Posted by wvufan76 on 10/10/2017 2:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/10/2017 11:24:00 AM (view original):
So throw away three seasons at D3? Sounds like fun.

Mike, I realize that you must argue about everything. The truth is if 100 percent of ALL D3 Coaches are impacted by new standards for ratings, the same guys who dominate now, will dominate during those same three seasons. Nobody will throw any seasons away, and your World, your Conference, and your personal ability will not be impacted. If you can produce winning teams now, as you have demonstrated, a freeze or cap on D3 recruiting will not impact you in the slightest. Guys who sign up for HD will not stay or go just because they have to recruit players destined for a D3 Team. People stay or go because of the many other options of where to waste money and not because the best player signed in a D3 Conference is a 455 rating point guard. But one thing that does blow people out the door is old vets like you and I who do play the system and luck into a 724 rating PF, and all they see on their squad are players from 388 to 478 and not explanation as to the why. They for the most part will leave before they ever ask the first question. Human nature tells me that, because people do not like coming across as dumb.

Only against bad, poorly thought out ideas.

First, let's argue on fair terms. This has nothing to do with D3. It's about protecting D1 back-up plans. Once we establish this we can quit the disingenuous "It's all about fairness to new users" crap.

Second, the easy "solution" is, if you must have separate recruiting options, make them "equal". That will shut me up about wasted seasons. Simply make sure all current player quality can be met by future player quality at ALL LEVELS. IOW, if the #1 D3 team has a guy who'll top out at 800, ensure a new recruit is in the next class that will match him. The quality of teams will remain constant and no one is ******* away 3-5 seasons. But, with lower scouting budgets, it very well may make location key. If you're not in the area of the top 10 D3, you probably won't even scout them.

I told you what I dislike about D2 and D3 Mike, waiting on second session...

And if you give D1 actions more value, the problem is fixed.

I've suggested, time and time again, to just remove level designations. That solves your issues and mine, no?

It would. But then what do you do with stars and the top 200? 3 stars and up, top 100: D1?

"First, let's argue on fair terms. This has nothing to do with D3. It's about protecting D1 back-up plans. Once we establish this we can quit the disingenuous "It's all about fairness to new users" crap."

Disagree.

Posted by buddhagamer on 10/10/2017 12:41:00 PM (view original):
Make it so the lower divisions can't even start accumulating AP on the upper level recruits until the actual recruiting period they will sign in.

D2 can only start applying AP on D1 level recruits at the beginning of RS2.
D3 can only start applying AP on D2 level recruits at the beginning of RS2.

All recruits would be open (all actions) in the final 24 hours (including D1 level recruits to D3 coaches).

This would allow Seble to remove the red-light restrictions as lower divisions won't be in a position to sign higher level recruits anyway until they can put in the schollie offer.

This is one of the most poorly thought out posts I have seen. It is a good example of how desperate everyone is to protect and strengthen the huge recruiting advantage that D1 already enjoys over the lower divisions. Desperation trumps logical thought.

To rephrase your suggestion in a way that might help you see what you have proposed, you are suggesting that the red light (ie, prohibition against signing players designated as expected to be above your level) be instituted so early and so rigidly that lower level teams cannot sign and cannot even contact recruits of their choosing. That's like saying Aunt Lillie doesn't need to go on a diet next month because you have withheld all food from the poor dear for the last two months.

Posted by zorzii on 10/10/2017 2:59:00 PM (view original):
It would. But then what do you do with stars and the top 200? 3 stars and up, top 100: D1?

Since there would be no designated levels, you don't HAVE to do anything with them. But, to protect the low budget at D2/D3, and possibly n00bs who think they can get the #1 PG in the nation, as follows:
Top 50 at each position, D1 only. D2/D3 never even see them thus saving scouting money
Top 125 at each position, D1/D2 only. Same deal. D3 never sees them.

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/10/2017 4:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by zorzii on 10/10/2017 2:59:00 PM (view original):
It would. But then what do you do with stars and the top 200? 3 stars and up, top 100: D1?

Since there would be no designated levels, you don't HAVE to do anything with them. But, to protect the low budget at D2/D3, and possibly n00bs who think they can get the #1 PG in the nation, as follows:
Top 50 at each position, D1 only. D2/D3 never even see them thus saving scouting money
Top 125 at each position, D1/D2 only. Same deal. D3 never sees them.

What about camps? Right now, users can select which divisions they would like to invite to the camp.
Without that selection there is a chance that you would pay $3000 or so for 50 athletes and 25 of them would be classified "DIII duds" in the current system.

Tough break. It would be the same as scouting NY and seeing 50 good players, 76 mediocre players and 186 turds.

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/10/2017 2:51:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wvufan76 on 10/10/2017 2:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/10/2017 11:24:00 AM (view original):
So throw away three seasons at D3? Sounds like fun.

