Date: Wed Jan 9 11:21:08 2008 Sender: Chip Caruth It seems like every year the list of available tier 1 CBEL teams gets longer. And to be honest, I'm having a hard time deciding if I should purchase another season. I haven't changed my coaching stratagy in years. Well, i've tried to but usually with horrible results. It seems once you've found the magic strategy you're set. Then it's a matter of recruiting, setting a depth chart and watching your team. We also haven't seen any changes to the game in quite a while. That's either because Andy thinks the game is perfect as it is or he's moved on. I'm guessing he's moved on and and we won't see any future changes. Since there's really nothing better out there(as far as i know) I guess i'll give it another season. I had a couple really bad recruiting years in a row so this year could be painful. We'll see. Date: Wed Jan 9 14:08:35 2008 Sender: Jay Schlegel Similarly, I've been curious about the decline of traffic on the basketball message board. For a long time, it was the second-most active board behind football (not counting chat). Now it is as dead as the hockey board. I too wonder if this is a commentary on the future of these two parts of the DEL world. Date: Wed Jan 9 21:46:57 2008 Sender: Dave Ayres The Dagger-Man attributes the CBEL downtrend directly to a significant drop-off in colorful press releases: AJ Perko left Pitt one season ago, and he was responsible for at least 65% of the discussion on this board. The league in general seems to be headed south ever since the departure of Rod Steele/The WorleyBird. What got CBELers involved and invigorated were the regular league-wide controversy and continual roasting of fellow coaches in Steele's weekly columns of Latex Leftovers / Don Wands / Bad Bird Droppings. Although probably not always appreciated by Andy, I am fairly certain that Worley/Steele's entertaining diatribes kept CBEL coaches coming back for more (and subsequently helped fill Andy's piggy bank). Steinberg and I are fairly interesting writers, but neither of us submit much press any more. Currently, there are only 52 Tier 1 coaches out of 108 Tier 1 teams. (Yep, a lot more Bobs out there!) However, in the last five seasons, only ten coaches have led their squads to more than one top-Ten finish: Dolphin (five for five at UMass, including four years in the top three), Smith (five straight at Louisville), Rogers (five straight at Kansas State), Byers (four of five at UNLV and St Bonnie), Couture (four of five at Virginia Tech) and Good and Steinberg at Colorado State and Houston (three). Ayres (Notre Dame), Crigger (South Florida), and McEntire & Bob (Duke, since retired) have two top-Ten finishes. These ten guys have pretty much dominated the entire league, grabbing 70% (35 of 50) of the Top Ten spots during the last five years! Since it's extremely tough to break into this elite group, other coaches (especially the newbies) are finding it more difficult to stick around if they can not, in fact, be entertained by something besides the game scores. And, hey, the average PR in DEL is about as stimulating as vanilla yogurt (sorry, Miss Manners)! Personally, as an incentive, I'd have all coaches vote at the conclusion of each season on the top three PR writers in the league (entertainment value, not volume), and then give quadruple prestige points (per each weekly PR) to the top finisher, triple points to the #2 guy, and double points to the third. So if perusing Joe Goeblow's prolific prose was the high point of my CBEL season and Joe penned 12 weekly press releases, I'd vote for him to get prestige points equal to four times the ordinary total that 12 PR would generate. If he penned 8 press releases, and was voted the #1 entertainer, he'd get four times 8, and so forth. This system would stimulate the entire league, make it more fun, and perhaps even bring Rod back into the fold! And since Mr. Latex was never that great of a coach, anyway (don't hit me, Rod!), the non-writers wouldn't have to worry about him running away with excessive prestige (since wins and losses are still the primary prestige factors)! Date: Thu Jan 10 16:59:37 2008 Sender: Dan Hilsgen Personally, I am unsure how much time I have to be consistently creative on PR's. I don't have a ton of time on my hands to do them (at least currently). I do enjoy the really creative ones and it does entertain me and adds a bit of extra flavor to the league. I guess I might be conserned that I would step too far out of the box where it would be taken....negatively by someone. So, I chose to go very safe. This is not a complaint towards the leadership of the league or anything. It just factors into my decision. In fact, the leadership of the league has been quite friendly and their interaction with me when I was new was key to my view of how long I wish to be involved in this league....which...currently is forever. That's my 2 cents on the matter. Date: Fri Jan 11 10:16:50 2008 Sender: Jian Lan I can't speak for the CBEL but in the CBA I am proud to say we have only 1 Bob coached team. Thats an incredible number but we get almost no press releases, maybe 4 or 5 per week at most. On the plus side we are seeing much more activates in terms of trades. I tried to get something going by giving people cash for sending out preseason divisional previews and giving more if they team up with another coach/gm to write the press. It didn't turned out the way that I had hope. I think one way of fixing it is to punish teams that are participating in the press releases. If a team do not send out a certain amount of press their budget should decrease. Also I think there should be a reward system for coachs/gms that are willing to do previews for the preseason, playoffs, drafts, all-stars, etc. Date: Fri Jan 11 14:25:50 2008 Sender: Christopher E Smith Jian, Your input is appreciated, but won't help the activity or popularity of CBEL. For one, we have always already had extra PR rewards for those coaches who volunteer to write extra PR columns in addition to their teams' regular weekly PR's. And extra PR writing has always been strongly encouraged, both for the fun of the league, and for the extra reward. In the college game writing PR's goes toward your coaching prestige. So if a coach chooses not to release any weekly PR's, then he is already losing out on gaining a little extra prestige. Those coaches who write the extra columns are rewarded with a bonus toward their prestige. I guess prestige would be the only comparison to team budget. I also have many seasons of experience in pro leagues where I gave monetary rewards (very generous I might add) to teams that would write division previews, playoff previews, and so on. This worked well for awhile, but then the interest dwindled away, even when the rewards were large enough to help that team be able to outbid someone on a super-stud FA. As far as the idea for punishment in any form for coaches who don't issue PR's - terrible idea. While PR writing is encouraged in any league, it is not mandatory. This is a sports sim, not a creative writing course. I can pretty much guarantee that if coaches were punished for not issuing PR's that the floodgates would open with coaches fleeing the leagues. But thanks. Chris Smith CBEL Co-Commish Date: Fri Jan 11 14:45:33 2008 Sender: Christopher E Smith TO ALL CBEL COACHES: Believe me, nobody has been scratching their head about coaches leaving this league more than I have. From going back and reading the original post from Chip, what I would really like to ask you all is to please give some feedback. I may issue a league-wide PR about this, but those of you who are on here could go ahead and reply. I would really like to hear feedback from as many of you as possible on all of the things that have been mentioned on here... 1) Why do YOU think that coaches are leaving CBEL? 2) What do you think we could do to bring back the excitement and enthusiasm that once existed? 3) What is it that has made this sim turn to being boring, going thru the motions, like Chip suggested in not changing his settings, and doing the same couple of things each season and then watching? 4) Why the decline in traffic that Jay mentioned? 5) Does everybody agree with the Dagger-man in that there is a direct correlation between the CBEL downtrend and the loss of colorful PR's? 6) How much more interest would be generated if a new rule - a PR bonus rule dubbed the Dagger-Dave Rule (lol) was put into effect? 7) I've always been tossing around that idea of adding double-dipping. How much of an effect do you think this would have on the league? 8) ANYTHING...OPEN FORUM man...voice any comments, suggestions, gripes, whatever that you have. Please...open up and let us know...is it because there have been no changes to the sim? If so, what? Is it the commishes? Is it because other coaches have left CBEL? How about because many other coaches have left DEL in general over the past year? Talk!!! Thanks in advance to any of you who comment on this. Date: Fri Jan 11 15:16:39 2008 Sender: Perez Suarez Chris, I know that I am one of the coaches that do not write oftenly and I have good ideas on what to write but I unfortunately do not have the time. I have been here awhile and I must say that when I came in the league was a lot more enjoyable than nowadays. The difference in my opinion is not the sim, the sim to me always has its tweaks that make it very entertaining and the way it is right now I think it is almost perfect, I would not change it a bit. The difference as Dave said are the PRīs. AJ, Worley, Miss Manners, Dirty Sanchez, those are the PRīs that I miss, those were really fun but I think too much limitations have been set and now you can not write anything that Dumbo or Cinderella would have said. My first season at CBEL, I had a great game against Andy (he was coaching Washington) and I had SW Texas St. I remember the PR that Dave Ayres wrote about it, it got me pumped for the game and it was really a good one. Those rivalries really made it interesting and a lot of fun. The only rivalry I had seen lately is a rivalry between Tennessee and Virginia in CCEL but besides it there is nothing as funny as what CBEL had years ago. I know there are kids and