Imo, it should be one big pool, but allow players to sign with any team in any division in accordance with their signing preference. This would hurt the assistant search recruiting method but I always thought that was kinda a loophole anyways. But it would empower lower division schools to take the risk for better players while being less confusing for new D3 coaches. At the same time, they could go back to the old days where certain players won't talk to teams at lower divisions.

To do so, maybe adjust the AP required to unlock a scholarship offer? Like if I, as a D3 coach, put 50 AP on a recruit but only got to 2% scholarship unlocked, then I probably move on.

Just thinking out loud.

It always made more sense to have one pool, and instead of dividing all the players into artificial and unrealistic “divisions”, just give them expectations, and tie their signing tendencies to that. Most mid-level recruits expecting to go D1 should basically be early signees when A+ D1 teams do enough to be at Very High consideration. Early for UCLA, EOP1 for Gonzaga, Late for Grand Canyon, and last day of signing for Colorado (D3). The better the recruit, the higher the expectation, and lots of elite recruits should still want to hold until the second session for teams with early entries to show their hands.

It’s a more natural progression than the clunky “red light”. It would require a readjustment of the scouting budgets, but that would have to happen if any change is implemented. Doing nothing is better than separating the pools (which has been covered extensively in dozens of threads over the last 5 years, and just isn’t going to happen, nor should it). But if the powers that be want to make a big update to the scouting/recruiting system, this is the direction they should be looking in.

Posted by mlitney on 2/23/2022 7:10:00 PM (view original):
Imo, it should be one big pool, but allow players to sign with any team in any division in accordance with their signing preference. This would hurt the assistant search recruiting method but I always thought that was kinda a loophole anyways. But it would empower lower division schools to take the risk for better players while being less confusing for new D3 coaches. At the same time, they could go back to the old days where certain players won't talk to teams at lower divisions.

To do so, maybe adjust the AP required to unlock a scholarship offer? Like if I, as a D3 coach, put 50 AP on a recruit but only got to 2% scholarship unlocked, then I probably move on.

Just thinking out loud.

I really don't understand how 1 large pool could possibly work. If I'm at d1, I gotta waste my time searching through garbage players that even d3 teams don't want? Way too much effort and I'm way too lazy for that.

I don't think it would be that difficult. They're already sorted by overall rating. Just add a distance filter, and you could scout the top-20 PG's within 500 miles or whatever you need. If you need to find a backup target, just look for a kid that all of the D2 schools are on. Haha.

Posted by mlitney on 2/24/2022 10:13:00 AM (view original):
I don't think it would be that difficult. They're already sorted by overall rating. Just add a distance filter, and you could scout the top-20 PG's within 500 miles or whatever you need. If you need to find a backup target, just look for a kid that all of the D2 schools are on. Haha.

And if camps were even remotely realistic, that would help, too. Replacing the division concept with “expectations” should mean that when Carnegie Mellon decides to do a private camp, they’re going to get players who might play at that level. Maybe if the camp is done later in RS2 (if a new coach takes over, for example) it might draw a higher level of talent from players who aren’t getting the expected attention, but early in the season, D3 camps should draw no players expecting to play at D1.

The idea that high level players attend hundreds of private camps in a year, including lots of D3 schools, is maybe the most hilarious part about 3.0.

Posted by Benis on 2/24/2022 9:04:00 AM (view original):

Posted by mlitney on 2/23/2022 7:10:00 PM (view original):
Imo, it should be one big pool, but allow players to sign with any team in any division in accordance with their signing preference. This would hurt the assistant search recruiting method but I always thought that was kinda a loophole anyways. But it would empower lower division schools to take the risk for better players while being less confusing for new D3 coaches. At the same time, they could go back to the old days where certain players won't talk to teams at lower divisions.

To do so, maybe adjust the AP required to unlock a scholarship offer? Like if I, as a D3 coach, put 50 AP on a recruit but only got to 2% scholarship unlocked, then I probably move on.

Just thinking out loud.

I really don't understand how 1 large pool could possibly work. If I'm at d1, I gotta waste my time searching through garbage players that even d3 teams don't want? Way too much effort and I'm way too lazy for that.

