I know this isnt a popular opinion, but one way in my mind to solve the issue of # of decent recruits vs influx of D1 coaches is to limit the D2 schools ability to just park on a recruit and then land him in session 2. Keep it so D2 schools can only sign D2 guys, same with D3. Or maybe the D1 recruits with no D1 school in the lead for the second session would then open up for D2/D3 schools to sign.

You lose a battle for a recruit (it can be for any recruit, not just the 3/4/5 stars) and then you are toast trying to land a backup. Its very hard to then go after the next tier of recruit because a D2 school is right there on him and you have no money left after having to spend it on your battle(s). If you are a high prestige school you can sometimes steal the recruit away from a D2 school if you have enough time left in session 1...but if you are lower than a B in a rebuild you are going to struggle, which really sucks. Then you have to either take a walk on or a D3 level recruit.

I mean, I try to work on backups as I am in the battle but you dont want to put too much APs into the backup option and take away from your battle.

I think you should only be able to recruit up or down 1 level. Pretty silly to think a D1 recruit would go D3 in 99.9% of cases. Low D2 going D3 makes sense.

Posted by crabman26 on 4/27/2022 1:50:00 PM (view original):
I know this isnt a popular opinion, but one way in my mind to solve the issue of # of decent recruits vs influx of D1 coaches is to limit the D2 schools ability to just park on a recruit and then land him in session 2. Keep it so D2 schools can only sign D2 guys, same with D3. Or maybe the D1 recruits with no D1 school in the lead for the second session would then open up for D2/D3 schools to sign.

You lose a battle for a recruit (it can be for any recruit, not just the 3/4/5 stars) and then you are toast trying to land a backup. Its very hard to then go after the next tier of recruit because a D2 school is right there on him and you have no money left after having to spend it on your battle(s). If you are a high prestige school you can sometimes steal the recruit away from a D2 school if you have enough time left in session 1...but if you are lower than a B in a rebuild you are going to struggle, which really sucks. Then you have to either take a walk on or a D3 level recruit.

I mean, I try to work on backups as I am in the battle but you dont want to put too much APs into the backup option and take away from your battle.

As a D1 coach, I always thought the D2 coaches holding a recruit until RS2 was helpful. If the D2 coach wasn't there, wouldn't a D1 sim just sign them in RS1 and take away more options? You still have to beat the D2, but at least the recruit is still there so you have the option of trying.

I could be misinterpreting your thoughts though.

by and large, the recruiting 'fix' many seasons ago, was made for d1. d2/d3 were afterthoughts, with one d3 coach heavily insisting that d3 coaches should be able to sign d1 recruits.

as stated above, IMO d1, d2, d3 should have seperate pools. this would have near zero affect on d1, but would help not hurt d2/d3, as it would even d2/d3 up. Much of the inbalance in d2/d3 now is from experienced coaches getting d1 recruits, while new coaches get all walkon level players, while they try to figure the game out.

also, the same recruiting resourses (AP's & recruting dollars) should be available for d2/d3's as d1, right now d3 is the hardest place to recruit for, not the easiest, with limited resourses & the lateness that recruits wait to sign. Make all 3 work the same would be my fix for the game.

I'd also think the 5 for $15 dollars for new coaches only makes sense, or 5 for $25.

I'd also consider making ALL d3 scouting free to help new coaches, or let the new coaches see a level or two at least, just to make things easier

I'm sure if 10 experienced coaches got together, they could come up with many ways to make d3 more fun for new coaches, those are the ones that hit me as I read this post. I applaud those posting, as I think it's a very worthwhile topic.

Posted by mlitney on 4/27/2022 2:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by crabman26 on 4/27/2022 1:50:00 PM (view original):
I know this isnt a popular opinion, but one way in my mind to solve the issue of # of decent recruits vs influx of D1 coaches is to limit the D2 schools ability to just park on a recruit and then land him in session 2. Keep it so D2 schools can only sign D2 guys, same with D3. Or maybe the D1 recruits with no D1 school in the lead for the second session would then open up for D2/D3 schools to sign.

