Let's cut to the chase here...

In my opinion, D-3 schools shouldn't have the ability to sign D-1 players.
As it stands now, through a lot of luck, D-3 schools could create superteams of D-1 players.

On a side note, i like that owners need to wait to Period 2 to sign players a Level higher.

Posted by npb7768 on 10/21/2016 5:12:00 PM (view original):
Let's cut to the chase here...

In my opinion, D-3 schools shouldn't have the ability to sign D-1 players.
As it stands now, through a lot of luck, D-3 schools could create superteams of D-1 players.

On a side note, i like that owners need to wait to Period 2 to sign players a Level higher.

+1

Should not EVER be able to pull projected D1 players down to D3. D1 may be pull down to D2 during recruiting period 2, and D2 players may be pulled down to D3 in period 2.

I really don't care how elite the D3 program is. However, some fringe D1 players should have projection of "D1/D2" (a new projection level). I mean any D1 projected player who is a 10-20 ATH rating and low cores perhaps should not be considered a D1 prospect. I also liked the post on a previous thread that ALL Upper level drop downs or pull downs have a possibility of not showing up and going to JUCO instead. Just like ineligibles.

I've made it pretty clear what I think about this...

But let me ask a question. Everyone who currently has a D3 team or has had a D3 team for ~5+ seasons - what is bad about D3 and what should be changed? Do people who play D3 find that it's not competitive because the players aren't as good?

Asked another way - Do we need to be able to recruit D1 players at D3 in order to have fun and enjoy it?

Benis, I have a team in DIII I've had for awhile (2 championships and 2 more title games). I honestly didn't recruit DIII players much from it under the old system. Most of what I recruited were drop downs. Now that I can recruit DI, I'll just wait to see what "falls through the cracks". This last cycle, I had 4 open scholarships, signed 2 DII guys and ended up cutting a guy so I could sign 3 DI recruits (might be 2 DI and another DII, can't remember). Now they were not true DI quality, and barely good enough for a DII team, but they are going to be solid at DIII.

Posted by Benis on 10/21/2016 5:41:00 PM (view original):
I've made it pretty clear what I think about this...

But let me ask a question. Everyone who currently has a D3 team or has had a D3 team for ~5+ seasons - what is bad about D3 and what should be changed? Do people who play D3 find that it's not competitive because the players aren't as good?

Asked another way - Do we need to be able to recruit D1 players at D3 in order to have fun and enjoy it?

I really didn't think anything was "wrong" with D3 (or D2 for that matter...). I had one D3 team already and added another after 3.0 not because I thought the game would be better, but because I wanted to contrast the start of the game under the new system vs. the old one and how it felt taking over a team like a new user would.

I am not expecting to keep either team longterm. The transition to 3.0 already ripped apart the all-human conference that I was initially in within Rupp world and I also feel the disparity in teams that will be pronounced in D3 will render the game less-than-enjoyable in the long run. If I had to lay odds, I would guess I either move up to D2 with both programs or drop one/both teams. We'll see how it goes though...

Posted by Benis on 10/21/2016 5:41:00 PM (view original):
I've made it pretty clear what I think about this...

But let me ask a question. Everyone who currently has a D3 team or has had a D3 team for ~5+ seasons - what is bad about D3 and what should be changed? Do people who play D3 find that it's not competitive because the players aren't as good?

Asked another way - Do we need to be able to recruit D1 players at D3 in order to have fun and enjoy it?

I don't have any D3 teams .. but I do have mostly D2 teams.

I am not in any way for limits on any recruit. If the SIMAI teams in Div-1 are signing Div-1 recruits then this is not a problem to me. And a Div-1 team SHOULD be able to offer a scholarship and win any recruit that a Div-III has on the last day when it opens up. If you are a div-2 teeam, you needed to open the scholarship for that D1 guy .. if you did then you should also be able to offer a scholarship and get him as well (if you wanted).

IF no one is offering these guys from the upper levels, then why is this a problem. It is very risky for the d3 team to do this. They have to have backup options or take crappy players and those backups cost money or APs.

I have no real problem with saying no D1 recruits on D3 teams .. but I don't see it as an issue that really needs attention. Are there D3 teams signing every player at a D1 level?

Posted by poncho0091 on 10/21/2016 6:03:00 PM (view original):
Benis, I have a team in DIII I've had for awhile (2 championships and 2 more title games). I honestly didn't recruit DIII players much from it under the old system. Most of what I recruited were drop downs. Now that I can recruit DI, I'll just wait to see what "falls through the cracks". This last cycle, I had 4 open scholarships, signed 2 DII guys and ended up cutting a guy so I could sign 3 DI recruits (might be 2 DI and another DII, can't remember). Now they were not true DI quality, and barely good enough for a DII team, but they are going to be solid at DIII.

