I don't see how going slowdown has no consequences. Slowdown could hurt you if:
1. You have a better team and bench

Posted by mlitney on 4/6/2022 11:22:00 PM (view original):
I don't see how going slowdown has no consequences. Slowdown could hurt you if:
1. You have a better team and bench

2. You have a decided depth advantage

3. You have better possession ratings (reb/BH/pass)

Slowdown is not always optimal or everyone would always use it all the time. I still don't see how it's remotely close to a "win button".

You’re not following along very well. Most of this has already been addressed.

First of all, why are you putting quotes around “win button” as though I said anything like that? Don’t put words on my keypad. “Win button” is your thing, not mine. I’ve used “upset button”. Not the same thing. Slowdown isn’t an automatic win. And it’s not always optimal either; again, that’s not something I’ve said. It can be *exceptionally strong*, in ways uptempo never is (on its own). Slowdown always covers up stamina flaws and protects against stamina drain - that is undoubted. And as powerful as stamina is since seble neutered press, that alone is enough to essentially make my case. Now whether or not you believe slowdown directly improves turnover mitigation and FG% on top of stamina drain, I think we also have to admit uptempo has the opposite effect. Uptempo always exacerbates stamina flaws; some teams are built to withstand that (those are the teams CS receives all those complaints about, presumably) with exceptionally good stamina, defense, and positional balance. But at its best, uptempo is really just pushing possessions as a hedge against bad sims. We can’t say those possessions are better or more productive because of tempo. And importantly, if the opponent is slowing down, it doesn’t really matter if you’re pushing tempo, you’re just increasing your own mediocre possessions, not affecting the quality of the opponents. So as I’ve addressed before, your concerns about possessions are very minimal in the realm of tempo strategy. There’s just no way I’m going to avoid playing slowdown because I’m worried about a bad sim. It’s a risk/reward choice where one choice is almost all risk for the vast majority of teams, and the other is all reward - neutral at worst - for every team that can use it. That’s a balance problem, and it has gameplay implications in recruiting as well.

“Slowdown is not always optimal or everyone would always use it all the time.”

That’s pretty hilarious, and also pretty similar to the silly logic CS was using. I mean, no. EVERYONE would not use it ALL the time, even if it was “always optimal” (again, never said it was). As powerful as it is - and you’ve seen some very successful coaches here attest to it - not everyone reads the forums, not everyone pays careful attention to what others are doing, and not everyone wants to do things the way other people do them, either.

Posted by shoe3 on 4/6/2022 9:39:00 PM (view original):

Posted by topdogggbm on 4/6/2022 7:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 4/6/2022 2:23:00 PM (view original):
“There's soooo many human teams in D1 with 10 or less scholarship players. To me, it seems like "win button" is running a deep uptempo press team. With the right matchups, you don't even need a lot of talent to make a decent run in the NT.”

That’s kind of what I’m saying - folks choose to play a certain way, take walkons, run short rosters, then get run over by uptempo/press teams and complain it’s overpowered. But that’s a gameplay choice they’re making, and the answer to their problem is to adjust their gameplay, it’s not for the game to give them a crutch. But that’s what happened when press was neutered the first time years ago, which is why tempo is the mess it is now, why uptempo is all risk for 98% of teams, and slowdown is all reward for every team that can run it.

It's not a game play choice to lose multiple 74/26 rolls when leading, in the same session. And I don't think anybody with an 8 man roster complains that press is too powerful when they get beat. They know what they're up against going into that setting.

I'm generally on board with the concept of "fix your own approach rather than complaining about it" (in the standard areas that we hear about it, like..... I forgot to renew, or we should get more money for RS2 so if we fail RS1 at least we can recover a little bit, or we should get more scouting money when we run out, etc). But I don't think there's one single coach here that complains press is too strong because they couldn't sign a full roster of their own. Coaches may complain at times that press is too strong. But the reason is not followed up by "because I can only sign 9 players".

