Well Steaks and PB&Js aside, I just don't think this game would make much sense if a preferences were absolute. It doesn't make much sense for a player to HAVE to play Motion/Zone. I mean, it's not in the faintest realm of realism (not that this game is very realistic most of the time).

But seriously, you ever hear about a recruit choosing a school because of the offense or defense that it runs. "well, I really liked what Tom Izzo had to say and I could definitely picture myself winning a national championship there but I'm just not a big fan of Man to Man defense so I had to choose Eastern Michigan University because I just dreamed about playing Zone defense since I was a little boy."

Posted by Benis on 8/19/2018 7:33:00 PM (view original):
Well Steaks and PB&Js aside, I just don't think this game would make much sense if a preferences were absolute. It doesn't make much sense for a player to HAVE to play Motion/Zone. I mean, it's not in the faintest realm of realism (not that this game is very realistic most of the time).

But seriously, you ever hear about a recruit choosing a school because of the offense or defense that it runs. "well, I really liked what Tom Izzo had to say and I could definitely picture myself winning a national championship there but I'm just not a big fan of Man to Man defense so I had to choose Eastern Michigan University because I just dreamed about playing Zone defense since I was a little boy."

I agree 100%. But my interpretation of preferences (which can be completely wrong, I admit)... things like offensive sets shouldn't weigh much. But distance and success should weigh a whole lot in my opinion. For me it's pointless to have a kid with a preference of close to home that lives in new York, and ends up at UCLA. When the considering schools are UCLA, Syracuse, Villanova, St John's, and UConn. I think it defeats the purpose of having preferences. I feel those two preferences should have major major impact.

i'm not even trying to say i'm right with any of these arguments. I am just speaking what I feel should be factored in. And it's not.

now if that same recruit from New York only got interest from Florida, Kansas, UCLA, and Arizona, then I feel UCLA is fine. Because none of the schools are close. If a player wants a rebuild, and the competing schools are Duke, UK, UNC, and Akron, I feel that Akron should hold a HUGE bargaining chip. Not just some minuscule little credit. That's just my opinions. Which aren't worth a damn, nor are anyone else's. That's just how I feel.

Only change I would make in preferences is changing the "wants rebuild" to "newer coach" (five or less seasons at a school).

It might help people when they transfer schools and move up divisions.

Posted by l80r20 on 8/19/2018 9:55:00 AM (view original):
This warrants repeating:
"The credit leader is a lower mid level Big 6 conference team who went all in; the dark horse is high A+ Syracuse, with multiple national championships in recent years, who made a late push. The outcome is realistic and completely understandable. The frustration stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of how the game works. No B level prestige team should ever feel “safe” when an A+ is lurking."

And no "B level team chasing a top 5 overall in the country player should ever be surprised to lose to a high A+."

Spud! What a random sighting -- especially when he: (a) has no active teams; and (b) is literally just repeating the post of someone else.

Given the way 3.0 has leveled the playing field, a B prestige team complaining about recruiting is pretty rich, though....