I understand that there should be some restrictions but the PRīs from Worly and Dirty Sanchez were creative, maybe they attacked some people but this is only a game and I would not get offended if someone said anything about me in the game. The media is always looking for the controversial story not the facts, if we really want to have an enjoyable media I think that several restrictions should be erased and let the war of press releases begin!!! It is a GAME and the purpose is to have fun at least in my opinion. Date: Fri Jan 11 16:36:51 2008 Sender: Ian Armstrong Hey, My opinion sort of runs along the lines of Perez's. I think that there has been a loss of some really colorful members to the league lately and that hurts the quality of the press releases. I won't lie and say I read every word of every press release out there but I will say the amount of ones I read all the way through has dwindles. I also think Perez is right when he says that there are quite a few restrictions. I understand that there needs to be but sometimes I think the restrictions may go a little too far. I will speak for myself when I say I do not feel the need to be overly offensive in my press releases (btw I am aware my press releases, though numerous, are not very entertaining) but that fear extends to writing about my fellow coaches. What I mean by that, and something Perez touched on, is that rivalries are a great part of this game but I personally have trouble knowing how much good natured ribbing is cool and how much is going to tick people off and get my team dinged. It may sound stupid but I think a little healthy taking the piss out of each other and our teams would be fun. Again I agree with Perez in that it is only a game. Obviously we don't want to get mean but I think there can be a lot of room for good natured fun in building rivalries. After all isn't that a big part of why fans like college sports? And when these rivalries get built people want to stay a part of the league. When I first started I would look at the banter back and forth and it motivated me to want to make my team good enough to be worth another coach writing about. I mean think about the press releases we are missing and a lot of them spent a lot of time one other teams. I suspect I am not the only one who used to read those PRs wanting to see if I was in them. I think the other issue is time. I try to do a press release every week and I try to make them worth at least a look from my fellow CBELers. But I sometimes miss weeks because my schedule just gets crazy. As such I assume that happens to everyone. I don't think there is much that can be done about this but I think if the rivalries were boiling and the press releases involved us writing about more than just our own teams that people would be more compelled to read. For me the sim is fine. It has its quirks but it is not what drives people away I don't think. I am not sure if more rewards will work. I think it might for a while but I agree with, I think it was Chris, who said that interest eventually will dissipate if that is the only reason people are doing it (or at least I think that is what he said- sorry Chris). But then again I could be wrong on all of that. This is just my opinion. Date: Fri Jan 11 16:51:49 2008 Sender: David Rogers I did indeed love the colorful PRs. It added a ton to the league, and inspired me to some creative writing as well. I am slammed for time, so I doubt my PRs would be any better for the next 8 weeks anyway. As for building a top program, it is somewhat formulaic, but there is no reason a new coach could not build a top program (using that formula) either. It just takes time and a bit of effort. I think encouraging a bit more smack talk, and inviting in some of the great PR writers of the past would be a dandy idea. ECHL has a great rule for consecutive PRs being worth a significant bonus (though he limited that bonus for top prestige programs). Best-of-luck, now you'll excuse if I go and drown my sorrows ina frosty mug (I just set the record for most near miss championships in a season, ECHL, CBEL, CMEL, CCEL). Date: Fri Jan 11 17:50:23 2008 Sender: Red Burley Obviously I havent quit CBEL; not that I havent been tempted more then once. Im regularly tempted to dump all my hoops teams. Personally I could care less about PRs. I write them when I remember and solely to get the bonus. Outside of the Whorleybird days, all the press releases that end up in my mailbox get deleted without being opened. My lack of enthusiasm, if you want to call it such, IS about the sim. I think Ive made comments in the past, and Im sure most were passed off as sour grapes. However, here is my take, Chris asked the question so blame him if you are tired of hearing me griping: "3) What is it that has made this sim turn to being boring, going thru the motions, like Chip suggested in not changing his settings, and doing the same couple of things each season and then watching?" -People don't change their settings because there doesnt appear to be any benefit to trying new strategies. 2-or-3-Pass, More Motion, Straight Man or Matchup Zone seem to be the only settings that work. Yeah, you can tweak things like individuals' shooting ranges, play around with defensive matchups, but your basic strategy is always the same. The penalties for doing anything different seem to always outweigh the benefits. Im sure that veteran coaches who really know what they are doing (I am not one of them) see this more clearly than anyone. The reason I like the football sim so much (and Im sure Im not alone) is because you CAN effect the outcome of the game with good strategy. You can try different things and have a reasonable chance of success. In the basketball sim, it either has NO effect or a negative effect. -Because strategy seems to be a dead end, the only way you can win in the basketball sim is to have superior talent. Thats fair and understandable and realistic; but from a "playability" point of view, its horrible! Because the "elite" teams in CBEL have a HUGE advantage in collecting all the best talent, unless you are one of those elite teams, any dreams you might have of being successful at a high level are a forlorn hope. There arent many cinderella stories in CBEL, because the sim makes it impossible. Am I the only one who sees this conundrum? You cant be successful without talent, and you cant get the talent without being successful. I also wonder if it is "realistic" any longer. Recent years in the NCAA should show anyone who is watching, the talent is much more widely dispersed these days. In any case, I go back to the football sim for contrast. Every CCEL season, there seems to be another team that rises up and takes a bite out of one or more of "the big dogs". This year I would point to Mississippi. Smart recruiting (and good strategy) can get you places in the football sim. That doesnt seem to be the case in CBEL. I guess what Im saying here is, the lack of PRs is a symptom, not a cause. What I think is, the lack of PRs is due to a lack of enthusiasm. Why is that? Because maybe the sim IS getting boring . . . Date: Fri Jan 11 19:34:55 2008 Sender: Tom DeSanctis I've said it many times before and I'll say it again. With only 13 scholarships available if you make even a slight mistake with recruiting or very few of your scholarship recruits pan out to be "A" rated players by the time they are a senior, you are pretty much screwed. I spent several seasons recruiting what I thought were pretty good players only to see them peak out at a "B" rating. I'm not sure if it was coincidence or if grabbing Oz as my assistant coach has helped the situation at Kentucky, but I've had two super recruiting classes and two great camps over the past two seasons and that has finally catapulted my team into the top 25 in talent and ranking. Now, being able to stay there is a much different story. I'll admit that I'm not the best game planner in CBEL (or CCEL for that matter) but its the recruiting and competition in these sims that make them enjoyable for me. I don't think Double Dipping in CBEL would be feasible because there isn't a direct split between Tiers like there is in CCEL (FCS/Tier 3 and FBS/Tier 1 and Tier 2). P.S. I miss the Worley Bird. In fact, I thought he was reincarnated in the coach of USC in CCEL. hehe... It would be nice to see the fun PR's coming back, though. Date: Fri Jan 11 19:57:49 2008 Sender: David Smith I love CBEL. It's the first DEL game that I joined and it is still my favorite. I remember when I started my goal was to become one of the best and I have stuck to that goal and have been able to build an elite level program at Louisville. I agree with some of the "complaints" with the sim that others have posted...mainly Red's observation regarding prestige and building a program. It is a lot like a person going to get credit for the first time...you can't get credit without having credit. For us it is you can't get top recruits without having prestige and you have a hard time climbing to the 19/20 prestige level without having talent. However, people do end up with credit and in our game it is possible to build your program to the 20 prestige level. Not easy...but possible. I look at Bob Crigger as a perfect example. Here is a coach who has been in the league 34 years. Look at his record. Bad last couple years at Iowa...got demoted (I think), went to Witchita State (tier2) for 3 years then back to tier 1 at South Florida. He has built the Bulls into one of the dominant teams that Dagger mentioned and currently has a 19 prestige after having had a 20 for the previous 4 years. He also won the CBEL championship. Concerning the Sim itself my philosophy has become - acquire the best talent possible, set your style of play, and then sit back and watch them play with very little intervention on my part. I have from time to time tweeked things like training, playing/shooting depth, and shoot against. However, for the most part once things are set for the season I don't change them. That is probably why my team has failed at the higher levels of the CBEL tournament when I have to play against better coaches. In CBA I play M-M while in CBEL I play matchup zone. M-M requires more coaching and