I like the idea of SIMAI "reserving" one or two open slots for session two, to give the new owner a chance to put his own mark on the team for his first season. And for those who feel that it just gives brand new owners an immediate opportunity to screw things up right out of the gate, how about this: have an email sitting in the inbox from the assistant coach with some recommendations of four or five candidates to fill those final one or two spots. Experienced owners can choose to ignore and go after their own guys, but n00bs at least get some guidance on their first recruits, and even though they're being "helped" by the AC, it's still their own semi-informed decision.

Posted by MikeT23 on 3/16/2017 6:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 3/16/2017 5:33:00 PM (view original):
I don't think it's the fact they will recruit great players but that they will recruit their OWN players. Plus they get experience. So the next season they have some clue of what's going on. There is zero downside to this.

While I'm not sure you had to say it twice, you did nail it.

They probably won't get great players. I got two guys who'll be bench warmers their entire careers, a sub-standard JUCO who did contribute some and, the crowning jewel, a guy who might set the school scoring record. While 3 aren't much to speak of, they're mine. Problem is, I didn't get to use any of them until my 2nd season.

Oops. A little drunk. March madness.

“I just wonder what level recruits they'll be able to grab, especially given that most agree the recruits have been really picked over by the time the second signing period starts. ... For a brand new coach, I'm not convinced the results will be all that good, again, given the level of recruits that will be available for them to choose from. “
No problem, they’ll be able to withstand a recruiting disaster and the feeling that they have no clue what they’re doing, a completely sour experience … because a couple of guys in this thread say they’ll love that feeling and naturally want to come back for more.

“So the next season they have some clue of what's going on. There is zero downside to this.” Actually, we were discussing a compelling downside to this until the owner of this thread realized it.

“And for those who feel that it just gives brand new owners an immediate opportunity to screw things up right out of the gate, how about this: have an email sitting in the inbox from the assistant coach with some recommendations of four or five candidates to fill those final one or two spots.”
LOL, in GD the assistant coach makes recommendations like that. Check out how well that is working for them.

So worst case scenario new coaches either get stuck with walkons and lose like they would've lost anyways

Or they recruit crappy players they are stuck with and have crappy players just like the sim would've recruited?

In both cases new coaches also get experience in recruiting earlier and learn through their actions unlike sitting around not recruiting

I already responded to the "recruiting disaster" scenario.

The screw it up royally without really knowing they're screwing up recruiting. But they enjoyed the experience of getting, and playing, "their guys". Maybe they stick with that team. But, if they don't, they can take a a different team and start anew. Plenty of openings.

If they don't enjoy anything about HD, because they're not getting the full experience, they disappear.

This is so uncomplicated.

It might be helpful if spud could articulate why he thinks what's being discussed is a bad idea with something more than "it's a bad idea".

Thats asking a lot of spud

Posted by tecwrg on 3/16/2017 9:24:00 PM (view original):
It might be helpful if spud could articulate why he thinks what's being discussed is a bad idea with something more than "it's a bad idea".

Oops, you should have read the thread before you posted that. Did you read the post just three above yours? Or did you read the more thorough posts that so convinced Mike he was wrong that he blocked them?

Or did you read. "A coach with a season of playing learns at least a little about what works, what doesn't, and what makes a useful player. If they're interested, they could even learn from opponents' rosters. Recruiting fresh out of the egg allows none of that."

Posted by CoachSpud on 3/17/2017 1:23:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 3/16/2017 9:24:00 PM (view original):
It might be helpful if spud could articulate why he thinks what's being discussed is a bad idea with something more than "it's a bad idea".

Oops, you should have read the thread before you posted that. Did you read the post just four above yours? Or did you read the more thorough posts that so convinced Mike he was wrong that he blocked them?

Or did you read. "A coach with a season of playing learns at least a little about what works, what doesn't, and what makes a useful player. If they're interested, they could even learn from opponents' rosters. Recruiting fresh out of the egg allows none of that."

The problem here is that your last sentence is wrong. Why does the coach only learn if he doesn't do recruiting first season? Your point is equally true with regard to recruiting -- "A coach with a season of [recruiting] learns at least a little about what works [in recruiting], what doesn't [in recruiting], and what makes a useful player [in recruiting]." This seems like another no-brainer that you're opposing for the sake of being contrarian.

Am I missing something, or does no recruiting go on the first season? You realize that the difference between recruiting right off the bat and in season is a few weeks right? It gives new coaches the chance to learn a little about what's necessary before actually signing guys. I'm not saying your ideas are necessarily wrong, but to simply dismiss it out of hand is foolhardy. There are a million different perspectives here. I don't see a lot of newbies posting their views of this on the forums. How do you guys know it really bothers them at all? I think the lack of retention is more based on the lack of success right off the bat is more the culprit. That's something I don't see how you change.

SS33, let's put it this way:

Really good chance you're not going to have much success. You don't know the game and, more than likely, SIM hasn't given you the players to compete.

So, would you rather learn with some players you chose or players that you didn't?

And, because spud simply won't acknowledge anything that is counter to his opinion, the supposed "recruiting disaster" is easily overcome. If a n00b realizes he did a poor job in recruiting and just can't deal with it for 3 more seasons, he can drop that team and pick up another. There are lots of openings in lots of worlds.

I agree Mike. Wasn't opposed to the changes you've brought forth. Just offering an opposing view point.

I think getting more experience on how recruiting works is more important than figuring out ratings and stuff right out of the gate. You don't want people to get frustrated with how to actually sign recruits, even if they're crappy.

Posted by CoachSpud on 3/17/2017 1:23:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 3/16/2017 9:24:00 PM (view original):
It might be helpful if spud could articulate why he thinks what's being discussed is a bad idea with something more than "it's a bad idea".

Oops, you should have read the thread before you posted that. Did you read the post just four above yours? Or did you read the more thorough posts that so convinced Mike he was wrong that he blocked them?

Or did you read. "A coach with a season of playing learns at least a little about what works, what doesn't, and what makes a useful player. If they're interested, they could even learn from opponents' rosters. Recruiting fresh out of the egg allows none of that."

I reported your bitchfest with benis. Off-topic posts with zero content regarding the issue. "Thorough" is laughable. And it's a bit sad that your argument is so wrong that you're pretending the reported posts contained much needed info.

I should add that we really have no idea why people play 1 season and leave. Unlike the unhappy vets, they don't announce that they're leaving as soon as their credits run out. They just disappear.

The entire point of this thread was to attempt to give them a reason to stay. I think, in a dynasty game, that getting "your" players on the fake court makes the game more interesting. With the aforementioned Rupp team, I still don't know the names of the players I'm starting/playing. I just look at ratings/results and make adjustments.