Posted by MikeT23 on 5/4/2017 12:39:00 PM (view original):
OK, I'll elaborate. I've found my targets for WCSU. I've gotten considerably better in scouting so I've got some scouting surplus. I'm now seeking one of two things: 1. A back-up plan in case D1/D2 coming calling 2. An upgrade over my targets. I'm not actively recruiting because we're between recruiting periods but I'm planning for a disaster and seeking better options. Either way, I'd "sit and wait". You're essentially asking for the risk to be removed from recruiting. If there's no risk/reward in this game, I'm not sure what we're doing.

I'm not asking for risk to be removed, it's just that the negative consequences of not landing a guy in 3.0 are incredibly high compared to 2.0. It doesn't help that in lower divisions we barely have enough $$ to max out home visits on a single recruit even when we have 3+ openings on our rosters. As an example, a few seasons ago I went for a low D1 guy (~520, not ranked in his position) with about 30 attn points a cycle and ended up maxing him out because another D2 was on him. I barely beat out the other D2 in session 1, but a lowly D1 sim from 10 miles away showed up as very low on the last cycle. Two cycles in to session 2, D1 sim signed the guy and both of us D2 coaches had to take walk-ons.

In 2.0 with only one recruiting session, the battle would have been upfront and you could choose to either battle the D1 sim or walk away based on important factors you would consider. In 3.0, we are not choosing to battle D1 guys and getting mad that we're losing them...it's the fact that we are throwing money at guys without knowing if there's going to be a battle or not. With our significantly lower budgets now that conference money is gone, being blindsided by a surprise battle is absolutely crippling. Perhaps this hasn't happened to you yet, but it's only been 4 seasons in 3.0 and I would guess more than half of the lower division users have a similar sob story(s).

I'm not sure why you'd max out home visits in D3. You're probably not supposed to be able to do that. That's why it's D3. I've lost out to D1 also on two cycles(more than once). Sucks but that's on me. It's my job to identify players D1/D2 don't want. It's what I'm doing right now in lieu of "sit and wait" to find options if D1/D2 want my top targets.

"Can you field a competitive team with only D3 players? I don't know. Probably, if you're the only one scouting them, and have easy access to the high potential ones every year."

Sure can. Check out my Gettysburg team.

" The game doesn't force anyone to play a certain way. If everybody's playing the same way, find a new angle. Go where the value is. If you don't like sitting around until the last day of recruiting, then use another tactic."

That's what I was saying. It's totally possible to build a great team by not "sitting and waiting".

The D3 market is probably largely uncontested in most worlds. There's probably a lot of value that goes unsigned.

Posted by pdxblazerfan on 5/4/2017 12:33:00 PM (view original):
No they don't have to, and in fact finding lower rated guys in division with all greens and high WE is an amazing way to rebuild a team from scratch...the issue is that once a team is good, there's no way to break into the elites unless you have pull-downs from higher divisions...and that's where the sit and wait comes into play.

+1. I shoot to beat the great coaches not to be a perennial nt participants. And I found that great success is linked to strategic location.

Trenton : I scout D3 at D3... D2 too. A player is a player but it seems there isn't talent to sign. And the lower the overall rating, the more you need to see in order to pursue the recruit, so more cash.

Posted by Trentonjoe on 5/4/2017 1:28:00 PM (view original):
"Can you field a competitive team with only D3 players? I don't know. Probably, if you're the only one scouting them, and have easy access to the high potential ones every year."

Sure can. Check out my Gettysburg team.

" The game doesn't force anyone to play a certain way. If everybody's playing the same way, find a new angle. Go where the value is. If you don't like sitting around until the last day of recruiting, then use another tactic."

That's what I was saying. It's totally possible to build a great team by not "sitting and waiting".

Great or good?

Look at my Gettysburg team, the talent is there. That team is ONLY d3 players.

Posted by Benis on 5/4/2017 1:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Trentonjoe on 5/4/2017 1:28:00 PM (view original):
"Can you field a competitive team with only D3 players? I don't know. Probably, if you're the only one scouting them, and have easy access to the high potential ones every year."

Sure can. Check out my Gettysburg team.

