Posted by ebel331 on 8/12/2010 12:27:00 PM (view original):

Like my man puff say, when you on top people just want to bring you down.  More titles more problems.

"UCF is no worse than a very good BCS school when it comes to recruiting because of the extra conf money." -DKC

Once again, this is pretty funny considering the ridicule I got when I tried to explain that the advantage Elites have over BCS teams is greatly exaggerated but it's well recognized that even Elite>BCS isn't near as great as BCS>MidMajor.  FYI, Camp CUSA got a whopping 60k in bowl money this season. 

I would agree with you on that. The gap between non-BCS and BCS schools is wider than the gap between BCS and Elite. To see that get glossed over in this thread is kinda funny.

Posted by ebel331 on 8/12/2010 12:27:00 PM (view original):

Like my man puff say, when you on top people just want to bring you down.  More titles more problems.

"UCF is no worse than a very good BCS school when it comes to recruiting because of the extra conf money." -DKC

Once again, this is pretty funny considering the ridicule I got when I tried to explain that the advantage Elites have over BCS teams is greatly exaggerated but it's well recognized that even Elite>BCS isn't near as great as BCS>MidMajor.  FYI, Camp CUSA got a whopping 60k in bowl money this season. 

Two different contexts.

That argument was discussed around the recruiting advantage.  Which has absolutely zero to do with who wins the NC.  It does't affect end-of-season rankings, nor does it affect in-game results.  Remember, a built-in advantage is only an advantage if you know how to use it.  You may well have just out-recruited people with built-in advantages.  That does not detract, however, from what that advantage is.

You winning the NC in back-to-back seasons from a non-BCS, while mighty impressive, does not develop (in a positive or negative sense) the Elite advantage discussion any further.  It does not disprove the Elite advantage.  It does not diminish whatever the Elite advantage may be.  It only proves that you're a helluva coach and you've used all the tools at your disposal to achieve your stated goal.

Posted by gt_deuce on 8/12/2010 2:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by ebel331 on 8/12/2010 12:27:00 PM (view original):

Like my man puff say, when you on top people just want to bring you down.  More titles more problems.

"UCF is no worse than a very good BCS school when it comes to recruiting because of the extra conf money." -DKC

Once again, this is pretty funny considering the ridicule I got when I tried to explain that the advantage Elites have over BCS teams is greatly exaggerated but it's well recognized that even Elite>BCS isn't near as great as BCS>MidMajor.  FYI, Camp CUSA got a whopping 60k in bowl money this season. 

Two different contexts.

That argument was discussed around the recruiting advantage.  Which has absolutely zero to do with who wins the NC.  It does't affect end-of-season rankings, nor does it affect in-game results.  Remember, a built-in advantage is only an advantage if you know how to use it.  You may well have just out-recruited people with built-in advantages.  That does not detract, however, from what that advantage is.

You winning the NC in back-to-back seasons from a non-BCS, while mighty impressive, does not develop (in a positive or negative sense) the Elite advantage discussion any further.  It does not disprove the Elite advantage.  It does not diminish whatever the Elite advantage may be.  It only proves that you're a helluva coach and you've used all the tools at your disposal to achieve your stated goal.

But you will recall plague's original argument was the Elite recruiting advantage is what determines the NC winner 97% of the time (or whatever the percentage of elites winning NC's was).

I directly quoted a point made specifically about recruiting. Thought it was pretty staight forward.

Posted by ebel331 on 8/12/2010 2:22:00 PM (view original):
I directly quoted a point made specifically about recruiting. Thought it was pretty staight forward.

Right, but the point of this thread is to (attempt to) use your NCs as proof that the Elite advantage (in recruiting, because that's the only place there is a built-in advantage, other than pre-season polls which don't matter) isn't as big as others say.  I say your NCs prove no such thing.

Posted by dravz on 8/12/2010 2:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gt_deuce on 8/12/2010 2:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by ebel331 on 8/12/2010 12:27:00 PM (view original):

Like my man puff say, when you on top people just want to bring you down.  More titles more problems.

