Posted by ab90 on 5/28/2017 7:25:00 AM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 5/27/2017 8:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by ab90 on 5/27/2017 8:16:00 PM (view original):
D2 and D3 are more fun. At D1, all of the top teams are the same. If you do away with lower division incentives, I— and half of the HD community— am out.

Is DII and DIII really more fun now, as compared to HD 2.0, or is it just easier for an elite coach such as yourself to dominate?

First, thank you for the compliment. But, I've always enjoyed the lower divisions more. Every year, I look to take Ohio State (I do take jobs largely based on schools at which I've studied/ visited/ heard of, etc.), but the job is never open. I also hate baseline prestige. That was why I quit GD; when you win a national title at Rutgers but still can't recruit with any of the umpteen elites, that's just a poor system.

Plus, I haven't won a championship since Nixon was office! Haha. It's at least been several months. Regardless of the level, winning titles is difficult.

Completely agree on baseline prestige ab. I've said for years, if they ever got rid of baseline prestige and instead created some form of dynamic prestige with an X year average (maybe 10 or 20 years) or some sort of decaying multiplier for more distant seasons, it would improve the game greatly. The name of the game in DI has always been about getting one of the schools with a high baseline, and there's been very little point in using anything else as you will always be fighting an uphill battle.

Posted by zorzii on 5/28/2017 9:31:00 AM (view original):
Still, whatever you decide, can we get action in the first session? The wait and see game kills the strategy. That is why I would cap so D1 teams don't end up fighting every division but giving more flow to recruiting at D2 and D3 is a must. Example : I finished first session at D2 Naismith, then it was the CT, then the NT, now jobs... I don't even remember my strat, the players I coveted, how the battles took place, when... It's like I needed to take notes to be more efficient.

I also agree on this which is part f why I enjoyed 2.0 recruiting. Yes it was a time crunch and a rush to get things done (things which were easily fixable), but we got it over with quickly without it dragging on. When we finish with the postseason in Tark, the only reason I'll remember who I was recruiting is notes I had to take and the points I have distributed.

Isn't it more efficient to use the color coded dots instead of taking notes?

People use them in different ways. Just because I have a guy on the highest rated color dot, does not mean I'm going all in on him. You have to consider who you have a realistic shot at, remember what division they are, monitor potential surprises that don't get attention. I use the colors to remember potential talent, but I might have a board of 50 guys to begin. Let's say I blue dot 15 guys, because they are all equally good, but I have specific needs. If I use the colors based on targets, and I lose out on my targets, I now have to go back and review my backup option to make sure which ones fit the role I need. This is why the notes are used. If I have 2 backup guards, but I expect one to be an elite pg, I want to make that note.

I won't argue with you because everyone is different but this is the sentence that I was questioning: "the only reason I'll remember who I was recruiting is notes I had to take".

I simply use the 4 colors to notate the level of interest I have. Blue-interested, Green-recruited, Orange-can offer scholarship, Red-have offered scholarship. If one of my reds goes elsewhere, some B/G/O are gonna get bumped up the ladder. I simply go to Recruit Home and look at categorized players.

By all means, not an argument at all. I won't use the colors for scholarship tracking, because it's already listed on the home page if you offered them. I use the colors to help me identify levels so typically for me:

Blue is a reach - I'll monitor to see what falls through the cracks, but likely won't go after hard early, because I expect to get knocked off by a higher level school. If we get near the end of period 1, and a few of them still have no attention, I'll go in hard.

Green is a division up, but I reasonably expect to be able to compete or higher level coaches are more likely to not pursue. More importantly I know I will have to wait until the second session to sign and will monitor more closely for higher level competition. I will increase AP as my pool shrinks and we near the end of period 1.

Yellow is at my division and I will go in hard on these guys early if I like someone a lot, since I can sign in period 1. I'll only recruit them though if they are on par talent wise with most of the green guys.

Red are last resort players if I have a need to fill, but all my other options get scooped up.

I'm not sure we're that much different. I just fail to understand the need for notes. Then again, you've had more success. So there's that.

Interesting. I do the colors purely based on who else is on the recruits and then I write a number rating in notes I assign to them.

Blue- Only me and sims at or below my prestige level.
Green-Only me and (beatable) sims
Orange-Only me, beatable sims, and humans at or below my prestige level.
Red-Humans above me or unbeatable sums.

It's actually very interesting to read how others use the colors. Under the old system I used to use Green for non drop/pull downs I was high on. Yellow was my backup, desperation options, and Red was for dropdowns I was waiting on a higher division school to stop recruiting (in case he filled all his scholarships). All other dropdowns I left without a color and would adjust them as their status changed.

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/30/2017 9:41:00 PM (view original):
I'm not sure we're that much different. I just fail to understand the need for notes. Then again, you've had more success. So there's that.

Mike, I somewhat misread your post on your colors. For some reason I read it the first time as you were using the whole color spectrum based on scholarship status. We're about on the same status, except I don't track my scholarships using any color. Some form of interest based assignment.

I use the colors by position mostly. Blue for guards, green for bigs, yellow for SF. Red for Juco.

Different strokes for different folks.

Posted by poncho0091 on 5/30/2017 11:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/30/2017 9:41:00 PM (view original):
I'm not sure we're that much different. I just fail to understand the need for notes. Then again, you've had more success. So there's that.

Mike, I somewhat misread your post on your colors. For some reason I read it the first time as you were using the whole color spectrum based on scholarship status. We're about on the same status, except I don't track my scholarships using any color. Some form of interest based assignment.

I agree using red for scholarship offered is a bit redundant but I like the guys I've offered to be easily notated in case my needs change(meaning someone took over a scholarship offered guy) and I need to start heavily recruiting one of the blue/green.