You lose a battle for a recruit (it can be for any recruit, not just the 3/4/5 stars) and then you are toast trying to land a backup. Its very hard to then go after the next tier of recruit because a D2 school is right there on him and you have no money left after having to spend it on your battle(s). If you are a high prestige school you can sometimes steal the recruit away from a D2 school if you have enough time left in session 1...but if you are lower than a B in a rebuild you are going to struggle, which really sucks. Then you have to either take a walk on or a D3 level recruit.

I mean, I try to work on backups as I am in the battle but you dont want to put too much APs into the backup option and take away from your battle.

As a D1 coach, I always thought the D2 coaches holding a recruit until RS2 was helpful. If the D2 coach wasn't there, wouldn't a D1 sim just sign them in RS1 and take away more options? You still have to beat the D2, but at least the recruit is still there so you have the option of trying.

I could be misinterpreting your thoughts though.

Yeah, I get what you are saying, and you are probably right regarding a sim school in on the D1 recruit....but by not having D2 schools on D1 recruits I would think that sim schools would get more of their initial lower targets since a D2 wouldnt beat them out. Right now I think sim schools are still getting their recruits PLUS the D2 schools are, with the D2's out of the equation I think you would have more viable backup options. Again I could be wrong.

Absolutely couldn't agree more with crab and oldresorter on restricting the levels. It's a no brainer in my opinion.

But I do believe that d3 recruiting projected d1 players was just an oversight by Seble. I think we can agree that d3 being able to sign d1 players is a MAJOR change but Seble never even mentioned it during the early stages of development. It wasnt until we started playing in Beta that we realized that this gameplay change occured. And then we didn't even have the levels restricted by signing periods like now. A d3 could sign a d1 projected Early signer the 1st signing cycle of the 1st recruiting session, it was ridiculous.

Seble really didn't think it through and by the time the concerns were voiced, it was too late. D3 was my favorite division at the time and it totally ruined it for me.

Gimme 3 separate pools and call it a day.

Posted by oldresorter on 4/27/2022 2:25:00 PM (view original):
by and large, the recruiting 'fix' many seasons ago, was made for d1. d2/d3 were afterthoughts, with one d3 coach heavily insisting that d3 coaches should be able to sign d1 recruits.

as stated above, IMO d1, d2, d3 should have seperate pools. this would have near zero affect on d1, but would help not hurt d2/d3, as it would even d2/d3 up. Much of the inbalance in d2/d3 now is from experienced coaches getting d1 recruits, while new coaches get all walkon level players, while they try to figure the game out.

also, the same recruiting resourses (AP's & recruting dollars) should be available for d2/d3's as d1, right now d3 is the hardest place to recruit for, not the easiest, with limited resourses & the lateness that recruits wait to sign. Make all 3 work the same would be my fix for the game.

I'd also think the 5 for $15 dollars for new coaches only makes sense, or 5 for $25.

I'd also consider making ALL d3 scouting free to help new coaches, or let the new coaches see a level or two at least, just to make things easier

I'm sure if 10 experienced coaches got together, they could come up with many ways to make d3 more fun for new coaches, those are the ones that hit me as I read this post. I applaud those posting, as I think it's a very worthwhile topic.

such an important point, how complicated d3 recruiting is now. i get that people are reluctant to chop d2 back into its own pool, and i get the conflict there. but i feel like we should all be able to come together and agree that d3 needs to be tailored at least in part to new coaches, and that what we have now is about as far from that as possible.... hopefully even, that the solution is an exclusive pool for d3 where d3 schools can only recruit from said pool.

one question though, i am sure i knew this answer at some point but forgot. are the pool totally absolute now? like if a c- d3 school sees 43 d3 recruits in texas, then the a+ d1 school is also seeing 43 d3 recruits in texas? or is it still in the eye of the beholder? it used to be that one school could see a recruit in d2, while a different school saw that same recruit in their d1 pool. if the pools aren't absolute (i think they are now?), that would definitely be a wrinkle...

