thinair, you've got a pretty solid won-lost record. You might be a better example of a Sutton or Majerus type than wildcat. But then one of those guys was an alcoholic and the other was obese and died of heart failure. So maybe you don't want to be them anyway.

 

 

 

Posted by thinair on 5/10/2014 12:28:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wildcat98 on 5/10/2014 10:25:00 AM (view original):

Posted by ettaexpress on 5/10/2014 10:23:00 AM (view original):
And with 50+ more seasons you'd be about a C- then. Congrats, I'm sure that feels like time and money well-spent.

I'm comfortable with my choices, and I enjoy playing this game. And in the self evals thread, I was honest about both my strengths and shortcomings, grading myself out about a C+.

Your record speaks for yourself wildcat. Don't sweat this guy. Under his criteria Eddie Sutton and Rick Majerus are **** coaches too. He has no idea how hard it is to win a game in the NT let alone with a title. I can't believe those of that throw compliments this guys way. Maybe etta has made himself look that bad the ever so slightest competent word that comes out of his mouth has you guys buy the hook. 

This guys reeks of idiotic narcissism. 

But I only have 30 conference titles, most being in competitive conferences and only a few elite 8 runs. So that doesn't mean anything. The funny thing is, I say those stats KNOWING that they are mediocre. Wildcat knows he's only an above average coach too (assumption, apologies if I'm putting words in your mouth). The difference is you're still trying to **** things out and call it gold. 

At the end of the day people play this game because they enjoy it. Most of us are adults or at least act like we are. If someone wants to stack up on sims and try to have the best winning percentage ever - fantastic. If someone's goal is to win a d1 title, so every team they have is at that level (hence making it more difficult to win a NC) they shouldn't get ridiculed by someone like you. 

Stay somewhere and build up a program and prove you can win. 

In the Self Evals thread I started, I graded myself out as a C+ level coach. Might have been a B- except that I still feel that I'm weak in game-planning.

I've been playing gridiron for just a little bit now and have found some decent success. Funny enough (albeit I could be way off) I think I'm FAR better at game planning in GD than hoops. Tells you how unconfident I am in my HD abilities haha. Luckily I've been in a great conference over in Phelan. Easy to pick up things when surrounded by great coaches. Especially when you're willing to listen.

Posted by thinair on 5/10/2014 1:07:00 PM (view original):
I've been playing gridiron for just a little bit now and have found some decent success. Funny enough (albeit I could be way off) I think I'm FAR better at game planning in GD than hoops. Tells you how unconfident I am in my HD abilities haha. Luckily I've been in a great conference over in Phelan. Easy to pick up things when surrounded by great coaches. Especially when you're willing to listen.

Exactly. I asked a TON of questions (and still do!) of fellow coaches. I really enjoy learning more about this game.

Also, I played GD for awhile, and had decent success (I believe I made it to the round of 8 once or twice), but it was just too time-consuming for me.

Man what I wouldn't give for Grow to be eligible. Just one more competent player would make a ton of difference. Up 2 with 7 minutes to go and just don't have the juice to finish it. Walkon backup gets a turnover, a charge, then my tired star gets 2 turnovers, gets taken out and that's pretty much it.

At least we know we've got some talent among the scholarship players.

Etta-

I mean no insult by what I am going to write. I am just offering some perspective, if you wish to ignore it, refute it, or something else it, sobeit. I am mostly offering this up to the community.

These are my points:

1. Don't be misled by game stats. My Dad always says, "Figures don't lie, liars figure." (And I am not inferring you're a liar Etta.) Your players game stats are inflated by playing weak competition and excessive minutes.

2. Compare your players to good teams in your division, not the teams on your schedule or in your conference.

You seem to think highly of Houseknecht on your old D3 team but he is very similar to a SIM recuited player in the same conference.

Name Yr. Pos. A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU FT OVR
Phillip Houseknecht Jr. PG 30 88 12 21 2 28 77 71 59 55 93 53 B- 589
James Reese Jr. PG 16 85 12 31 4 21 94 61 53 77 84 57 B 595

Maybe your guy has a little more growth left but they ultimately, they are going to be the same player. Both could be a scorer off the bench on a decent D3 team but starting them is going to be a huge gamble for a NT team.

Name Yr. Pos. A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU FT OVR
Eric Hundt Sr. SG 61 70 19 62 3 39 85 59 75 62 81 39 C+ 655

This guy is in conference as well (recruited the year after the two guys above as a JUCO) and is a MUCH better player.

3.Don't fall in love with performers. If a guy is doing better than you thought, look for the reason why. The equations are simple in theory but there are so many moving parts there are always some nuisances worth noticing. In Northwood's case, the stats are impressive because of the reasons I stated in #1.

Crawford is a nice player but he isn't the type of player that can carry a D2 NT quality team. T

The sim recruited guard is a foul waiting to happen when you play decent team.

The Freshmen center looks like he is going to be around 85 in REB and LP but the ATH in the 60's is going to keep him from being dominant. It looks like his DEF is still blue, but not real blue so you are looking at ATH/DEF/BLK all in the 50's and 60's so he will be below average defensively for a NT type team.