I went to it several years back as a way of learning the sim better. I have not adopted it for Louisville though...I have stuck with the matchup zone for a very long time. In the DEL basketball sims sticking with 1 defense is a benefit. You lose defensive effectiveness if you switch. I wonder sometimes if it would be better to get rid of that. I might be more willing to try something else against an opponent. As far as PRs I also miss the "controversial" writings of past coaches. I have never been one to write in that style and I doubt many read my PRs. I read some of the other coaches but I rarely read any PRs from any of the other DEL leagues that I am in. I have tried my hand at the extra regular PR as a way of trying to contribute to the interest of the leauge as well as build my own prestige level. Blue Chip Report (past) and Big East Weekly (current) have been my attempts. My Louisville press is written mainly for myself. From the time I started playing CBEL I have kept a record of my teams history (I can still go back to my tier 3 Northeastern team). I follow each players skill development and career statistics. I keep press releases to see what I have said about a player when I recruit him. It is the history part of it that keeps my interest in my program. Suggestions: Since there is probably not much that we can do about the playability of the sim then the only other alternative is to spice it up in some other way. I haven't spent a lot of time thinking about it but here are a couple ideas off the top of my head... 1. Each tier 1 conference should have a "commissioner". It could rotate among the conference coaches that want to participate. The conference commissioner could do things like write a weekly PR about the conference which could engage in a little "our conference is better than the others" type talk and promote the coaches and players of their league. Each commissioner would represent their conference in the CBEL selection committee (or appoint a representative). That would help with Chris and Andrew's problem of low participation. Of course the conference commissioners would receive a PR bonus and for that reason it may be a good idea to have this position be on a rotation basis. I don't know what you do if you have a conference where nobody wants to do it :( Well...so much for a couple ideas. That's all I've got right now. Date: Fri Jan 11 20:12:03 2008 Sender: Frank Nickles It would be neat to have a message board for each league. It would be a way to get to know the coaches a little more and would be a vehicle to encourage communication. To further this it would be nice to have a league page with standings, schedules, etc., as with all fantasy leagues. I realize that this takes development but some changes from time to time would be nice. The way to keep customers is to continue to improve. It doesn't have to be the sim, but the window dressing around it. Date: Fri Jan 11 20:46:56 2008 Sender: Bill Edwards People come and go in all Leagues. The truth is some people get "hooked" on this sim (me me me :) other people can take it or leave it. The degree of time and effort one puts into the game is directly proportional to the results achieved in my view. When I first started in CBEL 10 seasons ago in Tier 3 I set myself a goal of climbing to Tier 1 and building a winning program within 4 seasons and then elevating that program to compete for conference championships. Only through lots of patience and learning the nuances of the sim have I been able to accomplish these goals. I think the sim is absolutely sensational. Is it perfect? No. But it sure as heck is pretty dam good. For me I treat the whold deal as a big fantasy because when I was a boy growing up in Indiana and playing ball I always dreamed of playing for a great college team and coaching a college team. Same for pro teams. So for me this game is a dream come true. Hells bells how many 60 year old men has this for a hobby...:) I sought out advice from guys that have been here a while the first few seasons I was here, particularily in recruiting areas and I thank those guys (you know who you are) for giving me advice. The sim itself in regard to coaching is what I really enjoy doing. I had coached pro for several seasons prior to trying CBEL and became pretty successful so the transition was a bit easier. I coach every game and try a lot of different things. The sim lets you do a lot and to me never gets boring. If it becomes boring to me then that is the signal that it is time to move on to something else. As for the PR's I really enjoy doing them. Now I do not have the flair that some of the guys past and present do, but again I just try to put myslef in the place of the "real" coach and just go from there. I really don't care if people read my PR's or not...lol...heck I have fun doing them. I do agree that perhaps with a littly more leeway I would maybee let's say do a little of the Bob Knight style of Pr's....occasionaly I do this in my pro League and it always generates some good natured response. I would be careful about giving a whole bunch of extra points for "unusual" press releases. What one person thinks is good or funny another may consider bad and not funny. What I do think we can do a better job is more inter action within our respective conferences. Someone earlier kind of touched on this same thing. I mean I have been here several seasons now and the truth is there are 3 0r 4 coaches in my League that I have never even spoken with. Now I guess I have to take the blame myself for some of that so I have set myself a goal this season to write emails to my fellow League coaches and jsut try to be more cordial. In closing I just would say that although it may seem like things are on a decline now I really think with some effort on all our parts the League can bounce back. I think we have 2 GREAT commissioners. These guys work their butts off trying to improve things here and I just think we are fortunate in that respect. One more thing we all can do is use good ole "word of mouth" and PROMOTE this sim to our sports friends and pals. If we all could just get say ONE NEW person to try the sim each season and retain half of those then we would be on our way to getting things going upward again. I dunno guys but I prefer to look at the glass as half full instead of half empty. I have really enjoyed reading the comments here so far...great idea Chris! Date: Fri Jan 11 21:17:44 2008 Sender: Loren Smith I like the colorful PRs and would not mind having my name in print as long as it is in the context of the sim and not an overly personal attack. I do the same at times in the football CCEL Sis Boom Bah article...it seems fair to point out team flaws or coaching flaws in the context of the article as long as it is done in good taste. One sim change might be a bit more randomness when it comes to the tournament. You very rarely see the lower seeded teams (say #10 or lower) make it through the first round and even more rarely make it to the sweet sixteen. This might make teams building up programs (like myself) feel like they have a chance to make some noise in the tourney and would mirror real-life. I don't know exactly how prestige is determined in CBEL; but, it seems that making the tournament just a bit more random and also awarding different levels of prestige based on how far into the tournament you go might make sticking around to build a program more interesting...I built Tier 2 & 3 teams into solid teams for that level, but knew I never had a chance to advance in the tournament against Tier 1 teams. Of course, I might feel differently if I were a highly rated team. Date: Fri Jan 11 23:22:31 2008 Sender: Christopher E Smith Thanks for all of the feedback so far guys! I guess what I'm reading in nearly every post is about the PR's being way too restricted. I'm actually sort of surprised by that, because I thought I had made it clear that just about anything goes. I have not gotten on a single PR writer for quite some time, with the exception of the one coach who joined (I believe Columbia) long enough to grace us all with his masterful "f you all! f the league! you f'in n's...blah, blah." I have actually encouraged the Dagger-man to continue to write his columns, and also encouraged Worley/Steele not to leave the league. In fact, I thought our rules on PR's were far less restrictive than those of other college leagues. Personally, I would not be offended by anything that could be written in a PR. I'm not offended by any cursing, sexual references, being told my team sucks...maybe if someone said "Your Momma wears Army boots" to me! (LOL!) But no...I'm not offended by anything that is written. I have only tried to keep the writings from "crossing that fictional line" to keep them at some level of control. It's a very tough call guys. As a commish do you want to try to enforce the PR rules as written in the DEL pages to make every PR suitable for a child? The excellent commish before me attempted that and was nearly burned at the stake for it. Do you want to open PR's up to the "wild wild west", where anything at all goes (I believe EAFL did this). What I attempted to do was to find a middle ground that allows for almost anything, short of "My team is gonna beat the shit out of your team." or "Coach Ayres was too busy getting a bl*w job in the hot tub to comment." I allow talk of whips and chains, and on and on. Worley was a master at being able to write a beautiful COLRFUL PR and not cross that "line". So that's why I'm surprised to hear that people unanimously think the rules are too strict on PR's. Don't confuse me as being pissed at reading these comments...I seriously am not. This is exactly what this thread is for. If this is the #1 gripe we have in the league, then we can fix it and make it "anything goes", as long as we get the ok from Andy. But I'm also not convinced that this is the reason we have had so many coaches leave and/or lose interest. Sure, it may be a contributor, but there has to be much more to it than this. Please keep those comments comings guys! And same as before - speak out, don't hold anything back. Date: Sat Jan 12 04:53:21 2008 Sender: Johnny Barnes Setting your strategies for the season, leaving