I've been complaining about this for the last decade. Baseline prestige goes against the name of this game "Hoops DYNASTY".
At one point before Coach K arrived, Duke was not considered an elite school and would have had a low baseline prestige in HD. Coach K changed that. Coaches in HD don't get that chance. How can one create a dynasty if they are going to constantly be taxed by the ignorant rule of baseline prestige? Low baseline prestige schools have to be twice as successful as high baseline prestige schools to get their prestige up into the "A's". Total. Effing. BS.

Ill do it before someone else does. If you don't like baseline prestige, play DII or DIII. Its specifically in there to differentiate DI from the other divisions.

And honesty in 3.0 there are now plenty of low baseline prestige schools who are maintaining A/A+. So HD coaches DO get that chance. You just have to be very good at this game. Post back here at the end of your current season and let us know what you finished at.

If you already know all this and felt the need to rant ….carry on.

Yep, that's why I quit UT Arlington (my alma mater) in your same division. Too much of an uphill challenge for me as I'm not very good at HD. Moved up to Georgia, made a few okay NT runs, then left there to have an Ivy League team for fun.

I'd probably have multiple UTA teams if not for baseline prestige.

B- baseline https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/TeamProfile/History.aspx?tid=5292
C baseline https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/TeamProfile/History.aspx?tid=5485 (just want to note that they got to A- in season 110 with only Elite 8 / 2nd rd / sweet 16 / PI in previous 4 seasons.
B- baseline https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/TeamProfile/History.aspx?tid=5422 Just reached A after a few good seasons.

Also, most of the schools I was thinking of are actually B baseline schools (we have several in Smith) . I think of those as low baseline, but you may just be looking at those in the C range, which I admit are few.

A10 in Phelan has had multiple teams creep into the A- to A prestiges over the last few seasons. It takes a couple deeper runs in the NT which isnt easy to do.

Oh good, humble brag time!

My NMSU team with D baseline was A- for 10 straight seasons. It actually hopped up to A after the draft a couple times.

NMSU

But I'm with Mully. Baseline is what makes D1 different. It could use some tweaks but I like it.

It also allows for different types of personal challenges to build up a low prestige school at D1

Baseline could be weakened a tad, but I don't think it is that bad as of now (however, that's entirely my opinion). I think it would be more effective if they took a longer span of time than 4 seasons to adjust people's prestige.

This game isn't real life, but it attempts to mirror real life so - Butler basketball went S16, 2nd rd., 1st rd., NC game, NC game from 07-11. Even despite those impressive runs, I don't think anyone in '11 was thinking "this is among the most prestigious programs in the nation". It was more likely "Hayward hard carried them" in '10 and "Brad Steven is a mastermind and the team is just well rounded" in '11. If they had won one or both, I still don't know if we'd be talking "top tier prestige".

For UTSA, a more appropriate comparison may be Gonzaga. Gonzaga has S16, NC game, S16, E8 the past 4 seasons compared to your PI 3rd, PI 2nd, NC game, E8 (you'll be removing that PI 3rd for at least an E8 this season, congrats on that by the way!). I don't think people consider Gonzaga amongst the few most prestige programs, NOT because they aren't consistently impressive, but rather people don't watch them barring a good OOC game and then the NT.

That was a long rant to say. I kinda agree, but I kinda disagree.

one of my pet peeves are people claiming Duke was nothing until Coach K arrived.

The three seasons before Coach K was hired they were ranked and made a Final Four in 1978. A 2-seed the following year.

I'll give you the early-mid 70's weren't impressive. But every program goes through 6-10 year poor stretches. Even Kentucky, and I don't hear people say they weren't anything until Calipari arrived.

In the 60's Duke probably were a top 2-3 team for the decade. 7 top 10's in 8 years between '61-'68. That also was a time when only the ACC conference tourney winner got a bid to the NCAA. Not unusual for a couple top 10 teams from the ACC not making the NCAA in given season. The ACC tourney was often played at a higher level than the NCAA's. The one bid per conf was a reason South Carolina left the ACC after failing to make the NCAA three straight seasons ranked in the top 6.
Duke was a nobody prior to the 60's. But that's more than 60 years ago and before the creation of the ACC.

I like the idea of dividing the 27 conferences into 4 tiers, like it is now, but having no prestige advantage within each conference.
Tier 1 - all teams baseline A - (6) conferences --> Big Six conferences... Villanova (B+?) and Syracuse (A+) should have the same "A" prestige.
Tier 2 - all teams baseline B - (5) conferences --> midmajors - A10 MWC Mo-Valley WCC Horizon.
Tier 3 - all teams baseline C - (5) conferences --> low majors - CUSA Big-West Colonial MAC Ivy
Tier 4 - all teams baseline D - (11) conferences --> everyone else.
.

For low prestige midmajor schools to become elite, they need:
- a great coach of course.
- isolation.
- nearby Big Six schools that are weak or Sim owned.

The concept of a baseline prestige that A) doesn’t move, and B) is tied to a school rather than a coach or a conference was a pretty dumb idea. As npb7768 says above, and what I’ve been saying forever, a “baseline” prestige concept should apply only to conferences, not to individual schools. All big 6 conference programs should be tethered to the same baseline score, with the actual, functional prestige being mostly affected by a decades worth of performance, and only lightly affected by the baseline. I could also see a prestige concept that follows the coach being a viable thing, but that would have to be thought out a bit, because certain coach change scenarios could be exploitable in that situation.

i always liked the idea of making baseline 50% dependent on HD performance, with the majority being from the last 30 seasons or so (so like in season 150 someone can still go build a program)

At the end of the day you need some mechanism for the game to mirror real life. It serves it purpose.