Posted by hughesjr on 10/19/2016 1:12:00 PM (view original):

Posted by pkoopman on 10/19/2016 12:40:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jcfreder on 10/19/2016 11:48:00 AM (view original):
This problem exists because of several flaws in the system. I actually like the realism of EEs and do not think that they should be disclosed at an unrealistic, early time in the year. But it is way too hard to replace an EE with a serviceable player. A scholly offer from a high-prestige team should trump a large amount of effort from bottom-feeder teams, and players get signed too quickly in session 2.

But even aside from the pure recruiting-system problems, this would not be as big of a deal if you could legitimately play with an 8-man rotation, which is eminently doable in real life. Or if there were more realistic roster sizes/compositions---not just the very-common 10 scholarship players at any one time. One should not have to take walk-ons in order to have enough recruiting budget to compete with the big boys.

I agree with much of this, but keep in mind, when the recent updates to player preferences go into effect - presumably the next time a world rolls over and new recruits are generated - there will be more players with more intelligent preferences, appropriate to their status. Fewer top players preferring rebuilds, more top players wanting success and strong conferences. This should function to move the needle back to prestige on those elite recruits.

I still think more elite recruits should want to wait until the late period to sign, to let early entries shake out. I've been arguing this from day 1 of beta. I hope they come around to tweaking that eventually, as well.

I agree with more elite players than the average wanting to wait until the 2nd signing period as well. This along with opening all recruiting actions to anyone who lost an EE at the beginning of the 2nd Session should come close to fixing EEs.

This makes sense to me as well, and I agree that this would at least limit the EE penalty that currently seems to be in effect.

It still almost doesn't matter given the weight of APs. If you had an open scholarship for both recruiting periods, that's 32 cycles of APs. An EE only gets 10 cycles. Very very hard to catch up, especially given that the weight of prestige has also gone down. The weight of APs needs to go down, or extra APs should be awarded to EEs.

Posted by wang35 on 10/19/2016 2:31:00 PM (view original):
It still almost doesn't matter given the weight of APs. If you had an open scholarship for both recruiting periods, that's 32 cycles of APs. An EE only gets 10 cycles. Very very hard to catch up, especially given that the weight of prestige has also gone down. The weight of APs needs to go down, or extra APs should be awarded to EEs.

Well, not every single player is going to have maxed out HVs and you can find players with preferences that match your team.

Also remember that all you have to do is get to High to have a shot at a player. So you will be able to get some that you don't completely lead on.

I think if they do those things, that will certainly HELP mitigate EEs. They don't have to make it so you get to sign X more EEs for the X EE's you lost. They just need to make it a bit more fair if you lose multiple guys to EEs.

Why EEs are so horribly frustrating.

Every coin has two sides, including the universe of EE's. One side of the coin is that coaches are not entitled to replace EE's on a 1:1 basis. That is frustrating. The other side of the coin is that these same coaches enjoyed the superior performance of an NBA-ready player, unlike some of their conference mates. Isn't it strange how every thread about EE's only has one side?

Posted by rogelio on 10/19/2016 12:29:00 PM (view original):
Spud, you simply have no idea how the game is played at D1. 0-7 in your third year on a D1 team. Quit trolling the threads. I have no idea how you still have posting rights in this game.

If I were 0-7 on my third year on a team at any level I would have to look closely at what produced such a result. However, since I am not in my third year on any team at any level under this screen name, I am not real clear what you are referring to. The closest thing I can think of is being 20-14 overall, 0-7 playing nine freshmen and sophomores and changing the offensive and/or defensive set in my second season at a rebuild. But good try. And as for you having no idea, yeah, that was pretty darn close. Did you notice that I was commenting on the thread? And you weren't? Stay tuned.

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

Why EEs are so horribly frustrating.

Every coin has two sides, including the universe of EE's. One side of the coin is that coaches are not entitled to replace EE's on a 1:1 basis. That is frustrating. The other side of the coin is that these same coaches enjoyed the superior performance of an NBA-ready player, unlike some of their conference mates. Isn't it strange how every thread about EE's only has one side?

"Isn't it strange how every thread about EE's only has one side?"

Not really.

Posted by CoachSpud on 10/19/2016 3:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by rogelio on 10/19/2016 12:29:00 PM (view original):
Spud, you simply have no idea how the game is played at D1. 0-7 in your third year on a D1 team. Quit trolling the threads. I have no idea how you still have posting rights in this game.

If I were 0-7 on my third year on a team at any level I would have to look closely at what produced such a result. However, since I am not in my third year on any team at any level under this screen name, I am not real clear what you are referring to. The closest thing I can think of is being 20-14 overall, 0-7 playing nine freshmen and sophomores and changing the offensive and/or defensive set in my second season at a rebuild. But good try. And as for you having no idea, yeah, that was pretty darn close. Did you notice that I was commenting on the thread? And you weren't? Stay tuned.

