Posted by Benis on 10/6/2016 1:13:00 PM (view original):
I really dislike the idea of forced retirement. Just like Coach K or Jimmy B, you coach for as long as you like. It's your job for life if you're performance is up to snuff.

The problem is.. Life is not 120 seasons for Coach K. In a simulation where you simulate 10 years in one calendar year, a coach has a 'real career' in 2 or 3 calendar years. Guys camping out somewhere for 100 seasons is not good for business.

Posted by hughesjr on 10/6/2016 1:40:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 10/6/2016 1:13:00 PM (view original):
I really dislike the idea of forced retirement. Just like Coach K or Jimmy B, you coach for as long as you like. It's your job for life if you're performance is up to snuff.

The problem is.. Life is not 120 seasons for Coach K. In a simulation where you simulate 10 years in one calendar year, a coach has a 'real career' in 2 or 3 calendar years. Guys camping out somewhere for 100 seasons is not good for business.

Is this actually happening a lot? It's a straight question, I really have no idea.

Lots of good suggestions here but I'll specifically second the ideas of increased firing, updating all of the D1 prestige baselines, and pretty much everything that tarvolon wrote. A couple things that weren't already mentioned:

• In situations when multiple coaches have applied for the same job, maybe consider penalizing coaches that haven't recently coached in the current world. I will admit I make this suggestion after being burned by it a while back but I think it makes sense. Obviously if the currently unemployed coach has the clearly better resume, they should get the job. But if it's a close competition between a coach who has been employed in the world consistently the last few seasons and a coach who has been sitting unemployed for a few, the employed coach should get the advantage.
• Maybe a minor point but with seble gone and me not immediately recognizing cwisniewski's user name as a staff member, I wasn't aware that this was a WIS staff-created thread that was requesting input on future game design until I clicked on the thread. Maybe we could pin this thread or otherwise mark it in the forum list to show that it's a staff-created discussion?

I think this update should focus mostly on Division 1. I don't see a need to enforce stricter firing standards for D2 or D3 (because everyone know Duke and Kansas and nobody knows Western Alabama and CSU San Bernadino).

Firings should occur more often in Division 1, mostly tied to baseline prestige. Since D2 and D3 don't have baseline prestige, they don't matter as much for that.

The "trap" of moving from D2 to D1 (as mentioned above) is a bit harsh. Taking a D or D- team to a B- or B should allow upgrade of position. As it is now, the most realistic way for a coach to get to a Big 6 D1 team is (usually) to wait until that team has been run by SIMAI into the ground and become a C or such. Going from D2 to low D1 and to a mid D1 can be a long slow process, then it's waiting for a possible Big6 job to open, maybe.

I disagree with a point above, at least at Division 1 there's no advantage to having multiple accounts. Since scouting and recruiting are separated, scouting with an Alt ID doesn't necessarily help another ID with recruiting (unless you want to click twice as much to scout on two accounts). For D3 the scouting budget is lower so there may be more advantages. I don't have a problem one way or another with restricting alternate ID's, but ....

How would you know? That puts the onus on WIS to check IP's and credit cards and such, which I wouldn't think they would want to do.

This was said before, but be careful with ramping up firings too much with the change to 3.0. First, it might take some coaches - good coaches - a couple of seasons to adjust to 3.0 and they might have a temporary drop in prestige. To go along with this, 3.0 is supposed to even out the star recruits, meaning that the school (and their baseline prestige) you are at should have less to do with success. Theoretically a very good coach should be able to succeed at pretty much any Big 6 and even solid mid-major program. That said, here's my 2 cents:

1. Keep firings at only D1. There are plenty of good DII and DIII school's available in all worlds, no reason to fire a coach that is new to the game and still learning. If worlds start to get full with a marketing campaign, then this might have to be revisited.

2. When you go to a school you get a 5 year "contract". When you change jobs and you get the generic "welcome to the school" e-mails they should have in it exactly what needs to be done over the next 5 years to keep your job. That way a coach who gets fired should know it's coming and that should lessen the blow of how angry the coach becomes.

