Is there an advantage to moving and if so wen should a coach consider it?

I haven’t ever coached at D1... but from what I know, it’s a totally different game. Consider recruiting above all else. As a D2 coach, one of my strategies is to pay close attention to where the line is of solid D1 recruits that I can get without a D1 coach winning the recruit as one of his backup options.

Recruiting in D1 is entirely different. Battles happen earlier, and your recruiting season can be won or lost at the beginning of phase 1... depending how you play it.

It’s a personal preference for you to decide which division you prefer.

I like D1 much better than D2. There are a number of recruiting strategies you can use, and none are always successful because often it depends on what other coaches are doing and thinking. You have a lot more money to work with, so you can really recruit at pretty far distances if you want to, although it is still generally better to recruit close to home. You have a little more room for error as well because of the greater amount of cash.

There are challenges and rewards to be found at D3, D2, or D1 in HD. Each level requires different strategies. I personally keep teams in all of them.

If your measure of success is winning championships, stay in D3 or D2 - the math is in your favor there. Those levels contain significantly fewer human coaches and include a larger percentage of coaches in the first years of their careers.

If, on the other hand, you find joy in incremental improvements and playing against tougher opponents, try your hand at a D1 team. If you persist and keep getting better you'll find yourself challenging for championships there also.

I enjoy seeing the stories contained in the News during the job change periods - some coaches moving from D2 to their first D1 schools; some moving on from their initial D1 team to a Big 6 conference; others moving down from a Big 6 to a lower-level D1 or even back to D2.

Posted by topdogggbm on 11/22/2020 10:37:00 AM (view original):

Posted by chapelhillne on 11/21/2020 10:51:00 PM (view original):
I like D1 much better than D2. There are a number of recruiting strategies you can use, and none are always successful because often it depends on what other coaches are doing and thinking. You have a lot more money to work with, so you can really recruit at pretty far distances if you want to, although it is still generally better to recruit close to home. You have a little more room for error as well because of the greater amount of cash.

Can someone explain what "strategies" are out there in D1? Because personally I'm bored with D1 recruiting. Terribly.

With D2 you find targets that aren't such a high reach that D1s will come. You battle other D2s at times. But you also have signing preference obstacles. If a player is Early/EoP1, and D1s come on the last day of RS1, you can spend and maybe hold them off to get a roll, or decide to pass. You can start working on a D3 led D1 player as a back up. You can bomb a D3 led D1 player that's Early/EoP1 and steal before the D3 can sign him. You can unlock a D3 led D1 player but not offer, while waiting for your Early/EoP1 guys to make their signing decisions. Etc

At D1, you find a player that matches your preferences and doesn't have A+ D1s on him, and go all in. And sit and wait to see if you win or lose. And deal with the consequences when you lose, or if an A+ comes in and blows you out of the water. The end. I just don't see anything strategic about it.

Would anyone care to share what they mean by "strategy" in regards to D1 recruiting? I just don't see it.

(also, I don't really count the schools or coaches that are A+ in D1 having to have strategy. Sure there is some involved I'm sure. But A+ destroys everything. So those schools just TAKE whatever they want. That's not strategy to me. That's just "selecting". So I'm mainly asking for strategy for schools that are in the A to C+ range. Where real strategy is needed).
thank you for listening.

a+s don't take everything. that was never true but 3.0 totally shattered it.

this sort of ties into that other thread (not directly, but when i wandered from the original premise into general d1 recruiting stuff). perception tends to trump reality in d1 recruiting, as in so many things in life. power resides in a+ schools because people believes it resides there. you want a d1 recruiting strategy? manage perceptions. make them reality. good luck!

Im fairly new to this game and later on this week (day after thanxsgiving) I should be qualified for a lower D1 tier school. Ive been at UMSL for 6 seasons and have built them up nicely. Thats not to say that they still cant improve. Was just wondering whether it would be worth it to move up to one of those lower tier schools.

Posted by starfinder77 on 11/22/2020 12:43:00 PM (view original):
Im fairly new to this game and later on this week (day after thanxsgiving) I should be qualified for a lower D1 tier school. Ive been at UMSL for 6 seasons and have built them up nicely. Thats not to say that they still cant improve. Was just wondering whether it would be worth it to move up to one of those lower tier schools.

I like low D1 teams. There is a unique challenge to them. You can bully D2's, but still be susceptible to high prestige D2. You can snipe a high recruit from a napping higher prestige D1, and that 1 recruit can make a bigger difference for the lower team. You can build a team on potential and watch it improve each season. And once you make the NT, then the boost can be proportionately more rewarding.

Then there is Tark MEAC that has gone from low D1 to a power conference.

