This game isn't like real life.

Eh, I agree it shouldnt just be an automatic "whoever spent the most should win". But right now the fallbacks are what kills most people. If I lose the dice roll on a recruit I am going after in the second session, I am essentially toast as you cannot get back ups lined up.

I accept this and deal with it, but I know alot of folks cant get over it. There has to be some kind of solution to that issue. Whether it be more transfers or JUCOs....I dont know.

Posted by crabman26 on 9/29/2017 11:10:00 AM (view original):
Eh, I agree it shouldnt just be an automatic "whoever spent the most should win". But right now the fallbacks are what kills most people. If I lose the dice roll on a recruit I am going after in the second session, I am essentially toast as you cannot get back ups lined up.

I accept this and deal with it, but I know alot of folks cant get over it. There has to be some kind of solution to that issue. Whether it be more transfers or JUCOs....I dont know.

Yep. But some highs should not win also. I am all for the 40%-60% though.

And give us options once we strike out. My teams are in highly contested regions, I don't mind competition.

Unless you're talking about changing jobs, which is another topic, you absolutely can get backups lined up. But the users who come to the forums to complain choose not to play that way. That's a gameplay and expectations issue.

Posted by zorzii on 9/29/2017 11:17:00 AM (view original):

Posted by crabman26 on 9/29/2017 11:10:00 AM (view original):
Eh, I agree it shouldnt just be an automatic "whoever spent the most should win". But right now the fallbacks are what kills most people. If I lose the dice roll on a recruit I am going after in the second session, I am essentially toast as you cannot get back ups lined up.

I accept this and deal with it, but I know alot of folks cant get over it. There has to be some kind of solution to that issue. Whether it be more transfers or JUCOs....I dont know.

Yep. But some highs should not win also. I am all for the 40%-60% though.

And give us options once we strike out. My teams are in highly contested regions, I don't mind competition.

The "options" exist BEFORE you strike out. If you choose not to go after those silver options and compete for the gold instead, fine, but stop pretending it isn't your choice.

Posted by shoe3 on 9/29/2017 11:29:00 AM (view original):
Unless you're talking about changing jobs, which is another topic, you absolutely can get backups lined up. But the users who come to the forums to complain choose not to play that way. That's a gameplay and expectations issue.

I agree to an extent, you can get back ups lined up if you are battling for guys that have an early signing...but for the late signers it is more difficult to have backup options if you are in a battle.

Posted by crabman26 on 9/29/2017 11:57:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 9/29/2017 11:29:00 AM (view original):
Unless you're talking about changing jobs, which is another topic, you absolutely can get backups lined up. But the users who come to the forums to complain choose not to play that way. That's a gameplay and expectations issue.

I agree to an extent, you can get back ups lined up if you are battling for guys that have an early signing...but for the late signers it is more difficult to have backup options if you are in a battle.

You can have backups lined up for late guys too, but it starts early in the first session. It can get complicated, if you have a bold D2 or D3 deciding to reach up and invest, and especially if the prime guy is taking his time in the second session, but usually if you're on a guy from the start, the lower level teams move on early. Trying to move in *after* those lower level teams have already invested is not the way to do it. It's like trying to buy life insurance after 50. Now the price is much higher.

Some don't like to play this way - which is fine - because they'd rather invest all their APs on their top targets, to maximize their chances. Totally valid. But then you can't complain about the consequence, which is that if you strike out, you are behind the eight-ball.

Those extra 3-5 APs per cycle don't really move the needle much at all on a recruit you're going to go all in on anyway. Sure it matters, maybe a couple of percentage points at the end. But there's not a lot of value there. They are far more valuable on recruits that are not going to get a ton of attention, or visits from high prestige teams. That's why siphoning off 3-5 APs per cycle from your top target to cultivate a backup over the course of a recruiting session can pay off for people who, for whatever reason, don't want to take a walk-on in that slot.

One solution to the wasteland that is the second session: have players on SIM-coached teams transfer, as a form of graduate transfers. When the player rescind scholarship opens up, have each SIM coached team lose one senior player. It would create a pool of seasoned players that would be available as a possible contributor in the second session.

