Would love it, but I agree that we'd need to tweak the standards a bit. And depending on the tweaked standards, I may well not qualify. But if I did, I'd play it. Although I've never done D1. I'm sure I'd like it, but I wouldn't mind D2/D3 in an all-star world either. 

Personally I'm always open to the idea of challenges, but I think making it D1-only would be a mistake.  Don't most people consider it pretty flawed with recruit generation/baseline prestige/etc?  Seems like D2 would be a better choice, although that's been done before in Rupp and sort of fizzled out after a while.

I agree with others that WIS would never create a new world and alter the engine for something like this.

Not sure I'd qualify for such a world given the nature of folks who would be in it, but I'd be all over it if there was. I've long held the best way to get good at something is to dive into competition and have your butt handed to you a few times until you start to pick up on a few things.

Not sure I'd qualify for such a world given the nature of folks who would be in it, but I'd be all over it if there was. I've long held the best way to get good at something is to dive into competition and have your butt handed to you a few times until you start to pick up on a few things.

I"d do it in a second. You never know - keep bugging HD about it and there may be a (snowball's) chance (in hell). 

I've thought about this before...one question is how much it should cost for each season in the world, or if it should be free?

There is no way it should be free. Why should those who participate in one world (the "All-Star" world) get to play for free while others pay? No reason for that.

I agree it doesn't need to be free

I have long since wanted a world like this. People are asking for too high of standards. If you want the world full you can't make the standards to the point where only 30 coaches qualify. Simply putting national championship as a requirement makes it so the world, even with just D1 wouldn't be anywhere near full. 

i think you could certainly find enough coaches with championships or 1000 wins....i really don't think that's so high of a standard.  how many would be interested and/or willing to pay is another question.

but if you take away some of the exclusivity so that it can fill up, then it kind of defeats the intended purpose of an all-star world (though a full D1 would be great for other reasons).

Posted by kmasonbx1 on 6/12/2013 2:02:00 PM (view original):
I have long since wanted a world like this. People are asking for too high of standards. If you want the world full you can't make the standards to the point where only 30 coaches qualify. Simply putting national championship as a requirement makes it so the world, even with just D1 wouldn't be anywhere near full. 

I do think standards need to be more than 500 games played, but I agree that a national title is probably do much. So what do you do? A Final Four? Five Sweet Sixteens? One Sweet Sixteen? 500 career wins? I dunno. 

(for the record, to my ear, a final four or five sweet sixteens sounds like a nice disjunctive requirement, but I don't know if this is too lenient or too strict or just right)

There have been roughly 1,965 national champions across all divisions and all worlds in HD. Now granted, many of those were by coaches who are long since retired, and a good many are by the same coach(es), but there's still a pretty large pool of coaches to draw from. And you could always stage the entry invites. Start by inviting all coaches with a national title or 2000 career wins. If the world doesn't fill, relax the standards a bit and then have a new batch of invites. Rinse and repeat until the world fills. When new openings come up in future seasons, they'd be filled on a merit-based system like applying for any other new coaching job.

Is that number, just the total of national championships played? 

The thing that people are discounting is how many active coaches that have a championship don't play D1. There are others, like coaches wanting to add another team, coaches being able to afford another team, and then you have some coaches who will be intimidated by playing with nothing but successful coaches. Personally I'd love the challenge, but I don't think every coach feels the same. 

I would love to see this happen, but the standards for the world would be interesting. I do like professor's idea of tiering invites. 

Not sure of the requirements, but I like the idea of D1, but without baseline prestige. This is different from D2 because prestige makes a much bigger difference plus there's more money to have fun with. No baseline would be good, but I think, to somewhat simulate real life, higher prestige baseline schools would still start at a higher prestige the first season, but from there on in there would be no baseline.

if WIS wont indulge your idea...perhaps you guys could decide amongst yourselves to populate a certain world to the max (they attempted this in GD a year or so ago)...and if you are able to nearly fill a world, or at least D1...maybe then WIS would be more likely to listen to your request and set up a separate world with characteristics that you desire

As perhaps a "simpler" tweak for HD, would be just using the D3 template (teams, locations etc.) but bumping the recruiting budget to equal D1 recruiting.  That eliminates baseline prestige right there too.  They you still have the same recruit generation just the D1 level recruits rarely get taken and you eliminate the EE headache.
Of course, there would be no firings, but without baseline, do firings really matter?

To further simplify things for WIS, the world is a "hidden" world.  It is only visible to IDs meeting the eligibility requirements under that ID.  Plenty of websites have exclusive sertions that only open up if you qualify (i.e., have sufficient posts, become a paying member, etc.) so the coding must be pretty straightforward.
Thus, HD can use the same engine and only have to adjust the recruiting budget if people wanted ther D1 recruiting aspect.