the sim to run, and only coming on to check results does not seem very engaging. There has to be some other reason for people to stay and play. Coaches need to be involved in the game, feel they have a role to play, otherwise this will all seem a waste of time and money. Tom wrote above that the competition is what is most enjoyable about these sims, and I agree. I'll add to that competition against other human coaches. Without that sense of competition and of community we may be better off going to buy a PC game and sim through however many seasons we like, when we like. I believe this sim needs that banter between coaches. That friendly rivalry where each coach is determined to win against each of the others, and where each coach welcomes the challenge the other players provide. Any initiative that encourages involvement, role playing and human interaction should be welcomed. Perhaps a betting competition, press interviews, or just more forum discussion. Date: Sat Jan 12 11:13:07 2008 Sender: Dave Ayres Sorry, guys, I would have replied to this thread Friday evening, but, as Chris so presciently predicted, I was "too busy getting a BJ in the hot tub!" First of all, when I brought up the whole PR issue earlier in this thread, and stated that I felt the league seemed to be "heading south" since the second departure of Worley/Steele, I neglected to mention the great personal job that Chris (with Andrew's help) has done as Commish. Actually, the efforts that Chris has put forth to keep the league informed, interesting, and afloat go way "above and beyond" what you'd expect from a DEL Commissioner. Heck, I think Chris has been the best CBEL commissioner in my 40+ Joe-Paterno-like seasons in the league! (Now that I've garnered some extra brownie points, I expect a couple of Jessica Simpson look-alikes, courtesy of Mr. Smith, to appear at next weekend's clothes-optional sauna session in South Bend!) And Chris was absolutely right about his being a lot more lenient than most previous commissioners in what he allows in PR. That being said, I HAVE seen Chris become overly sensitive about certain comments/PR that I thought was okay. Best examples of this have been coaches' written criticisms of the tournament selection committee, and the removal of the rookie Southern Utah coach a few seasons ago for a "sexually suggestive" PR that I thought was no more inflammatory than some of the Rod Steele (or my own Dagger Dave) PR. Anyway, Chris, overall a 10-star (non-bl*w) job! In my earlier thread comment I also touched on the difficulties of fielding an elite team on the Tier 1 level, and the tendency for a few schools to dominate. Like many of the other respondents above, the sim is all about recruiting. I, too, don't think that coaching decisions make a whole lot of difference in a game's outcome, except to possibly NEGATIVELY affect your team if you don't use the "vanilla" settings. I had quite a few communications with Worley/Steele during his CBEL tenure, and the MAIN reason that he left the sim the second time was because of his inability to develop a top program at USC. He specifically referenced UMass's (and a few others) continued dominance of the league. This is Andy's sim, but as long as Andy coaches at UMass, the league as a whole will suffer. (I know that more than a few of you guys believe this, but are too intimidated to say it!) The "golden years" of CBEL were the seasons right after Andy retired as the coach of Washington, and before he took over at UMass. (Come on now, no one really believes that Fitz is actually pulling the UMass strings!) What would be the best case scenario for Andy (and the league) is to have him "retire" at UMass, and then take one of the WORST Tier 1 schools and see if he can turn it into a contender. Everyone else can watch what he does, and ultimately, gain a better insight into the sim. I truly believe that this would make a HUGE difference in CBEL! The other major item (as mentioned previously) is to make changes in the post-season tourney to more equalize the field (as in real-life). It's been suggested numerous times in the past, and it's a SIMPLE fix: totally elminate the POD BONUS (home court advantage) given to the higher tourney seeds. This would make the post-season MUCH more interesting! Anyway, I hope I've stimulated some additional discussion. And I really hope that Andy considers the UMass transfer thing! Date: Sat Jan 12 12:08:58 2008 Sender: Red Burley Thanks for mentioning Andy, Dave. I knew there was something else I wanted to put in my post, and couldnt remember what it was. First of all-I wish Andy would leave UMass, but not because I feel he has an unfair advantage. Its because *I* want UMass, I live about a 20 minute drive from the Mullins Center. Dave brings up the point of being able to watch Andy and see how he builds up a program. This brings me to something that would not effect the functioning of the sim but would be a huge advantage to some of us knuckleheads. After recruiting is done, and after waivers in the pros, obviously you can see who signed who. What you CANT see, and what would be helpful to some of us, would be someplace we could look to see HOW another team outbid us for the guy we really wanted. Maybe a page that would list all the offers made to that player. Those of us that flail helplessly when it comes to recruiting and signing players might actually learn something from a feature like this. I dont know if it would help retain coaches, but it would make things a tad less frustrating and might lead to better competition. Rather then just being outbid for talent year after year, we could actually learn from our mistakes. Date: Sat Jan 12 12:15:37 2008 Sender: Loren Smith Well, I took over the second to the bottom Tier 1 school in Oklahoma State just to see if I could build them up. I am not a good offensive coach and certainly not in the upper echelon of coaches; but, have had success in recruiting at the lower tiers and plan to stick with it as long as it takes to start getting some tourney victories. Date: Sat Jan 12 12:44:01 2008 Sender: James Sheasley During my two tenures in CBEL I have yet to break into Tier 1. I seem to be in a good position to do that after this upcoming season. I was fortunate to have a few other human coaches in the Patriot League this past season while I was at Navy. I found at the tier 3 level a team can have such a gap between the things they do well and things they don't do well where me changing the things I did from game to game could have a significant impact to take away an opponents strength and give them things they weren't as adept at doing. For example Holy Cross had their phenom freshman point guard and a good shooting guard while not having much ability to pound the inside. In my games against Holy Cross I went to a 3-2 zone when either of those guards were on the court. And that had significant results as it was one of the few season series that I swept. Holy Cross also demonstrates how not knowing what you are doing can have an extreme negative impact on team performance. Holy Cross was ranked 3rd in the Patriot League in talent, yet they finished the season at the very bottom of the conference. This coming season I am able to take over my alma-mater, JMU, in Tier 2, but I will be the only human coach in the conference. As I don't have much interest in developing a tier 2 program, I hope to only spend one season at JMU and make the transition to tier 1 where I will have more competition amongst human coaches. I think the pod bonus is also unnecessary with the dominance of the top teams in the league. And furthermore, when teams of the same seed happen to naturally fall into closer regions and no adjustments have to be made due to avoiding first round conference match-ups, they will be placed in their home region if possible. When George Mason played UConn in the regional final in Washington D.C. the crowd was overwhelming for GMU as D.C. is just miles from their campus. While this doesn't apply directly to the concept of "pod bonus", my point is that the higher seed doesn't always have a "home court" advantage. Date: Sat Jan 12 16:14:52 2008 Sender: Dan Hilsgen A few quick hits: 1. I echo the comments on the CBEL Tourny being much to predictable in who will win as usually what is expected happens. I think the truely enjoyable things about the real life NCAA March Madness is that even though it is generally thought that say...6 of the last 8 teams will be seeds 1, 2, 3 or 4 seeds there likely will be a cinderella or two and maybe even one that makes it to the final four. Even upsets in just the first couple of rounds will lead to added excitement. If when I get to the Tier 1 level and get my program to a level where I barely get into the tournament and the current POD BONUS or something else has not been tweaked or eliminated then I will try to win but will pretty much figure I will lose any games in the tournament that I am the lower seed in. If things change where cinderellas are more likely then I would enter it still rationally thinking that it isn't likely that I will get to the final four....but...I will know in the back of my head that my team could....just could....be one of the cinderellas. Some tournaments without the POD BONUS may play out like they do now, some may have a couple cinderellas and one or two may be like the Wild Wild West...where anything can happen. I think this is the biggest thing I would hope was addressed. 2. Thanks for your clairification on the PR rules n such. Yeah, the set up rules seem very wide open. I now might have to gameplan some interesting ideas provided I have the time and just see where it goes. I understand the desire to keep total chaos from happing in PR's. This discussion has shown me that there is good leway in what I can write about. 