Posted by starfinder77 on 11/22/2020 12:43:00 PM (view original):
Im fairly new to this game and later on this week (day after thanxsgiving) I should be qualified for a lower D1 tier school. Ive been at UMSL for 6 seasons and have built them up nicely. Thats not to say that they still cant improve. Was just wondering whether it would be worth it to move up to one of those lower tier schools.

depends what you mean by 'worth it', but in short, yes. low d1 is always hard. waiting to get a bit better school isn't going to change that. actually, historical wisdom says there's 2 leaps in d1 - learning to coach a mid major, and learning to make it at a lower end BCS school where you are getting pummeled all conference play and can never use the CT to bail you out when you miss an at-large bid.

frankly, its easier to learn at the lower school. you get easy wins and easy CT titles to help you along. you used to get bonus money for being in a major conference - a whole extra scholarship worth or more, usually. but now you don't. even back then, folks felt it was easier for most coaches to start at the lower school. now without bonus money, there's really no competition. start at a crap school. do well there, get over hump #1, move to bcs, and start on hump #2. not everyone has a problem with both humps - a lot of people do struggle on both - some folks only really struggle with one or the other. but that is the general path folks should plan on, i would say.

the time where its not worth it is if you are going to be put off by struggling in low d1. your d2 programs are getting good but generally speaking, the top third to half of d1 is all coaches who could run an a+ program in d2. so if you are behind on both recruiting and coaching, expect a steep curve in d1 for a while. its just the way it is. but if you are eager to get your d1 start, and you don't mind to continue learning there for a while, then go for it! and good luck!

Posted by starfinder77 on 11/21/2020 6:26:00 PM (view original):
Is there an advantage to moving and if so wen should a coach consider it?

I have half the number of full seasons under my belt as you do. But personally, I don’t feel quite ready to leap into D1.

As expected, D1 is more cut-throat. Do you want the challenge or do you want to consistently win? I used to play in a D3 conference that would send 7-8 teams to the NT per season and that made HD a lot of fun! Winning the CT felt like a major accomplishment.

I want to make my personal benchmark of being a perennial S16 or better team at D2/D3 before I move to D1. The short of it is, I like winning! ;-) Once I’ve proven to myself that I can consistently make it past R2 of NT, D1 here I come.

Posted by cbriese on 11/22/2020 10:43:00 AM (view original):
There are challenges and rewards to be found at D3, D2, or D1 in HD. Each level requires different strategies. I personally keep teams in all of them.

If your measure of success is winning championships, stay in D3 or D2 - the math is in your favor there. Those levels contain significantly fewer human coaches and include a larger percentage of coaches in the first years of their careers.

If, on the other hand, you find joy in incremental improvements and playing against tougher opponents, try your hand at a D1 team. If you persist and keep getting better you'll find yourself challenging for championships there also.

I enjoy seeing the stories contained in the News during the job change periods - some coaches moving from D2 to their first D1 schools; some moving on from their initial D1 team to a Big 6 conference; others moving down from a Big 6 to a lower-level D1 or even back to D2.

I agree with a lot of this. I have always said that all the divisions seem like 3 different games with different challenges.

I do find joy in things like improvement. Or maybe getting "further than expected". Or different challenges. Winning with all the sets, winning in each world I play. Things like that. But if you noticed, i did say winning in most of that.

I'm at Portland in Rupp WCC, where a bunch of friends all joined together. I'm a D prestige there. Small victories will be huge. I don't care that I will lose a ton there some years. I'm there for the conference greatness attempt. I also have schools like Louisville and Michigan, but it's still extremely early in my D1 career. But I don't see why I can't win at an elite level with all of them eventually.

But my main question, was about what goes into D1 strategy? I don't really know what's strategic about it. Low D1 has a lot of strategy involved. I just don't grasp what's strategic when you get to an A+ level season. As far as recruiting. Like what are you looking for? Or trying to accomplish?

Look for good preference matches, high talent, and (maybe if it's important to you) as little of competition as possible. But at that point most or all of your preferences are great, and you're not running into bigger badder teams that are coming to take your players as the days pass. Unlocking backups comes next I guess. But when you say "strategy", what are you actually looking for? Or doing? Real question. I'm trying to learn here

Posted by craigaltonw on 11/22/2020 3:05:00 PM (view original):

Posted by starfinder77 on 11/21/2020 6:26:00 PM (view original):
Is there an advantage to moving and if so wen should a coach consider it?

I have half the number of full seasons under my belt as you do. But personally, I don’t feel quite ready to leap into D1.

As expected, D1 is more cut-throat. Do you want the challenge or do you want to consistently win? I used to play in a D3 conference that would send 7-8 teams to the NT per season and that made HD a lot of fun! Winning the CT felt like a major accomplishment.

I want to make my personal benchmark of being a perennial S16 or better team at D2/D3 before I move to D1. The short of it is, I like winning! ;-) Once I’ve proven to myself that I can consistently make it past R2 of NT, D1 here I come.

And here I thought we were going to NSIC it forever?

Just kidding. I plan to move to DI eventually as well. I've actually got 10 or so friends also playing. We're mixed between 4 conferences at DII and DIII. We want to take over a DI mid major at some point.

Posted by topdogggbm on 11/22/2020 10:37:00 AM (view original):

Posted by chapelhillne on 11/21/2020 10:51:00 PM (view original):
I like D1 much better than D2. There are a number of recruiting strategies you can use, and none are always successful because often it depends on what other coaches are doing and thinking. You have a lot more money to work with, so you can really recruit at pretty far distances if you want to, although it is still generally better to recruit close to home. You have a little more room for error as well because of the greater amount of cash.