"UCF is no worse than a very good BCS school when it comes to recruiting because of the extra conf money." -DKC

Once again, this is pretty funny considering the ridicule I got when I tried to explain that the advantage Elites have over BCS teams is greatly exaggerated but it's well recognized that even Elite>BCS isn't near as great as BCS>MidMajor.  FYI, Camp CUSA got a whopping 60k in bowl money this season. 

Two different contexts.

That argument was discussed around the recruiting advantage.  Which has absolutely zero to do with who wins the NC.  It does't affect end-of-season rankings, nor does it affect in-game results.  Remember, a built-in advantage is only an advantage if you know how to use it.  You may well have just out-recruited people with built-in advantages.  That does not detract, however, from what that advantage is.

You winning the NC in back-to-back seasons from a non-BCS, while mighty impressive, does not develop (in a positive or negative sense) the Elite advantage discussion any further.  It does not disprove the Elite advantage.  It does not diminish whatever the Elite advantage may be.  It only proves that you're a helluva coach and you've used all the tools at your disposal to achieve your stated goal.

But you will recall plague's original argument was the Elite recruiting advantage is what determines the NC winner 97% of the time (or whatever the percentage of elites winning NC's was).

There's a bit of a chick-and-egg problem in that argument, if that's truly what he argued, because generally-speaking, the best coaches are the ones coaching at Elites.  So there is going to be a definite Elite bias in NCs won.  I could even see that bias being disproportionately high, because the best coaches tend to coach at the Elites (over time) in disproportionate numbers.

Be that as it may, back-to-back NCs for a non-BCS school still fails to dispel any notions about Elite advantage.  Impressive as it is.  All that it proves is that, with sufficient coaching acumen, Elites winning the NC are not a foregone conclusion.

What I find funny about some coaches who criticize is this..........try ignoring the 'name' of the team and instead look at the roster makeup. If a coach recruits well and is patient, he can build a stacked roster at any school......doesn't matter if it is 'elite', 'bcs', or 'non-bcs'. Trying looking at the rosters of the teams instead of focusing on the conference affiliation.

For the most part, JConte has this game setup to rank his version of 'elites' high at the beginning of each season whether they deserve it or not. Notre Dame (his favorite school) certainly wouldn't be ranked in the top 3 of Camp at the beginning of next season without this setup. As it stands now, Central Florida could win 20 titles in a row and I don't see them being preseason #1 at any time during that run. They must rely on good recruiting, good gameplanning, and a very strong SOS to have a shot at a title.

If anyone still wants to whine about it, try getting some guys to man up and fill up your conference. I for one would love to see the type of 'chaos' we'd create if all D1 conferences in Gridiron Dynasty were full of humans.

GT obviously winning at UCF doesn't have anything to do with the specifics of Elite prestige advantage in recruiting.  The guy simply said UCF recruiting for me was similar to recruiting from a good BCS team, which is obviously false and it made me laugh after all the gruff I took in the old Elite threads.

And those threads were basically about Elites = Titles.  People cried that IA was unfair and they couldn't coach the school they wanted because only Elites could compete for titles.  Over and over I pointed out that it was the best coaches that were winning and things like coaching, location, local competition, etc, etc were all more important than the "Elite" status that was receiving credit for the 97% win rate.  Yes, I'd say building a Dynasty at nonBCS UCF in the middle of Florida surrounded by 3 boogeyman Elites supports my point pretty well. 

Posted by vhoward415 on 8/12/2010 3:25:00 PM (view original):
What I find funny about some coaches who criticize is this..........try ignoring the 'name' of the team and instead look at the roster makeup. If a coach recruits well and is patient, he can build a stacked roster at any school......doesn't matter if it is 'elite', 'bcs', or 'non-bcs'. Trying looking at the rosters of the teams instead of focusing on the conference affiliation.