3. Here would be my criteria for the contracts and again, this would all be listed very clearly on the welcome to the school e-mail:

a. If over the period of the 5 year contract the prestige of the school has increased, you keep your job (get another 5 year contract). So the coach who takes over "B" prestige Kentucky and has increased them to an A- in 5 season (clearly has them going in the right direction) would not be fired.

b. A coach that has their team at their baseline prestige or above would not be fired. They are meeting their school's expectations so to say.

c. The next part gets a little more complicated, but their has to be something in place so that a team that has a down season or two at the end of a contract but has had success doesn't get fired. I'm thinking about the coach that wins two National Championships their first two seasons but gets gutted by EEs and drops from an A+ to and A at the end of the contract. I think most agree two Championships in a 5 year span should allow a coach to keep their job. What the criteria should be would be up for debate. Maybe something like the following (just as a starting point)

Baseline Prestige A+ Number of wins needed in National Tournament to keep job: 10

Baseline Prestige A Number of wins needed in National Tournament to keep job: 8

Baseline Prestige A- Number of wins needed in National Tournament to keep job: 6

Baseline Prestige B+ Number of wins needed in National Tournament to keep job: 4

Baseline Prestige B Number of wins needed in National Tournament to keep job: 2

Baseline Prestige B- through F Number of appearances needed in National Tournament to keep job: 1

Just to be clear, if you meet any of the above 3 criteria, you would get to keep your job. You would not need to meet all 3. I think the above would be fair as to not fire too many coaches, but also making coaches at least keep the program at the level it "should" be based off of baseline prestige.

I like all the points piman

Posted by kcsundevil on 10/6/2016 1:43:00 PM (view original):

Posted by hughesjr on 10/6/2016 1:40:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 10/6/2016 1:13:00 PM (view original):
I really dislike the idea of forced retirement. Just like Coach K or Jimmy B, you coach for as long as you like. It's your job for life if you're performance is up to snuff.

The problem is.. Life is not 120 seasons for Coach K. In a simulation where you simulate 10 years in one calendar year, a coach has a 'real career' in 2 or 3 calendar years. Guys camping out somewhere for 100 seasons is not good for business.

Is this actually happening a lot? It's a straight question, I really have no idea.

What do you mean not good for business? I don't think people would like it very much if they were forced to retire after having a lot of success at a school. They would probably be pretty annoyed and may not want to play anymore.

Maybe it happens often but yeah, how many times has someone been at a B6 D1 school for over 50 seasons? Seems rare but maybe it's not. Also, if firing is ramped up, combined with the changes w/ 3.0, I think it'd be even less common.

But regardless, if it's me and I MUST have the job at Syracuse and there is a coach there who is a vet and who is awesome at the game and will never leave, I'll just go to another world and try to get the job there. Otherwise I feel like we're just punishing success and that doesn't make sense to me, IMHO.

Posted by piman314 on 10/6/2016 2:39:00 PM (view original):
This was said before, but be careful with ramping up firings too much with the change to 3.0. First, it might take some coaches - good coaches - a couple of seasons to adjust to 3.0 and they might have a temporary drop in prestige. To go along with this, 3.0 is supposed to even out the star recruits, meaning that the school (and their baseline prestige) you are at should have less to do with success. Theoretically a very good coach should be able to succeed at pretty much any Big 6 and even solid mid-major program. That said, here's my 2 cents:

1. Keep firings at only D1. There are plenty of good DII and DIII school's available in all worlds, no reason to fire a coach that is new to the game and still learning. If worlds start to get full with a marketing campaign, then this might have to be revisited.

2. When you go to a school you get a 5 year "contract". When you change jobs and you get the generic "welcome to the school" e-mails they should have in it exactly what needs to be done over the next 5 years to keep your job. That way a coach who gets fired should know it's coming and that should lessen the blow of how angry the coach becomes.

3. Here would be my criteria for the contracts and again, this would all be listed very clearly on the welcome to the school e-mail:

a. If over the period of the 5 year contract the prestige of the school has increased, you keep your job (get another 5 year contract). So the coach who takes over "B" prestige Kentucky and has increased them to an A- in 5 season (clearly has them going in the right direction) would not be fired.

b. A coach that has their team at their baseline prestige or above would not be fired. They are meeting their school's expectations so to say.

c. The next part gets a little more complicated, but their has to be something in place so that a team that has a down season or two at the end of a contract but has had success doesn't get fired. I'm thinking about the coach that wins two National Championships their first two seasons but gets gutted by EEs and drops from an A+ to and A at the end of the contract. I think most agree two Championships in a 5 year span should allow a coach to keep their job. What the criteria should be would be up for debate. Maybe something like the following (just as a starting point)

Baseline Prestige A+ Number of wins needed in National Tournament to keep job: 10

Baseline Prestige A Number of wins needed in National Tournament to keep job: 8

Baseline Prestige A- Number of wins needed in National Tournament to keep job: 6

Baseline Prestige B+ Number of wins needed in National Tournament to keep job: 4

Baseline Prestige B Number of wins needed in National Tournament to keep job: 2

Baseline Prestige B- through F Number of appearances needed in National Tournament to keep job: 1

Just to be clear, if you meet any of the above 3 criteria, you would get to keep your job. You would not need to meet all 3. I think the above would be fair as to not fire too many coaches, but also making coaches at least keep the program at the level it "should" be based off of baseline prestige.

