Realistic Lengths of Coaching Careers Topic

Posted by artie40 on 1/21/2014 4:22:00 PM (view original):
Posted by alblack56 on 1/19/2014 3:42:00 PM (view original):
"or the coach would just die."  I'm 59 and would rather not be reminded of my mortality. LOL  But, if I have to die in WIS, can I at least pick my method?

 I'd like to be killed by a tortoise dropped by an eagle that had mistaken my bald head for a rock suitable for shattering the shell.

It would have to be something cool like that...I'd hate it to say, "you died of diabetes" or cancer or something.

Mine would be dying when my parachute didn't open while sky-diving. The rapture of falling followed by the splat of finality.

I thought this was Hoops "Dynasty", not Hoops "Die Nasty"? LOL! 
1/22/2014 3:23 AM
Posted by gomiami1972 on 1/22/2014 1:53:00 AM (view original):
Posted by gillispie1 on 1/21/2014 10:29:00 AM (view original):
i totally understand where gomiami/alblack are coming from, but i think making d1 as flexible as d2/d3 would be a massive mistake. to me, there is already not much purpose in having d3 and d2, although i recognize the budget does make things somewhat different. i do believe baseline prestige should be fluid, but very slowly - something like baseline starts at 100% original baseline, and each HD season starts to count for 2%, reducing original baseline by 2%, down to a minimum of say 50%. once there are more than 25 seasons, you could have something like the last 15 seasons count for 2% and the 20 before count for 1%, or something like that.

i think a system like that would make sense because a highly fluid baseline would just result in the low level conferences becoming the BCS conferences - why would anybody ever leave? i think the ladder system is a vital carrot on a stick, and also, the big schools have a ton of fans so from a business standpoint, it makes sense to keep them good. maybe this suggestion is too slow, but i think if you could say average an a at a c prestige school, and eventually get them to a B (combining 50% of an A with 50% of a C), that would be plenty high enough - i think high end coaches can fairly easily keep an a range prestige on a b- prestige (low end BCS) school, so there isn't much need to allow you to take someone all the way up to a+ baseline. note i don't mean you need A prestige in a given season for 50 seasons, but just the non-baseline component, the success of teh season component, to be an A. i'd also support something where over 100 seasons or so, HD results totally replace baseline, but i would be absolutely against something quick like 10-20 seasons comprising the lion's share of baseline prestige. 
I will respectfully disagree, gillispie. 

In the real world, Kentucky has 1000 fans for every 1 Morgan State fan and most of the college basketball revenue can be generated by and flow through a small number of elite schools, then get somewhat redistributed to everybody else through NCAA tournament payouts, road game checks and the like.  In the real world, that is a successful business model.

For What if Sports, there might be 1000 Kentucky fans for every 1 Morgan State fan but the revenue stream is 1:1.  Only 1 fan is going to coach Kentucky.  The other 999 either need to find an alternative school while waiting for the Wildcats to open or not play the game at all.  Morgan State can also have 1 coach.  So, each school has the potential to generate the same $12.95 revenue each season for WiS. 

What makes the WiS business model even more absurd is, because of the rewards structure and baseline prestige, the only schools worth spending money on (as a pay-to-play user) are also the same schools that will generate the least amount of revenue.  BCS schools make more and deeper post-season appearances because of their built-in advantages, meaning those users are getting bigger reward credits and paying less per season.

If the goal for What if Sports is to make HD profitable for the company, making 70% of DI a disincentivized, SIM AI wasteland that generates 0 cash flow is the dumbest business model of all time.
its an interesting case you make... but i dont know if it really disagrees with what i suggested. further, the 1000 UK fans, as long as they are paying anywhere in HD, hoping to get to UK some day, they definitely are paying more than that 1 morgan state fan, unless maybe that fan is tracyr :) 

i do agree having the severity of built in advantages is too much, but i think i already am an advocate for a system where a dedicated fan can change the fundamental underlying baseline prestige of his favorite school, instead of feeling hes forced to move up to ever be competitive. the all-out flat scale also addresses that issue, but i think it goes way too far. the multiple levels within d1 is, to me, a vital carrot on a stick for many coaches. reaching the highest level is an "end" for some users, and of course they will stay a while, but whats the next challenge? you see guys start to rebuild mid majors and other things but, the primary carrot on the stick for many, many HD users is climbing the ranks. "cant wait till i get to _____" is so important to keep gamers playing a game when things stagnate or they get down on their luck. from a business model standpoint, i think keeping that carrot on a stick is very important.

it seems to me, it doesnt have to be one or the other - the way it is, or flat like d2/d3. cant an intermediate system where baseline is fluid but still exists, not necessarily the system i propose, have the key advantages of both the current d1 and d2/d3 systems in HD? specifically, keeping the levels and carrot-on-a-stick mentality, while also allowing the passionate fan to build his school, and get it up to a BCS level status? sure, its not as easy as d2/d3 (get lucky one NT), but still, it can be done.
1/23/2014 2:11 PM
Appreciate the response.  I was focusing on the sentence that contained "the big schools have a ton of fans so from a business standpoint, it makes sense to keep them good."  However, I hate cutting one sentence out of an entire post and then commenting on it out of context. 

The ladder system is fine...but only if there is some financial incentive for the "many, many HD users...climbing the ranks...cant wait till i get to _____" playing this game.  Based on the number of SIM AI teams, WiS needs do a much better job keeping the DI understudies interested on a paying basis.  Further, as long as the firing logic is weak, virtually all of those coaches are going to remain fruitlessly chasing that carrot for a very long time. 

Hand out loyalty credits to coaches who remain at the same non-BCS DI team for a number of seasons, change the prestige calculation...WiS, do something...because doing nothing is not the answer.
1/23/2014 11:18 PM
well we certainly agree on your final point there =)
1/24/2014 2:44 AM
◂ Prev 123
Realistic Lengths of Coaching Careers Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.