Posted by shoe3 on 9/29/2017 11:29:00 AM (view original):
Unless you're talking about changing jobs, which is another topic, you absolutely can get backups lined up. But the users who come to the forums to complain choose not to play that way. That's a gameplay and expectations issue.

My back-up are lined up, but not the same caliber, so they are only to put the team on hold until recruiting works out... If you have back-up as good, and you spent your money losing rolls, you will get caught in the late session by teams who just got $$$ from EES or someone who has money left cause he chose the wrong battles.

Posted by shoe3 on 9/29/2017 12:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by crabman26 on 9/29/2017 11:57:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 9/29/2017 11:29:00 AM (view original):
Unless you're talking about changing jobs, which is another topic, you absolutely can get backups lined up. But the users who come to the forums to complain choose not to play that way. That's a gameplay and expectations issue.

I agree to an extent, you can get back ups lined up if you are battling for guys that have an early signing...but for the late signers it is more difficult to have backup options if you are in a battle.

You can have backups lined up for late guys too, but it starts early in the first session. It can get complicated, if you have a bold D2 or D3 deciding to reach up and invest, and especially if the prime guy is taking his time in the second session, but usually if you're on a guy from the start, the lower level teams move on early. Trying to move in *after* those lower level teams have already invested is not the way to do it. It's like trying to buy life insurance after 50. Now the price is much higher.

Some don't like to play this way - which is fine - because they'd rather invest all their APs on their top targets, to maximize their chances. Totally valid. But then you can't complain about the consequence, which is that if you strike out, you are behind the eight-ball.

Those extra 3-5 APs per cycle don't really move the needle much at all on a recruit you're going to go all in on anyway. Sure it matters, maybe a couple of percentage points at the end. But there's not a lot of value there. They are far more valuable on recruits that are not going to get a ton of attention, or visits from high prestige teams. That's why siphoning off 3-5 APs per cycle from your top target to cultivate a backup over the course of a recruiting session can pay off for people who, for whatever reason, don't want to take a walk-on in that slot.

Agreed on the 3-5 APs, its typically what I do to stay "on the radar" with those type of recruits.

And yes, I agree with everything you are are saying and am generally on that side of the argument with all of this...I just want to play in worlds that are more filled, even if we are in the right on this argument, if the masses stay away what good is it to be right? I just see alot of coaches leaving, which sucks.

I am only talking D1. In D2-D3, you have backups forever... I have backup lineup up in D1... but without cash, that you spent because you could win, It's tough to get these backups also, cause... some will be as desperate as you.

"even if we are in the right on this argument, if the masses stay away what good is it to be right?"

Couple things to say on this. First, every tech update comes with attrition from people who just don't like the changes. You don't judge the success or failure of the update until much farther in the future, especially when we're talking about this kind of game, which updates rarely anyway. Second, I don't think the sky is falling. D1 is generally fine, I think. The optimal population, IMO, is about 8-10 per major conference, 5-8 for a handful of "mid-major" conferences, and 0-4 for the lower levels. That comes out to around 120, giver or take, based on how many "mid-majors" there are. Not too far off from that now. The four big 6 conferences I play in are all in that 8-10 range, and are pretty competitive and fun right now, though some did go through a period of depression, which was more a factor of the faulty jobs process, where coaches couldn't take over programs like Duke until they crashed.

The appeal of full worlds is kind of a fantasy. To make that an appealing game, I think they'd have to totally eliminate effort from the recruiting process, or you're right, there are just going to be people constantly stepping all over each other for every level of recruit, and very few - probably no - people are going to actually find that appealing in practice.

Its been a year... I think we can judge how nuHD is going.

All time low D2 and D3 populations.

shoe - don't take this the wrong way but you don't have any top notch D1 teams. Could it be your strategy works because you are picking up players that leave you battling DII schools in battles? It would really mean more for a top 10 D1 coach to come out here and spout the things you are saying because at the top of DI what you claim in ALL your posts about backup plans just isn't possible. You are an excellent DII coach so maybe your strategy is more applicable to DII/DIII.


NOW......
If you want to talk about having backup plans the 1st few days of recruiting, that's another story. But once you are invested, if another team comes in and makes a push you can be screwed. You can't change plans from there because you are then behind every other team that has been plowing APs into recruits from day 1.