And this is the other thing. We all know that there are guys labelled at D2 who are better than guys labelled at D1 .. those ratings don't take into account potential, and also don't take into account WE (which, if below 10 makes growth fairly limited, etc.)

Since potential (and extremely low WE) is not taken into account, the player ratings and Division designations are basically pointless.

I look at the best players, including potential, and recruit the best guys I can get. The only reason I care about Player Division Designations at all is if I have to wait until the 2nd session (or last day in D3) to sign a guy. If WIS would actually REALLY rate the players, using their position roles (with the addition of potential and low WE logic) .. then maybe the division designations and player ratings might mean something .. then you could really base limits for D3 to D1 and have it matter.

Posted by hughesjr on 10/21/2016 8:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by poncho0091 on 10/21/2016 6:03:00 PM (view original):
Benis, I have a team in DIII I've had for awhile (2 championships and 2 more title games). I honestly didn't recruit DIII players much from it under the old system. Most of what I recruited were drop downs. Now that I can recruit DI, I'll just wait to see what "falls through the cracks". This last cycle, I had 4 open scholarships, signed 2 DII guys and ended up cutting a guy so I could sign 3 DI recruits (might be 2 DI and another DII, can't remember). Now they were not true DI quality, and barely good enough for a DII team, but they are going to be solid at DIII.

And this is the other thing. We all know that there are guys labelled at D2 who are better than guys labelled at D1 .. those ratings don't take into account potential, and also don't take into account WE (which, if below 10 makes growth fairly limited, etc.)

Since potential (and extremely low WE) is not taken into account, the player ratings and Division designations are basically pointless.

I look at the best players, including potential, and recruit the best guys I can get. The only reason I care about Player Division Designations at all is if I have to wait until the 2nd session (or last day in D3) to sign a guy. If WIS would actually REALLY rate the players, using their position roles (with the addition of potential and low WE logic) .. then maybe the division designations and player ratings might mean something .. then you could really base limits for D3 to D1 and have it matter.

Bingo. Exactly why this tangent falls flat. With my D3 championship team at Carleton in Smith a few years ago, I had 4 players who very well could have been starters at mid-major D1s. That's what makes championship caliber recruiting - being able to find the best players available to you. True now, as it was in the previous version. It's not a secret or anything. And as has been admitted, the guys we're wringing our hands over in 3.0, for the most part, would not exactly be the cream of a D2 class, anyway - that's why they're available to D3s. Of course there will be some diamonds found. Tip your hat, and try to beat them.

Okay, lots of things here. First, why is this a big deal now and yet nobody complained about it in 2.0? At least in 3.0 everybody has a chance at everybody. In 2.0 there were certain guys that would drop to A+ schools and not C+ schools, not to mention the whole 70 mile thing. Yet we all (sure not all) loved pull downs even though some D1 guys would go to certain D3 schools and not others. That was inherently unfair.

Second, to go with what hughes said, the division players are listed at really doesn't matter for a lot of recruits. I have a little exercise. This is from my list in Phelan with my D3 Cal Tech team this past recruiting session. Which guys are DI which are D2 and which are D3?

Player A: Center Juco Jr
Ath 69 (Blue)
Speed 19 Black
Rebound 72 Green
Defense 74 Black
Block 58 Black
LP 45 Black
WE 64

Player B (PG) Juco Jr
Ath 27 Green
Speed 81 Red
Def 36 Black
Per 72 yellow
BH 66 Green
Passing 74 Black
WE 53

Player C SG
Ath 55 Black
Speed 68 Black
Defense 68 Green
Perimeter 44 Green
BH 67 Yellow
Passing 38 Green
WE 18

Player D Center
Ath 82 Black
Speed 16 Black
Rebound 59 Green
Def 58 Green
Bloc 46 Black
LP 45 Black
WE 29

Player E PG
Ath 62 Yellow
Speed 63 Green
Def 40 Green
Per 75 Yellow
BH 49 Green
Pass 42 Green
WE 36