I like most of this. But a caution about high D1 rebuilds, 1 national tournament appearance in 5 seasons isn't necessarily going to be an attainable goal for a doormat in a Big 6. I'm not a terrible coach, but taking over C Virginia in an A conference in Naismith (as pkoopman) you might think so. After 5 seasons we were finally winning a conference game here and there, and now after 8 have prestige back up to B-, and (fingers crossed) may be ready to compete for a national tournament appearance. The point about spreading out talent in 3.0 is well taken, but I'd prefer to e cautious about jumping the gun. I think generally, unless prestige has actually dropped over the tenure, the coach should be safe.

Posted by shoe3 on 10/6/2016 3:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by piman314 on 10/6/2016 2:39:00 PM (view original):
This was said before, but be careful with ramping up firings too much with the change to 3.0. First, it might take some coaches - good coaches - a couple of seasons to adjust to 3.0 and they might have a temporary drop in prestige. To go along with this, 3.0 is supposed to even out the star recruits, meaning that the school (and their baseline prestige) you are at should have less to do with success. Theoretically a very good coach should be able to succeed at pretty much any Big 6 and even solid mid-major program. That said, here's my 2 cents:

1. Keep firings at only D1. There are plenty of good DII and DIII school's available in all worlds, no reason to fire a coach that is new to the game and still learning. If worlds start to get full with a marketing campaign, then this might have to be revisited.

2. When you go to a school you get a 5 year "contract". When you change jobs and you get the generic "welcome to the school" e-mails they should have in it exactly what needs to be done over the next 5 years to keep your job. That way a coach who gets fired should know it's coming and that should lessen the blow of how angry the coach becomes.

3. Here would be my criteria for the contracts and again, this would all be listed very clearly on the welcome to the school e-mail:

a. If over the period of the 5 year contract the prestige of the school has increased, you keep your job (get another 5 year contract). So the coach who takes over "B" prestige Kentucky and has increased them to an A- in 5 season (clearly has them going in the right direction) would not be fired.

b. A coach that has their team at their baseline prestige or above would not be fired. They are meeting their school's expectations so to say.

c. The next part gets a little more complicated, but their has to be something in place so that a team that has a down season or two at the end of a contract but has had success doesn't get fired. I'm thinking about the coach that wins two National Championships their first two seasons but gets gutted by EEs and drops from an A+ to and A at the end of the contract. I think most agree two Championships in a 5 year span should allow a coach to keep their job. What the criteria should be would be up for debate. Maybe something like the following (just as a starting point)

Baseline Prestige A+ Number of wins needed in National Tournament to keep job: 10

Baseline Prestige A Number of wins needed in National Tournament to keep job: 8

Baseline Prestige A- Number of wins needed in National Tournament to keep job: 6

Baseline Prestige B+ Number of wins needed in National Tournament to keep job: 4

Baseline Prestige B Number of wins needed in National Tournament to keep job: 2

Baseline Prestige B- through F Number of appearances needed in National Tournament to keep job: 1

Just to be clear, if you meet any of the above 3 criteria, you would get to keep your job. You would not need to meet all 3. I think the above would be fair as to not fire too many coaches, but also making coaches at least keep the program at the level it "should" be based off of baseline prestige.

I like most of this. But a caution about high D1 rebuilds, 1 national tournament appearance in 5 seasons isn't necessarily going to be an attainable goal for a doormat in a Big 6. I'm not a terrible coach, but taking over C Virginia in an A conference in Naismith (as pkoopman) you might think so. After 5 seasons we were finally winning a conference game here and there, and now after 8 have prestige back up to B-, and (fingers crossed) may be ready to compete for a national tournament appearance. The point about spreading out talent in 3.0 is well taken, but I'd prefer to e cautious about jumping the gun. I think generally, unless prestige has actually dropped over the tenure, the coach should be safe.

the way I understand those suggestions, you only have to do one of the three things (a, b, or c) to keep your job, not all three.