3. Rivalries are what drive sports and competition. However, it takes two coaches or programs or even conferences both participating in PR wars per say to make one. Not sure how to facititate rivalries other than the way they naturally seem to pop up (through continuous close competition and bullitin board material via the media). Date: Sat Jan 12 17:13:45 2008 Sender: Christopher E Smith This is good stuff guys! I appreciate reading every word you're all writing. Dagger - glad to hear you were off enjoying yourself (haha). And you did an excellent job of brown-nosing (lol). And yes, I will admit that there have been a couple of times (most of them way back in my beginning) where I may have over-reacted to a PR. For one thing - yes, I am "ultra-sensitive" (lol) to any public complaints against the selection committee, and that is because the guys that work on that do so on a voluntary basis, it is far more detailed than any other committee, and the committee puts a whole lot of effort into making every seed just right. So you go thru this process of meeting over each seed, and then you get coaches (who weren't willing to participate) hollering that they are an 8 instead of a 7. If you truly care about the tourney selections then you should participate. Otherwise you have no room to complain. It's like someone bitching because Hillary wins the election, but yet they didn't even vote. (I have been using"you" as a general term for anybody...not a Dave attack). The S Utah PR, if I remember correctly, basically came out saying that the team had been "flogging their mules", although it was a different term (can't remember). But who wants to read that? And that leads me back to last night's comment by me on PR's...of the 2 examples I gave, do you all really think that allowing content like that would improve attitudes? I do thank you for the compliments Dagger, although I personally don't think I'm at the top of the all time commish list (and let me not exclude Andrew in any reference I make to myself or "commish." I've never been out to win a popularity contest. Nonetheless, compliments are very much appreciated any time we receive them. Thanks to Bill as well. The pod bonus is something that nearly everyone has wanted removed for a long time. I can't say if that will ever happen or not, but with it being such a hot item of the coaches it might be well worth doing. As far as coaches being able to build a program and move up thru the ranks...hell yeah it's possible. I realize it can be frustrating when you're at a lower level and trying to move up quickly. But perhaps that's part of the problem - being in a rush to move up too quickly and/or before you learn the ins and outs of coaching and recruiting. It sounds to me like we have some coaches who have not made use of one of DEL's most valuable resources - the willingness of experienced coaches to help out. If any new coach comes into the league, takes the time to read ALL of the DEL Help Pages on that particular sport, and then also asks very important questions to coaches, whether that be on this forum or by direct e-mail to a coach), I guarantee that they can learn the ropes of building a winning program. Perfect example - Skylar Wilton of Texas AM CC. That team was simply pathetic when he took it over, he had a ZERO prestige, and ZERO experience in CBEL. He read and re-read everything, and he asked me question after question (and I'm far from the best coach to be asking). I helped guide him thru everything from scheduling to who to keep to a full course on recruiting invitations and the actual recruiting phase, and even how to keep players with PT promises happy. What did he do? The guy went out and landed the #1 class in the nation (he went nuts with pt promises - 7 I believe, along with his schollies and about 12 points). In a matter of 3(?) seasons he guided his team to a berth in the Big Dance, and he never lost a player due to PT. Frank Nickles and Dan Hilgsen sort of fall into that same category. So there is a wealth of information available IF YOU ASK. Whereas I think if you read everything, and then just try to figure out everything on your own, you can easily become a lost puppy (especially when it comes to recruiting). Bill Edwards is a masterful coach who likes to micro-manage each game, and every phase of it - that's excellent! He had already been a God in the pro game, but had struggled somewhat with the recruiting aspect of the college game. He asked others for a little help, and took his team to status of national powerhouse! And then there are coaches like Marc Byers, who I consider the top coach in CBEL. To watch him leave his perennial powerhouse St Bonaventure, go to a not-very-good UNLV team, and turn them into contenders in his first season, and then national powerhouse in his second. That is all proof of that it can be done. Hell, I won a national championship several seasons ago, and reached the final this season, and I am FAR from the best coach in this league. If I can win it all, then ANYONE can! Whew...I gotta drop off of here for a little while, but will comment on other topics later. Keep-em coming guys - the more we get, the more we can do to help things. Date: Sat Jan 12 18:18:03 2008 Sender: Dan Hilsgen Chris, I was wondering if you could clairify something for me. I will list what you wrote and then ask the questions. "The pod bonus is something that nearly everyone has wanted removed for a long time. I can't say if that will ever happen or not, but with it being such a hot item of the coaches it might be well worth doing." Who has the power to make the decision on removing the pod bonus? Is it Andy or the CBEL comish(s)? The reason I ask is because you stated that it is something nearly everyone has wanted removed for a long time and it has continued on this thread to be a hot item. I would think then by removing it the net result would be very positive. Positives: - The feeling going into the tournament that all teams have at least a cinderella shot at winning it all or makeing an unexpected push deep into the tournament or being the #8 or worse seed that knocks off the powerhouse #1 seed in the region. - A feeling that even though your program is constantly ranked outside the Top 25 but is almost always in the tournament you can do well in the tournament and build a legacy for your program even without that Top 25 title. - New coaches see that Cinderella stories can come true. - Mimics real life March Madness better. Negatives: - The only one I can think is that teams seeded No. 1, 2, 3 etc. might feel the need to put even more time into preping for a game and might be less certain of an impending win. And I am not so sure this is a negative. If I were a No. 1, 2, or 3 seed I would rather have that sense of anticipation over that thought of pretty much figuring I have it in the bag. Date: Sat Jan 12 20:48:39 2008 Sender: Andy Dolphin A couple quick comments. The relative lack of upsets in the CBEL tournament has nothing to do with the pods. At most, that's a couple-point swing for the "home" team, so unless you had a 1-point loss, it's simply wrong to blame the pod effect. I realize that the pod bonus is a lightning rod for upset coaches, but you can't eliminate lightning strikes by removing a lightning rod... The real reasons we don't see more upsets in the CBEL tournaments are twofold. First, there aren't quality mid-majors in the way that there are in real-life, because the good coaches all take promotions. I'm fairly sure that a talented CBEL coach could keep his program ranked in the 60s (as the good Tier III coaches can do in CCEL), which gives them a realistic shot at an upset come tournament time. And, the elite Tier II programs could be sitting around the periphery of the top 25 year after year, just like with real-life Gonzaga. But, with Bob running the teams, the upset odds are much lower. In short, that's probably 20 teams (or, the 12 through 16 seeds) that have virtually no chance of winning. The other issue, maybe related, is that the best CBEL teams are much better than the best real-life teams. Just going off the predictive rankings, last year's CBEL Louisville would be expected to beat last year's real-life UNC about 8 times out of 9 tries. This could be, again, the fact that Bob isn't the best recruiter, so good CBEL coaches will stand out far higher above the pack than real-life ones. Or, it could be that CBEL coaches aren't doing this full-time, so you'll see a greater disparity based on experience with the sim and time people are willing to commit. In a league with equal coaching/recruiting skills (i.e., all Bob run), the disparity goes away and the league looks entirely realistic. Regarding my participation in the league, I realize this will always be something of an issue. It's really nice in CCEL, where I can coach a Tier I independent (Notre Dame), and thus nobody has to compete against me who doesn't want to. In CBEL, I'm opting for the low-effort strategy, and contrary to popular belief, John and I really do split the duties. He recruits, I coach. (A few seasons, he's been unable to recruit so I did that for him. And, a couple of times, we didn't recruit at all.) I'm not trying to be argumentative, but it seems that the same people who complain that coaching has only a tiny impact on the outcome are also saying that my coaching of UMass somehow makes CBEL less enjoyable. Regarding the question about me dropping UMass and taking over a team as a newbie coach, with zero prestige. For the record, I have joined both CCEL and CMEL as a newbie coach, and in both cases had no problems turning weak programs around in a few seasons. My CCEL Florida State team entered the preseason with a top-15 talent ranking in what would have been my third season, and my Washington team (which I took over from FSU) made the BCS title game in my fourth season. In CMEL, I won the championship in my sixth season in the league. For that matter, CBEL UMass was a 16 or 17 prestige when I joined on. I'm not writing this to boast -- I'm pointing out that I've already gone through this exercise before, and have already demonstrated that good coaches can climb the ladder quickly in the DEL college leagues. So, I fail to see how going through such an exercise yet again is going to change anyone's mind. Date: Sat Jan 12 21:26:54 2008 Sender: Tom DeSanctis Andy beat me here but I was going to point out that he took on Notre Dame with 0 coaching prestige points, watched them drop immediately to a 16 and then bringing them back up to a 20 within three seasons in CCEL. But.... "The relative lack of upsets in the CBEL tournament has nothing