Posted by grimacedance on 5/18/2018 9:28:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 5/18/2018 11:41:00 AM (view original):
Those are some cool ideas Grimace, I like it.

I do think we need an improvement of preferences like many people have mentioned. The preference of a particular Offense & Defense is just random and boring. Or players want to play on a team with a strong defense... but are terrible at defense. Or wants perimeter.. but are terrible at per shooting.

I'd also replace fast tempo with high scoring - which is just the opposite of strong defense. Some other ideas - big school vs small school. Academics. Location. Getting to the NBA. I'm sure there are plenty more to think of.

I'd also love to have Coach Loyalty mean something for recruits and actually have a coaching profile that goes along with the team's prestige. You get dinged pretty hard when moving to take over a rebuild and I think your coach prestige/loyalty should follow you. It'd be like if Mark Few took over Rutgers - I'm sure he'd pull in quite a few recruits because of his reputation as a great coach.

But within your system proposed you could have all those things - coach, school and preferences- impact whether a kid wants you knocking on his door 7 days a week.

As far as coach loyalty, I think the best way to do it is to revive/rethink reputation.

Coach reputation is a relic of the old days when you could offer a recruit illegal money to entice them, so it reflected how clean or dirty you were. Ever since they got rid of illegal cash, reputation is meaningless.

Reputation should be based on the success you have had at all jobs in that world, with more weight given to more recent jobs. A coach like only/viva would be an A+: a coach with many FFs and multiple titles. In Tark, I would be a B/B+. I have a lot of conference titles and NT appearances, but nothing past the Sweet Sixteen.

Some players would value coach loyalty more than reputation -- they want reassurance they will play for the same coach for 4 years. Others would value rep more highly -- they'd play for a mercenary if he could get them to the Final Four.

I love these types of ideas. I think not having anything linked to the player - as the coach, is a big miss. We have long time coach preference and it's OK I suppose but pretty limited IMO.

I was thinking you could make promises harder to meet. No more promises only matter in regular season. Or only needing 70-80% of minutes/starts. If you don't meet your promise to a player, your loyalty or reputation goes down. Or if you cut a player you recruited, it goes down. Or RS a guy and he gets ****** off but you keep it on anyway, etc etc

Then when you make promises to future recruits, your loyalty rating acts as a modifier to how much it's worth. It needs to actually mean something or it's pointless.