I agree with everything tarvolon posted. Well thought out and well researched as usual.

I also like what piman posted. In his 3c part where he put out starting points I do think they would need to add categories for each Baseline Prestige category based on what the actual prestige was when the new coach took over.

For instance looking at the B+ Baseline Prestige. If someone took over Purdue in the Big 10 and the prestige was down to C+, that should have a different set of expectations than if someone took over Purdue and the prestige was currently at B+. Like shoe3 stated about Virginia--good luck getting 4 NT wins with Purdue in your first 5 seasons if you take them over starting at C+.

I like piman's contract idea but would probably want that first contract to be longer--7 seasons instead of 5 to take into account the first season being mostly all not your recruits. Then maybe 4 season contracts after that with certain criteria to be met. IF they do set out concrete achievements you have to have to keep your job at certain schools--it will make it MUCH easier to digest for someone who gets fired. If it is just a grey area and WIS won't tell you what the firing criteria is--it will lead to more disgruntled customers. Also if you are fired at a B+ baseline prestige school--you should automatically be qualified for any job at B baseline prestige or lower. As much as GD sucks right now--at least they have the firing and re-hiring in D1 in reasonable shape.

Thanks to the current guys at WIS for taking a look at fixing this problem that should have been fixed a LONG time ago.

BCS (Elite, Big Six...chose your name) at the D1 level SHOULD NEVER have a Sim Coach! You need to make the logic so that these schools always having a Human Coach. BUT, the caviat must be improved Firing logic. If you are only a middle of the Road Coach, you can expect four recruiting years or less at that level (one cycle should be all you get).
Mid Major and Smaller D1 programs may not fire you for eight or ten .500 seasons, but not get your team Winning or to the "March Madness" for an elite will get you fired.

Posted by piman314 on 10/6/2016 2:39:00 PM (view original):
This was said before, but be careful with ramping up firings too much with the change to 3.0. First, it might take some coaches - good coaches - a couple of seasons to adjust to 3.0 and they might have a temporary drop in prestige. To go along with this, 3.0 is supposed to even out the star recruits, meaning that the school (and their baseline prestige) you are at should have less to do with success. Theoretically a very good coach should be able to succeed at pretty much any Big 6 and even solid mid-major program. That said, here's my 2 cents:

1. Keep firings at only D1. There are plenty of good DII and DIII school's available in all worlds, no reason to fire a coach that is new to the game and still learning. If worlds start to get full with a marketing campaign, then this might have to be revisited.

2. When you go to a school you get a 5 year "contract". When you change jobs and you get the generic "welcome to the school" e-mails they should have in it exactly what needs to be done over the next 5 years to keep your job. That way a coach who gets fired should know it's coming and that should lessen the blow of how angry the coach becomes.

3. Here would be my criteria for the contracts and again, this would all be listed very clearly on the welcome to the school e-mail:

a. If over the period of the 5 year contract the prestige of the school has increased, you keep your job (get another 5 year contract). So the coach who takes over "B" prestige Kentucky and has increased them to an A- in 5 season (clearly has them going in the right direction) would not be fired.

b. A coach that has their team at their baseline prestige or above would not be fired. They are meeting their school's expectations so to say.

c. The next part gets a little more complicated, but their has to be something in place so that a team that has a down season or two at the end of a contract but has had success doesn't get fired. I'm thinking about the coach that wins two National Championships their first two seasons but gets gutted by EEs and drops from an A+ to and A at the end of the contract. I think most agree two Championships in a 5 year span should allow a coach to keep their job. What the criteria should be would be up for debate. Maybe something like the following (just as a starting point)

Baseline Prestige A+ Number of wins needed in National Tournament to keep job: 10

Baseline Prestige A Number of wins needed in National Tournament to keep job: 8

Baseline Prestige A- Number of wins needed in National Tournament to keep job: 6

Baseline Prestige B+ Number of wins needed in National Tournament to keep job: 4

Baseline Prestige B Number of wins needed in National Tournament to keep job: 2

Baseline Prestige B- through F Number of appearances needed in National Tournament to keep job: 1

Just to be clear, if you meet any of the above 3 criteria, you would get to keep your job. You would not need to meet all 3. I think the above would be fair as to not fire too many coaches, but also making coaches at least keep the program at the level it "should" be based off of baseline prestige.