Thank you for the clarification... Still, I cannot agree that you are commenting on the thread. You are trolling it.

You seem to suggest you have some other screen name with more experience than you have under this one. Why aren't posting under that name?

I had 3 EE with 1 a surprise on my VaTech team in wooden (waykbordr) and had a real tough time getting on the lists of serviceable players that would maybe be good role players as SRs, I ended having to sign 530ish overall guys because either I couldn't catch up with the leaders or then ended up signing to quickly for me to even make a dent. Again the 10 cycles of 2nd period is basically a waste and a slap in the face of EE coaches. It needs to be fixed sooner rather than later, maybe by atleast evening out the cycles and/or doubling the att points for the EE. This would be a step in the right direction.

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

Why EEs are so horribly frustrating.

Every coin has two sides, including the universe of EE's. One side of the coin is that coaches are not entitled to replace EE's on a 1:1 basis. That is frustrating. The other side of the coin is that these same coaches enjoyed the superior performance of an NBA-ready player, unlike some of their conference mates. Isn't it strange how every thread about EE's only has one side?

elite college teams get both sides of the coin.

Of course there is one very easy way to fix the EE problem, and that is to do away with EEs in HD. HD is not the NCAA, or the NBA; so why does WIS feel that their product has to mirror those institutions? I really don't think that many people would care if EEs were taken out of the equation, especially in lieu of the major problem it would alleviate in the new 3.0.

I think we give it a few seasons. Based on what I see, if you are able to get 1-2 EE's a year, you would be elite. I believe gone are the days of 4+ players going the NBA route early from teams. Going forward, you will have to recruit 8-10 guys across 4 classes that most likely will stay 4 years and try to bring in a guy or 2 if really good that may leave early. It may be hard to deal with initially for the few, and I mean very few, coaches who got these multiple EE's every year but long term, it will add to the strategy of the game.

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

Why EEs are so horribly frustrating.

Every coin has two sides, including the universe of EE's. One side of the coin is that coaches are not entitled to replace EE's on a 1:1 basis. That is frustrating. The other side of the coin is that these same coaches enjoyed the superior performance of an NBA-ready player, unlike some of their conference mates. Isn't it strange how every thread about EE's only has one side?

I might agree with your "two sides of the coin" argument if my two guys who went were "NBA-ready players," but they were #81 and #96 on the big board, and the #96 guy was "likely staying." I didn't lose two lottery guys. And WIS itself apparently doesn't think these guys are "NBA-ready" either, notwithstanding their draft declarations, since only 60 guys get drafted each year.

The major issue here is that an EE (let alone 2 or 3) is extremely punitive in recruiting. That is: (1) not realistic -- I seem to recall one of seble's arguments for revamping recruiting was to add realism, since there are lots of recruiting battles in real life; and (2) screws up incentives -- why would 3.0 incentivize coaches not to go after the elite players (or even non-elite), since they may unexpectedly jump early and torpedo that next year's recruiting? I have my theories as to the 2nd question, but that is ground that has been well trod.

There is something more realistic about new recruiting : we will see less superclasses. I remember the fab five, then we saw sone at Kentucky, one at Duke these past years. Other than that, it seems more spread out than 2.0. Still Ees should declare in the first cycle so teams can plan ahead. It's easy for coach to know in reality, say you an Andrew Wiggins, go Canada, you know he is gone after a year even if hasn't played a game for your team as a freshman.. And coaches know the odds on sophs, juniors, so they plan ahead.

Posted by Benis on 10/19/2016 4:09:00 PM (view original):

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

Why EEs are so horribly frustrating.

Every coin has two sides, including the universe of EE's. One side of the coin is that coaches are not entitled to replace EE's on a 1:1 basis. That is frustrating. The other side of the coin is that these same coaches enjoyed the superior performance of an NBA-ready player, unlike some of their conference mates. Isn't it strange how every thread about EE's only has one side?

"Isn't it strange how every thread about EE's only has one side?"

Not really.

Oh, really? Do you remember one about anything but "oh woe is me?" Anything but what a terrible thing it is to have more than one EE? About how hard it is to get a new EE to replace every one lost? I think not. Surely no celebration of having enjoyed the guy's performance.

Or are you just suggesting that in a forest of whining threads, one more whining thread isn't strange?

Posted by vandydave on 10/19/2016 5:15:00 PM (view original):

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

Why EEs are so horribly frustrating.

Every coin has two sides, including the universe of EE's. One side of the coin is that coaches are not entitled to replace EE's on a 1:1 basis. That is frustrating. The other side of the coin is that these same coaches enjoyed the superior performance of an NBA-ready player, unlike some of their conference mates. Isn't it strange how every thread about EE's only has one side?

elite college teams get both sides of the coin.

Bingo!!! My point exactly. But you only see one side in the forums.