Short rosters now days is due to a combination of high D1 participation and lack of REAL D1 talent. Sure, a coach can decide to aim for lesser talent. But how many piman/kimball/hawkfan91-92 rosters do you see in D1 with 60 ATH/SPD guys? Not many. So to compete with those guys, you need some talent. And there's not enough to go around. If you do wanna go the lesser talent + full roster direction, you pretty much HAVE to run press and get the high ST guys and use that approach. If you're running M2M/Zone and any offense besides fastbreak, you are NOT winning without elite talent. And lots of it. Period. There's no discussing that.

“Coaches may complain at times that press is too strong. But the reason is not followed up by "because I can only sign 9 players".

Except yeah, it very often is. That’s pretty much what cub was referencing earlier. This was a pretty common complaint coming out of 3.0 beta, in fact. And the fact that Chris is saying CS is still getting “hundreds” of complaints about press tells me not much has changed.

If you want to beat Kimball, Piman or Hawkfan (I’m in conferences with the latter 2, and often play Kimball in non conference in multiple worlds) you need to challenge them for recruits. Make them battle, sweat, take walkons, or senior transfers (Piman does that all the time, FYI). The answer is not to have the game deliver you a fail safe crutch that you can count on to (sometimes) make your team lots better, and anyway never makes your team worse.

Like we all don't know this and do this already? I just picked a couple of hot coaches to make a point. And if we're battling the elite schools, guess what? We're signing elite players! Which is my original point. Gotta have em.

And your last comment to basketts, Haha!! What does it matter if it's win button, magic button, upset button, or button up your collar? YOU are the one bringing the concept here!

Posted by topdogggbm on 4/7/2022 3:21:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 4/6/2022 9:39:00 PM (view original):

Posted by topdogggbm on 4/6/2022 7:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 4/6/2022 2:23:00 PM (view original):
“There's soooo many human teams in D1 with 10 or less scholarship players. To me, it seems like "win button" is running a deep uptempo press team. With the right matchups, you don't even need a lot of talent to make a decent run in the NT.”

That’s kind of what I’m saying - folks choose to play a certain way, take walkons, run short rosters, then get run over by uptempo/press teams and complain it’s overpowered. But that’s a gameplay choice they’re making, and the answer to their problem is to adjust their gameplay, it’s not for the game to give them a crutch. But that’s what happened when press was neutered the first time years ago, which is why tempo is the mess it is now, why uptempo is all risk for 98% of teams, and slowdown is all reward for every team that can run it.

It's not a game play choice to lose multiple 74/26 rolls when leading, in the same session. And I don't think anybody with an 8 man roster complains that press is too powerful when they get beat. They know what they're up against going into that setting.

I'm generally on board with the concept of "fix your own approach rather than complaining about it" (in the standard areas that we hear about it, like..... I forgot to renew, or we should get more money for RS2 so if we fail RS1 at least we can recover a little bit, or we should get more scouting money when we run out, etc). But I don't think there's one single coach here that complains press is too strong because they couldn't sign a full roster of their own. Coaches may complain at times that press is too strong. But the reason is not followed up by "because I can only sign 9 players".

Short rosters now days is due to a combination of high D1 participation and lack of REAL D1 talent. Sure, a coach can decide to aim for lesser talent. But how many piman/kimball/hawkfan91-92 rosters do you see in D1 with 60 ATH/SPD guys? Not many. So to compete with those guys, you need some talent. And there's not enough to go around. If you do wanna go the lesser talent + full roster direction, you pretty much HAVE to run press and get the high ST guys and use that approach. If you're running M2M/Zone and any offense besides fastbreak, you are NOT winning without elite talent. And lots of it. Period. There's no discussing that.

“Coaches may complain at times that press is too strong. But the reason is not followed up by "because I can only sign 9 players".

Except yeah, it very often is. That’s pretty much what cub was referencing earlier. This was a pretty common complaint coming out of 3.0 beta, in fact. And the fact that Chris is saying CS is still getting “hundreds” of complaints about press tells me not much has changed.

