Posted by gillispie on 6/25/2022 12:00:00 PM (view original):
i agree with that generally poncho, adjusting to the times is certainly important. now that recruits are spread more equitably that they used to be, it should also in theory be easier to cram more coaches into a d1 world i suppose? plus folks have had some time to adjust to the already-lower ceiling on high end teams, that came with 3.0 in general?

there aren't zero limits to adjusting, though. the really high end recruits are just as incredible as they've ever been, and there are going to be teams who manage to cobble together a starting lineup of great and elite recruits. all aspects of evaluating recruits are at least moderately tied to the recruit's relation to the top players out there. you can only overcome so much of a gap, even if top teams have dropped from 10 very high end recruits to 6 or 7, other coaches are still going to be (rightfully) comparing their starters, to the starters on the best teams. its hard to feel like you can compete if that gap gets too big.

i look around and i see plenty of B prestige teams, coached by good but not necessarily 20 title folks, who have some REALLY good players. i think there are definitely enough of those to go around. i really enjoy the high level of competition that we have right now, the way those B prestige teams exist, the way that some folks run 9 deep slowdown and others run 12 deep fb/fcp, its all really good in my book. i would hate to see that balance get upset very much. this is the best balance we've had in d1 at least in a very long time (1.0 d1 was pretty great IMO, but i didn't get to play it long enough to get ****** off about the things i didn't like).

a couple people made a point earlier about it taking several rounds of adjustments to get it right, if they tried to adjust recruit gen. i 100% agree with that. i don't think things are broken enough to go that far. but it does feel like the general level of intensity in recruiting in d1, is pretty darn high. i like it, but i don't think i make a good representative sample... i definitely worry the intensity is high for the general hd population. that's why i am kind of settling into a position of, i really don't think it makes sense for them to go in and mess with recruit gen, not with a new staff who really doesn't know this game well. i do think a new world would be cool though, just let a bit of the pressure out. also, the lack of new worlds is a shame, its been such a source of excitementment when it happened, and most of you guys have never gotten to experience it. now that we've pivoted to a situation where everyone accepts d2/d3 as empty wastelands, where its really a d1-centric game, and where d1 populations are high instead of low - it feels to me like the right time to strike with a single new world.

agreed. to me, the gen is not broken enough to try to fix it (given how complicated maintaining a good game balance is).

We know exactly what to expect with a new world, and how it will change balance, etc.

I actually really think it would be cool to have recruiting start early in the season and have each cycle last 24 hours. Maybe start RS1 after the 5th game so we've all got about a week to scout. Even if you're in the 1st year of a rebuild, it would give you something to do right away while you're team is losing every game. It would also be easier to make sure that you don't miss any cycles despite our busy lives.

Have EE's declare their intentions early as well so we know exactly how many scholarships we need to fill and can plan accordingly. Even if we don't receive the additional funds until RS2, it would still be very helpful. It would mean that postseason results don't have an effect on the Big Board, but it would also mean that we wouldn't need to game the EE system as much. Oh, he's leaving? I'll just max his PER then.

Im not currently playing in d1 but when I do look through D1 there are a bunch of small rosters, D1s taking crap players, slow down all over (yuck), etc... Im sure there are other ways to win but that seems like the dominant philosophy. Having all EE's make decisions after non-con or something sounds like a good idea. I also like the idea of penalties for taking a bunch of walkons. Maybe there is a penalty after having under 10 scholarship players that can practice (exclude ineligibles to give a benefit for teams that fill up their spots). Additionally, I would add a 13th scholarship and increase the pool of recruits accordingly. The idea of making promises count for each year is interesting as well but there are other should transfer say 50% of the time and maybe 70% of the time if they have a wants to play preference (not positive on the percentages). Also, not a fan that you can just start someone for the first 22 or whatever games and then change everything for the end of the season. Not positive what the fix is there but it is not ideal.

Sorry if I duplicated anything. This is a long thread and I skipped a couple pages.