Can someone explain what "strategies" are out there in D1? Because personally I'm bored with D1 recruiting. Terribly.

With D2 you find targets that aren't such a high reach that D1s will come. You battle other D2s at times. But you also have signing preference obstacles. If a player is Early/EoP1, and D1s come on the last day of RS1, you can spend and maybe hold them off to get a roll, or decide to pass. You can start working on a D3 led D1 player as a back up. You can bomb a D3 led D1 player that's Early/EoP1 and steal before the D3 can sign him. You can unlock a D3 led D1 player but not offer, while waiting for your Early/EoP1 guys to make their signing decisions. Etc

At D1, you find a player that matches your preferences and doesn't have A+ D1s on him, and go all in. And sit and wait to see if you win or lose. And deal with the consequences when you lose, or if an A+ comes in and blows you out of the water. The end. I just don't see anything strategic about it.

Would anyone care to share what they mean by "strategy" in regards to D1 recruiting? I just don't see it.

(also, I don't really count the schools or coaches that are A+ in D1 having to have strategy. Sure there is some involved I'm sure. But A+ destroys everything. So those schools just TAKE whatever they want. That's not strategy to me. That's just "selecting". So I'm mainly asking for strategy for schools that are in the A to C+ range. Where real strategy is needed).
thank you for listening.

Well, the first thing I'd say is I think you're reaching far too low for your prestige level and the caliber coach you are at Louisville. Missouri is going a bit better; I think Bass/Cooper/Johnson/Trimble/Johnson are good level guys to target for your prestige, although Cone, Reece, Anselmo, Krieger are mostly wasted roster spots. Some of the guys you've recruited at Louisville are roughly D+ D1 caliber players. I'm not sure what strategies you're employing right now, but your yield isn't great.

Your recruiting at Portland, meanwhile, has been fantastic. You look like a 1r/2r tweener team which is a great place to be with 1 useable senior in your 4th year of a full low D1 rebuild. Really everyone but Collier gets the cubcub pass (who's developed so far at least).

How large of a net are you starting out with at Louisville? If you can make that level of a team with D prestige you should be competing for final fours year in and out with A-. Creating a net is one of the major parts of D1 recruiting.

At Nebraska (D+ to C prestige) I usually try to target 20 guys per spot open. So the year I had 6 ships, I targetted 110 guys. This year I had 1 open ship and targetted 25-30. I hope this helps!

I also think something you underrate in D1 is the idea of the fact that unlocking players is a race. Low D1 is truly a race to unlock ships on as many guys as possible. Most teams like to save their resources to fight for top 100 guys, not spend 8k to have a 50-50 chance at the 80th PG in the country in a C+ vs C battle. There are so many comparable talents, it's all about getting on one first so other people move on. If you get a ship/start/minutes on as many guys first as possible, you're in really good shape.

Also, the idea that coaches can select recruits at A+ hurts you as an A- recruiter. Maybe you're too scared of going after A+ schools as you're overestimating the impact of 2/3 of a letter grade? Remember that A+ vs A- is the same as D+ vs D- in effect, or roughly C+ to A+ in D2. That being said, do remember some teams displayed at A+ are more like A+++ or something if they have a ridiculous baseline/NT/draft combo.

To me there are several strategies. Do I want to try to go all in on a guy, and hope that scares others off? If I have 4 openings, do I want to find 4 players or go heavy on two? Do I want to just get my name on a player, without making it obvious this is who I am going after, then make a late push with 20 HV and a CV and hope my AP are enough to win the player? Do I cast a wide net of like 80 players with a point or two, and see who is the least difficult battle, or do I want to do 20-40 AP on just a few players? I do try to match preferences, but that is not always totally essential. It does help with your perceived strength. No one strategy seems to work all of the time. One thing I will say that is a good strategy, in my opinion, is to try to decide early who you will go for. I find if I have a lot of indecision, it usually does not turn out well, At low level D1, when I had a bad prestige, my goal was to find the players that would be really good by the time they were Junior and senior, and not try to compete with high prestige teams. At least to me, there are so many strategies that can work.

good posts by cub and chap.

most folks who reach out and have asked about recruiting over the years, its usually either, you have no plan, what the hell are you doing with a soph class consisting of 3 true bigs and nothing else, that sort of thing - or especially for d1 - you simply aren't aiming high enough.

dogg you seem to be falling into the latter. i'm not saying you are asking for help but as cub points out, you aren't aiming very high. this is pretty normal. folks under estimate what is possible. here's what i recommend. set a really high bar for talent and just strike out until you get there. take 4 walkons for 4 seasons straight if you have to. eventually because you are good at these sort of things (it appears) you'll find a way to get there, to get to 10 players consistently and then higher. and until then you will suffer and that suffering will motivate you to do better. its a pretty common experience for folks to drone on in mid d1 for ages just shooting for mediocrity and succeeding, don't fall in that rut. between all the guys who start great and all the players with the potential to be great as upperclassmen, there's a lot of fish out there. you run man and have a- prestige. you have no excuse for recruiting anyone outside those two categories anymore.