If you want to beat Kimball, Piman or Hawkfan (I’m in conferences with the latter 2, and often play Kimball in non conference in multiple worlds) you need to challenge them for recruits. Make them battle, sweat, take walkons, or senior transfers (Piman does that all the time, FYI). The answer is not to have the game deliver you a fail safe crutch that you can count on to (sometimes) make your team lots better, and anyway never makes your team worse.

Like we all don't know this and do this already? I just picked a couple of hot coaches to make a point. And if we're battling the elite schools, guess what? We're signing elite players! Which is my original point. Gotta have em.

And your last comment to basketts, Haha!! What does it matter if it's win button, magic button, upset button, or button up your collar? YOU are the one bringing the concept here!

I’ve been very clear, doggg. The tempo options are unbalanced. Both should have corollary risks and rewards, but should both come with consequences for departing from normal flow of the game, especially if your team isn’t built for it. But instead of that, we have an unbalanced game, because what has gotten most complaint over the years is press, even after it’s botched neutering. My continued participation here is as much about countering that wrong-headed idea - “press is too strong!” - as anything else, because I know very well that nothing big is going to happen to slowdown from a development standpoint until there’s a 4.0/full rewrite of the game code. If we can get fewer tickets sent to CS about the strength of press (and more on how strong slowdown is) because more folks know about what slowdown does against it, then maybe they’ll be inclined to improve the game on rewrite.

If your plan is to sign only elite players, that’s fine. Like I said, that’s a valid choice. And if you beat a deep uptempo press team with slowdown that way, well at least the system is working as originally intended. But it would still be a more balanced game if your option to slow down came with the consequence of giving up FG% and/or turnover mitigation. And it should, both because that makes basketball sense, and because the other departure from normal tempo already has built-in consequences that often result in those things. If you’re telling us that you lost battles during recruiting, so you want to keep that equalizer, well no. That’s just a bad argument. Recruiting battles are won and lost during recruiting. The game should not offer you a crutch or an equalizer after the fact to make up for it. Come back harder next season; or try to find a way to win without them.

As to your second point, at least get the user right. I was responding to mlitney, not basketts. And the difference between a “win button” and an “upset button” is pretty big, certainly the way we were using the concepts. I’m not talking about a guaranteed victory. I’m talking about an easy choice to make that gives you a much better shot at a big upset, with no real downside, and leaves the opponent no counter-move to circumvent. It doesn’t *always* work. Doesn’t work most of the time in fact, when the spread gets big enough. But it always is likely to produce a positive effect for the team using it, and there is nothing - outside of also running slowdown - the favorite can do as a countermeasure. That’s what “upset button” means.

I have no idea what in the hell “win button” means, to be honest.

When teams want to pull upsets in real life, they run slowdown. You limit possessions and hope the percentages work in your favor. You’re also reducing your risk of foul trouble with slowdown as well. There are many indirect affects of slowing the game down that make it optimal to pull an upset.

I don’t believe it directly affects shooting percentage, turnover rate, etc. instead, I think it merely allows for fewer possessions and subsequently slows down the rate of fatigue as well. I think you are confusing indirect factors as being direct and I strongly doubt they are direct.

It also seems shoe only finds fault with the engine when he loses. Losses happen. They even happen when you’re the better team. It doesn’t mean the engine is broken.

With that said, I think where there may be an issue (and what may be causing slowdown to seem overpowered) is with fatigue. It seems players completely forget how to play basketball when they are tired. This means by slowing it down you are almost immune to this concern. I've been the benefactor of this more than it has hurt me. So if they did make an alteration I would personally like to see players play a little better even while they are tired.

Personal attack by quote symbols. The most cunningly subtle form of passive aggression.

Calm down shoe, I wasn't trying to derail your livelihood. Just making a counterpoint to your statements such as:
". But for all teams that can run it (ie, non FB teams) slowdown has no such disadvantage."

", why uptempo is all risk for 98% of teams, and slowdown is all reward for every team that can run it."