Unpopular opinion. I would love a D1 world that was almost 100% human. People are buying $50,000 bored apes Veefriends. Saying12 bucks for a season in a single day world is to much is an excuse. All I am reading is established coaches not wanting consequences for over extending during recruiting. I came back after along hiatus and have some rebuilds and some long hauls and some bottom barrel Power 6 teams. more humans makes the lower conf's better and would help balance SOS and RPIs. Don't be afraid of more competition. Plan better and be prepared with options 2,3, or even 4.

The division cap argument has been done so many times in so many threads, it’s not going to change. But to recap:

1. Capping divisions will hurt new players. Right now they can compete for the same level of recruit that experienced coaches can get. *What they lack is information*. New players that seek mentors, or take time and study carefully in the first season do absolutely fine, precisely because of how open recruiting is. If they came in and had to try to compete for top level talent against experienced coaches (in high prestige programs) they would have a much bigger obstacle in front of them. So if anything, just do a better job of getting the information on how the system works to new players.

2. Capping divisions does affect the higher divisions. The recruiting system is basically a resource based economy, and to be functional, prices should be set by the widest number of buyers possible. A game where backup options are just sitting there waiting for you destroys the valuation process of the market. For an individual user, it might seem more convenient. For the whole game, closing pools creates more of the situation in #1 - limited upward mobility.

And also, the idea that D1 pool players being available to D3 teams was an “oversight” by seble is truly laughable. Seble didn’t just forget to close off a loop. It was discussed by lots of us long before it was too late to change, it was there intentionally.

I don’t understand 1. If a D3 coach came in competing for D3 recruits against other D3 programs, how is that worse than a D3 coach coming in and competing for D1 recruits against possibly other D1, D2 or D3 programs?

I’m not saying I disagree. I just don’t see how if you capped divisions a new player wouldn’t be able to compete for the same players as an experienced coach in D3 would e competing for, which you say is only possible because of uncapped divisions if I’m understanding you correctly.

If last season when I started, I could only recruit D3, against other more experienced coaches who could only recruit D3, that’s easier than trying to figure out which D1 player I can recruit, that no other D1 or D2 is going to go after, and that I can still land while not waiting so long that I miss out on good fallback recruits.

Recruiting is hard everywhere in this game I gather. But D3 is hard. If you said they could only get D2 starting at the second period, that would make more sense. And make it easier to follow. I get moving up one division to recruit. I don’t get how most human schools at D3 can fill their rosters with D1 recruits. Maybe they don’t. But enough do.

I know you hate me Poopshoe but I'm just stating facts. NO ONE was talking about needing to recruit D1 players at D3 schools. Not a single person knew that was coming before we got into Beta. Don't believe me? Go look at the threads on recruiting update. In fact, I found a great quote by Gillispie from Seble's recruiting update thread.

"its really too much to squeeze into one update. frankly, its too much to even discuss in a manageable way. there is SO MUCH to discuss on those topics, its really not feasible for us to constructively tackle them all in the same thread. as these other topics have been discussed, huge issues have arisen - and we haven't gotten very deep into it at all - virtually nothing has been said about the dropdown/pulldown reform. i want to tackle each of these topics individually - but my general comment is this - its just too much, its not too much to do ever, but its too much to try to rush into 1 update. "

This is exactly my point. There was just way too much going on and things got missed. How this new dropdown/pulldown system would actually work was mostly ignored by Seble.

Hell, we were already in Beta when I realized that Seble forgot to freaking include FT potential and pointed it out.

Hey look, it's you!

Like Gil said, there was just WAY too much going on and things got missed.

Posted by johnroberts on 4/27/2022 6:45:00 PM (view original):
I don’t understand 1. If a D3 coach came in competing for D3 recruits against other D3 programs, how is that worse than a D3 coach coming in and competing for D1 recruits against possibly other D1, D2 or D3 programs?

