Posted by mullycj on 11/1/2016 2:12:00 PM (view original):
koop - assuming static budget, what's your response to the argument that teams with large classes will never be able to compete with teams with only 1-2 openings? Have you thought this through?
I stopped beating that dead horse a long time ago, it's not going to fly. One big change a year!
But for the sake of discussion, the idea was to have the principle determining factors be, in no particular order, preferences, prestige and promises. For the system I was envisioning, resources shouldn't matter (for recruiting - I was assuming scouting resources would still be affected by open scholarships). The recruiting process, in that hypothetical universe, is to find good matches for your program, then prioritize your efforts through allocation of attention, and especially promises (starts, minutes, and I wanted to add shots in there as well).
The advantage teams with lots of open scholarships would have in this situation is freedom to offer lots of promises, which takes the place of "effort". A team with only 2 scholarships and lots of returning upperclassmen may be giving up quite a bit of production giving all those starts, minutes, and shots to freshmen. And if the team lost early entries, they should have those prestige benefits as well. That's the gist.
It would have been a huge change, and probably too much to seriously consider, given everything else that was changing.