Mike, I realize that you must argue about everything. The truth is if 100 percent of ALL D3 Coaches are impacted by new standards for ratings, the same guys who dominate now, will dominate during those same three seasons. Nobody will throw any seasons away, and your World, your Conference, and your personal ability will not be impacted. If you can produce winning teams now, as you have demonstrated, a freeze or cap on D3 recruiting will not impact you in the slightest. Guys who sign up for HD will not stay or go just because they have to recruit players destined for a D3 Team. People stay or go because of the many other options of where to waste money and not because the best player signed in a D3 Conference is a 455 rating point guard. But one thing that does blow people out the door is old vets like you and I who do play the system and luck into a 724 rating PF, and all they see on their squad are players from 388 to 478 and not explanation as to the why. They for the most part will leave before they ever ask the first question. Human nature tells me that, because people do not like coming across as dumb.

Only against bad, poorly thought out ideas.

First, let's argue on fair terms. This has nothing to do with D3. It's about protecting D1 back-up plans. Once we establish this we can quit the disingenuous "It's all about fairness to new users" crap.

Second, the easy "solution" is, if you must have separate recruiting options, make them "equal". That will shut me up about wasted seasons. Simply make sure all current player quality can be met by future player quality at ALL LEVELS. IOW, if the #1 D3 team has a guy who'll top out at 800, ensure a new recruit is in the next class that will match him. The quality of teams will remain constant and no one is ******* away 3-5 seasons. But, with lower scouting budgets, it very well may make location key. If you're not in the area of the top 10 D3, you probably won't even scout them.

With three Worlds of D3, it is not about Protecting D1 Back ups. But then it is about improvement across the board of D1 Sims so in around the bout way, it involves D1 Backup plans.

I will use the loophole until they take it away, and I will still enjoy D3 when I am forced to go back to scouting D3 caliber players.

It's not a loophole. It's a game design.

Just lost another player with my A prestige Maryland School to an A- D2 Cheyney. I had 7 HVs and a CV and 323 AP. I also guaranteed 10 minutes. I'm sure Cheyney probably had more in him, but still.....

I don't mind losing battles to D1 schools, but to continue losing battles to D2 schools is extremely frustrating.

Posted by chapelhillne on 10/13/2017 11:16:00 PM (view original):
Just lost another player with my A prestige Maryland School to an A- D2 Cheyney. I had 7 HVs and a CV and 323 AP. I also guaranteed 10 minutes. I'm sure Cheyney probably had more in him, but still.....

I don't mind losing battles to D1 schools, but to continue losing battles to D2 schools is extremely frustrating.

I'm guessing since he didn't recruit anyone else, he could've had as much as 1,000 APs invested into him. If you consider 50 APs equals a HV, he had a 40 to 14 advantage in HVs to go along with the wants to play preference, which I'm sure he gave him a start and at least 20 minutes. I'm assuming you jumped in late, in that case he would've had the considering credit preference as well?

I can see both sides of the argument. It's entirely unfair for the D-2 school to get jumped especially since they've put in so much effort, but at the same time who would turn down an offer from a high prestige school such as Maryland? It's also another reason to keep D-1, D-2 and D-3 recruiting separate. Each division should have their own pool of players to recruit from.

Chap, I had 865 AP 16 HV 1 CV 15 promised minutes and promised start with 4 VG preferences and no bad or very bad. For what it’s worth, I agree completely that your Maryland team should have won rather easily. Kind of feel bad when winning these but it’s the system we have and if we don’t go after those guys at D2 you simply can’t compete for a title.

Posted by snewell12 on 10/14/2017 11:59:00 AM (view original):
Chap, I had 865 AP 16 HV 1 CV 15 promised minutes and promised start with 4 VG preferences and no bad or very bad. For what it’s worth, I agree completely that your Maryland team should have won rather easily. Kind of feel bad when winning these but it’s the system we have and if we don’t go after those guys at D2 you simply can’t compete for a title.

Thanks for posting. I had 323 AP, 7 HV, 1 CV, 10 minutes and no promised start. I was very good in two and neutral in the other two. The two I was good in was Wants Success and Strong Conference. That may be one of the issues because if you compare the ACC as a strong conference to any D2 strong conference, that should be a big difference, and really wants success too, since success in a conference like the ACC should be higher than at a D2 conference. I don't blame you at all snewell for going after him. And I could see a very slight reason a player like this would go the way he did in real life, since you did pay more attention to him, and I brought in a really solid freshman class, and a player like this would probably not play that much until perhaps the Junior year. I could see him being a valuable player in his senior year, whereas at Cheyney he would get a lot of minutes. But if Sims at Big 6 D1 programs were stronger, there are probably a number of big schools that he would have played at. I was afraid to promise any more to him because I already had a lot of promises out there, and felt like it would hurt the team this year if he played any more.