Posted by kypride on 6/14/2012 6:25:00 PM (view original):

Posted by isack24 on 6/14/2012 6:09:00 PM (view original):
What happens when person can't recruit at all, or can't gameplan for a NC game?

It sucks, and it's happened to me, but I don't think unavailability should affect what would be good for the overall betterment of the game.

This game is 90% recruiting. There's no comparison to failing to gameplan.

As for overall betterment of the game, I like recruiting in D2 and D3 as it is. I have no D1 teams.

OK, fine.  What happens when someon can't recruit at all?  Or until the last day?

Why should they be out of luck?

Posted by dacj501 on 6/14/2012 6:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by girt25 on 6/14/2012 6:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by reinsel on 6/14/2012 5:05:00 PM (view original):
But I do agree with Girt on 1 point.  The amount you can put into a recruit in once cycle should be limited.  I got 50 Campus Visits to stick in one cycle this period in Allen.  That is completely wrong and should be limited.

In fact I think everyone could be happy if you were limited to 10 calls, 10 letters, 10 SV, 10 HV and 1 CV per cycle.  THAT would make late  recruiting WAY WAY WAY harder, especially at distance.

That would also make it so that you really had to recruit every cycle, or almost every cycle, to maximize effectiveness.

Which would be fine with me, I check pretty much every cycle anyway. But if dac's argument is that we're penalizing people who can't even log in for one cycle in 24 hours, certainly something like that would be much, much worse.

Gotta run, but I don't like the above for a lot of reasons.

Technically Dan my argument isn't so much based around those who cannot recruit til later, although certainly they are a factor. My argument really is that recruiting lasts 50 hours before signings. Hour 49 should be no different than hour 1. The system does not need artifical limits to protect players who are unable to protect themselves because they overreached and spent too much and cannot protect their own. What are we now, the NBA? We need rules to protect us from ourselves?

Someone talked about the problem with schools with 5+ ships stealing recruits from schools with 2. None of these suggestions will stop that. Only a complete redesign of recruiting will. Since that issue is here to stay, I do not see the advantage from an overall competitive balance standpoint to making these changes.

So then we just fundamentally disagree, which is OK.

I don't think that a team just starting to recruit a kid at the 11th hour before signings carries the same weight as a team that has faithfully been recruiting him from early in the process. I don't see why that would be the case.

After some research, I finally found the stats I was looking for:

16.3% of the top-100 recruits in 2011 decommitted. 

This is far higher than the percentages that are lost to poaching each year.  So, if you really want to mimic RL, there should be a recruiting bonus for those who recruit later.

I have to agree with girt-- The example of a DUKE stepping in at the last mintue to take a player is not really very realistic.  Ask the college coach and he'll tell you, if that was the case then the best schools wouldn't even recruit.  They know the value of recruiting early and often and I don't think I ever read a coaches book where they didn't say that was the major key in being a successful recruiter.  In fact, a majority of the time I would argue, players choose a school that we as outsiders would not view as the "best" or the "highest prestige".  Since including all the factors that really drive recruit decisions is not possible (at least for a long time), increasing the early multiplier by a bit might add some more reality to the game and it seems that most agree on at least a little bump. 
   I don't think there is a question to whether or not that would increase recruit battles as it obviously would-- the question would be more of who would benefit from that and would it really be giving an even larger advantage to the "wrong" teams?

Posted by alblack56 on 6/14/2012 7:41:00 PM (view original):
After some research, I finally found the stats I was looking for:

16.3% of the top-100 recruits in 2011 decommitted. 

This is far higher than the percentages that are lost to poaching each year.  So, if you really want to mimic RL, there should be a recruiting bonus for those who recruit later.

love it.

Posted by alblack56 on 6/14/2012 7:41:00 PM (view original):
After some research, I finally found the stats I was looking for:

16.3% of the top-100 recruits in 2011 decommitted. 

This is far higher than the percentages that are lost to poaching each year.  So, if you really want to mimic RL, there should be a recruiting bonus for those who recruit later.

I would love to learn more about the kid who caused the .3%. Did he get 30% through his decommittment speech and then change his mind?

Recruiting is fine. If you get poached I understand the frustration but it happens. Get another player boost your prestige and try again next season. We've all been there.

Posted by dukenilnil on 6/14/2012 9:43:00 PM (view original):
One thing that hasn't been mentioned but is a large factor in why I dislike late rush recruiting (i agree poaching is a loaded term but all the alternatives are clumsy) is the following:

recruiting in hd should be about more than just who has the most money and prestige (although those should be large factors). Recruiting should reward real world effort too. That is, the guy who signs in every cycle and puts effort into players from the start (making hd a priority in their life during recruiting), should receive a considerable, but not insurmountable credit, over the person who doesn't do anything until later in recruiting.
Right now, you can spend hours each day in recruiting and put a lot of real world effort into it,, only too be overcome by Johnny come lately just before signing. The current system just makes it to easy too lose both aa significant investment off time and some real world money.
A system that rewarded real world effort as described above would have the following benefits :

1) creates an incentive to invest time early and often in hd, boosting page hits and presumably value to wis
2) rewards real world effort, not just a fictitious bank ascent
3) helps the little guy either the lower prestige school or the low scholarship guy) have an option to compete a little bit, i.e., don't have much prestige or money, invest lots of time early and often.
4) increases battles because people will feel like the time commitment is worth it s its not strictly a cash formula.
5) likely increase hd participation because it gives the little guy a chance to be successful earlier by devoting time to the game

N.b. I realize a lot of late comers put in a ton of effort too, but there its certainly a frustration with putting in a lot of effort into one player only to have it be for not. You feel like you wasted all this time and then you factor in the effect a poor recruiting class can have on the program, you can waste a lot of money too
N.b. I am not proposing a radical bonus that would allow early recruiters to block late comers easily, just a stronger boost

Did this post really happen?

Posted by mrg1037 on 6/14/2012 8:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by alblack56 on 6/14/2012 7:41:00 PM (view original):
After some research, I finally found the stats I was looking for:

16.3% of the top-100 recruits in 2011 decommitted. 

This is far higher than the percentages that are lost to poaching each year.  So, if you really want to mimic RL, there should be a recruiting bonus for those who recruit later.

I would love to learn more about the kid who caused the .3%. Did he get 30% through his decommittment speech and then change his mind?

Well this is hilarious.

(No sarcasm, realized this could be taken in different ways).

Ever tried recruiting late or poaching?  It's already hard as balls, I don't know why you guys want to make it harder.  Protect your recruits and man the **** up.  Sometimes you have to make hard decisions when recruiting, deal with it.  Maybe you think you could beat this other team that showed up on your guy in a battle, but if you do you won't be able to protect your top guy.  Maybe you let guy #2 go to make sure you get your target.  Maybe you go get guy #2, but as a result your top guy gets taken because you spent all your cash getting a guy who wasn't as good.  Tough ****.  If recruiting was easy this game would be no fun.  For all you guys who are saying you spend so much time and effort in recruiting and think you should get a bonus for that, that's the stupidest idea I've ever heard.  If you're going to spend all that time on HD, spend it wiser, make a spreadsheet/chart/diary/whatever and figure out which schools near you need what, what battles they're in, what battles they could win or lose, which guys that you want to go after are in danger.  That way, you can be prepared instead of disappointed when that guy you thought was going to be your all-time leading scorer gets nabbed by Duke.  This game is all about recruiting and recruiting is all about strategy and if your strategy isn't working, find a new strategy instead of trying to change the rules.