It doesn't. It's just a lesson in how to unnecessarily waste time and resources scouting. For the record, the current system is just 1 large pool. Scouting is just broken up by divisions, but even that is combined in the camps and can be combined through the other searches.

Posted by mlitney on 2/24/2022 10:13:00 AM (view original):
I don't think it would be that difficult. They're already sorted by overall rating. Just add a distance filter, and you could scout the top-20 PG's within 500 miles or whatever you need. If you need to find a backup target, just look for a kid that all of the D2 schools are on. Haha.

Overall rating isn't remotely feasible due to potentials unless you could search/sort by final potential overall rating. Consider the fact that there are quite a few D1 schools dipping down to D2 players. The range could be anywhere from 500-850 or whatever the max recruit is? D2 from about 450-600 maybe. Then add in a player could rise 50 points or 200 points.

Posted by shoe3 on 2/24/2022 1:56:00 AM (view original):
It always made more sense to have one pool, and instead of dividing all the players into artificial and unrealistic “divisions”, just give them expectations, and tie their signing tendencies to that. Most mid-level recruits expecting to go D1 should basically be early signees when A+ D1 teams do enough to be at Very High consideration. Early for UCLA, EOP1 for Gonzaga, Late for Grand Canyon, and last day of signing for Colorado (D3). The better the recruit, the higher the expectation, and lots of elite recruits should still want to hold until the second session for teams with early entries to show their hands.

It’s a more natural progression than the clunky “red light”. It would require a readjustment of the scouting budgets, but that would have to happen if any change is implemented. Doing nothing is better than separating the pools (which has been covered extensively in dozens of threads over the last 5 years, and just isn’t going to happen, nor should it). But if the powers that be want to make a big update to the scouting/recruiting system, this is the direction they should be looking in.

I think the clunky red light concept doesn't make sense. Ultimately you would have 1 pool per division. You compete with the people in your division. There's no red light because you don't need to see recruits at other divisions. Additionally, this would allow significant flexibility to make preference mean a lot more so that someone can't just outbid someone on a recruit or win because they got in first. A preference level could be worth 5 HVs for example now, so if I have a VH on a preference, it actually means something.

If anything there is a clunky red light right now at the lower levels because you have to sign upper-level players to have any chance to compete, and you have to wait on a clunky red light before you can sign those players. The current concept is confusing for new players and the lower level populations have emptied because of it.

the whole idea of having three divisions of recruits is to minimize the time wasted sifting through crap recruits (or way too good ones). overall rating is a poor measure and requires scouting level 4. i don't think merging all three and making folks deal with the massive set of players is going to help, i think that just takes us in the wrong direction.

Posted by gillispie on 2/24/2022 11:01:00 AM (view original):
the whole idea of having three divisions of recruits is to minimize the time wasted sifting through crap recruits (or way too good ones). overall rating is a poor measure and requires scouting level 4. i don't think merging all three and making folks deal with the massive set of players is going to help, i think that just takes us in the wrong direction.

This

Posted by gillispie on 2/24/2022 11:01:00 AM (view original):
the whole idea of having three divisions of recruits is to minimize the time wasted sifting through crap recruits (or way too good ones). overall rating is a poor measure and requires scouting level 4. i don't think merging all three and making folks deal with the massive set of players is going to help, i think that just takes us in the wrong direction.

Well no, you’re looking at this the wrong way. The scouting game is always about how you build your pool. Where are you drawing from, how many guys are you scouting up and when/how, etc. It’s still going to be about that. I’d just remove the clunky red light stuff that exists because of the unrealistic and arbitrary divisions and replace that with expectations to make the process feel more natural.

I suspect those of us who already scout efficiently and get nice big pools to L4 really won’t see any problem with what I’m talking about (though like I said, budgets would have to be readjusted, though this would need to happen with any big change we’re dreaming about). There are always going to be guys who experience FOMO and can’t grasp the notion of letting good prospects around them go by unseen, but I don’t know what you do about that. Scouting in a resource allocation game can’t possibly work if everyone sees everyone, and it won’t be much of a game if there is *one right way* to do it.