to do with the pods. At most, that's a couple-point swing for the "home" team, so unless you had a 1-point loss, it's simply wrong to blame the pod effect." Ok, Kentucky lost at (POD) Marquette this season in the 2nd round by 1 point. There's the proof. hehe Date: Sun Jan 13 00:56:34 2008 Sender: Christopher E Smith Ok ladies, To continue... Dan - I think your question about who is in charge of the pod bonus has been answered. And anybody else who brought up the pod bonus - your desires to do away with it have been answered. Also, anyone who mentioned UMass opening up - that has just been answered. Allow me to revisit the idea of double-dipping... First off...how many of you believe that you would be interested in taking a team IF double-dipping in some way was implemented? Ok, the only way I thought this could work in the past was to have some new teams created outside of the 3 tiers that we already have. This CANNOT be done. New teams could be created within tier 3 in special "bogus" conferences designated only for double-dipping which would NOT have bids to the Big Dance or DIT. The double-dippers would have a tourney of their own (most likely). BUT...here is a VERY IMPORTANT question that I would like to hear as many opinions as possible on: If "x" amount of "double-dipping" teams were to be added (with "x" most likely being 20 to 30), how would you all feel about having that many more teams to deal with in inviting and recruiting? It's not possible to create a separate pool of players for the double-dippers, so they'd have to feed out of the same pool of players we already have. Would this be a problem for you guys, or would this be well worth a possible implementation os a double-dipping system? PLEASE SOUND OFF! Thanks! Date: Sun Jan 13 01:27:50 2008 Sender: James Sheasley I don't think double-dippers isolated to tier 3 would impact tier 1 recruiting efforts. I personally would be very interested in double-dipping if I could use James Madison (Tier 2) or Navy (Tier 3) or possibly other programs that I have an attachment to. I realize that some scenarios are less likely than others. Date: Sun Jan 13 06:31:00 2008 Sender: David Rogers Double Dippers: A double dipper tier III team would impact Tier 1 recruiting (though lightly noticeable), in my opinion. I wouldn't ban them from all tournament play, but I would restrict them to the DIT. This simply mirrors double-dipping in CCEL, which has been a fun experiment. I don't expect that adding double-dippers would have a huge impact on the league though. Date: Sun Jan 13 08:49:03 2008 Sender: Loren Smith Double Dippers would certainly impact recruiting at Tier 1, Tier 2, & non-DD Tier 3. I started was building Long Island at Tier 3 with NO scholarships. I was able to get solid recruits to walk on and then provided them scholarships in subsequent years because they were the best on the team. I think that I only went into recruiting with 2 scholarships in the four years that I was there. Usually, my recruits had me as their fourth or fifth choice behind schools offering scholarships or in higher tiers. Those top choices normally filled their roster before the guys that I was targeting came up. So, they walked on at LIU. If the DD conferences are in the same recruiting region as a coach trying to build his Tier 3 or Tier 2 team (and maybe even Tier 1), there will be recruits taken by the DD schools that would otherwise go to a coach who is not a DD. Date: Sun Jan 13 10:31:33 2008 Sender: Brian Steinberg Couple things here ... first I guess in general I am on a bit of a down period of interest in DEL given everything else I have going on for entertainment and RL responsibilities. That said, I still manage a 20 prestige CBEL squad, just double-dipped BEL/BWC, and recently double-dipped CFL/CWC and NABA/BWC. I guess this brings me to my first topic which is the magic template. While strategy helps and there isn't one way to do things there are a lot more ways NOT to do things. For example in COACH until I see it working consistently you will never see me doing WR reverses, QB runs, or 0 man all-out blitzes among other things. In BASKET this would be doing much on the extreme: 1 pass or 5 pass for example. I'm not sure how this can be fixed as what we have now is better than years ago when training all your points in rushing and never passing could give you an unbeatable rushing attack UNLESS the defense trained run defense and keyed it. Regarding Andy and UMAss ... Every new league I've joined I am competative from season 1 too. Give him a new squad and since he knows what NOT to do he will be competitive right away wherever he goes. Regarding PR's this goes back to my downswing on interest ... I gave up making "fun" PR's for many reasons and typically don't read anyone else's other than a few specific owners I know may be worthwhile. This also gets back to rivalries or lack thereof. I don't have a magic fix for you ... since I started playing this game in the 90's I maxed out characters in EQ, DOAC, had runs with QUAKE, and many other games and got bored and quit. I got married, got a "real job", and am building a 1/2 million dollar house. For some reason despite all this (other than a small break) I am still playing THIS game so something keeps me coming back. I can't blame Andy for not drastically changing a successful formula too much. It's somewhat surprising this game has lasted this long at all! If you want some ideas for getting traffic up I would brainstorm ways to get new coaches interested and keep them interested quickly. This is still a game for geeks who happen to like sports more than the other way around. I would look for ways to make day to day changes matter more but still cater to coaches who don't have time for more than periodic tweaks to a general magic template. One thing I still disagree with is the importance of "one big day" more than the entire season to build your team for year (or years) to come. If you are busy or forget or otherwise have obligations just before invites/recruits or free agency round 1 your team is hosed. People for years have suggested spreading this out over a longer period of time which also has it's negatives. I do like the idea someone suggested to report losing bids on players. So in conclusion to my ramblings while waiting on the NFL games to start ... Andy has done an amazing job in creating a GAME that has lasted almost 20 years while billion dollar gaming companies provide games that come and go. Our Commishes in CBEL have done an amazing job and is far more active than others. Can't blame them. I suspect at some point this will come down to Andy and whether he wants to revamp his games again at some point or just tweak. It's not like these leagues are dead ... we have just seen some turnover in veteran owners which is bound to happen in any game. Date: Sun Jan 13 13:20:29 2008 Sender: Andrew Sanford I read everything that everyone has written and for the most part, I agreed with what everyone said. With a sim like this, one that hasn't changed in a while and I'm not saying its a bad thing. I can remember, I might have been in middle school when I started playing and we had to email all of our orders in instead of having this wonderful website. To get old coaches back: I don't know if it is possible to get old coaches back. They all have a reason why they left, boredom, real life taking over, etc. I don't know if we can get them back without making a change to the sim. I know I left 5 or 6 years back for maybe a year or two and I missed it so I came back and here I am. To get new coaches: I know I have advertised a few times on some other boards that I frequent, I don't know what good it does. I know with me, sometimes I would wish guys would sign up with what seemed like a real name, it would make it look like they were a bit serious and not with some kind of corny name like "The Cool Kid" or something of that nature. I guess we just have to advertise and hope that they stay and like the game so we can have more coaches. I know the more coaches I see, the more I am happy because then I don't have to fill the DIT with computer squads which I have been having to do more and more the past few seasons. I guess if there is one thing I would like to see is when a recruit or a free agent signs with a team, I would like to see how close another team was in signing that recruit/free agent. This may be more needed in the pro leagues than college. Date: Sun Jan 13 15:58:16 2008 Sender: Jay Schlegel Some of my additional thoughts: Having Andy or any of the top-level coaches take over a new team will prove nothing that hasn't already been proven, as mentioned above. But I do think there is a *perception* that it is so difficult to overcome the top-level coaches as to be effectively nearly impossible. If folks do not get enough enjoyment out of the sim otherwise, I think eventually that perception can lead to frustration or boredom and leaving the league. So if we can figure out how to add double-dippers, increase rivalries, and add interest to PRs, that would be great. I don't think double dippers would significantly affect recruiting unless there are a lot of them. However, the CCEL experience seems to indicate that double dippers end up becoming the big dogs of tier-3, which affects recruiting within that tier but also affects the perception of a newbie coach that there is a huge immediate hurdle to overcome if you find a DDer on your schedule. I too have had my frustrations with the lack of upsets in the CBEL Tournament. Whether it is due to the pod bonus or not is not clear to me. It could also be due to a fantastic job of seeding the field by the selection committee. I think the tournament brings focus to the fact that there are really only 15 or so teams that have a realistic chance at winning the tournament. Again, this is largely about perception. But it also highlights the limitations of the coaching options -- just what can the coach rated #20 do differently in their gameplan to upset the top-level coaches? I've tried the available options in such situations, and no upsets were to be had. I'm not advocating increased randomization, nor do I think that is what anyone else here would want. If there is any tweaking