Great NW in Iba is equally dominant. All human teams have either made the Nt or won the PI for the last 10 (soon to be 11) seasons. Multiple Top 10 teams nearly every year. Join!

Posted by cubcub113 on 9/24/2017 5:04:00 PM (view original):
Great NW in Iba is equally dominant. All human teams have either made the Nt or won the PI for the last 10 (soon to be 11) seasons. Multiple Top 10 teams nearly every year. Join!

How many humans in that conference? How many humans in D1 in Iba?

Posted by Benis on 9/23/2017 4:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 9/23/2017 4:39:00 PM (view original):

Posted by johnsensing on 9/22/2017 5:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 9/22/2017 4:41:00 PM (view original):
I don't see what's so rocket-sciency about that. All levels are competing from the same overall pool of recruits. It's just a matter of determining how high up you and your school can reach to get the best players to fit your program. At the top level D1 schools, everybody in the pool is fair game and recruitable. As you drop down to lower level D1, then through D2, and finally through to D3, the realistic "reach" is going to be progressively lower.

So what's the problem? Why are some people here insisting "you don't understand D1 recruiting", as if it's magically different? And why would more humans in D1 somehow create a problem?

It isn't magically different, but it absolutely is different for all of the reasons benis and I stated (and probably others). To answer your last question, though, I'll repost what I posted this morning in another thread:

"Here's what will happen in a full 3.0 DI w/re elite recruits: certain teams will win their dice rolls and be loaded; certain teams will split them (win 1, lose 1) and have a team with a few studs and a bunch of holes, and certain teams will go 0-fer. Currently, the teams that go 0-fer have alternatives (not great alternatives, but alternatives), because it's so easy to push SIM off recruits -- those backups will be much harder to obtain in a full DI, since you'll be falling back against humans. Multiply this over a few years, and you're going to have even more coach frustration than you do now (and a couple of monstrous teams that were lucky, went 6-0 in dice rolls over a couple years, and are nearly unbeatable). Additionally, right now there is a viable strategy of building up a team via picking up non-elite players who will be decently strong (700-750 overall) by their senior years -- those teams can make runs (probably can't win NTs, but you can make some S16s). While there's some competition for those recruits, it's often SIMs, or you can snag a few recruits w/o any competition at all. That path will be closed in a full DI, because you won't be able to win anyone playable without full-out battles."

This is already happening in DI -- in 2.0, there were 15/20 elite teams (or so), all of whom had a shot at the NT, then a big gap to the next tier -- much harder to make a S16. In 3.0, there's a much larger pool of teams that can make the S16, but a smaller pool of true NT contenders. More people in DI will heighten this effect.

Yeah, you didn't really "explain" anything here. This was really more of a whine-fest.

To summarize: "A larger population of human users means that it will be harder to land elite players, and it will be harder to get fall-back alternatives because everybody else will be going after them too".

Sounds like a lot of whining because your sense of entitlement to get the players (or fall-back options) you want is being challenged, and recruiting will be harder.

A fixed pool of D1 quality players spread out over 250 humans instead of 50 humans means the talent is spread out over a larger pool of coaches,which should lead to MORE competitive balance rather than less.

Seems like that should be a good thing.

You should ask your buddy Mike about why he quit playing HD in the 1st place. It was too HARD to compete against the big boys. People whined and whined and finally Seble threw them a bone with 3.0.

Pretty funny how we've come full circle on this one.

3.0 was created because people couldn't handle the competition. Now people say they want the competition..

This is hilarious.

No, dummy, I quit because it wasn't a level playing field. At least be accurate.

In my opinion - to have a dominant conference you need multiple dominant teams. These don't have to be the same teams season after season but you should have several that have legit shots at getting to the FF. 4-5 teams in the S16 every season.

That's my definition of dominant.

Posted by gomiami1972 on 9/23/2017 8:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 9/23/2017 6:52:00 PM (view original):
Actually probably not. Still would need a lot or users to be content with little to no postseason success.

Not just postseason success...little to no postseason (NT) appearances.

No matter what, only 64 reach the NT. 50 users, 150 users, 250 user. Only 64.

If people only play because they can make the NT, then they damn sure don't want 150 users in a world.

Posted by tecwrg on 9/24/2017 10:02:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 9/24/2017 9:47:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 9/24/2017 9:43:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 9/24/2017 9:37:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 9/24/2017 9:36:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 9/24/2017 9:28:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 9/24/2017 9:24:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 9/24/2017 9:16:00 AM (view original):
currently in Phelan there were 1,600 D3 recruits generated and 1,200 D1 recruits generated.

There are 55 human coached D3 teams and 113 human coached D1 teams.

Those numbers roughly correspond to the number of schools at each division.

The D1/D2/D3 designation for recruits are basically just window dressing, as players can be signed at any level. They're really just guidelines.

