Date: Mon Oct 22 11:53:37 2007
Sender: Coach Stone
I have 6 guys of which I wanted to sign 2 and I only sign 1 after investing 29
points each...what a bunch of garbage!!
Date: Mon Oct 22 13:09:51 2007
Sender: Kevin Caery
How about 10-prestige tier-3 Holy Cross getting 2 A+ recruits?
Date: Mon Oct 22 13:25:14 2007
Sender: Laurent Boudias
That's pretty good and interesting how these two players had besides Holy
Cross, another low prestige school among the favorite top 5 schools.
Date: Mon Oct 22 13:29:05 2007
Sender: Laurent Boudias
Coach Stone, why should you get them? Since then is it garbage not to be able
to recruit 2 players out of 6?
Is it because having a 20 prestige, you feel like you should get everything you
want? What a spoiled brat! :)
Date: Mon Oct 22 19:01:32 2007
Sender: Coach Stone
Sorry Laurent, just had to vent a little, just had a Mike Gundy moment in CBEL.
Its just that recruiting seems to get more frustrating every season as there is
no rhyme or reason to how things roll in recruiting. How does Holy Cross pull
down 2 A+ players, how does UNLV pull in 3 A+ players when they would have to
spread out their points amoungst those recruits?...Its the same old story,
their is no rhyme or reason to why a player chooses a school and it
frustrates...just venting :)
Date: Mon Oct 22 23:53:34 2007
Sender: Christopher E Smith
I don't get it guys. This seems strange to me too. It's as if the tier 3 Bob
teams have gained some super powers in recruiting.
As already mentioned, Holy Cross (Patriot - 10 prestige) came out as the big
weiner...3 A players ranked in the top 58 overall, 2 of those within the top
21.
19) SG Egan
21) SG Kirby
58) PG Avedikian
+ 3 more players signed for 6 total, and 1 point leftover.
Lehigh (Patriot - 7 prestige)
22) SG Romero
100) PF Volin
+ 2 more players signed for 4 total, 1 point and 2 schollies left.
New Hampshire (America East - 10 prestige)
13) C Guerrero (5th best center)
+ 3 more signings for 4 total, 1 point and 1 schollie remaining
N Arizona (Big Sky - 6 prestige)
23) SF Aaron
+ 4 more, 1 point and 2 schollies left
N Dakota St (Indy - 7 prestige)
28) C Urban
+ 3 others, 1 points and 3 schollies remaining
S Dakota St (Indy - 5 prestige)
29) PG Dipuccio
+ 2 additional signings, 1 point and 4 schollies remain
Oddly enough, every single team I mentioned above is a Bob, or else I would not
have mentioned them. It's pretty impossible for a human coach with a prestige
like any of these teams to even get this level of player to even visit them.
Interesting.
Date: Tue Oct 23 03:36:55 2007
Sender: Marc Byers
We used 16 points on each of the 3 A+ guys we recruited this season, all three
guys were favouring us prior to recruiting, the 4th guy we used our remaining
points on. i think it was about 10 points, and was the only guy who wasnt
leaning towards us prior to the signings
I think the # of points you spend is just a small factor on signing day, of
equal value is where that recruit has you ranked prior, along if they are
requesting PT or not
Date: Tue Oct 23 05:32:23 2007
Sender: Laurent Boudias
hey coach, no problem. I understand frustration, it happens to me a lot too,
except that what happens to me is normal. :)
Date: Tue Oct 23 09:05:58 2007
Sender: Christopher E Smith
When I made my comment on the little tier 3 Bobs, I completely neglected to
mention anything about UNLV, and I apologize for that Marc. The fact that UNLV
landed three A+ players is very realistic, so I'm not sure why there was a
question about that Coach Stone. Being a 20 prestige, national champs and a
regular kickass recruiter, Marc has nothing to explain here. Results like that
are no surprise, and are pretty much the norm for Coach Byers...so way to go
man!
As for having to spread out the points...it doesn't work as simple as that.
I've had occasions in the past where I'd be the #2 school on a players list,
and maybe even have the same "4sp" (or whatever) as the #1 choice, I'll shell
out 50 points and the top choice will shell out 10 points and get the player.
That's always been the case, so nothing more than good points management
there.
I only chimed in because of the unusually large amount of A players going to
lowly tier 3 Bob-coached teams, who somehow leapfrogged the highest prestige
tier 1's, and had points and/or schollies remaining. The level of blue-chippers
we're talking about would normally just toss an invitation from one of these
schools in the can. Can anyone imagine a real-life scenario of Holy Cross
pulling in the nation's 19th, 21st and 58th best players? On the same day,
Lehigh grabs #22 and #100? And along with those other schools I listed landing
a top 30 player? Something is scwewy here.
I think this is an Andy question.
Date: Tue Oct 23 09:19:17 2007
Sender: Jay Schlegel
The weirdness of the lower-tier Bob schools landing some of the top prospects
has always been there, as far as I can recall. This is part of the randomness,
otherwise those teams would apparently not get any decent players at all.
However, I also recall seeing this more in CBEL than say in CCEL, and cannot
recall if there is any explanation for that.
Date: Tue Oct 23 09:36:19 2007
Sender: T Cass
I had the best recruiting class of my CBEL experience this turn as I was able
to bring in two A+ type guys. Balitis was a God send, thank you Louisville for
not having any schollies available to give to him! :)
I honestly wish we could do the double dip in CBEL, I know, I know, not going
to happen, but I really think there are some possibilities of making some of
the Tier 3 type teams very strong in CBEL... mainly because of the 25 invite
rule. If CCEL was limited to say 70 invites, then the smaller schools would be
getting a LOT more players than they do now.
