I've consciously chosen to rebuild at every place I've been and I've done a good job of it (I'm now at Vanderbilt, Wooden). But I've been at Vanderbilt for six seasons and it seems I've hit a plateau that I just can't get over. If I push for good recruits, I get beaten every time by better teams. It just seems like there's no wiggle room to improve a team competing with national title-level teams in its conference.

Any insight or input would be super appreciated because I'm getting to the point where I want to give up out of boredom.

I saw your post in the SEC conference chat and considered reaching out to you.

Big 6 rebuilds are tough, but not impossible, even with the more average baseline schools. In Iba, I've turned Oklahoma State (B baseline) into a consistent NT team. I've gotten them from a C- to a B+. It's taken me about eleven seasons, but the Big 12 there is loaded, it was particularly strong when I first got there. (the season before, it had three of the four 1-seeds.)

I see you've gotten Vandy to a C+, so you are making some headway. I haven't studied your recruits. But some quick pointers: look for local guys who want to play and sign Early or By End of First. Have a large web so you give yourself a lot of chances to hit. Take walk-ons.

Hope this helps. Feel free to send me a sitemail.

Yes, it is possible, though it is difficult. There are others who have done it more often, and better, than I, but here's what worked for me:
- Be sure to schedule appropriately non-conference. As you'll likely take some lumps in conference, you need to ensure you get a solid non-conference. This means not only scheduling to ensure you get a solid number of wins, but also quality wins. Beating a bunch of 250+ RPI teams doesn't help. I tried to focus on teams that I thought I had about an 85% chance of beating, and scheduled road games as much as possible. To do this, I analyzed what my team would look like next season, as well as what the opposing team would look like (e.g., factoring in graduating seniors).
- In recruiting, in the early years, I cast a wide net in scouting, and then focused on similar players as to what I looked for in DII (i.e., guys that slip through the top level DI cracks), but rather than just looking for late preference, you now can look at all preference (in fact, late is the worst to look at, because EEs will result in late top prestige DIs sweeping in, and you also have potential DII competition) - not top tier guys, but guys who weren't quite as desirable (in my first 8 seasons at Stanford, I only had 3 draft picks) as the top tier for one reason or another (e.g., not top 100 recruits, IEs, low current rating but high potential, decent current ratings but low WE, guys with lower OVR total ratings due to certain very low categories but who had good cores, etc.). I would jump on these guys early and try to lock up as many of them as I could, and would immediately give up and reallocated if an A prestige team (and even some higher B teams) joined in with any level of interest. I would also try to design my classes (using RS, IEs, etc.) in such as way as to stack them so that I would have a bunch of upper classmen with high IQs (IQ is something I think a lot of coaches undervalue) at the same time, to give me a chance of beating some of the elite teams who are starting a lot of freshmen and still learning, as a way to make it into the NT and boost prestige.

The above is definitely not the only way to do it, and not necessarily the best, but it worked for me - hopefully it can be helpful to you!

Posted by pallas on 2/26/2020 1:14:00 PM (view original):
I saw your post in the SEC conference chat and considered reaching out to you.

Big 6 rebuilds are tough, but not impossible, even with the more average baseline schools. In Iba, I've turned Oklahoma State (B baseline) into a consistent NT team. I've gotten them from a C- to a B+. It's taken me about eleven seasons, but the Big 12 there is loaded, it was particularly strong when I first got there. (the season before, it had three of the four 1-seeds.)

I see you've gotten Vandy to a C+, so you are making some headway. I haven't studied your recruits. But some quick pointers: look for local guys who want to play and sign Early or By End of First. Have a large web so you give yourself a lot of chances to hit. Take walk-ons.

Hope this helps. Feel free to send me a sitemail.

This is good feedback! I'm actually already doing most of that but I think the one thing I could work on is taking walk-ons and going more all-in on recruits. I recently did that but I think I shot too high. It's just so frustrating and I feel like I'm not making progress.