to the coaching that could be done, that might help here. So, if CBEL needs a better caliber of coach to stay at tier-2, how do we do that? We would have to make it worthwhile to stay there, as currently only a few coaches do so. Currently there is a prestige cap on lower-tier teams -- why not remove it? Maybe link prestige at lower levels to SoS, so that winning a bunch of games against cupcakes doesn't upend things. Or keep prestige as it is (so that upper-tier teams can still win recruiting battles if other things are equal) and build an incentive program which increases recruiting points (but does not change prestige): win your conference, get an extra point; win your conf tourney, get an extra point; win X post-season games, get X points. For rivalries, we could designate one hard-coded unchanging conference rivalry for each team (e.g. Duke/UNC, MI/MISt, etc) -- the winner gets an additional recruiting point. We could also allow coach-requested rivalries for 1-2 non-conf games (like scheduling, both coaches have to confirm) with the winner getting an extra point each season. For recruiting, I think it would help if recruiting activities of some kind happened over a longer period of time -- particularly during the post-season. The post-season in CBEL is not very long, but it is long enough (including the week for selecting the tourney field) that if your team isn't in the post-season then there is nothing to do until season init. I know that from past discussions that the recruiting pool cannot be generated earlier, but I forget why that is. If there is any way to move up the generation of the list, that might help alleviate boredom. Additionally, maybe there is a way to build in some kind of prerecruiting: allocate points each week either to regions or to positions (e.g. allocate a point to get a C or PG), but not both regions and positions, to give some early edge. Here I will mention something I've mentioned in similar discussions of the football sim. I agree that the DEL sims attract folks who likely are geeks first and sports fans second. Games such as Madden and the various basketball video games seemingly are attracting folks who are fans first and who don't have to be geeks in order to succeed. Now, I do not think we should "dumb down" DEL in order to make it appeal to a wider audience. As mentioned above, if we can demystify the recruiting results, that might help coaches with the learning curve. But if we are looking for a "great leap forward" into the next 20 years of DEL sims, I think we need to find a way to make the sim visual. How could this happen, in reality? I don't know. Since things currently have to run on a set league schedule, perhaps just converting the PBP into a visual medium, so you can watch a replay of your game, might be of interest. Yeah, I know I'm dreaming, but still. This is from the perspective of trying over the years to convince friends who do rotisserie leagues to try DEL. Obviously they are geeky and dedicated. But they aren't even interested in trying it. Why? My conclusion is that they don't get the vicarious thrill of watching their roto players make a big play on Sportscenter, they can't read DEL stats in the newspaper, they can't watch their players on TV either for the thrill or to scout for next season. So, my feeling is that making DEL visual at some level would reach a wider audience. Date: Sun Jan 13 16:39:04 2008 Sender: Dan Hilsgen Andy - Thanks for your clairification of the pod bonus. One or two points is a small amount and really is like putting on a bandaid for a wound that needs a tournaquet. I like the most recent idea that was expressed by making a way for people to create a colegiate program at the Tier 2 level that could become a consistently postseason viable program. Some way for a coach to say...."hey, I love this college. It is my favorite school. I want to be it's head coach forever in CBEL and I know that it is entirely possible through hard work and all to consistently field a team that has a shot at going deep into the tournament." Now, I think it still should be a little bit more difficult to maintain this on a consistant basis than it is to do at Tier 1. That would just mimic real life. Gonzaga isn't always great. They are always good or very good though. But if we show that it is a legit possibility then maybe more coaches stay at Tier 2 and more of the conference winners are maybe better teams getting those bottom half CBEL tournament seeds. I will go on record that I am planning on going to Tier 1 and there are a number of programs there I have followed and continue to follow in real life that I would like to run on CBEL. But I'll bet there are coaches out there that cheer on a Tier 2 team and might wish to stay there at Tier 2 with that team rather than move to Tier 1 if they thought they could be a consistent factor at Tier 2 if they worked their butt off. Date: Sun Jan 13 17:26:31 2008 Sender: Dave Ayres First of all, in all my eleven or so real-life years throughout the CBEL and CMEL, Andy Dolphin has been a real stand-up guy. Many seasons ago, when he was personally running CBEL himself, Andy gave me (the Dagger Man) a lot of leeway (particularly in PR). The sims are still great and I think that everyone who's been around DEL for awhile really appreciates this. We've also seen Andy mellow out and become much more diplomatic than he was when he first began the sims. But Andy, there are times when you still are hard-headed for (at least what appears to me) no apparent reason, and too stubborn to make fairly EASY changes (or at least what would appear to be fairly easy changes) to improve the game. You yourself have admitted that there is a greater (MUCH greater) disparity between the top teams in CBEL than there is in real life, leading to less upsets in the tournament. I am pretty sure that EVERYONE realizes this. As I recall (and Dagger does sometimes get senile after all these DEL seasons), the POD bonus was implemented right after one CBEL tournament in the late "teens" where there were a ton of upsets (something like 40-50%). But, the way things are now, with the top teams so much better, what is the purpose of the bonus, especially with an apparent super majority of the current coaches against it? I mean, if ANYONE should want the bonus to stay, it should be me and my Inebriated Irishmen, since we're the ONLY #1 seed since the time the bonus was initially implemented to EVER lose a first round game to a #16 seed (a Bacardi a day doesn't necessarily keep the alumni at bay)! But I see no need for the Pod bonus, and it couldn't be that difficult to remove the bonus from the game programming. As for Andy "retiring" from UMass, it's pretty obvious that he is going to be successful wherever he coaches, and I was NOT asking him to take over a team with "ZERO" prestige. My point was that, by taking over a terrible Tier 1 team, and letting everyone know about it up front, all the rest of the league (including a lot of us old-timers) would have a much better insight into HOW to build a Top Ten team from the "ground up." Because, like it or not, in CBEL it's a lot harder to build an elite program than it is in CMEL (which figures, if for no other reason than more upsets and variables occur in RL baseball). Let's take the current CBEL Dayton program (yep, they're in the same conference as UMass) as an example. It would be extremely cool (and challenging) to see someone like Andy take over this team, which is by FAR the WORST squad in Tier 1. Heck, they're almost the worst team in ANY tier: 0-30 record last season, current #329 ranking, #290 talent, super-ugly prestige (for Tier 1) of 10. Biggest guy on the Dayton roster is 6'9". Two most talented players are a C/B 6'7" soph center and a C/C junior PF (ouch!) But wait, it gets worse! Why? Because there are 7 other guys on the roster with D/C talent or worse on scholarship, and NONE are seniors! So you've got at least TWO more seasons before you can dump their worthless buttocks and use their schollies to recruit someone better! (On a semi-positive note there are four currently-available scholarships.) Aside from the C/B and C/C duo mentioned above, the other current Dayton scholarship holders are: 4 D/D juniors, a D/C soph, a D/C freshman, and an F/D soph! Did this last guy bribe Coach Bob or what? Prospects of immediate improvement for this team? About as good as Homer Simpson getting admitted into MENSA! Aside from Andy (and maybe Byers, Couture, Rogers, or Dave Smith) there are very few of us that could do much with this roster. But, if one of these guys took control of this team, it certainly would be fun (and educational) for te rest of us in CBEL to follow their progress! Now the main reason that I'm the all-time leader in CBEL victories isn't because I'm a great coach or recruiter: it's simply because I've been around so long. There are at LEAST a dozen other guys who are much better than me, and Andy (obviously) is the BEST of the lot! So what I am suggesting is to get approval for one of the top coaches (hopefully Andy) to "volunteer" to take over Dayton for say, eight seasons to see if they can turn the program around. Unless the coach is already in the A-10 (to avoid a conflict of interest in recruiting), they wouldn't have to give up their current team. (In Andy's case, he could let Fizpatrick go it alone at UMass for a few seasons, and then return.) So this would be a "double dip experiment" on a limited basis. And no, I don't think that league-wide double-dipping is a good idea, primarily because new Tier 3 coaches would have an even more limited talent pool to choose from (with the 20-30 double-dippers as suggested), and thus, be more easily discouraged. Am I willing to "put up or shut up" regarding the Dayton suggestion? Well, if neither Andy nor someone like Rogers, Byers, David Smith, etc., is willing to do this, I am prepared to send Andy a check for $48 to cover the cost of the next eight seasons for Dayton (as long as I still got to keep Notre Dame and could take over Dayton prior to the initial round of invites this Thursday). What does everyone (including Andy) think about this off-the-wall idea? Date: Sun Jan 13 18:22:19 2008 Sender: Michael Courtney I thought