I love the idea of a contract! That way, BCS/Elite Schools would spell out exactly the term and conditions of your hiring!

I also agree that D2 and D3 Schools have no firing logic! You stay and play....period.

I would however also propose that the "Last Human" can qualify for any comparable job in the same season he becomes the last Human in a Conference. I was in the Summit several seasons ago and watch over a two year period the five other human Coaches leave, and was stuck there that season and the next by myself, and prefer Conferences with human Coaches. You need to give a guy in that situation the ability to stay at the level he has worked up to, and still move.

contracts with minimum win/appearance numbers in the NT seem like a disincentive to take a low level big 6 program, regardless of any other factors. especially because you are no longer getting conference money from NT success, it's like all the challenges of a big conference with few of the rewards.

I wouldn't do anything too crazy at first. after the reaction to the extreme change to scouting/recruiting, i think most would agree a measure of restraint is in order for the next changes--make adjustments, then tweak/increase them as we see how they work. that said, I agree with some of the suggestions already posted:

• make firing a little more common at the very top jobs. i wouldn't tie it to a specific # of NT wins or make it super challenging (especially since there is not a shortage of good jobs right now)...but surely we can make it a little tougher than it is currently. coaches in big six leagues shouldn't be able to make one PI in 10 seasons and keep their job. we should have no firings at baseline D jobs in D1 or at D2/D3.
• make hiring easier with each subsequent job cycle. if no one applies, the school's standards should drop a little each cycle until they get a coach or reach a set lower limit that would allow for an approprsiately experienced coach to get the job (ie, an A+ prestige job might start with A+ job standards but drop to A, then B+ B, etc, down to, say, C+ job standards if no one takes the job as we reach the end of the jobs process). a 2-level job eligibility decrease (so to speak) should open access to most jobs substantially without going overboard and getting really inexperienced coaches at top jobs.

Posted by piman314 on 10/6/2016 2:39:00 PM (view original):
This was said before, but be careful with ramping up firings too much with the change to 3.0. First, it might take some coaches - good coaches - a couple of seasons to adjust to 3.0 and they might have a temporary drop in prestige. To go along with this, 3.0 is supposed to even out the star recruits, meaning that the school (and their baseline prestige) you are at should have less to do with success. Theoretically a very good coach should be able to succeed at pretty much any Big 6 and even solid mid-major program. That said, here's my 2 cents:

1. Keep firings at only D1. There are plenty of good DII and DIII school's available in all worlds, no reason to fire a coach that is new to the game and still learning. If worlds start to get full with a marketing campaign, then this might have to be revisited.

2. When you go to a school you get a 5 year "contract". When you change jobs and you get the generic "welcome to the school" e-mails they should have in it exactly what needs to be done over the next 5 years to keep your job. That way a coach who gets fired should know it's coming and that should lessen the blow of how angry the coach becomes.

3. Here would be my criteria for the contracts and again, this would all be listed very clearly on the welcome to the school e-mail:

a. If over the period of the 5 year contract the prestige of the school has increased, you keep your job (get another 5 year contract). So the coach who takes over "B" prestige Kentucky and has increased them to an A- in 5 season (clearly has them going in the right direction) would not be fired.

b. A coach that has their team at their baseline prestige or above would not be fired. They are meeting their school's expectations so to say.

c. The next part gets a little more complicated, but their has to be something in place so that a team that has a down season or two at the end of a contract but has had success doesn't get fired. I'm thinking about the coach that wins two National Championships their first two seasons but gets gutted by EEs and drops from an A+ to and A at the end of the contract. I think most agree two Championships in a 5 year span should allow a coach to keep their job. What the criteria should be would be up for debate. Maybe something like the following (just as a starting point)

Baseline Prestige A+ Number of wins needed in National Tournament to keep job: 10

Baseline Prestige A Number of wins needed in National Tournament to keep job: 8

Baseline Prestige A- Number of wins needed in National Tournament to keep job: 6

Baseline Prestige B+ Number of wins needed in National Tournament to keep job: 4

Baseline Prestige B Number of wins needed in National Tournament to keep job: 2

Baseline Prestige B- through F Number of appearances needed in National Tournament to keep job: 1

Just to be clear, if you meet any of the above 3 criteria, you would get to keep your job. You would not need to meet all 3. I think the above would be fair as to not fire too many coaches, but also making coaches at least keep the program at the level it "should" be based off of baseline prestige.

Great. I would also like to +1 the idea of giving fired coaches a free year in that world.