Posted by gdog13cavs on 2/26/2020 2:13:00 PM (view original):
Yes, it is possible, though it is difficult. There are others who have done it more often, and better, than I, but here's what worked for me:
- Be sure to schedule appropriately non-conference. As you'll likely take some lumps in conference, you need to ensure you get a solid non-conference. This means not only scheduling to ensure you get a solid number of wins, but also quality wins. Beating a bunch of 250+ RPI teams doesn't help. I tried to focus on teams that I thought I had about an 85% chance of beating, and scheduled road games as much as possible. To do this, I analyzed what my team would look like next season, as well as what the opposing team would look like (e.g., factoring in graduating seniors).
- In recruiting, in the early years, I cast a wide net in scouting, and then focused on similar players as to what I looked for in DII (i.e., guys that slip through the top level DI cracks), but rather than just looking for late preference, you now can look at all preference (in fact, late is the worst to look at, because EEs will result in late top prestige DIs sweeping in, and you also have potential DII competition) - not top tier guys, but guys who weren't quite as desirable (in my first 8 seasons at Stanford, I only had 3 draft picks) as the top tier for one reason or another (e.g., not top 100 recruits, IEs, low current rating but high potential, decent current ratings but low WE, guys with lower OVR total ratings due to certain very low categories but who had good cores, etc.). I would jump on these guys early and try to lock up as many of them as I could, and would immediately give up and reallocated if an A prestige team (and even some higher B teams) joined in with any level of interest. I would also try to design my classes (using RS, IEs, etc.) in such as way as to stack them so that I would have a bunch of upper classmen with high IQs (IQ is something I think a lot of coaches undervalue) at the same time, to give me a chance of beating some of the elite teams who are starting a lot of freshmen and still learning, as a way to make it into the NT and boost prestige.

The above is definitely not the only way to do it, and not necessarily the best, but it worked for me - hopefully it can be helpful to you!

Thanks for the input! I guess I just need to further refine my recruiting strategy.

Looking at your team, I think you need to be more selective in players you recruit and how to build your team. Looks like you might focus on ath/def a little too much at the expense of other attributes. You need a good 3pt shooter on your team desperately, I think that's hurting this seasons team a lot.

More specifically, look at John Brown. This guy is bringing very little to the table. He has good spd/ath but his defense is very low for B6 D1. You could balance this if he has great offensive ability but he doesn't. Very little Per, no Lp and mediocre passing. Bh is nice but without better per/lp, he's very limited. Try to be more intentional about what role you want a guy to play on your team. What is this guy's role?

You play M2M. Dont be afraid to take a walk on instead of signing an average player that doesnt improve your team.

And what's the deal with Mines? You gave him a RS and it's hard to understand why. I cant see his potential but his defense is still in the 50s after gaining 8 pts and his reb hasn't improved a single point from 65. For a player that is clearly a Center, 65 reb and 55 defense isn't gonna cut it at D1.

I'm not saying never RS or just go for 5 stars. But you need to be much more selective on the players you can get and understand if they're worth having on your team. You're now planning to sink 5 seasons worth of recruiting resources on a player who shouldn't be on a B6 team.

Posted by Benis on 2/26/2020 2:52:00 PM (view original):
Looking at your team, I think you need to be more selective in players you recruit and how to build your team. Looks like you might focus on ath/def a little too much at the expense of other attributes. You need a good 3pt shooter on your team desperately, I think that's hurting this seasons team a lot.

More specifically, look at John Brown. This guy is bringing very little to the table. He has good spd/ath but his defense is very low for B6 D1. You could balance this if he has great offensive ability but he doesn't. Very little Per, no Lp and mediocre passing. Bh is nice but without better per/lp, he's very limited. Try to be more intentional about what role you want a guy to play on your team. What is this guy's role?

You play M2M. Dont be afraid to take a walk on instead of signing an average player that doesnt improve your team.

Good feedback. You mention, though, that I focus on defense too much but then you mention how low John Brown's defense is. Kinda confusing?