" I would simply prefer that when Tex (or I, for that matter, I use slowdown at UConn and Minny too sometimes) presses that slowdown button, it also comes with a risk of some consequences, not *just* good stuff"

So you're clearly making a case that slowdown has no disadvantages, and I'm saying that isn't true at all. There are several scenarios where a slowdown hurts your team. But feel free to ignore this argument and deflect by being outraged about my off-the-cuff use of "win button".

Posted by trojan4309 on 4/7/2022 10:02:00 AM (view original):
When teams want to pull upsets in real life, they run slowdown. You limit possessions and hope the percentages work in your favor. You’re also reducing your risk of foul trouble with slowdown as well. There are many indirect affects of slowing the game down that make it optimal to pull an upset.

I don’t believe it directly affects shooting percentage, turnover rate, etc. instead, I think it merely allows for fewer possessions and subsequently slows down the rate of fatigue as well. I think you are confusing indirect factors as being direct and I strongly doubt they are direct.

It also seems shoe only finds fault with the engine when he loses. Losses happen. They even happen when you’re the better team. It doesn’t mean the engine is broken.

Lol. Another one not following along. It would be great if you read what I write, instead of responded to the things you think I mean. Thanks.

In real life, upsets happen in lots of different context, but always have concepts behind them that go beyond “limit possessions and hope for the best”. Some weak teams use slowdown, but lots of strong teams slow it down too - because when you have the better team, the percentages *definitely* work in your favor. In fact, it’s one way you know this was designed by a math/coder, rather than a basketball player. Running down the clock is more commonly seen in sports by teams who are very strong. If I know I can score against you 57% of the time, and you can only expect to score against me 45% of the time, why would I want more possessions for strange things to happen, like injuries, or foul issues, or a juiced 3-pt shooter?

On your second paragraph, if you had followed along, you’d know I’ve addressed this twice already in this thread. I suspect it’s direct, but I acknowledge not everyone does, and I don’t expect CS to disclose that info. But again, as you explicitly say in your follow up, the stamina issue means even if it’s only an indirect effect on stamina drain and subsequent fatigue, that’s a concrete performance factor, a primary consideration for gameplay, and a balance problem, since slowdown has no risk and uptempo is all risk.

And the last part is just ignorant. Everyone who has spent time in conference with me knows I lose a bit, and win a bit, but the things I hate about the engine I hate ALL THE TIME. Don’t project your own stuff on to me.

Posted by mlitney on 4/7/2022 10:55:00 AM (view original):
Personal attack by quote symbols. The most cunningly subtle form of passive aggression.

Calm down shoe, I wasn't trying to derail your livelihood. Just making a counterpoint to your statements such as:
". But for all teams that can run it (ie, non FB teams) slowdown has no such disadvantage."

", why uptempo is all risk for 98% of teams, and slowdown is all reward for every team that can run it."

" I would simply prefer that when Tex (or I, for that matter, I use slowdown at UConn and Minny too sometimes) presses that slowdown button, it also comes with a risk of some consequences, not *just* good stuff"

So you're clearly making a case that slowdown has no disadvantages, and I'm saying that isn't true at all. There are several scenarios where a slowdown hurts your team. But feel free to ignore this argument and deflect by being outraged about my off-the-cuff use of "win button".

I’m not outraged. Don’t be silly. You just used the wrong term, and I’m pointing it out. I even spelled out the difference in my reply to doggg, if you’re still wondering why it matters.

And no, you haven’t made a case that there are any real consequences to slowdown. That’s the problem, as I’ve already addressed (I can pull it out for you if you need it, it was a response to cub on the second page, where I first talked about why possessions are not a valid concern for a team who might run slowdown). You might think about it like “oh, I have the better team, and if I press slowdown what if I get a bad sim and run out of possessions?” But that is fundamentally different from the consequences you’d be looking at, the problems you’d have to manage, if thinking about pressing uptempo. In a discussion about big picture gameplay balance, which affects lots of things, including recruiting behavior, that difference is very significant.

