Posted by topdogggbm on 11/29/2017 5:50:00 PM (view original):
I have NO dog in this fight. So this is completely a question. So please, no one attack me for my dumb thought or my ridiculous idea or whatever.

But are any people here in favor of some type of cap for how long you can coach ONE particular team in a world?

i mention this because for all the players that haven't been playing for the last 5 years, i would assume most/all the Big 6 teams that people want, have been filled by a dominant coach. And that coach has no room to go "UP" any longer. Locking down a UNC/UK/UCLA for the next 100 season's. If a limit was in place, that would create movement, openings for possibly other deserving humans, and also force that coach that was pushed out due to a limit, to start over somewhere and reignite a flame again in the rebuild process.

Personally i avoid D1 cuz I'm not good enough yet to get a big name school (which is why i say that i have no dog in this fight). I don't wanna coach at Toledo or somewhere and get pounded every year by Big 6 teams, all while knowing that none of those coaches will leave anytime soon for me to have a shot at them schools. I'd rather stay at D2 and compete at a higher level. Just an example.

Once again, this is a question to the forum.... Not something I'm pushing for

I’m one of those guys with 50 seasons at UCLA. I woulda left a few years ago if it wasn’t such a punishment to switch schools. Hell, I’m on my last credits now (I needed my SS run to stay funded) and unless they change I’m out. I just don’t say anything about it, like most, because we are sick of the fight. Seble knows the product sucks and is losing people. When he can fix it he will have to choose whether to do so. Reminding h8m that more users feel this way, even if we don’t spew verbal diarrhea like MiniT, doesn’t do much. But you are not alone. By far.

Posted by cubcub113 on 11/29/2017 11:19:00 AM (view original):
Both spud and l80r20 use the term waaaaambulence.

It is widespread on other sports games boards. I am surprised you never heard of it.

Posted by lakevin on 11/30/2017 5:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by topdogggbm on 11/29/2017 5:50:00 PM (view original):
I have NO dog in this fight. So this is completely a question. So please, no one attack me for my dumb thought or my ridiculous idea or whatever.

But are any people here in favor of some type of cap for how long you can coach ONE particular team in a world?

i mention this because for all the players that haven't been playing for the last 5 years, i would assume most/all the Big 6 teams that people want, have been filled by a dominant coach. And that coach has no room to go "UP" any longer. Locking down a UNC/UK/UCLA for the next 100 season's. If a limit was in place, that would create movement, openings for possibly other deserving humans, and also force that coach that was pushed out due to a limit, to start over somewhere and reignite a flame again in the rebuild process.

Personally i avoid D1 cuz I'm not good enough yet to get a big name school (which is why i say that i have no dog in this fight). I don't wanna coach at Toledo or somewhere and get pounded every year by Big 6 teams, all while knowing that none of those coaches will leave anytime soon for me to have a shot at them schools. I'd rather stay at D2 and compete at a higher level. Just an example.

Once again, this is a question to the forum.... Not something I'm pushing for

I’m one of those guys with 50 seasons at UCLA. I woulda left a few years ago if it wasn’t such a punishment to switch schools. Hell, I’m on my last credits now (I needed my SS run to stay funded) and unless they change I’m out. I just don’t say anything about it, like most, because we are sick of the fight. Seble knows the product sucks and is losing people. When he can fix it he will have to choose whether to do so. Reminding h8m that more users feel this way, even if we don’t spew verbal diarrhea like MiniT, doesn’t do much. But you are not alone. By far.

I didn't check out your level of success. But if you've been at UCLA for that long, I'm sure you qualify as a good coach.

But why do you look at it as "punishment" to leave your school? Rather than looking at it as a challenge. I would think (not speaking from experience) that it would breathe new life into what this game is kind of about. The build up. You may struggle a few seasons. But apparently you're a good coach. You'd be back on your feet in no time, along with the gratification of "I succeed again". No?

Can't it be both?

Its both. Very Wardo-like.

Posted by mullycj on 11/29/2017 11:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 11/29/2017 7:27:00 PM (view original):
As far as recruiting goes-

I don't mind the dice rolls. I've had good breaks and I've had bad ones. It's fine.

But once you play D1, you see how recruiting should actually work. D3 (and even D2) is mostly a sit and wait game. Yeah, you can do some strategic moves with APs and whatnot but for the most part, you're just chilling the entire 1st session since you can't sign any D1/D2 guys until the 2nd. Snoozefest.

Additionally, since the redlight allows you to know EXACTLY what a player will sign (very 1st cycle of the 2nd session if they're Early or EoP1), you can just sit there and poach. Doing the HV love bomb on the 1st cycle of 2nd session is a pretty common strategy. Not much back and forth battling going on here.

Also, you don't HAVE to get in dice rolls at D3 to field a really good team. At D1, it's pretty much mandatory if you want to get past the 1st round.

To me, it just feels very blah.

For the REAL old timers this was what D2/D3 was like way back when.
You had "pulldowns". Given enough money you could pull a player down from the division above you but were screwed if a higher division coach went after that player.

Yep.

What I dislike most about 3.0 is the recruiting but only because I tend to be more of a D2-type coach. As was pointed out earlier, I hate having to sit and wait for the first five days, twiddling my thumbs, waiting until the 2nd session so I can sign some decent players who aren't D2 JuCos. It makes recruiting extremely tedious and, honestly, I often end up forgetting about it entirely and then having to try to scramble to catch up in the 2nd session.

You want to liven up recruiting? Let D1 schools sign kids from the 5 p.m. cycle on signing day, let D2 teams start at 5 p.m. the next day, and D3 teams start at 5 p.m. on the last day. You think coaches are scrambling for recruits now?

Of course, that could have the unintended consequence of D1 coaches becoming more conservative with their recruiting, so maybe move those lines back one day. Let D2 teams start signing D1 guys on the last day at 11 a.m. or something like that. D3 teams start signing at say, 11 p.m. on the first day of the 2nd session.

Those are just some quick and dirty deadlines that I threw out there but as a (primarily) D2 coach, I have to say that recruiting is B-O-R-I-N-G!!!!

YOU could move up to D1. As I told zorzi, who complains constantly about D2/D3 recruiting, there are openings in D1.

It was fun before Mike. Make it amazing again. Cap.

Or, conversely, those that don't find D2/D3 recruiting fun should probably try D1. That's the recruiting system you're requesting. Play the game you're given not the one you wish it was. Except, in this case, the game you want actually exists and you COULD play it.

You can also adjust your gameplay. I’ve got a guy from the D2 pool on my roster, and one I’m recruiting for next season. No one is forcing you to only go after D1 recruits. If you want to play that way, cool, but you’ll have to wait.

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/4/2017 4:34:00 PM (view original):
Or, conversely, those that don't find D2/D3 recruiting fun should probably try D1. That's the recruiting system you're requesting. Play the game you're given not the one you wish it was. Except, in this case, the game you want actually exists and you COULD play it.

I like DI recruiting so much. EEs are flarked though.