Great point. I know of many great D1 coaches who have built up their program using only D3 rated recruits. It's a super secret strategy that not many people know of. But I guess the cat is out of the bag now.

Stop acting retarded (unless you can't help it).

You KNOW that many great D3 teams are built from primarily/exclusively from D1 rated recruits.

That cat's been out of the bag for quite some time.

But But but. I thought the designation was just window dressing??

It is. That's why D3 teams can recruit D1 designated players.

What don't you understand?

C'mon man. It's pretty obvious what I'm saying here but if you'd like, I'll say it again

There are 1,600 D3 recruits generated for 55 D3 humans
There are 1,200 D1 recruits generated for 113 D1 humans.

You don't see the imbalance that ALREADY exists? So you're going to have 1,200 D1 recruits for 250 D1 humans and that's going to work just fine?

People are going to have to settle for less than what they might be getting now in D1. So what?

Twelve of us have built a dominant D3 conference in Smith, primarily from pulling down low level recruits from D1. If, hypothetically, Smith D1 filled with humans, we would have to collectively change our strategies. We'd likely have to settle for "lesser" quality pulldowns from D2. We'd adjust. And we'd somehow live through it.

And if Smith D2 magically also filled with humans, and we had to settle for even lesser quality D3 players, we'd adjust for that as well. And we'd somehow live through that, too.

Seriously, your argument boils down to a sense of entitlement of "competition would make the game harder for us, and take us out of our comfort zone".

This is dead one. Had this discussion years ago in HBD. When a world is populated with 100s competing against 100s, you wonder why your 100 isn't blowing away the competition. It's because they're all 100s. Same with 90v90, 80v80 and so on. HD users fail to understand this. They simply want 'mo bettah playahs!!!

"This is dead one. Had this discussion years ago in HBD. When a world is populated with 100s competing against 100s, you wonder why your 100 isn't blowing away the competition. It's because they're all 100s. Same with 90v90, 80v80 and so on. HD users fail to understand this. They simply want 'mo bettah playahs!!!"

Okay, I really enjoyed this.

This is basically the whole reason why capping D3 would be fine. Garbage players aren't garbage anyone because everyone would be operating under this cap. And holy smokes people did not understand this.

Well maybe saying people is too harsh - Spud didn't understand it.

I love how we keep coming full circle on these topics. It's a lot of fun.

The "problem" with capping D2/D3 at this point is the next 3-4 seasons. You'll have these low level D1 players finishing their careers and dominating the FR/SO/JR classes from D3 only. But, yeah, your premise is right. The best true D3 players will beat the lesser D3 players.

But it's also why there would be no need to change recruit generation if D1 populations reached 250. The best would be the best and, theoretically, the talent would be spread thin. Using single digits for simplicity, that 9 FB/press team would be a 6. And they'd be competing against other 6s in man/zone with that occasional 7 just whipping all of their *****.

Posted by MikeT23 on 9/24/2017 5:41:00 PM (view original):
The "problem" with capping D2/D3 at this point is the next 3-4 seasons. You'll have these low level D1 players finishing their careers and dominating the FR/SO/JR classes from D3 only. But, yeah, your premise is right. The best true D3 players will beat the lesser D3 players.

But it's also why there would be no need to change recruit generation if D1 populations reached 250. The best would be the best and, theoretically, the talent would be spread thin. Using single digits for simplicity, that 9 FB/press team would be a 6. And they'd be competing against other 6s in man/zone with that occasional 7 just whipping all of their *****.

The difference is what gomiami pointed out.

The As and Bs in D1 will STILL have great players.

Currently you can snag a few really nice players and put together a competitive team with a C prestige (or even D prestige). Instead of a C/D competing with As and Bs for recruits, they will only compete against other C/D for bad players. So what you'll have is basically like it is in real life - the Major conf schools are head and shoulders above the little guys. Those little guys can only hope they win their conf tourney and then go get demolished in the NT. That's BEST case scenario.

But it's even worse than real life because there are only 27 auto bids in HD while there are 32 in RL. And high major conferences can get seeded 1-16 while in RL it's only 1-12.

Well now you're just making a case for term limits at schools and/or firings. . Give the successful little guys a landing spot at a bigger school.

We know that's a bad idea.

I don't know if I'm making a case for anything. I think all B6s would be full. Mid majors with decent prestiges will be near full. Then all the scrub schools will have people at them for 1-3 seasons and stop playing because they can't move up and they can't get past the 1st round of the NT. It's just not sustainable.

Posted by MikeT23 on 9/24/2017 5:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 9/23/2017 4:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 9/23/2017 4:39:00 PM (view original):

Posted by johnsensing on 9/22/2017 5:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 9/22/2017 4:41:00 PM (view original):
I don't see what's so rocket-sciency about that. All levels are competing from the same overall pool of recruits. It's just a matter of determining how high up you and your school can reach to get the best players to fit your program. At the top level D1 schools, everybody in the pool is fair game and recruitable. As you drop down to lower level D1, then through D2, and finally through to D3, the realistic "reach" is going to be progressively lower.

