"Elite college teams both get the benefit of early entries and replace them with more early entry quality players."
Are you talking about RL all of a sudden? This thread was about HD.
i probably shouldn't enter into this discussion, as i'm a long way from a big6 DI team, but i went to the knowledge base for an answer..i know this is a new recruiting system, so it will take time to adjust strategies..so i'll just follow this discussion with an open mind..

A.	When you are recruiting the elite level players, losing them early to the NBA is part of the game and should be factored into your recruiting strategy.

of course one should factor the effects into strategy

the issue is what should be the effect - and is it out of balance for game play

some think its okay - some think folks who lose EEs get hammered too hard - based either on comparison to real life or based on what is good for game play

Here's the bes t way to think of it:
1. Normal recruit: 32 cycles x 20 att pts = 640 total att pts to be used on a full option of recruits

2. EE recruit: 10 cycles x 20 att pts = 200 total att pts to be used on 25% of the total recruits but more than likely only a few of the top 50 positional recruits with be signable for the 200 pts and max recruits. Most of these late sign recruits were being fully recruited during the first cycle with more than likely more than 200 or 400 att pts already dumped in before the 2nd cycle even starts.

early entries in the current system are basically unreplaceable with normal DIA role players, no body is arguing to be replaced with elite players just normal players would be nice. But when u only get 1/3 of the att points your hosed from the start.

Posted by all2matt on 10/22/2016 10:00:00 PM (view original):
Here's the bes t way to think of it:
1. Normal recruit: 32 cycles x 20 att pts = 640 total att pts to be used on a full option of recruits

2. EE recruit: 10 cycles x 20 att pts = 200 total att pts to be used on 25% of the total recruits but more than likely only a few of the top 50 positional recruits with be signable for the 200 pts and max recruits. Most of these late sign recruits were being fully recruited during the first cycle with more than likely more than 200 or 400 att pts already dumped in before the 2nd cycle even starts.

early entries in the current system are basically unreplaceable with normal DIA role players, no body is arguing to be replaced with elite players just normal players would be nice. But when u only get 1/3 of the att points your hosed from the start.

Completely agree.

When I have 3 EEs, I'm just looking to get equal resources to the guy that had 3 walkons or 3 seniors. Instead, I get 600 APs and he gets 1920 APs. And that's assuming were recruiting a player who signs last cycle, so in reality its worse than 3:1.

Here's another point. In Allen, period 2 is about to begin. My school, Colorado was the NT runner up and has very good prestige, 100 APs and $9000 from EEs. So I am about to poach the heck out of some poor soul. I feel bad about it. I wish I didn't have to do it, but 100 APs and 20 HVs are about to ruin someone's Sunday. I can't wait because signings start right away, so sucks to be you random Allen person who is recruiting a 4 or 5 star player right now.

This isn't going to be fun for them either.

Posted by reinsel on 10/23/2016 8:30:00 AM (view original):
Here's another point. In Allen, period 2 is about to begin. My school, Colorado was the NT runner up and has very good prestige, 100 APs and $9000 from EEs. So I am about to poach the heck out of some poor soul. I feel bad about it. I wish I didn't have to do it, but 100 APs and 20 HVs are about to ruin someone's Sunday. I can't wait because signings start right away, so sucks to be you random Allen person who is recruiting a 4 or 5 star player right now.

This isn't going to be fun for them either.

Please don't pick me. Please don't pick me...


But yeah, all2matt and reinsel you guys bring up very good and fair points. I agree.

Just declare Ees on the first cycle. I mean, why not do that, it doesn't change a lot.

My suggestion

Before the first recruiting session give available scholarships and attention points to teams for underclassmen who are listed as likely declaring for the draft. I understand not all players who are listed as likely going will declare and some players listed as probably staying will declare, but this would be a realistic solution and help alleviate teams that get crippled by multiple EE.

With this idea when the season rolls over and the underclassmen declare and the likely going decide to stay in school its possible that a team will have more players signed than actual available scholarships. In this case the school would be forced to relinquish recruits to get down to the available scholarships and those recruits would be available to sign with the next school on the consideration list.

Posted by zorzii on 10/23/2016 9:00:00 AM (view original):
Just declare Ees on the first cycle. I mean, why not do that, it doesn't change a lot.

This would solve everything in my opinion. EEs would still suck, because you lose a great player, but at least you can replace them. And you know that you need a PG or whatever.

You forget: WIS doesn't think the EE situation is a problem. It is, in fact, the goal. If top coaches can continue getting the best recruits, that will not result in the "increased competitiveness" (i.e. a trophy for everyone) that Seble is trying to achieve. They don't want to "solve everything." 3.0 IS the solution.

Posted by jeffdrayer on 10/24/2016 1:41:00 PM (view original):
You forget: WIS doesn't think the EE situation is a problem. It is, in fact, the goal. If top coaches can continue getting the best recruits, that will not result in the "increased competitiveness" (i.e. a trophy for everyone) that Seble is trying to achieve. They don't want to "solve everything." 3.0 IS the solution.

Actually, that is NOT what they said. They said that they wanted to watch it for a while this way and see how it plays out in the game. Then they would look at it again.

They did not say any of what you said.

They said, they don't want people getting all the top 100 recruits with few/no battles. And they said, they THINK the EE thing will be able to be solved by the coaches planning for it better but they would look at it and maybe make adjustments in the future.

But why let the truth get in the way of good hyperbole?

In the long term, they may fix it.

In the short term, its a huge pain for the transition to 3.0 for teams that have multiple possible but uncertain EEs