1.  The DI coach that gets 10-20 recruits to instantly consider him for 3 spots then doesn't decide on which ones to take until well after signings begin, essentially holding those players hostage from other, lower-level schools (DII) that could get them, but can't afford the cash it would take to pry them loose.  I feel like guys that haven't signed or been offered a scholarship for even a couple of cycles after recruiting should become much more open to recruiting from other schools and FSS should reflect that.

2.  Losing a recruit that was considering me (a DII school) to an A+ prestige DI school.  We shouldn't be looking at the same recruiting pool at all.  Where does that happen in real life?  Only with a UNC, Kentucky, UConn that tells a player that he can walk-on, but they don't waste a scholarship.  WIS needs to make a change in recruiting to either reduce the pool that DII can actually obtain (which would not be as much fun) or improve the #20-100 rated recruits so they won't be looking at the bottom of the barrel to find a diamond in the rough.

A little more info you say?  The recruit in question will likely end up around 730-750 overall with solid cores.  Not a bad DI player as a sub for 4 years, but a damn fine DII recruit.  I was battling a D prestige DI team for him when the A+ prestige team showed.  I don't have any problem with losing the battle, but I don't feel like an A+ team would be involved for a lower rated recruit like this in RL. 

With regards to your 2nd point, real life is littered with examples of lower rated (or non-rated) recruits that ended up in the NBA, or clearly could have contributed at high level D1, if only those high level teams had taken a closer look. Jeremy Lin, for a very recent example.

Or how about Sherman Douglas, back in the mid-1980's at Syracuse (for those old enough to remember). The guy had one scholarship offer from a D1 program... Old Dominion. Syracuse thought they had Boo Harvey locked up as a PG recruit, but that fell through due to academic concerns. So what did Syracuse do? They effectively poached Douglas from ODU at the very last minute, and the guy ended up the NCAA's all-time assist leader when he graduated, and played many years in the NBA. Obviously, an awful lot of high-level D1 programs missed on Douglas, but they certainly could have used him, if they had known.

It's just like the situation you've described. So yes, it does happen in real life. Looking for diamonds in the rough is part of the fun of the game, IMO.

You acknowledge that the player in question will end up 730-750 overall, which is clearly a D1 caliber player, despite whatever their initial ratings are. So why should a D1 team not be interested? Even bench players can be important for A+ schools, especially if they lose 2-3 EE's every season. Having a guy who's guaranteed to stay 4-5 seasons and provide an A/A+ IQ depth of the bench can be big. At my A+ school, I have intentionally signed lower rated players I knew would not go EE, for that very reason. Would it have bothered you less if it was a B or C prestige D1 school who took him from you, as opposed to an A+? 

I think what D2 coaches (and low level D1 as well) need to realize is that recruiting low-rated players with tons of high potentials is a high-risk/high-reward strategy. You hope like hell that these guys will slip through the cracks, but recognize that a discerning higher level coach on the lookout for diamonds in the rough might find and grab them. It's just a part of game.

Also another recent example- Zack Novak had one D1 scholarship offer form Valpo but Michigan liked how tough he played and poached him away, Novak has started since he was a sophmore, is a 1,000 point sorer, has been a Mich. captain for 3 years, is top 10 in 3 point shots made in michigan history, and is the heart and soul of the michigan team.  This kind of stuff happens all the time.

I don't agree with either of your points...

Yeah, you dont like that, don't stay in D2, move up to D1 and both your problems go away.

I'm the culprit that stooped down for barretchap's recruit.

I often grab a lower ranked recruit to cover in case of Early Entry.  I've lost a combined 7 frontcourt players early the past 3 seasons.  Last season I ended up with two of my five man rotation up front being filler guys like this.  One of the two graduated and the other is a senior, so it's time to bring another one in. 

I pegged this guy to end up at least 750, most likely 770, and depending on the cap on those high-highs, possibly 800  (ATH in mid 90's, REB over 70, DEF over 80, LP of 90, B- FT shooter, and BH & PAS both around 50).   Even though he is rated in the 180's at PF, my grading had him ranked much closer to 50th.

I also signed the #1 PF.   I'd estimate the chances that this low-ranked guy sees more playing time over the course of his career than the #1 (before he bolts Early Entry), at better than 50/50.

Shame on you for signing a player that will help your team!   

Trentonjoe, thanks for your insightful responses but you seem to be missing the point.  I don't have a problem with iguana (wasn't going to mention names, but since you owned up to it...) grabbing a guy that will be a serviceable 4 year player.  I don't think you really stooped to get him.  I have a problem with the lack of players between #1 and #184 that he would feel worthy of recruiting that were still available.  It bothers me that a DII school would be in the hunt for a player that one of the best schools sees as a solid contributor.

The point is that recruit generation needs to have more potential instead of a large number of low potential recruits that no DI team wants.  Perhaps those top-flight recruits could max out at 1200 and work down to the guys that are DII/DI players maxing where they are now.  Having the #50 PF max at 650 with avg to poor cores is what bothers me. 

Professor, I kind of see your point, but even in the Sherman Douglas example Old Dominion at that time was not a bad team and they were DI not DII.  Sure there are players that develop into pros, but that also incorporates things we don't have in WIS such as growth spurts where a player suddenly went from a wiry 6'1" guard to a 6'8" SF.  DIII guys have made it in the pros.  It does happen, but show me when a top DI school went after a guy that was looking at a low level DI school or a DII school.

I still don't understand your point.   I am pretty sure I disagree with it though.

I like the aspect that some guys have very little potential.   The fact that the # 50 recruit is or isn't good doesn't bother me at all.   

The top DI schools get the best players.
The other DI schools get the next best players.
The DII schools get what is left over.

It sounds to me you want to make every set of players better so your DII guys will be "better".

I think you want to disagree just to disagree.  The fact that the #50 recruit sucks doesn't bother me by itself.  There should be some duds out there.  The fact that so many players between #25 and #200 have poor potential such that most human coaches ignore them bothers me.

I don't want every set better.  I want one set better.  If WIS wants to make DII players have more holes in their game, I'll adjust.  I've dealt with that before in my time here prior to potential and after they made a change during potential. 

Are your points:

1. To many ranked recruits have bad potential
2. You want the DII player pool to be better

WIS doesnt listen to paying customers. never have never will. Does Seble even work, still at WIS?

1. Yes
2. No

Posted by Iguana1 on 3/4/2012 1:10:00 PM (view original):
I'm the culprit that stooped down for barretchap's recruit.

I often grab a lower ranked recruit to cover in case of Early Entry.  I've lost a combined 7 frontcourt players early the past 3 seasons.  Last season I ended up with two of my five man rotation up front being filler guys like this.  One of the two graduated and the other is a senior, so it's time to bring another one in. 

I pegged this guy to end up at least 750, most likely 770, and depending on the cap on those high-highs, possibly 800  (ATH in mid 90's, REB over 70, DEF over 80, LP of 90, B- FT shooter, and BH & PAS both around 50).   Even though he is rated in the 180's at PF, my grading had him ranked much closer to 50th.

I also signed the #1 PF.   I'd estimate the chances that this low-ranked guy sees more playing time over the course of his career than the #1 (before he bolts Early Entry), at better than 50/50.

Whoa.  Are we talking about in Allen?

I wouldn't usually say anything, but I've got a serious problem with this given that your alternate ID happens to be in the same conference as barret,

That's a pretty blatant conflict of interest, in my opinion, and frankly, I don't think you should be recruiting the same geographic area with both your IDs, as it creates an appearance of impropriety.

Sorry, Iguana, but I think that's just plain wrong.