Date: Tue Oct 23 12:37:01 2007
Sender: James Sheasley
As the current coach for Navy, I think I can effectively kiss good bye any
hopes of winning a Patriot League title in the next four seasons. I'm looking
forward to getting back to Tier II ASAP.
Date: Tue Oct 23 12:55:02 2007
Sender: Christopher E Smith
I realize that the small schools have always grabbed a player here and there,
but I just don't recall it being this extensive. I may be wrong, but having
this many top blue-chippers picking those little schools is very unrealistic.
Todd,
I have seriously been tossing the double-dipper idea around in my coconut for
quite awhile, and would really like to be able to make it happen. We have so
many vacant teams in tier 3 that we could easily designate a couple of
conferences for double-dipping. However, the problem that we then run into is
that each of those conferences gets an automatic berth in the tourney, meaning
that no matter what conferences we picked, there would be double-dippers in the
tourney. If not for that fact, we could implement it. And using the tier 3
Independents is not a viable option because very soon (within the next couple
of seasons) about half of those teams will be moving into other conferences to
reflect real life.
So I'm open to any idears that anyone may have that could actually make the
double-dipping work. I just don't want to see a double-dipper get a berth in
the Big Dance. I also don't think we want to take away any automatic berths
from small conferences in order to make this happen, or else that takes away
from the real-life factor. Andy has also said in the past that he will
definitely not create any additional conferences or teams for double-dipping.
So given all of that info, if anyone can come up with a way to make
double-dipping work, we're game to try it.
Date: Tue Oct 23 13:45:58 2007
Sender: Laurent Boudias
As far as making the brackets for the tournament, is it a problem for you not
to place 2 teams with the same coach in the same region?
Would it complicate the process a lot?
Date: Tue Oct 23 16:04:46 2007
Sender: Jay Schlegel
Can't allow coaches to have more than one team in the CBEL tourney -- too much
room for 'shenanigans'...
Some time ago I suggested adding the 1AAA or whatever the heck it is called as
essentially a tier-4 just for the double dippers. You know, whatever league
that Grand Valley State and Mount Union and those type schools inhabit. I know
that level has its own playoff for football and I think it does for basketball.
Essentially it would be a separate league, so anyone could join. It would be
nice if it ran within CBEL, so that everyone saw the PRs and so on, though
somehow preventing those teams from ending up randomly on the tier-1 schedules,
but it might be easiest to implement as an entirely separate league -- but it
would be essential in my opinion to make the talent level ultra-low so that it
truly is a tier-3 or tier-4 level league that does not siphon coaches away from
CBEL.
Date: Tue Oct 23 16:10:40 2007
Sender: Laurent Boudias
what problems would you see if they are in different regions?
Date: Tue Oct 23 18:57:25 2007
Sender: James Sheasley
1 AAA used to be a designator to describe Division 1 schools that did not
sponsor football programs.
Grand Valley St is a Division II school. Mount Union is a Division III school.
I know there are over 300 football programs in division III, I'm sure the
number of basketball programs is much higher than that.
Date: Tue Oct 23 23:00:39 2007
Sender: Christopher E Smith
I agree with Jay on this one - we simply cannot allow any coach to have 2 teams
in the tourney...period. Laurent - would it complicate the bracket too
much...well potentially it could affect it, but that is not the reason we can't
have a coach have 2 teams in the tourney. Or maybe I should just say that we
cannot have any double-dippers in the regular tourney.
The double-dipping in the CCEL is much simpler by having the bowl system.
That's not as simple in a bracket playoff system for obvious reasons.
And of course the easiest way to make double-dipping work would be to have
teams added for double-dipping only, such as the Division III schools that Jay
mentioned, although we obviously would not need 300+ schools. If we could only
have schools from one or two conferences added (enough that there could be a
separate championship bracket) that would suffice. But Andy has stated in the
past that there is absolutely no way that he will add any conferences and
teams. So the only thing that leaves room for is the group of tier 3
Independents. We have only 11 schools there now, and as I stated earlier, this
upcoming real life NCAA season has about half of these schools joining
conferences. So that leaves maybe 6 teams. I think the interest would be higher
than only 6 teams, even if it is only to try it out at first.
So this is where we got stuck before.
This is something I've wanted to make happen since we talked about it before to
make more coaches happy with the league. It would be perfect if we could only
have a group of say 24 schools added to a separate group (tier), and allow
those schools to have their own separate bracket. I think that would help spark
some more interest in the league. I can see many existing coaches wanting to at
least give it a try, and several staying with it. I know I would personally be
interested in having a team. And I even have a coach who is interested in
commishing the double-dips only, and would take care of that tourney.
Date: Wed Oct 24 05:16:09 2007
Sender: Laurent Boudias
and what about the double dippers going to the DIT whether they are conference
champ or not with their second team?
If they are in the DIT with their first team, big deal!
Does anyone cares a lot about the DIT in CBEL?
Date: Wed Oct 24 07:16:56 2007
Sender: T Cass
I like that idea Laurent... had not thought of the DIT...
My suggestion was to take the MEAC and use it, since it has 11 teams. I do
like Chris' suggestion of adding some teams, IF Andy would be willing to do it.
It could just be a double dip league of 24 teams that could also play regular
teams.
We need to get Andy's thoughts on this, because I think this could definitely
spark some new interest.
Dolphin Simulation Games is not responsible for the content of posts.
Please report any offensive messages to help@dolphinsim.com.