To flesh out a little more what I want, one of the things I talked about in beta when I was pushing the one-big-pool thing was “bullseye” scouting for the assistant. That means the ability to send the assistant to a location - say, Denver, if you’re based on the east coast - and have them scout out 250 or 500 mile radius from there. Adjusted price, it should be somewhere between where the assistant is now and hand-selecting scouting. That, along with a public regional camp might become a popular way to do lower level scouting.

Posted by shoe3 on 2/24/2022 11:27:00 AM (view original):

Posted by gillispie on 2/24/2022 11:01:00 AM (view original):
the whole idea of having three divisions of recruits is to minimize the time wasted sifting through crap recruits (or way too good ones). overall rating is a poor measure and requires scouting level 4. i don't think merging all three and making folks deal with the massive set of players is going to help, i think that just takes us in the wrong direction.

Well no, you’re looking at this the wrong way. The scouting game is always about how you build your pool. Where are you drawing from, how many guys are you scouting up and when/how, etc. It’s still going to be about that. I’d just remove the clunky red light stuff that exists because of the unrealistic and arbitrary divisions and replace that with expectations to make the process feel more natural.

I suspect those of us who already scout efficiently and get nice big pools to L4 really won’t see any problem with what I’m talking about (though like I said, budgets would have to be readjusted, though this would need to happen with any big change we’re dreaming about). There are always going to be guys who experience FOMO and can’t grasp the notion of letting good prospects around them go by unseen, but I don’t know what you do about that. Scouting in a resource allocation game can’t possibly work if everyone sees everyone, and it won’t be much of a game if there is *one right way* to do it.

The thing is there is no red light that exists currently. Recruiting is wide open to all and we already have "expected" level. It's just called "projected level" now. I'm one of those people that dislike the current model and scout fine (well enough for consistent championship runs). I'm fine with the amount of resources, but the current process is just tedious.

Posted by poncho0091 on 2/24/2022 12:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 2/24/2022 11:27:00 AM (view original):

Posted by gillispie on 2/24/2022 11:01:00 AM (view original):
the whole idea of having three divisions of recruits is to minimize the time wasted sifting through crap recruits (or way too good ones). overall rating is a poor measure and requires scouting level 4. i don't think merging all three and making folks deal with the massive set of players is going to help, i think that just takes us in the wrong direction.

Well no, you’re looking at this the wrong way. The scouting game is always about how you build your pool. Where are you drawing from, how many guys are you scouting up and when/how, etc. It’s still going to be about that. I’d just remove the clunky red light stuff that exists because of the unrealistic and arbitrary divisions and replace that with expectations to make the process feel more natural.

I suspect those of us who already scout efficiently and get nice big pools to L4 really won’t see any problem with what I’m talking about (though like I said, budgets would have to be readjusted, though this would need to happen with any big change we’re dreaming about). There are always going to be guys who experience FOMO and can’t grasp the notion of letting good prospects around them go by unseen, but I don’t know what you do about that. Scouting in a resource allocation game can’t possibly work if everyone sees everyone, and it won’t be much of a game if there is *one right way* to do it.

The thing is there is no red light that exists currently. Recruiting is wide open to all and we already have "expected" level. It's just called "projected level" now. I'm one of those people that dislike the current model and scout fine (well enough for consistent championship runs). I'm fine with the amount of resources, but the current process is just tedious.

There is a red light. It’s the mechanism that makes lower division schools wait until cycle x for a player in the higher pool to sign. That’s what we’re referring to. Having those cycles defined and known is arbitrary and causes all sorts of problems.

If you find scouting tedious now, I suspect it’s not really fine, and you should try other methods.

I'm probably in the minority when I say that I'm all in favor of things that require knowledge and/or effort. I put a lot time/effort into learning this game and getting better. I want my time/effort to allow me to climb to a higher level than most other coaches. Scouting is just one of many, many facets of this game where a little extra effort can go a long way in determining success. This isn't a response to any particular poster (*cough* benis *cough*), but just a general thought.

Poncho, I'd genuinely like to hear what you think is so tedious about the current process. The assistant search method takes about 10 minutes once you've figured it out. I can't think of a way it could be less tedious unless you just want all recruits automatically scouted to level 4 with the push of a button. But what would be the fun in that?