Posted by skinndogg on 2/24/2017 11:59:00 AM (view original):
After reading this thread, I still believe people are putting too many eggs all in one basket. IMO, the first two days of recruiting period one, you need to cast a really wide net. I'm talking 1 AP for at least 20 "backup guys". I've been going into the second recruiting cycle with 6-7 "backup" guys, who I would consider serviceable to good DIV I players, and I'm the only team on them. No SIMS, no humans, nobody but me. And all I did was give them 1 AP per cycle.

So if I do lose a battle I spent more money on, I'm not frantically searching for a replacement. Up the AP's on one of the backups that have nobody on them, and in a couple of cycles you can offer that schoolie at a min. price. This keeps you from having the gapping holes in your lineup.

This is what I do.

Posted by cubcub113 on 2/25/2017 10:47:00 AM (view original):

Posted by skinndogg on 2/24/2017 11:59:00 AM (view original):
After reading this thread, I still believe people are putting too many eggs all in one basket. IMO, the first two days of recruiting period one, you need to cast a really wide net. I'm talking 1 AP for at least 20 "backup guys". I've been going into the second recruiting cycle with 6-7 "backup" guys, who I would consider serviceable to good DIV I players, and I'm the only team on them. No SIMS, no humans, nobody but me. And all I did was give them 1 AP per cycle.

So if I do lose a battle I spent more money on, I'm not frantically searching for a replacement. Up the AP's on one of the backups that have nobody on them, and in a couple of cycles you can offer that schoolie at a min. price. This keeps you from having the gapping holes in your lineup.

This is what I do.

Not sure it's a good idea.

Posted by bhansalid00 on 2/25/2017 9:29:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/25/2017 7:10:00 AM (view original):
Incorrect. As both myself and stewdog stated, there ARE specific incidents that MIGHT cause a recruit to go to local college as opposed to some big time D1 halfway across the nation. Therefore, once in thousands of times seems pretty damn accurate.

Using words like "immaterial" and "nonstarter" are simply words to prohibit/discourage discussion. So, be a pal and let that be the last time you do it. Thanks in advance.

Mike, I chose those words carefully and I stand by them. Here's why.

1. Throughout the years, on chats and forum posts, WIS has said there are some recruiting "battles" that can never be won. Now, where that "hard line" is has obviously changed with 3.0, but it still exists. A D1 A++++ putting in huge effort, prefs and promises can never lose to a D3 D school with bad prefs putting in minimal effort. Can't happen. Not once in a thousand or trillion. If you're not ok with there being a hard line for extreme cases, take it up with the developers.
2. So the OP scenario is interesting because many of us feel it should be on the "never" side of the hard line. You're welcome to disagree with that and say it should be allowed infrequently. But the fact it "only happened once" doesn't matter for the question of whether it should ever happen.
3. Once every couple of weeks, someone brings up the "extenuating circumstances" argument. What if the recruit's mom got cancer and wants him to play at a specific place? Short answer: HD doesn't care. Mom's cancer, brother went there, Dad's sleeping with the AD's secretary - HD has already factored those types of chaotic events into the likelihood percentages. There are no "incidents" that aren't already baked into the equation. So again, the OP's example broke the hard line, and it doesn't matter for what reason that happened.

Sigh. When you choose those words, carefully or not, you say "This is not a discussion. This was wrong and any dissenting opinion is wrong. YOU need to come on over to my side."

I didn't read the rest because I know you are not open to discussion.

Nonetheless, here's the thing: You assume the developers did not want this to happen. Well, I'm of the belief, if they leave a school with a chance, i.e. 21% chance, there is a 1 in 5, roughly, chance they wanted them to get the recruit. Just because YOU don't think any 18 y/o would choose the local D3 over some D1 school doesn't mean it doesn't, or shouldn't, happen. I think the game worked EXACTLY as designed.

How good is the recruit in question? I know what his potential is, but what I mean is, is he a division one player?

The D3 dumped tons of resources into the guy. He had a 21% chance of winning. Why do you think he had that chance?

Posted by cubcub113 on 2/25/2017 10:47:00 AM (view original):

Posted by skinndogg on 2/24/2017 11:59:00 AM (view original):
After reading this thread, I still believe people are putting too many eggs all in one basket. IMO, the first two days of recruiting period one, you need to cast a really wide net. I'm talking 1 AP for at least 20 "backup guys". I've been going into the second recruiting cycle with 6-7 "backup" guys, who I would consider serviceable to good DIV I players, and I'm the only team on them. No SIMS, no humans, nobody but me. And all I did was give them 1 AP per cycle.

So if I do lose a battle I spent more money on, I'm not frantically searching for a replacement. Up the AP's on one of the backups that have nobody on them, and in a couple of cycles you can offer that schoolie at a min. price. This keeps you from having the gapping holes in your lineup.

This is what I do.

Uh, hey guys that are continually ******** about not being able to run off 10-season streaks of 30-plus wins anymore--the game has changed. Maybe it's time you do too? Skinndogg and cubcub have it right. Not in the sense that their strategy is 100% correct--I mean, who the hell knows--but the idea of coming up with a new ways to succeed, instead of just ******** NON-STOP, is a real winner. Perhaps we should all try to be so forward-thinking...

Posted by thewizard17 on 2/25/2017 8:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/25/2017 6:20:00 PM (view original):
The D3 dumped tons of resources into the guy. He had a 21% chance of winning. Why do you think he had that chance?

Only 4 posts today? Must be some kind of record.

Want me to explain the 2-3 zone to you again? That will up my post count.

Mike : it's time to cap d3 recruiting to d2.

Or not. Because, as I stated and you ignored, it will decrease the D3 pool thus causing n00bs with zero seasons to battle vets with 100s of D3 seasons for players. How on earth can that be a good thing?

Posted by zorzii on 2/26/2017 8:03:00 AM (view original):
Mike : it's time to cap d3 recruiting to d2.

The more this gets tossed around, the more I'm on board with an earlier (MikeT?) suggestion - no player division projections, with the exception of keeping the star ratings and top 100.

It won't happen. I've been suggesting the same for HBD coaches for years. The market will sort it out but WifS is unwilling to make it happen. Could be a huge programming issue, indifference or just a refusal to make the change because they believe this way is the best way.

Or they could just fix recruit generation.

Mike : I need you to post something two more times. Nothing pinkish, or nothing that finishes with Fact!