Posted by Benis on 2/26/2020 2:57:00 PM (view original):
And what's the deal with Mines? You gave him a RS and it's hard to understand why. I cant see his potential but his defense is still in the 50s after gaining 8 pts and his reb hasn't improved a single point from 65. For a player that is clearly a Center, 65 reb and 55 defense isn't gonna cut it at D1.

I'm not saying never RS or just go for 5 stars. But you need to be much more selective on the players you can get and understand if they're worth having on your team. You're now planning to sink 5 seasons worth of recruiting resources on a player who shouldn't be on a B6 team.

You've done this before - your feedback and tone could be much more constructive and less critical. You're right, you don't know his potentials. He's not a great rebounder, but his defense is green and should wind up in the 80s or so while his ATH should end up near 80. His LP should end up around 90+, so he's my offensive big guy. I was trying to do with Mines specifically what you mentioned - be intentional with the role of each player. I gave him a redshirt because his defense is a liability until it improves a bit. With a green potential, he should start in the 60s next season and improve it quickly.

Posted by kaw_86 on 2/26/2020 4:05:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 2/26/2020 2:52:00 PM (view original):
Looking at your team, I think you need to be more selective in players you recruit and how to build your team. Looks like you might focus on ath/def a little too much at the expense of other attributes. You need a good 3pt shooter on your team desperately, I think that's hurting this seasons team a lot.

More specifically, look at John Brown. This guy is bringing very little to the table. He has good spd/ath but his defense is very low for B6 D1. You could balance this if he has great offensive ability but he doesn't. Very little Per, no Lp and mediocre passing. Bh is nice but without better per/lp, he's very limited. Try to be more intentional about what role you want a guy to play on your team. What is this guy's role?

You play M2M. Dont be afraid to take a walk on instead of signing an average player that doesnt improve your team.

Good feedback. You mention, though, that I focus on defense too much but then you mention how low John Brown's defense is. Kinda confusing?

Not really because while some guys on your team give you defense and not much else, Brown doesn't even give you the defense. At least going all out on ath/def gives you a great defense, what does Brown give you?

(What can brown do for YOU)

Posted by kaw_86 on 2/26/2020 4:05:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 2/26/2020 2:52:00 PM (view original):
Looking at your team, I think you need to be more selective in players you recruit and how to build your team. Looks like you might focus on ath/def a little too much at the expense of other attributes. You need a good 3pt shooter on your team desperately, I think that's hurting this seasons team a lot.

More specifically, look at John Brown. This guy is bringing very little to the table. He has good spd/ath but his defense is very low for B6 D1. You could balance this if he has great offensive ability but he doesn't. Very little Per, no Lp and mediocre passing. Bh is nice but without better per/lp, he's very limited. Try to be more intentional about what role you want a guy to play on your team. What is this guy's role?

You play M2M. Dont be afraid to take a walk on instead of signing an average player that doesnt improve your team.

Good feedback. You mention, though, that I focus on defense too much but then you mention how low John Brown's defense is. Kinda confusing?

tone aside - i think benis is making good points here - let me try to help with that confusing bit.

basically, when evaluating players for competitive play, you want to focus on the abilities each player brings to the table. there are 3 core abilities for guards and bigs - scoring and defense - and then guard skills for guards, reb for bigs. SFs have all 4.

rule of thumb - every player needs two clear ability strengths. then, you want to combine players with those abilities in a careful way, so for example, having 3 great rebounder / defenders from the 3-5 and 2 great guard skill / defenders from the 1-2 is still going to be a poor team - no offense. you really want to get to something like 2 scorers, 2 rebounders, 2 guard skills, and 4 defensive strengths per lineup (at least when the players are grown - obviously your FR backups are not yet expected to have clear strengths! they are expected, however, to eventually develop them).

