"Problem: Great D3 coaches don't move up to D1/D2 and crush noobs ... True, that is a problem.
Solutions: Give an incentive to move up by-" ... imposing tenure limits if gifts don't work.

"Damn, it's not often something gets reported. I want to know what was said."
IF WIS is consistent in their moderation of the forums, the post will be restored by Tuesday or Wednesday. Of course, that may be a big IF.

A term limit is a terrible idea, it's called Hoops Dynasty for a reason. Plus it's a terrible business model to anger the people who have been playing for 40-50 seasons, and even if they are getting credits they have still payed more money for the game than the noobs.

Starting at D1 ruins the whole process of advancing, and they would be garunteeed to go 2-25 because they would have to be on a sucky team, and then they quit. I think it should be a little easier to move up from D2 to D1 though.

D3 is defiantly easier than D1 because you don't have to know how to find the perfect player and then win battles for them, and it's much easier to not battle for your players. You just have to know a couple ratings to look for and recruit them. You don't even have to have that good of a team in D3 to make the NT, if you have a good amount of upper classmen and you aren't in a full conference you will almost always make it.

Posted by MonsterTurtl on 3/7/2017 7:31:00 AM (view original):
A term limit is a terrible idea, it's called Hoops Dynasty for a reason. Plus it's a terrible business model to anger the people who have been playing for 40-50 seasons, and even if they are getting credits they have still payed more money for the game than the noobs.

Starting at D1 ruins the whole process of advancing, and they would be garunteeed to go 2-25 because they would have to be on a sucky team, and then they quit. I think it should be a little easier to move up from D2 to D1 though.

D3 is defiantly easier than D1 because you don't have to know how to find the perfect player and then win battles for them, and it's much easier to not battle for your players. You just have to know a couple ratings to look for and recruit them. You don't even have to have that good of a team in D3 to make the NT, if you have a good amount of upper classmen and you aren't in a full conference you will almost always make it.

-1
+1
+1

I only disagree with your first paragraph. It is NOT called Hoops Rotting in the Same Place for a reason. For every experienced coach squatting indefinitely in the same place, there are a number of other coaches hoping to move. Does your business model curry favor with the one at the cost of the numbers, or do you favor the numbers even if it means the one has to move or start anew? If he knows what he's doing, starting anew is no hardship.

As the guy who yells "YOU WANT REALISM BUT YOU'VE BEEN AT GATECH FOR 43 SEASONS!!! HTF IS THAT REALISTIC???" at stewdog every time he posts, term limits are retarded. Removing a coach from "his" school will only sour him on the game. Firing for incompetence is almost as bad but probably a necessary evil.

Term limits would effectively kill the game. Many coaches who stick around have built up relationships with other people and a connection to the school. Forcing them to start over would have made many say it's time to hang it up, and if you haven't noticed, the world populations aren't exactly booming. Tark DIII is down to almost 50 coaches. DII in the 60's and DI just over 100. What reason do we need term limits, when there are hundreds of other available schools.

Firings I'm on board with at DI though.

Thank you for handling it, WIS.

With 3.0, I don't think there is a need for a term limit. You don't like someone dominating the game? Then coach better. We've had enough coaches leave because of 3.0. If more coaches leave, then others will get bored from competing against other SIM teams. I just read poncho's post and agree 100%.

With firings, they need to strike a fine balance with the current system and real life. Obviously there should be more firings, but at the same time, you don't want coaches putting all that effort into getting a D-1 team and then have them frustrated, because they had a couple of 10-17 seasons while rebuilding, get axed and then leave the game. I also think the requirements for getting fired should be listed, for instance 5 consecutive .500 seasons at D-1. No postseason berths for 7 years, just hypothetically speaking.

Those who don't like the idea of term limits and are thinking in terms of the good of the game, not just personal preference, please address this: "It is NOT called Hoops Rotting in the Same Place for a reason."

I'd call it "The game that needs more users not less so firings and term limits are stupid ideas" Dynasty.