I’m not saying I disagree. I just don’t see how if you capped divisions a new player wouldn’t be able to compete for the same players as an experienced coach in D3 would e competing for, which you say is only possible because of uncapped divisions if I’m understanding you correctly.

If last season when I started, I could only recruit D3, against other more experienced coaches who could only recruit D3, that’s easier than trying to figure out which D1 player I can recruit, that no other D1 or D2 is going to go after, and that I can still land while not waiting so long that I miss out on good fallback recruits.

Recruiting is hard everywhere in this game I gather. But D3 is hard. If you said they could only get D2 starting at the second period, that would make more sense. And make it easier to follow. I get moving up one division to recruit. I don’t get how most human schools at D3 can fill their rosters with D1 recruits. Maybe they don’t. But enough do.

Think of it like an actual pool. Right now, the pool is quite large. One way to play the game at D3 is to cast a wide enough net to see what pops up inside. This flattens the effect of prestige between your D3 rivals. *You don’t have to compete against them for the same recruits*, you just need to be able to look for other similar recruits in areas where they are likely to fall to you.

In a closed pool, you will need to compete against those experienced coaches and high prestige programs if you want to compete against them on the court. And now their prestige advantage will be amplified. This limits your upward mobility.

And keep in mind, D1 recruits are not always the best play. In lots of situations, D2 pool recruits make more sense (and many D2 pool players are MUCH better than the bottom of the D1 pool anyway). We shouldn’t get so caught up in how the system delineates the pools. They basically only exist to tell us where the recruit expects to play - sometimes those expectations prove unreasonable, they get little or no higher level interest, and they end up playing D3. There’s really nothing unrealistic or problematic about it. The problem some folks (like crabman at the top of this page) have with it is that it makes it harder for them to lock up backup options for cheap. I have never had any sympathy for that perspective.

Another quote from Seble when someone asked about drop downs

"- I don't expect the dropdown/pulldown system to exist in the same way it does now. Recruits would definitely behave in some of the same ways though. For example, I think a low DI recruit would hold out longer to sign if he only got interest from DII schools. He would eventually sign with a DII school if that's the only interest he got."

Does that sound like what we have today? Any mention about how D3 teams can beat D1 teams in recruiting battles or that it was even an option? Thought not.

It’s truly hilarious that benis thinks inadvertently leaving out FT potential (which was fixed immediately upon discovery) is the same kind of “error” as allowing D1 pool players to be recruited by D3 teams. After all the pages of talk about the “red light” during which, if it was an error, seble could have…. you know… fixed it the way he fixed FT. But he just forgot. Lol.

if one wants d1 to be uber competitiive and 100% fair (there would be no such thing as 'good' areas and bad ones), make all recruiting national, i.e. take away the local discounts, make all HV's and CV's one fixed rate.

then at d2 make the recruiting more regional, maybe like the current structure, where the pull is a state or two, with occasional furher away pulls.

Then finally, make d3 more local, i.e. make the structure even cheaper than the current for hv's and cv's.

then, the reduced budgets would make sense.

I would guess d1 would be a bloodbath though, I'm not sure, but would the 10-15 A+''s in most worlds all try for the same top recruits, leaving windows of opportunity for those shrewd enough to work along the fringes? be fun to find out

trouble is with any changes, it would require a pretty massive study, as the current user base IMO is largely d1 and largely happy, aren't they?

the ? I was trying to look at, maybe I got the intent of the thread wrong, is what could be done to make d3 (and maybe d2) better?

I still think no pools, more CV / HV power in d3, and maybe an intro rate that could keep NEW coaches captivated for 3-5 yrs at a nice price would be my list of ideas.

I posted this when the last major change was made, it was spot on, I posted that no matter what is changed, a subset of the population will emerge who will learn the game and excel at it. this is true for new users and old ones, those who study it or have an aptitude for it or both. But I refuse to condede that there are NO answers or hope for ideas to make things better without throwing the whole current game away. I still think that my list of ideas is hardely the best 3 or anything like that, but I feel if the game designer was so inclinded, improvements could be made