So what's the problem? Why are some people here insisting "you don't understand D1 recruiting", as if it's magically different? And why would more humans in D1 somehow create a problem?

It isn't magically different, but it absolutely is different for all of the reasons benis and I stated (and probably others). To answer your last question, though, I'll repost what I posted this morning in another thread:

"Here's what will happen in a full 3.0 DI w/re elite recruits: certain teams will win their dice rolls and be loaded; certain teams will split them (win 1, lose 1) and have a team with a few studs and a bunch of holes, and certain teams will go 0-fer. Currently, the teams that go 0-fer have alternatives (not great alternatives, but alternatives), because it's so easy to push SIM off recruits -- those backups will be much harder to obtain in a full DI, since you'll be falling back against humans. Multiply this over a few years, and you're going to have even more coach frustration than you do now (and a couple of monstrous teams that were lucky, went 6-0 in dice rolls over a couple years, and are nearly unbeatable). Additionally, right now there is a viable strategy of building up a team via picking up non-elite players who will be decently strong (700-750 overall) by their senior years -- those teams can make runs (probably can't win NTs, but you can make some S16s). While there's some competition for those recruits, it's often SIMs, or you can snag a few recruits w/o any competition at all. That path will be closed in a full DI, because you won't be able to win anyone playable without full-out battles."

This is already happening in DI -- in 2.0, there were 15/20 elite teams (or so), all of whom had a shot at the NT, then a big gap to the next tier -- much harder to make a S16. In 3.0, there's a much larger pool of teams that can make the S16, but a smaller pool of true NT contenders. More people in DI will heighten this effect.

Yeah, you didn't really "explain" anything here. This was really more of a whine-fest.

To summarize: "A larger population of human users means that it will be harder to land elite players, and it will be harder to get fall-back alternatives because everybody else will be going after them too".

Sounds like a lot of whining because your sense of entitlement to get the players (or fall-back options) you want is being challenged, and recruiting will be harder.

A fixed pool of D1 quality players spread out over 250 humans instead of 50 humans means the talent is spread out over a larger pool of coaches,which should lead to MORE competitive balance rather than less.

Seems like that should be a good thing.

You should ask your buddy Mike about why he quit playing HD in the 1st place. It was too HARD to compete against the big boys. People whined and whined and finally Seble threw them a bone with 3.0.

Pretty funny how we've come full circle on this one.

3.0 was created because people couldn't handle the competition. Now people say they want the competition..

This is hilarious.

No, dummy, I quit because it wasn't a level playing field. At least be accurate.

You complain about a non-level playing field but yet there were multiple non-B6 schools in the 4 seasons your at Virginia Tech (BIG SIX SCHOOL) making E8/f4/nc games? At least be accurate.

Clearly schools like Rice, Western Illinois, and Buffalo were given unfair advantages in Iba?

Oh ****, looks like Loyola Chicago were 2-time runners-up. And in Season 21? Northern Iowa wins the NT! Wow! I see what you mean Mike, small schools had a big advantage.

Posted by Benis on 9/24/2017 6:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 9/24/2017 5:41:00 PM (view original):
The "problem" with capping D2/D3 at this point is the next 3-4 seasons. You'll have these low level D1 players finishing their careers and dominating the FR/SO/JR classes from D3 only. But, yeah, your premise is right. The best true D3 players will beat the lesser D3 players.

But it's also why there would be no need to change recruit generation if D1 populations reached 250. The best would be the best and, theoretically, the talent would be spread thin. Using single digits for simplicity, that 9 FB/press team would be a 6. And they'd be competing against other 6s in man/zone with that occasional 7 just whipping all of their *****.

The difference is what gomiami pointed out.

The As and Bs in D1 will STILL have great players.

Currently you can snag a few really nice players and put together a competitive team with a C prestige (or even D prestige). Instead of a C/D competing with As and Bs for recruits, they will only compete against other C/D for bad players. So what you'll have is basically like it is in real life - the Major conf schools are head and shoulders above the little guys. Those little guys can only hope they win their conf tourney and then go get demolished in the NT. That's BEST case scenario.

But it's even worse than real life because there are only 27 auto bids in HD while there are 32 in RL. And high major conferences can get seeded 1-16 while in RL it's only 1-12.

Good point. And building a D1 team if location is not on your side is really hard and takes patience. So at 250, 200 heck, good luck! I think the way it works now : 150 is the goal at D1 unless they change recruit generation and cap D2 out of most D1, making some sort of drop down solution.
up

"Mama always said life was like a box of chocolates. You never know what you are going to get."