you can make some exceptions to the 2 strength rule - particularly with a filler player here at there, especially at the 3 or 4, where you have a strong defender who is decent but not great at basically everything else. or at least 1 other thing. that is alright. even better, you can get a career backup on the team who has only 1 strength - a huge one though, in offense (and almost always 3pt scoring). top end scorers can carry the offensive load of 2 players (more or less), so it makes it easier to tolerate only 1 strength when its elite scoring - but in general - you want to make exceptions very rarely. never take guys with 0 clear ability strengths, at least not unless you are taking more than 4 walkons.

so, that said - having a guy with crap defense is not a problem, as long as he has the 2 clear strengths to make him a viable player. similarly, if your whole team has ability strengths in defense, but as a result you are shy in scoring (especially), rebounding, and guard skills - its going to be a bad arrangement of ability strengths - this is where having a careful arrangement of those strengths, good synergy between your players, is important.

so really, 2 related concepts here, but not contradictory. benis is saying (i think) that you have too many defensive ability strengths and too few scoring and other ability strengths - but also, that some of your guys are guys you shouldn't even recruit, guys who have no ability strengths, or maybe sort-of-1, or something like that. but he may be wrong about the guy in question - as you both pointed out, he doesnt know what he will look like in the end. on that specific topic, what do you perceive to be the guy's caps, and roughly where do you expect him to be at the end of his 3rd non-redshirt season? in short, guys need to have developed those clear strengths by end of junior year.

It's very possible to do, but not easy.

I took over Crum in Northwestern at C prestige in a loaded Big 10 and have built them into a power. A+ prestige, 22 straight NT appearances, 2 national titles, and at one point, 5 straight final fours. I had no clue what I was doing at first though. It took me 10 years to make our first NT, but we haven't missed one since.

Scheduling has been mentioned already but is very very key. Just schedule 10 away games against decent SIMAI teams. Look for teams that were around 100-150 in RPI that are only graduating one or two players. You want teams you can definitely beat, but not teams that are terrible and will tank your RPI and SOS. The goal here is to go 10-0 in non conference because you will struggle in conference.

Recruiting is everything. Forget about ever battling a team with higher prestige unless the preferences REALLY favor you. Your goal is to find the best recruits that the elites do not want. Be prepared to be knocked off your top targets, and your backups. Just keep running from battles against higher prestige teams. Take a look at the best D2 teams. They are often better than the 16 seeds in the D1 tournament. So take your time to really scout out lots of players... Everyone emphasizes ATH/DEF for good reason, so make sure if all else fails, the recruit has the potential to get to at least 90/90 in ATH/DEF. Don't be afraid to liberally promise minutes and starting positions either.

Eventually, once you make a couple NT's, your prestige will make it to B- or B. Now you can begin taking shots at better players, but you have to be really careful. Try to take the time to study what other teams are doing. Write down how many open scholarships they have, and how many recruiting battles they are in. You can get a very good sense for how everyone is spending their recruiting money and AP just by going through the top 100 list of recruits and clicking on the considering lists. Also pay attention to JUCO's and international recruits as they are often battled for. If a coach seems to be overextended you can consider making a play for one of their uncontested players.

The main thing to avoid is getting into huge recruiting battles with teams that are in a better position to land the player than you are. I think I was an B+ or A- until I finally battled another team in my conference for a recruit.

Not sure if you need help with your depth chart or gameplan….

And keep asking questions on the forum! Good luck!

the scheduling advice is key. the only reason a BCS rebuild is in some ways harder than a **** conf rebuild is the scheduling - every other item, they either have an advantage (baseline and conf prestige) or are neutral.

at a borderline NT caliber team (by quality), you can REALLY easily make the NT if you have a good schedule for it - it just so happens that losing 10 games in conference is a REALLY bad schedule for it.

as others said - start with better sims from bad conferences. these teams will win most of their conf games and have solid records, and you should win fairly easily. if you aren't fairly easily beating sims, then you have to work on some other stuff, but by the time you have a really great d2 team (which is the starting goal for d1 teams), it should be relatively easy to beat some sims.

from there, you just take a small step up - you might schedule some humans even from bad conferences, or at least the best sims in bad conferences (the theme is find teams you can beat reliably, who play most of their games against truly awful teams, so that they'll still have a good record). a full half of your RPI is your opponent's record - and a quarter is your win/loss. so by playing a team with a solid record, who you can beat, you are pretty well stacking the RPI deck.

