Posted by vhoward415 on 8/23/2017 12:39:00 PM (view original):
I've always wanted to be able to redshirt more than 3 players. I'd love to be able to have a roster of all redshirts at some point.

Posted by nitros on 8/23/2017 11:55:00 AM (view original):
I have a quick fix list, now for the long fix list. These are aspirations, so probably my title of "fix" is not that accurate. Either way, here are things I would like to see changed:

1. Length of Recruiting - Reduce the recruiting period by a couple of days.

2. Transfers - Put in place a transfer program, such that a player with certain attributes (you can take these from the scouting reports) is likely to transfer to a lower division if they do not get X (insert playing time, starts or so forth).

3. Transfer Recruit Period - This is a period after the end of the season, but prior to the new season. This is a "recruiting process" similar to the recruiting process you already have in place, but only for the "transfer pool". This will give coaches that are done with their season something to do.

NOTE: The concept comes from the great Wilk coaches in our chat sessions. Not my original idea, but I love it.

4. Expanded rosters - If you put injuries back in, please increase rosters by 4 (or some other number that makes sense).

5. Fumbles vs. Int - Too few Int's and too many fumbles IMO. If you have a QB with a certain GI with an FIQ above 70, you are never going to toss an INT. That seems not very realistic.

6. Better PBP - I am not a fan of full transparency. However, I do want information from which I can understand the system better. This can be accomplished through the PBP.

7. "Release Green Recruit" - There are situations where it is obvious that a coach has multiple "green recruits" and has no interest in them. At the coaches election, he should be able to "withdraw" from the recruiting process and push that recruit back in the pool. Since this is a coaching option, I do not see a downside and I think should be an easy thing to implement.

8. Re-alignment - The current conferences are not as accurate as I would like. That may be on purpose. If not, it would make for more enjoyment if the conferences were more accurate.

9. College Playoff - Match the 4 team playoff at 1A.

10. Elites - Put in place a process by which a BCS team can become elite and an elite team can become non-elite. If this is truly a "dynasty" game, I would think some coaches would find it challenging to take a team and turn them into an elite team over a considerable period of time.

Thanks for reading.

nitros (James)

Posted by gt_deuce on 8/23/2017 2:57:00 PM (view original):
1. Leave recruiting alone (for now). It's the most-functional part of the game.
2. Do not reinstate injuries. Some aspects of realism detract from the game... that is one of them.
3. Do not expand rosters - the rich will only get richer. Instead of snagging Penn State's good back-up RB when he signs his top target, that guy will go to PSU with expanded rosters; not you. Under expanded rosters, lower-tier D-IA schools don't get nearly as many good players, because they're then occupying the bench on Elites and pseudo-Elites.
4. Yes to removing (or raising) the redshirt limit.
5. FIX ONSIDES KICKS! I almost lost a game (really, would've sent it to OT) due to four-straight onside kicks that went against me, where I was leading by 35 in the 4th Qtr. I also almost lost another game, not quite in such dramatic fashion, this past season with a series of two straight onside kicks against me. And I also won a Bowl game in Dobie today due to being on the good side of a successful onside kick, just to show it cuts both ways. Regardless, it's out of proportion with reality... and here's one place more reality would do good.

I would like to see coaches have recruiting advantages based on their success over the past 4 or 5 years. Maybe have a point value for prestige. If a coach wins a conference championship, they get a +1. Maybe a point for each round they advance in the playoffs, round 1 (+1), round 2 (+2) and so on. Not just a “vision” thing, but an advantage when recruiting against other coaches.

I would also like to see schools have a disadvantage for frequent coach turn over. Do recruits really want to go to a school where they may have 2, 3, or 4 coaches during their career? The team can still be good and get players, but maybe it’s harder to convince a player to commit.

Any thoughts???

Posted by jim19_72 on 8/23/2017 8:22:00 PM (view original):

I would like to see coaches have recruiting advantages based on their success over the past 4 or 5 years. Maybe have a point value for prestige. If a coach wins a conference championship, they get a +1. Maybe a point for each round they advance in the playoffs, round 1 (+1), round 2 (+2) and so on. Not just a “vision” thing, but an advantage when recruiting against other coaches.

I would also like to see schools have a disadvantage for frequent coach turn over. Do recruits really want to go to a school where they may have 2, 3, or 4 coaches during their career? The team can still be good and get players, but maybe it’s harder to convince a player to commit.

Any thoughts???

Posted by jim19_72 on 8/23/2017 8:22:00 PM (view original):

I would like to see coaches have recruiting advantages based on their success over the past 4 or 5 years. Maybe have a point value for prestige. If a coach wins a conference championship, they get a +1. Maybe a point for each round they advance in the playoffs, round 1 (+1), round 2 (+2) and so on. Not just a “vision” thing, but an advantage when recruiting against other coaches.

I would also like to see schools have a disadvantage for frequent coach turn over. Do recruits really want to go to a school where they may have 2, 3, or 4 coaches during their career? The team can still be good and get players, but maybe it’s harder to convince a player to commit.

Any thoughts???

Posted by jim19_72 on 8/23/2017 8:22:00 PM (view original):

I would like to see coaches have recruiting advantages based on their success over the past 4 or 5 years. Maybe have a point value for prestige. If a coach wins a conference championship, they get a +1. Maybe a point for each round they advance in the playoffs, round 1 (+1), round 2 (+2) and so on. Not just a “vision” thing, but an advantage when recruiting against other coaches.

I would also like to see schools have a disadvantage for frequent coach turn over. Do recruits really want to go to a school where they may have 2, 3, or 4 coaches during their career? The team can still be good and get players, but maybe it’s harder to convince a player to commit.

Any thoughts???

Posted by gt_deuce on 8/23/2017 2:57:00 PM (view original):
1. Leave recruiting alone (for now). It's the most-functional part of the game.
2. Do not reinstate injuries. Some aspects of realism detract from the game... that is one of them.
3. Do not expand rosters - the rich will only get richer. Instead of snagging Penn State's good back-up RB when he signs his top target, that guy will go to PSU with expanded rosters; not you. Under expanded rosters, lower-tier D-IA schools don't get nearly as many good players, because they're then occupying the bench on Elites and pseudo-Elites.
4. Yes to removing (or raising) the redshirt limit.
5. FIX ONSIDES KICKS! I almost lost a game (really, would've sent it to OT) due to four-straight onside kicks that went against me, where I was leading by 35 in the 4th Qtr. I also almost lost another game, not quite in such dramatic fashion, this past season with a series of two straight onside kicks against me. And I also won a Bowl game in Dobie today due to being on the good side of a successful onside kick, just to show it cuts both ways. Regardless, it's out of proportion with reality... and here's one place more reality would do good.