" The game doesn't force anyone to play a certain way. If everybody's playing the same way, find a new angle. Go where the value is. If you don't like sitting around until the last day of recruiting, then use another tactic."

That's what I was saying. It's totally possible to build a great team by not "sitting and waiting".

Great or good?

How about very good.

Posted by shoe3 on 5/4/2017 12:41:00 PM (view original):
I read through a thread like this, and the thing that is most striking is the lack of imagination. There is a *much wider* array of viable strategies in 3.0. It's true at D3, too. I took another team at the start of 3.0 to try the game out at D3, and I didn't find it hard at all to field competitive teams with D2 players. The only D1 guy I went after signed after I had already left for D1.

Can you field a competitive team with only D3 players? I don't know. Probably, if you're the only one scouting them, and have easy access to the high potential ones every year. The game doesn't force anyone to play a certain way. If everybody's playing the same way, find a new angle. Go where the value is. If you don't like sitting around until the last day of recruiting, then use another tactic.

You've got it right. Lack of imagination is a very gentle way of putting it. I like those "sit and wait" and "waiting game" comments, and the single minded focus that location is everything. I hope all the coaches I compete against think that way, but they seem a lot sharper than that.

So as a new player, I see many of the 'upper echelon' D3 coaches signing ranked DI players. That is VERY intimidating to me, Trentonjoe claims that a very talented team can be created solely from D3 players. Is that seriously possible? How can I expect to compete with teams that sign exclusively projected DI athletes? I'd love to scout and sign strictly D3 players since they largely go uncontested but there are SO many and most of them are NOT good.

Yeah Gettysburg looks good for sure. I think you can get good teams going for D3 only, for sure. Especially if you're a good coach - which you are.

And I don't mean to be offensive but put that team in a superconference like Phelan USA S and I don't think you win enough games to qualify for the NT.

But then again, maybe you'll rip off a run to the F4 this season. who knows.

Posted by Trentonjoe on 5/4/2017 1:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 5/4/2017 1:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Trentonjoe on 5/4/2017 1:28:00 PM (view original):
"Can you field a competitive team with only D3 players? I don't know. Probably, if you're the only one scouting them, and have easy access to the high potential ones every year."

Sure can. Check out my Gettysburg team.

" The game doesn't force anyone to play a certain way. If everybody's playing the same way, find a new angle. Go where the value is. If you don't like sitting around until the last day of recruiting, then use another tactic."

That's what I was saying. It's totally possible to build a great team by not "sitting and waiting".

Great or good?

How about very good.

Very good talent in the hands of a great coach is an elite team. True at every level. Those elite teams are experiencing the same frustrations as everybody else, regarding reaching high and losing out. There is far less perpetuity of greatness than there was pre-3.0. It used to be that A+ D2 and D3 teams had access to players you could never touch with a lower prestige team.

You can, and probably should reach high with a slot or two every year, without committing your entire recruiting class year after year to D1 players you may end up getting beaten for, and losing resources on. A little creativity and flexibility will go a long way.

Posted by zagsrulez on 5/4/2017 2:26:00 PM (view original):
So as a new player, I see many of the 'upper echelon' D3 coaches signing ranked DI players. That is VERY intimidating to me, Trentonjoe claims that a very talented team can be created solely from D3 players. Is that seriously possible? How can I expect to compete with teams that sign exclusively projected DI athletes? I'd love to scout and sign strictly D3 players since they largely go uncontested but there are SO many and most of them are NOT good.

I think it requires a special talent that I'm sure I don't have. Making the pieces fit so to speak. For me, I need great talent to compensate for my weak gameplanning skilz. TJ has more leeway.

Posted by Benis on 5/4/2017 2:26:00 PM (view original):
Yeah Gettysburg looks good for sure. I think you can get good teams going for D3 only, for sure. Especially if you're a good coach - which you are.

And I don't mean to be offensive but put that team in a superconference like Phelan USA S and I don't think you win enough games to qualify for the NT.

But then again, maybe you'll rip off a run to the F4 this season. who knows.

Are you talking about the 3.0 Super conferences? or the 2.0 superconferences?

I am not convinced this team is great but they are only JR's . I scheduled super hard next season (or am in the process of it) to see how well they really do.