Posted by shoe3 on 4/7/2022 11:15:00 AM (view original):

Posted by trojan4309 on 4/7/2022 10:02:00 AM (view original):
When teams want to pull upsets in real life, they run slowdown. You limit possessions and hope the percentages work in your favor. You’re also reducing your risk of foul trouble with slowdown as well. There are many indirect affects of slowing the game down that make it optimal to pull an upset.

I don’t believe it directly affects shooting percentage, turnover rate, etc. instead, I think it merely allows for fewer possessions and subsequently slows down the rate of fatigue as well. I think you are confusing indirect factors as being direct and I strongly doubt they are direct.

It also seems shoe only finds fault with the engine when he loses. Losses happen. They even happen when you’re the better team. It doesn’t mean the engine is broken.

Lol. Another one not following along. It would be great if you read what I write, instead of responded to the things you think I mean. Thanks.

In real life, upsets happen in lots of different context, but always have concepts behind them that go beyond “limit possessions and hope for the best”. Some weak teams use slowdown, but lots of strong teams slow it down too - because when you have the better team, the percentages *definitely* work in your favor. In fact, it’s one way you know this was designed by a math/coder, rather than a basketball player. Running down the clock is more commonly seen in sports by teams who are very strong. If I know I can score against you 57% of the time, and you can only expect to score against me 45% of the time, why would I want more possessions for strange things to happen, like injuries, or foul issues, or a juiced 3-pt shooter?

On your second paragraph, if you had followed along, you’d know I’ve addressed this twice already in this thread. I suspect it’s direct, but I acknowledge not everyone does, and I don’t expect CS to disclose that info. But again, as you explicitly say in your follow up, the stamina issue means even if it’s only an indirect effect on stamina drain and subsequent fatigue, that’s a concrete performance factor, a primary consideration for gameplay, and a balance problem, since slowdown has no risk and uptempo is all risk.

And the last part is just ignorant. Everyone who has spent time in conference with me knows I lose a bit, and win a bit, but the things I hate about the engine I hate ALL THE TIME. Don’t project your own stuff on to me.

I’ve read every word of your ******** and moaning, despite how awful a read it truly is. I’ve also checked out all of your complaining that no one cares to here in your conference chats… across multiple worlds. Yet, I wouldn’t stoop down to call any of your points “ignorant.”

As far as the game side of this, I have no interest in discussing it any further with you as you have shown no ability to have a civil discussion. I’m sorry you got SO offended by me stating what is clear: that your complaints come right after one or more of your losses.

Lots of discussion regarding the effectiveness of different tempos here but not enough conversation about just how lame slow down is and that coaches should feel bad about themselves for using it. This is an issue of both good taste and morality
Source: I love the fastbreak.

Posted by trojan4309 on 4/7/2022 10:02:00 AM (view original):
When teams want to pull upsets in real life, they run slowdown. You limit possessions and hope the percentages work in your favor. You’re also reducing your risk of foul trouble with slowdown as well. There are many indirect affects of slowing the game down that make it optimal to pull an upset.

I don’t believe it directly affects shooting percentage, turnover rate, etc. instead, I think it merely allows for fewer possessions and subsequently slows down the rate of fatigue as well. I think you are confusing indirect factors as being direct and I strongly doubt they are direct.

It also seems shoe only finds fault with the engine when he loses. Losses happen. They even happen when you’re the better team. It doesn’t mean the engine is broken.

Tell me you have never coached without telling me you have never coached in real life.

If I feel my team is deeper but not as talented on the top end( top 6-8) I try to run the other team out of the gym. I don't call any timeouts and I tire them out, and than try to keep tiring them out. I sub 5 in 5 out every whistle. In real life. I also want to get them in foul trouble so sometimes the right play is to tire out the starters and go at them early and often.

With some of these Stacked but only 6 deep DI teams FB/Press should be the answer not slowdown.