I like to run press early at Big 6 school rebuilds. Going to get a lot of middling talent so might as well use numbers to advantage. Then after making a couple Big Dances and getting into that B range I switch to my m2m. I am not going to compete for great talent with a C range prestige Big 6 school but I can get some with a B or better prestige at a Big 6.

Posted by gillispie1 on 2/26/2020 5:17:00 PM (view original):

Posted by kaw_86 on 2/26/2020 4:05:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 2/26/2020 2:52:00 PM (view original):
Looking at your team, I think you need to be more selective in players you recruit and how to build your team. Looks like you might focus on ath/def a little too much at the expense of other attributes. You need a good 3pt shooter on your team desperately, I think that's hurting this seasons team a lot.

More specifically, look at John Brown. This guy is bringing very little to the table. He has good spd/ath but his defense is very low for B6 D1. You could balance this if he has great offensive ability but he doesn't. Very little Per, no Lp and mediocre passing. Bh is nice but without better per/lp, he's very limited. Try to be more intentional about what role you want a guy to play on your team. What is this guy's role?

You play M2M. Dont be afraid to take a walk on instead of signing an average player that doesnt improve your team.

Good feedback. You mention, though, that I focus on defense too much but then you mention how low John Brown's defense is. Kinda confusing?

tone aside - i think benis is making good points here - let me try to help with that confusing bit.

basically, when evaluating players for competitive play, you want to focus on the abilities each player brings to the table. there are 3 core abilities for guards and bigs - scoring and defense - and then guard skills for guards, reb for bigs. SFs have all 4.

rule of thumb - every player needs two clear ability strengths. then, you want to combine players with those abilities in a careful way, so for example, having 3 great rebounder / defenders from the 3-5 and 2 great guard skill / defenders from the 1-2 is still going to be a poor team - no offense. you really want to get to something like 2 scorers, 2 rebounders, 2 guard skills, and 4 defensive strengths per lineup (at least when the players are grown - obviously your FR backups are not yet expected to have clear strengths! they are expected, however, to eventually develop them).

you can make some exceptions to the 2 strength rule - particularly with a filler player here at there, especially at the 3 or 4, where you have a strong defender who is decent but not great at basically everything else. or at least 1 other thing. that is alright. even better, you can get a career backup on the team who has only 1 strength - a huge one though, in offense (and almost always 3pt scoring). top end scorers can carry the offensive load of 2 players (more or less), so it makes it easier to tolerate only 1 strength when its elite scoring - but in general - you want to make exceptions very rarely. never take guys with 0 clear ability strengths, at least not unless you are taking more than 4 walkons.

so, that said - having a guy with crap defense is not a problem, as long as he has the 2 clear strengths to make him a viable player. similarly, if your whole team has ability strengths in defense, but as a result you are shy in scoring (especially), rebounding, and guard skills - its going to be a bad arrangement of ability strengths - this is where having a careful arrangement of those strengths, good synergy between your players, is important.

so really, 2 related concepts here, but not contradictory. benis is saying (i think) that you have too many defensive ability strengths and too few scoring and other ability strengths - but also, that some of your guys are guys you shouldn't even recruit, guys who have no ability strengths, or maybe sort-of-1, or something like that. but he may be wrong about the guy in question - as you both pointed out, he doesnt know what he will look like in the end. on that specific topic, what do you perceive to be the guy's caps, and roughly where do you expect him to be at the end of his 3rd non-redshirt season? in short, guys need to have developed those clear strengths by end of junior year.

This is super helpful! Perhaps I've been l not specializing enough so I'll work on that. I have algorithms that predict where recruits' abilities will be at each year so that's helpful. I think I just need to shoot a bit higher and specialize more.