OK, the cycle isn't over yet, but I'm coming around to like almost everything about the new system.

Consider me mostly convinced.

Early entries are still a massive problem -- I see people shying away from top talent because the penalty is so great. Which means you have folks walking to classes with multiple top-5 players because they are willing to trade away a season two years from now. Fix the EE problem now, please!

Don't do it .. don't come over to the dark side!

Posted by lakevin on 10/24/2016 9:15:00 AM (view original):
OK, the cycle isn't over yet, but I'm coming around to like almost everything about the new system.

Consider me mostly convinced.

Early entries are still a massive problem -- I see people shying away from top talent because the penalty is so great. Which means you have folks walking to classes with multiple top-5 players because they are willing to trade away a season two years from now. Fix the EE problem now, please!

I'm glad you're coming around. IMO, it gets better each season.

I still disagree that EEs are a "massive problem". The trade off is exactly what I'd expect, given the nature of the commodity - I have to choose whether to go after the best of the best, and the realistic risk that comes with them, or going after safer, 4-year players; or striking some semblance of balance between the two.

I'm noticing in Crum that teams with potential EE's are positioning themselves with players who have "Late" signing preferences, so owners are already adjusting to keep from getting hosed.

I have another thought about EEs that came to me last night.

Let's say you recruit a 5 star guy that will turn pro after his sophomore year. You get two years of productivity out of him. However, for much of the two years, his IQ is low.

Compare that to a guy that starts out at 600, but has very high potential and a good WE. He will probably stay for 4 years, and he will also be very productive over at least his final two seasons. But those two seasons should be MORE productive than the EE guy because the second player will be playing his "star" years with a high IQ.

Something to consider. You still want to hope he gets drafted after his senior year for the prestige bump, so I suppose that's the downside.

Posted by chapelhillne on 10/24/2016 11:57:00 AM (view original):
I have another thought about EEs that came to me last night.

Let's say you recruit a 5 star guy that will turn pro after his sophomore year. You get two years of productivity out of him. However, for much of the two years, his IQ is low.

Compare that to a guy that starts out at 600, but has very high potential and a good WE. He will probably stay for 4 years, and he will also be very productive over at least his final two seasons. But those two seasons should be MORE productive than the EE guy because the second player will be playing his "star" years with a high IQ.

Something to consider. You still want to hope he gets drafted after his senior year for the prestige bump, so I suppose that's the downside.

Not to compare HD to real life .. but this is the same issue that faces them as well. Do I take a really great guy for one year or someone not quite as good for 2 or 3.

Both strategies work. Duke and Kentucky do great every year with 'get the best guys even if they are one and done'. Other teams like Wichita State and VCU make it to elite 8's with guys who might not even get drafted.

I always take the best I can .. they might just stay :D

Posted by lakevin on 10/24/2016 9:15:00 AM (view original):
OK, the cycle isn't over yet, but I'm coming around to like almost everything about the new system.

Consider me mostly convinced.

Early entries are still a massive problem -- I see people shying away from top talent because the penalty is so great. Which means you have folks walking to classes with multiple top-5 players because they are willing to trade away a season two years from now. Fix the EE problem now, please!

lakevin...I'm in the same boat as you. I'm about 95% convinced that I'll be here for a long, long time. I think the D3 budgets need tweaked a bit, and addressing the EE situation would help as well...but overall I'm aboard.

One thing that has been mentioned to me by a guy I used to mentor who was thinking about coming back. He's been looking over teams in Knight to take over and was asking me if he's able to recruit in that second cycle because some of the recruits being signed are awful. I told him (and correct me if I'm wrong so I can tell him) that if you're a Coach in a world and switching jobs you can recruit that second period, but if you're joining the world you're stuck with what was given you by Simmy in both periods. He remarked that that makes rebuilds even tougher, especially when he's looking at D3 programs. I'm hoping he finds a situation and comes back.