Posted by trojan4309 on 4/7/2022 11:36:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 4/7/2022 11:15:00 AM (view original):

Posted by trojan4309 on 4/7/2022 10:02:00 AM (view original):
When teams want to pull upsets in real life, they run slowdown. You limit possessions and hope the percentages work in your favor. You’re also reducing your risk of foul trouble with slowdown as well. There are many indirect affects of slowing the game down that make it optimal to pull an upset.

I don’t believe it directly affects shooting percentage, turnover rate, etc. instead, I think it merely allows for fewer possessions and subsequently slows down the rate of fatigue as well. I think you are confusing indirect factors as being direct and I strongly doubt they are direct.

It also seems shoe only finds fault with the engine when he loses. Losses happen. They even happen when you’re the better team. It doesn’t mean the engine is broken.

Lol. Another one not following along. It would be great if you read what I write, instead of responded to the things you think I mean. Thanks.

In real life, upsets happen in lots of different context, but always have concepts behind them that go beyond “limit possessions and hope for the best”. Some weak teams use slowdown, but lots of strong teams slow it down too - because when you have the better team, the percentages *definitely* work in your favor. In fact, it’s one way you know this was designed by a math/coder, rather than a basketball player. Running down the clock is more commonly seen in sports by teams who are very strong. If I know I can score against you 57% of the time, and you can only expect to score against me 45% of the time, why would I want more possessions for strange things to happen, like injuries, or foul issues, or a juiced 3-pt shooter?

On your second paragraph, if you had followed along, you’d know I’ve addressed this twice already in this thread. I suspect it’s direct, but I acknowledge not everyone does, and I don’t expect CS to disclose that info. But again, as you explicitly say in your follow up, the stamina issue means even if it’s only an indirect effect on stamina drain and subsequent fatigue, that’s a concrete performance factor, a primary consideration for gameplay, and a balance problem, since slowdown has no risk and uptempo is all risk.

And the last part is just ignorant. Everyone who has spent time in conference with me knows I lose a bit, and win a bit, but the things I hate about the engine I hate ALL THE TIME. Don’t project your own stuff on to me.

I’ve read every word of your ******** and moaning, despite how awful a read it truly is. I’ve also checked out all of your complaining that no one cares to here in your conference chats… across multiple worlds. Yet, I wouldn’t stoop down to call any of your points “ignorant.”

As far as the game side of this, I have no interest in discussing it any further with you as you have shown no ability to have a civil discussion. I’m sorry you got SO offended by me stating what is clear: that your complaints come right after one or more of your losses.

lolx2.

I don’t even know or care who you are, or what your alt ID might be, but I’m always flattered by my stalkers.

Anyway, if you actually did read what I write (you don’t) you would notice all the times I acknowledge to folks things like “yeah that was BS” or “I have no explanation for that” or “this engine is so bad” after THEIR losses (often to me). So basically, lol again. Especially since you basically agree with me, you just don’t like me and want me to care about it.

Posted by shoe3 on 4/7/2022 12:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by trojan4309 on 4/7/2022 11:36:00 AM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 4/7/2022 11:15:00 AM (view original):

Posted by trojan4309 on 4/7/2022 10:02:00 AM (view original):
When teams want to pull upsets in real life, they run slowdown. You limit possessions and hope the percentages work in your favor. You’re also reducing your risk of foul trouble with slowdown as well. There are many indirect affects of slowing the game down that make it optimal to pull an upset.

I don’t believe it directly affects shooting percentage, turnover rate, etc. instead, I think it merely allows for fewer possessions and subsequently slows down the rate of fatigue as well. I think you are confusing indirect factors as being direct and I strongly doubt they are direct.

It also seems shoe only finds fault with the engine when he loses. Losses happen. They even happen when you’re the better team. It doesn’t mean the engine is broken.

Lol. Another one not following along. It would be great if you read what I write, instead of responded to the things you think I mean. Thanks.

