. Duh. ;-)

Have NBA draft or have players declare during the season, but before the first recruiting period. It fixes everything about EE's.

"What above a regime where the users who have players on the big board get extra APs?"

Actually, that is a variation on what users have begged for (without any justification) in so many disguises it is impossible to keep track of them. It is also an example of one of the things 3.0 is intended to fix, the perpetuation of a few teams at the top through no continuing merit of their own.

there goes spud again ranting about how the top coaches in 2.0 were actually very bad they were just handed all their success and allowed to stay there.

guess when you can't sustain success you have to project out that no one else can be good at the game either you just magically walk into an A+ program and are handed top recruits whenever you feel like it.