Posted by p6453 on 10/24/2016 3:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by lakevin on 10/24/2016 9:15:00 AM (view original):
OK, the cycle isn't over yet, but I'm coming around to like almost everything about the new system.

Consider me mostly convinced.

Early entries are still a massive problem -- I see people shying away from top talent because the penalty is so great. Which means you have folks walking to classes with multiple top-5 players because they are willing to trade away a season two years from now. Fix the EE problem now, please!

lakevin...I'm in the same boat as you. I'm about 95% convinced that I'll be here for a long, long time. I think the D3 budgets need tweaked a bit, and addressing the EE situation would help as well...but overall I'm aboard.

One thing that has been mentioned to me by a guy I used to mentor who was thinking about coming back. He's been looking over teams in Knight to take over and was asking me if he's able to recruit in that second cycle because some of the recruits being signed are awful. I told him (and correct me if I'm wrong so I can tell him) that if you're a Coach in a world and switching jobs you can recruit that second period, but if you're joining the world you're stuck with what was given you by Simmy in both periods. He remarked that that makes rebuilds even tougher, especially when he's looking at D3 programs. I'm hoping he finds a situation and comes back.

That is true, and I wish there was a fix for that. I am suffering through a team that went 0-27 last year (Johns Hopkins) that has 6 sophomores and 6 Freshmen that the SIM recruited for me. I can't do anything about it this year, but I am going to use my super limited funds and AP that I get with 0 openings, and see if I can unlock a few D1 players, and cut as many of the current team as I can.

Posted by p6453 on 10/24/2016 3:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by lakevin on 10/24/2016 9:15:00 AM (view original):
OK, the cycle isn't over yet, but I'm coming around to like almost everything about the new system.

Consider me mostly convinced.

Early entries are still a massive problem -- I see people shying away from top talent because the penalty is so great. Which means you have folks walking to classes with multiple top-5 players because they are willing to trade away a season two years from now. Fix the EE problem now, please!

lakevin...I'm in the same boat as you. I'm about 95% convinced that I'll be here for a long, long time. I think the D3 budgets need tweaked a bit, and addressing the EE situation would help as well...but overall I'm aboard.

One thing that has been mentioned to me by a guy I used to mentor who was thinking about coming back. He's been looking over teams in Knight to take over and was asking me if he's able to recruit in that second cycle because some of the recruits being signed are awful. I told him (and correct me if I'm wrong so I can tell him) that if you're a Coach in a world and switching jobs you can recruit that second period, but if you're joining the world you're stuck with what was given you by Simmy in both periods. He remarked that that makes rebuilds even tougher, especially when he's looking at D3 programs. I'm hoping he finds a situation and comes back.

With the exception that IF you were in a world before .. you can enter the "Office" of that team by clicking on Show Previously Played Worlds. If you go to the office during the Job Change period of a World, you can get a team before the 2nd recruiting session starts and recruit from that team, as well as cutting players. There are two spots you can get in. This is for Rupp .. but only the dates change

Friday	11/25	3:00 AM		Job applications start
Saturday	11/26	2:00 AM		Job acceptances start
Sunday	11/27	11:59 PM		Job change period ends
Monday	11/28	2:00 AM		Player rescind scholarship start
		8:00 AM		Recruiting period 2 starts
		5:00 PM		Recruiting period 2 Attention Points processing starts
Wednesday	11/30	10:59 PM		Player rescind scholarship end
		11:00 PM		Recruiting period 2 ends
Thursday	12/1	12:00 AM		Next season starts
		3:00 AM		Next season new coach signups start

So in Rupp world, if you go into the office and get a team in the job change period (11/25 to 11/27), you can recruit in the 2nd Session .. you need to be unemployed in that world to do it there.

If you wait and take the same team on 12/1 .. you get the SIM recruited guys from the 11/28 to 11/30 AND you can't rescind scholarships until the end of the season that started on 12/1.