Here's the point. With limited budgets you have to give coaches a chance to go find some good players, and we have better chance to do that at higher levels. If not it just becomes who is lucky enough to scout some D3 guys who can actually play. And like the original poster said, the system works. I ended up with a D3 guy, a D2 guy, and a D1 guy, just about like I would have in 2.0. To go along with this, a lot of D1 guys are not D1 guys. Some aren't even D2 guys. What is wrong with a D3 guy who the system wrongly lists at D1 going to a D3 school? And the levels given by the game are projected levels anyway. For those of you who follow the NFL and the draft, how many guys are "projected first round picks" only to fall to the second or third round? I see this as similar to WIS projections. Sometimes they are wrong and guys fall. Last, it's not like they sign on the first cycle. If nobody else wants them after 25 cycles of recruiting, I say let them go to the team that recruits them.
FWIW
Player A D2
Player B D3
Player C D1
Player D D2 (by far the best player in the group, lost him in a VH vs VH battle to another D3 school)
Player E D1 (mentioned on first page as player I lost in second session which is fine with me. I shouldn't be able to beat a DI school and he should wait for an offer to sign at his projected level)

hughes and koopman, thank you for such very reasonable posts. When we consider how uncommon it is for a good recruit to drop down, and how risky it is for a D3 or even D2 team to try to recruit over their heads, we see that this is all a tempest in a teapot.

koopman, you say "a few years ago, I had 4 players who very well could have been starters at mid-major D1s." Did that destroy D3? I ask because we have been assured that D1 recruits (even bad ones) falling to D3 will destroy D3. Since we are likely to continue to hear that, I am interested in how badly your team actually destroyed D3. I don't recall hearing in the forums that D3 was destroyed. Thanks.

Piman, Hughes, pkoopman- you guys make very valid points. Not saying I agree but you may be right in the end. We will see.

I still believe that D3 teams as a whole are going to recruit better classes in 3.0. I think most teams will be avg 55 ath/def easy. I still think this neuters sims (which comprise 75% of the teams in most worlds right now) and puts teams behind the 8 ball when taking over a new D3 program previously coached by a sim.

And yes the listing of divisions sucks so its not black and white, agree there. So players D1, D2 or D3, no matter what its labeled, are gonna be damn good players. And there are a lot of them to go around since the worlds are so empty. So of course guys will slip through the cracks. There are so few human coaches to prevent it.

And then how it impacts D1 - worse players for sims, fewer good recruits going JuCo yadda yadda.

Posted by Benis on 10/21/2016 10:40:00 PM (view original):
Piman, Hughes, pkoopman- you guys make very valid points. Not saying I agree but you may be right in the end. We will see.

I still believe that D3 teams as a whole are going to recruit better classes in 3.0. I think most teams will be avg 55 ath/def easy. I still think this neuters sims (which comprise 75% of the teams in most worlds right now) and puts teams behind the 8 ball when taking over a new D3 program previously coached by a sim.

And yes the listing of divisions sucks so its not black and white, agree there. So players D1, D2 or D3, no matter what its labeled, are gonna be damn good players. And there are a lot of them to go around since the worlds are so empty. So of course guys will slip through the cracks. There are so few human coaches to prevent it.

And then how it impacts D1 - worse players for sims, fewer good recruits going JuCo yadda yadda.

Benis: While I don't want D1 SIM teams to over-recruit, I do want them to try to fill all their teams with real players. It SHOULD be better in that regard now. They are not limited to only certain times, so they should be able to put attention points on someone whenever they lose a prospect and they should be able to get guys in the last 24 hours of session 2.

If that is not happening, then they should definitely adjust the SIM recruiting at D1.

For what it is worth, I have Mississippi Valley State in Tark, and in my Conference there are 9 SIMAI teams, and none of them took a Walkon this last season in HD3 recruiting.

I have a D3 team in Allen (using my last credit amount), just signed a D1 PROJECTED Recruit. I had four openings and I took a shot. The other three recruits were D2 PROJECTED. No other school (human or sim) showed any interest in this player. No other interest at all. So I see no issue.

There is a great deal of risk because of the money involved in scouting potentially could triple in states. I see VERY LITTLE CHANCE in D3 super teams with D1 players.

Personally I think a D2 recruit should be able sign with a D3 school in the first session IF there is no D2 interest and the recruit prefers to sign early. Ineligible players included since a D3 school is unaffected.

Please note the word used in player profiles is "PROJECTED".

D1 players need a lot of work from D2, I can't imagine from D3... So you can't base your strat solely on d1 while at d2 or d3. In IBA d2, i lost almost all
d1 to sims and d1 teams. I even lost as a d2 team the best player d2 i found. Shooting for the moon is risky and will eventually screw up a program.

"No other school (human or sim) showed any interest in this player. No other interest at all."

From what I can tell so far, this is the key. Now, you can absolutely tell if somebody is showing any interest. Before, a higher Division team could be lurking on a player and not make a decision or put in any effort until he absolutely had to. The higher Division Team can still do that, but now it's a risk for them to do that also. If you want a player, you have to go after them, or you risk losing them.