The transfer SF is a trap player in my opinion, lots of #'s but nothing special. He looks close to maxed out in everything but ATH and BH. Guys with lots of scores in the 50's and 60's look nice but don't really do anything well. He could be used to exploit slow guards with his LP but you aren't going to find many good teams in D2 with guards that have speed under 70.


The players you have aren't "talent" as good D2 coaches would define it

I know this is critical but I hope you don't get insulted by it. I just think some of your assumptions are based on faulty logic. Take this for what it is worth, I am sure you have noticed the big fat ZERO next to my championships counter ;)

You seem to be very biased toward ATH and DEF in your recruiting and team development. I'm not. I think we could probably stop there. We simply seem to value different things. There are certainly NT teams that aren't built the way you try to. 

IMO if Grow was eligible we'd have 4-5 wins right now. The two fatal flaws are obviously depth and we just can't rebound the ball. 

You all love to run down developing teams by saying they should be comparing themselves to NT teams...all the while your own BW team is shite and certainly not comparable to an NT team. So why the double standard? You're even in a conference that is garbage this year...

You're simply way off base on Crawford.
There are 24 D-II guards with a PE higher than him. So we can start there.
9 of them have a DE of 58 or higher. 8 of them have an ATH of 58 or higher (not all of those are the same guy). 15 have SP higher than Crawford's, of those only about 5 are higher than 80. Unfortunately his PE won't get a lot better but some other ratings will (blue in BH, LP, black in ATH and DEF). Forget stats, he's just good.

Considering Godina is playing out of position, I can't imagine what there is to criticize about him. He's shot the ball quite well, and held in as can be on defense. Obviously, he wouldn't be a full time PF, but you figure a guy that had 30 starts in a major D-I conference should be able to score a little bit, and indeed he has. 

Joyce and Grow look like two of the better FR bigs in the conference. There is 1 D-II sophomore with LP 90+, never mind the high RB as well. Grow is the only 90+ FR. Joyce isn't that but he's a better defender and still blue in DE and LP (and just went black in RB), so he'll probably eventually look about like Grow with better defense.

I would have liked to have had a couple of more recruits but all of the guys I recruited look like pretty good players now or in the future. 

Fair enough, baby. Good Luck.

We'll see what happens if I can add another 3ish players to the mix next year. Obviously, it depends on how good those guys are.

WIth 30K, you certainly should be able to.

"You're simply way off base on Crawford.
There are 24 D-II guards with a PE higher than him. So we can start there. "

I am not trying to start a fight but that isn't right. There are more than 80 guards and SF's with a PER over 85 in D2 RUPP. I would wager to guess there are probably about 100-110.

You are correct. I forgot to specify that I was talking about juniors, in an attempt to look at people who will be back. There may be some outstanding FR/SO that would fit into those categories, but probably not many. 

Good eye.

Posted by ettaexpress on 5/11/2014 11:27:00 AM (view original):
You seem to be very biased toward ATH and DEF in your recruiting and team development. I'm not. I think we could probably stop there. We simply seem to value different things. There are certainly NT teams that aren't built the way you try to. 

IMO if Grow was eligible we'd have 4-5 wins right now. The two fatal flaws are obviously depth and we just can't rebound the ball. 

You all love to run down developing teams by saying they should be comparing themselves to NT teams...all the while your own BW team is shite and certainly not comparable to an NT team. So why the double standard? You're even in a conference that is garbage this year...

You're simply way off base on Crawford.
There are 24 D-II guards with a PE higher than him. So we can start there.
9 of them have a DE of 58 or higher. 8 of them have an ATH of 58 or higher (not all of those are the same guy). 15 have SP higher than Crawford's, of those only about 5 are higher than 80. Unfortunately his PE won't get a lot better but some other ratings will (blue in BH, LP, black in ATH and DEF). Forget stats, he's just good.

Considering Godina is playing out of position, I can't imagine what there is to criticize about him. He's shot the ball quite well, and held in as can be on defense. Obviously, he wouldn't be a full time PF, but you figure a guy that had 30 starts in a major D-I conference should be able to score a little bit, and indeed he has. 

Joyce and Grow look like two of the better FR bigs in the conference. There is 1 D-II sophomore with LP 90+, never mind the high RB as well. Grow is the only 90+ FR. Joyce isn't that but he's a better defender and still blue in DE and LP (and just went black in RB), so he'll probably eventually look about like Grow with better defense.

I would have liked to have had a couple of more recruits but all of the guys I recruited look like pretty good players now or in the future. 

see... on one hand, you say you got better - and its true. but on the other hand, saying you are not as bad means little when the comparison point is yourself from a month ago. the reality is, you have a LONG way to go, and this post is evidence. i haven't condemned you for your hundred little bickering posts with other guys, even though its annoying and you are still totally crapping up the forums. but here, this guy offered you some solid advice, and fair criticisms of your team - and you respond by being a total ***** to him. which is totally in form, but thats a form you claim to have put behind you - which is absolutely not the case.