Posted by hughesjr on 10/24/2016 6:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by p6453 on 10/24/2016 3:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by lakevin on 10/24/2016 9:15:00 AM (view original):
OK, the cycle isn't over yet, but I'm coming around to like almost everything about the new system.

Consider me mostly convinced.

Early entries are still a massive problem -- I see people shying away from top talent because the penalty is so great. Which means you have folks walking to classes with multiple top-5 players because they are willing to trade away a season two years from now. Fix the EE problem now, please!

lakevin...I'm in the same boat as you. I'm about 95% convinced that I'll be here for a long, long time. I think the D3 budgets need tweaked a bit, and addressing the EE situation would help as well...but overall I'm aboard.

One thing that has been mentioned to me by a guy I used to mentor who was thinking about coming back. He's been looking over teams in Knight to take over and was asking me if he's able to recruit in that second cycle because some of the recruits being signed are awful. I told him (and correct me if I'm wrong so I can tell him) that if you're a Coach in a world and switching jobs you can recruit that second period, but if you're joining the world you're stuck with what was given you by Simmy in both periods. He remarked that that makes rebuilds even tougher, especially when he's looking at D3 programs. I'm hoping he finds a situation and comes back.

With the exception that IF you were in a world before .. you can enter the "Office" of that team by clicking on Show Previously Played Worlds. If you go to the office during the Job Change period of a World, you can get a team before the 2nd recruiting session starts and recruit from that team, as well as cutting players. There are two spots you can get in. This is for Rupp .. but only the dates change

Friday	11/25	3:00 AM		Job applications start
Saturday	11/26	2:00 AM		Job acceptances start
Sunday	11/27	11:59 PM		Job change period ends
Monday	11/28	2:00 AM		Player rescind scholarship start
		8:00 AM		Recruiting period 2 starts
		5:00 PM		Recruiting period 2 Attention Points processing starts
Wednesday	11/30	10:59 PM		Player rescind scholarship end
		11:00 PM		Recruiting period 2 ends
Thursday	12/1	12:00 AM		Next season starts
		3:00 AM		Next season new coach signups start

So in Rupp world, if you go into the office and get a team in the job change period (11/25 to 11/27), you can recruit in the 2nd Session .. you need to be unemployed in that world to do it there.

If you wait and take the same team on 12/1 .. you get the SIM recruited guys from the 11/28 to 11/30 AND you can't rescind scholarships until the end of the season that started on 12/1.

Thanks, hughes I'll let him know.

Posted by hughesjr on 10/24/2016 12:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by chapelhillne on 10/24/2016 11:57:00 AM (view original):
I have another thought about EEs that came to me last night.

Let's say you recruit a 5 star guy that will turn pro after his sophomore year. You get two years of productivity out of him. However, for much of the two years, his IQ is low.

Compare that to a guy that starts out at 600, but has very high potential and a good WE. He will probably stay for 4 years, and he will also be very productive over at least his final two seasons. But those two seasons should be MORE productive than the EE guy because the second player will be playing his "star" years with a high IQ.

Something to consider. You still want to hope he gets drafted after his senior year for the prestige bump, so I suppose that's the downside.

Not to compare HD to real life .. but this is the same issue that faces them as well. Do I take a really great guy for one year or someone not quite as good for 2 or 3.

Both strategies work. Duke and Kentucky do great every year with 'get the best guys even if they are one and done'. Other teams like Wichita State and VCU make it to elite 8's with guys who might not even get drafted.

I always take the best I can .. they might just stay :D

The problem is that in real life, nothing prevents Duke/Kentucky in going out and recruiting a replacement. Andrew Wiggins was a 1 and done and pretty much everyone knew it, didn't stop Kansas on the recruiting trail in trying to find a replacement for him. In HD, there is a barrier which prevents a suitable replacement even though you *know* the recruit is gone. Compare that with a "surprise" underclassman that declares and I can see some school scrambling around but again nothing prevents them from going out on the recruiting trail to find anyone.