For the most part, JConte has this game setup to rank his version of 'elites' high at the beginning of each season whether they deserve it or not. Notre Dame (his favorite school) certainly wouldn't be ranked in the top 3 of Camp at the beginning of next season without this setup. As it stands now, Central Florida could win 20 titles in a row and I don't see them being preseason #1 at any time during that run. They must rely on good recruiting, good gameplanning, and a very strong SOS to have a shot at a title.

If anyone still wants to whine about, try getting some guys to man up and fill up your conference. I for one would love to see the type of 'chaos' we'd create if all D1 conferences in Gridiron Dynasty were full of humans.

Thanks Vincent, I was going to say the same thing.  If you all know the "secret SOS" formula, use it.  Fill up your conference with people and start winning.

Make your conference a little more bearable to be around and people would find it fun to join a conference with you.  That was the Big Ten's biggest problem when I was there.  We could almost fill it but had way too much arrogance and ignorance (not now but back in the day).  When I came back, I took Army and the problem with the Sunbelt is... look at it, it's empty.

Z's list of NC winners.... thanks for leaving me out... I don't count mine due to the lack of competition I had to beat    LOL, kidding man

Posted by ebel331 on 8/12/2010 3:42:00 PM (view original):

GT obviously winning at UCF doesn't have anything to do with the specifics of Elite prestige advantage in recruiting.  The guy simply said UCF recruiting for me was similar to recruiting from a good BCS team, which is obviously false and it made me laugh after all the gruff I took in the old Elite threads.

And those threads were basically about Elites = Titles.  People cried that IA was unfair and they couldn't coach the school they wanted because only Elites could compete for titles.  Over and over I pointed out that it was the best coaches that were winning and things like coaching, location, local competition, etc, etc were all more important than the "Elite" status that was receiving credit for the 97% win rate.  Yes, I'd say building a Dynasty at nonBCS UCF in the middle of Florida surrounded by 3 boogeyman Elites supports my point pretty well. 

I agree - it absolutely does support your point about being able to overcome the obstacles.  It supports that point beautifully.

Why are we trying to bash ebel here? Obviously there's been an argument about conference, prestige, elite status, etc. before I started playing, but I imagine no matter which conference you are in, BCS, non BCS, Mid Major, and no matter what region you are in, winning an NC in D1 is hard. Winning back to back NC is probably very hard?

So why don't we just say nice job and congrats on the win.

Posted by gt_deuce on 8/12/2010 3:58:00 PM (view original):

Posted by ebel331 on 8/12/2010 3:42:00 PM (view original):

GT obviously winning at UCF doesn't have anything to do with the specifics of Elite prestige advantage in recruiting.  The guy simply said UCF recruiting for me was similar to recruiting from a good BCS team, which is obviously false and it made me laugh after all the gruff I took in the old Elite threads.

And those threads were basically about Elites = Titles.  People cried that IA was unfair and they couldn't coach the school they wanted because only Elites could compete for titles.  Over and over I pointed out that it was the best coaches that were winning and things like coaching, location, local competition, etc, etc were all more important than the "Elite" status that was receiving credit for the 97% win rate.  Yes, I'd say building a Dynasty at nonBCS UCF in the middle of Florida surrounded by 3 boogeyman Elites supports my point pretty well. 

I agree - it absolutely does support your point about being able to overcome the obstacles.  It supports that point beautifully.

Stop agreeing with me, it's only page 4

Why have these forums been so dead lately?  Seems like they died off when the format changed.

/unban Snake_p ?

Posted by polabonez on 8/12/2010 4:35:00 PM (view original):
/unban Snake_p ?

#fail

Posted by tianyi7886 on 8/12/2010 4:17:00 PM (view original):
Why are we trying to bash ebel here? Obviously there's been an argument about conference, prestige, elite status, etc. before I started playing, but I imagine no matter which conference you are in, BCS, non BCS, Mid Major, and no matter what region you are in, winning an NC in D1 is hard. Winning back to back NC is probably very hard?

So why don't we just say nice job and congrats on the win.

It's just a discussion.