If he has “the wants to play” preference, the timing of when the promises were made is a key component that is missing from the given information.

Posted by drichar138 on 5/18/2019 1:29:00 PM (view original):
If he has “the wants to play” preference, the timing of when the promises were made is a key component that is missing from the given information.

I indicated that in a previous post. Team 1 was 4th cycle and Team 2 was 2nd cycle.

Posted by beachhouse on 5/18/2019 1:41:00 PM (view original):

Posted by drichar138 on 5/18/2019 1:29:00 PM (view original):
If he has “the wants to play” preference, the timing of when the promises were made is a key component that is missing from the given information.

I indicated that in a previous post. Team 1 was 4th cycle and Team 2 was 2nd cycle.

ah, missed that post. Thanks.

No worries! I’ll let this go for a bit longer and then reveal the percentages.

Posted by beachhouse on 5/18/2019 8:14:00 AM (view original):
Team 1
D3 level
A+/A- prestige (from RS1 to RS2)
47 seasons in world, all one school.

AP applied: 980 (39.2)
Home Visits: 17
Campus Visits: 1
Start Promised and 25 Minutes



Team 2
D3 level
C+/B- (RS1 to RS2)
1st season in world

AP applied: 2017 (77.6)
Home Visits: 20
Campus Visits: 1
Start Promised and 25 Minutes


Preferences:
Team 1 is Very Good on all recruits preferences
Team 2 is Very Good on all recruits preferences except: Wants Success (Bad); Strong Defense (Neutral) and Long-time Coach (Very Bad)

Both teams were at Moderate after RS1. No other teams had offers in.

What do you think the outcome was?

Not sure if the answer has been posted yet, but I'll go with 62-38 Team 2.

Team 1 - 52-48.

100/0

Team 1 takes it.

Team 2 never got above moderate.

What exactly were the preferences? You say “team 1 was “very good” on all recruit preferences.” Preferences carry different weights so knowing exactly what the preferences were matters as well.

Regardless, this is a pretty solid example of why I continue to say APs are wildly over-valued in the forums.

Wants success, was the dagger in my opinion. Has to be the most important of all preferences. (Maybe wants to play is right there with it). Very good to bad seemed to be the difference maker.

However, i'm surprised that preferences and prestige matter THAT much at the D3 level. Considering both schools went all in AND the losing school more than doubled the AP and wasnt even in signing range. I feel like in a battle between D3 schools, going all in should AT LEAST get you in the dice roll. No matter the prestige and preference levels. I'd be ok with it if it was the longest odds possible (i'm not sure what that is, maybe 80/20?). An A+ D3 shouldn't carry that much weight over a D- D3 (just examples). If this was D1, i'd get it. But D3, just seems kinda odd

This kinda shocks me.

Posted by topdogggbm on 5/19/2019 1:21:00 PM (view original):
Wants success, was the dagger in my opinion. Has to be the most important of all preferences. (Maybe wants to play is right there with it). Very good to bad seemed to be the difference maker.

However, i'm surprised that preferences and prestige matter THAT much at the D3 level. Considering both schools went all in AND the losing school more than doubled the AP and wasnt even in signing range. I feel like in a battle between D3 schools, going all in should AT LEAST get you in the dice roll. No matter the prestige and preference levels. I'd be ok with it if it was the longest odds possible (i'm not sure what that is, maybe 80/20?). An A+ D3 shouldn't carry that much weight over a D- D3 (just examples). If this was D1, i'd get it. But D3, just seems kinda odd

Personally, I believe distance is the top preference...but the OP implied that distance was Very Good for both so it wasn't a factor. I think it is odd as well that the second team couldn't get into the High category with all of that effort.

This dice roll makes me reconsider how I evaluate preferences and their importance.

Since we were both moderate I knew it would be a coin flip. I hoped that having put in so much effort that the contributing factor to not getting the player would be a similar effort.

Was very shocked to see that my AP effort doubled his and that I even did more HV’s

Let me rephrase my preference statement. I think they are grouped somewhat. With each recruit having slightly different importance on each.

Tier 1 being Wants to Play, Distance, and Success preference

Tier 2 being Long Term Coach, conference strength, and play style

Tier 3 being offense and defense.

Each recruit likely has a different weight based off the preferences they have, or the combination of the preferences they have. So in this example, the tier 1 preferences of Wants to play had equal effort. And distance didn't seem to be involved. So i meant the "Wants Success" was the dagger in THIS particular battle. And not necessarily the most important preference in all battles