In real life, upsets happen in lots of different context, but always have concepts behind them that go beyond “limit possessions and hope for the best”. Some weak teams use slowdown, but lots of strong teams slow it down too - because when you have the better team, the percentages *definitely* work in your favor. In fact, it’s one way you know this was designed by a math/coder, rather than a basketball player. Running down the clock is more commonly seen in sports by teams who are very strong. If I know I can score against you 57% of the time, and you can only expect to score against me 45% of the time, why would I want more possessions for strange things to happen, like injuries, or foul issues, or a juiced 3-pt shooter?

On your second paragraph, if you had followed along, you’d know I’ve addressed this twice already in this thread. I suspect it’s direct, but I acknowledge not everyone does, and I don’t expect CS to disclose that info. But again, as you explicitly say in your follow up, the stamina issue means even if it’s only an indirect effect on stamina drain and subsequent fatigue, that’s a concrete performance factor, a primary consideration for gameplay, and a balance problem, since slowdown has no risk and uptempo is all risk.

And the last part is just ignorant. Everyone who has spent time in conference with me knows I lose a bit, and win a bit, but the things I hate about the engine I hate ALL THE TIME. Don’t project your own stuff on to me.

I’ve read every word of your ******** and moaning, despite how awful a read it truly is. I’ve also checked out all of your complaining that no one cares to here in your conference chats… across multiple worlds. Yet, I wouldn’t stoop down to call any of your points “ignorant.”

As far as the game side of this, I have no interest in discussing it any further with you as you have shown no ability to have a civil discussion. I’m sorry you got SO offended by me stating what is clear: that your complaints come right after one or more of your losses.

lolx2.

I don’t even know or care who you are, or what your alt ID might be, but I’m always flattered by my stalkers.

Anyway, if you actually did read what I write (you don’t) you would notice all the times I acknowledge to folks things like “yeah that was BS” or “I have no explanation for that” or “this engine is so bad” after THEIR losses (often to me). So basically, lol again. Especially since you basically agree with me, you just don’t like me and want me to care about it.

No, I don't like you. You are a very unlikeable person... as well as an incredibly immature one. I'm sorry you are so bitter, and I truly hope your life gets better (:

If we look at what is undisputed, the fact that tempo directly affects fatigue in players, then I don't see how what Shoe is saying isn't right. Running slowdown will lower the hit you take on fatigue, whereas uptempo makes it worse. You have to actively combat the negative effects of uptempo with better team stamina. You don't have to do anything for slowdown because there are no negatives from a fatigue standpoint.

Sure, running slowdown isn't efficient if you have a deep team. But that's only a "negative" for deep teams that benefit from more possessions. It's not a disadvantage for stacked D1 teams with 7-8 top 10 players and the rest walkons. Slowdown isn't that great at D3 and D2 because those first 7-8 recruits are just not going to be that much more dominant than what an uptempo (often press) team can recruit. It's just easier in those divisions to recruit full teams. That's not the case in D1. You can create a big advantage with those first 7-8 players by targeting top recruits. You'll land some and miss rolls on others. An uptempo (often press) team just can't target that many top level guys or they'd never sign the required 11-12 players it takes to run it. There's going to be a larger discrepancy in D1 when comparing the first 7-8 guys and I think that is where Shoe's frustrations come into play. It's a popular strategy because slowdown enables it. There probably should be some form of penalty.

A side thought: while creating those shallow but insanely talented D1 teams is a recruiting choice, EEs also have a big role in this and its not always the coaches using this recruiting strategy that get hit hard with EEs. If we add a penalty to slowdown, I'd also like to see rs2 have some changes so that its easier to replace EEs.

Finally, on a more lighthearted note, adjusting slowdown to be more realistic with how basketball works is kind of funny when we got uptempo+fastbreak+press combo that somehow creates traps at all areas of the court on every single possession. Even the most famous Havoc or Huggins defenses run that maybe 70% of the time. There's just things in this game that can't be exactly aligned with how basketball works, and that's isn't necessarily a bad thing.