What I find curious is that nothing in HD prevents going around recruiting elite level talent when you have "ZERO" openings (and everyone can see you have none) and you can go offer scholarships to multiple top 100 players if you can open them up, but a school with 5 guys on the board getting the same amount of resources as the school with 0 openings in the first recruiting cycle is kind of dumb.

The don't get the same amount of resources.

SCOUTING BUDGET:
Division 1: 35K base + 4K per opening
Division 2: 25K base + 3K per opening
Division 3: 15K base + 2K per opening

ATTENTION POINTS BUDGET:
20 Base + 20 per opening across all divisions

RECRUITING BUDGET:
Division 1: 5K base + 3K per opening
Division 2: 3K base + 2K per opening
Division 3: 1K base + 1K per opening

If you are Div-1 and have zero openings, you get:

35K to scout and 5K for recruiting and 20 APs per turn.

If you are Div-1 with 5 openings, you get:

55K for scouting, 20K for recruiting, and 120 APs per turn.

That is nowhere NEAR the same amount of resources.

No, team A has zero openings (i.e. some mid majors with no seniors/walk ons) versus team B which has zero openings as well but the difference is team B has 5 players that might go EE (i.e. Kansas).

So for recruiting period #1 where all the recruits are available, both teams get the same amount of resources to get recruits to get interest in them, and I find it kind of unfair that they do (and not anything like RL).

I get that .. but we can't have people locking up a bunch of recruits when they have no openings yet.

Right now, you can offer scholarships to anyone, so you can (while slow) do that. And it is kind of like real life, in that it is the games way of saying .. coach, you have no spots, and you don't KNOW if Willie Cauley Stien is going pro or not (he stayed 4 years).

If you give the guy 5 openings worth of points and no one goes early, he ties up a bunch of people and then can't sign them in the end.

Sure, if you are willing to wait until the end, you might be able to figure that out and battle for the recruits .. or otherwise the guys don't get signed by anyone.

A compromise might be .. 1) make the big board a bit more reliable than it is now (maybe not 100%, but a lot closer than it is now).
2) Give people 1/2 credit initially for people projected to go early, 1/3 credit for people on the fence.
3) Calculate and give them the correct amount at roll over after guys actually decide.

In that scenario, lets say that the big board (which is now more accurate, maybe 75%) says that Kansas has 2 guys going and 3 guys on the fence. The coach would get 2 recruits worth of cash (scouting and recruiting)/APs due to EEs.

At rollover, 3 guys go .. so he gets an additional '1 recruits' worth of resources.

If only one guy goes EE (and he got 2 guys worth of resources, based on projections), the APs get cut back to only 1 recruit's worth and if he has enough cash left in either area, 1 recruit's worth of resources is taken away. If he does not have enough cash left to take resources back for one recruit, his remaining cash goes away (since he already overspent based on a project 2 EEs).

I could live with something like that .. it is better than we have now .. and guys get something early.

Though, just somehow being 100% and letting people know and paying early is certainly the best thing .. if they can pull it off.

We can craft 150 different compromise solutions, but, at the end of the day, they don't work. If the goal is to provide some sort of "success penalty" (TM) for having talent that goes early, you will (i) flatten out the game (ii) turn off people who are successful, and (iii) maybe - and I say maybe because he is just that painful -- allow Spud to win a NT game.

Alternatively, you admit this is a failure and move on. As I see it there are a few ways to do this:

(i) have a 100% accurate declaration decision at or about week 20 and allocate scholies and then resources accordingly
(ii) give credit based on the Big Board and force folks who get too many scholies to cut someone
(iii) eliminate EEs
(iv) craft some overly complicated system where a number of players are pushed back in the pool, resources are dumped on guys with EEs allowing them to poach. Yeah, that's a bad idea.

Or we can drive away those of us who have gotten good at the game. I have this season and one more paid for. Will be watching this space.