I had a pretty good team with butler but I guess not. I'm having a hard time with knowing what my team can do. for the new coaches, I think a learning center is what we need. I've played in this league before and I am having a difficult time trying to win with some good tallent. Have I been out too long or has this gotten harder? I think some other experenced coaches should help or a beeter explination of the way the game is played should be available. I'm having a hard time figureing out if a high motion offense is good or not or if I should go with a low one. It is really a disapointing season if you think you have great tallent to win but you have a loosing season and wonder why. I've played in this league before but now I find it hard to win and can't figure out why! Date: Sun Jan 13 19:08:31 2008 Sender: David Smith Dagger presents an interesting idea regarding taking on the Dayton project. I would be interested in doing it and have ties to the Dayton area since I went to a DIII school not far from it and started my high school coaching career there as well. In fact my team played several tournament games at UD arena and lost an OT regional final game in '88. I'm not sure that I am the one to take on the project but am flattered by Dagger's recommendation. If the project is ok'd and no one else is interested I would do it. Date: Sun Jan 13 20:16:34 2008 Sender: Skylar Wilton As a lowly Tier 3 coach, I would not be thrilled to see extensive double-dipping by more experienced CBEL participants for the reasons already mentioned in this thread. The biggest negative would be less overall talent available to new coaches. BTW, I have had a wonderful time so far in Tier 3 and everyone I've communicated with has been extremely helpful, especially Chris Smith and Frank Nickles. I think the "limited" double-dip experiment with Dayton is a super idea! If Dave Smith would share regular insights with all the newbies regarding what was going right as well as wrong as he attempted to develop the Dayton program, I believe the experiment would benefit the entire league. And it would prove particularly beneficial to those of us who eventually may want to move up into Tier 1. Date: Sun Jan 13 20:40:46 2008 Sender: Dave Ayres Well, gang, what do you think? David Smith has volunteered to take the reins of the Dayton Flyers in the "Sky High or Stink Like a Sty" experiment! Dave would be an excellent person to do this, since he has aways been willing to share his game insights with the unwashed masses (lol). If the project gets the okay of Andy and Chris, Dave's summaries either on this board or in Dayton PR regarding his weekly strategy and recruiting tactics should really prove valuable, not only to Courtney and Wilton, but the rest of us schnooks as well! Date: Sun Jan 13 21:23:43 2008 Sender: Dan Hilsgen I agree that the "limited" Dayton project is a good idea. I like to think I have a relatively good grasp on things, however, am always willing to learn from others and their experiences. I am a huge fan of hearing the thought process behind the decisions and the effect of the decisions in PR's or via the forum. It might even lead to an area in the help section about the Dayton project and things learned from it, etc. that new coaches could be pointed to. ANOTHER IDEA TO AID NEW COACHES: Obviously there have been coaches that have helped out newbies with their teams. This is awesome and I believe helps keep more people around until they are ready to go it alone a bit more. Maybe if we could have coaches that are willing to "buddy up" with new coaches tell the comish(s) they are willing to help out X amount of coaches via email and then the comish assigns certain new coaches to that veteran coach to reach out to and personally greet and offer assistance to. Just an idea....organizing it a bit. Take it or leave it. Date: Sun Jan 13 21:35:51 2008 Sender: Bill Edwards "It is really a disapointing season if you think you have great tallent to win but you have a loosing season and wonder why. I've played in this league before but now I find it hard to win and can't figure out why!" Michael, I will be more than glad to take a look at your team and see if I can give you some input. Will contact you by email. Date: Sun Jan 13 21:44:51 2008 Sender: Christopher E Smith I am 100% behind this "Sky High or Stink Like a Sty" experiment! I say let's see how this goes - this will definitely be something of major interest to the entire league, and I like it. So we need only the blessing of the Dolphin-man himself, and we'll get this underway! Date: Sun Jan 13 22:05:05 2008 Sender: Christopher E Smith Dan - I get the gist of what you're saying about coaches helping newbies...however, I don't think we want to burden existing coaches with a commitment to helping "x" number of new coaches per season. Instead, I could have experienced coaches tell me that they don't mind fielding newbie questions, and then I could lead the new coach more toward those who have said they don't mind, or something like that. I guess what I'm saying is that I don't want any coach to be committed to something like this, or else I see the old "classroom slouching down in their seats when the teacher asks a question" happening among experienced coaches. The current system "as-is" is really quite effective. First of all, any new coach should read the DEL Help in great detail - a whole lot of question will be answered from that alone, AND that material has been written by Andy and other experienced coaches in that sport. Next comes hitting the Basketball forum, list the archives, and just go thru and read what all has already been covered in the past. There is a wealth of knowledge packed in the archived threads of all sports. Once the new coach has done both of those items and still has a question/questions, then I would suggest asking it in a new thread on this very forum. Most coaches will gladly chime in with their advice and knowledge. THEN comes the asking someone for help. From my years of experience I would say that most coaches have always been willing to help someone out when asked. That is another beautiful feature of DEL. But a new coach can always come to either one or both of the commishes for guidance. But finally I know what you're getting at as far as who to ask what, and almost any new coach is going to be somewhat shy about just asking anybody. So perhaps it would be a good idea for me to just form a "pool" of those experienced coaches who would be willing to help. Does that sound like a plan? Does it sound like a plan for you experienced and knowledgeable coaches out there? Date: Mon Jan 14 01:09:39 2008 Sender: Scott Kramer For me, I don't really care what the PR's are about, they just add a bit of realism to the game. I do enjoy reading some of them, but most I just skim through or don't read at all. I do make a mental note of those that seem to be always writing something and these guys are the ones, to me, who help make the league more realistic. It doesn't matter to me what they say, whether they are keeping the league posted on how their season is going, or writing something witty, it is more the fact that they are staying involved in the CBEL community. I don't have tons of time with work and family to dedicate to a weekly column, but I do make an effort to post on how my teams season is going or make it a point to note an upset win...things like that. I do it to not only get the prestige bonus, but to also help stay involved throughout the season. I don't personally think you should penalize a guy if he doesn't write anything, but it is nice to give a little added bonus to those that take the time to at least write something. To me, you are really missing out on some of the enjoyment of the sim if you never make an effort to get involved with some sort of PR. As far as the sim goes, I will be going into my ninth season, and there are only a few things that come to mind as far as things that make me go hmmmm. First, I do agree with Red that the only way to be successful is by having superior talent. It does seem like the Elite teams have a big advantage here, enough so that I think coaches become discouraged after a few seasons and just give up. I do agree that talent in the NCAA does seem more dispersed now, but in this league unless you have made it into the elite, collecting the best talent is indeed very difficult. One thing that might help with this is for the walk-ons to be of better quality. It seems like some of the teams are lucky enough to land a good walk-on, but for the most part they are just a waste. If teams were able to get better talent for walk-ons, they may in fact be able to be more competitive since they don't have to compete with anyone for these players. Then I can understand if after a season or two, these guys demand a scholarship if they are getting significant playing time which forces a coach to decide if that player is worth keeping instead of using that scholarship to sign a player through the recruiting process. Another thing that I have a trouble understanding is how players you invite react to playing time promises. If I make a promise to a player, why does he ignore me or doubt my promise? If I make this promise and don't keep it, then I can understand paying a prestige penalty the following season and players in the future ignoring me or doubting my promise, but until I have shown that I will not keep my word, why should they not believe me? If I'm a kid deciding between a couple of colleges (in the same tier) and one promises me playing time and another does not, I have to tell you, I think I'd lean toward the college where I have been told I am going to be "the man," as opposed to sitting the bench for a couple of seasons someplace else. I think it is part of the competitive nature of a college kid to want to play and be a significant part of his team. I have made promises to kids for playing time (in which they would have been the starter), only to have them ignore me and end up riding the bench someplace else. Also, for me, I don't mind setting my strategies and not having to do a whole lot other than make some tweaks here and there. I don't have an hour a day to sit down and thoroughly scout my opponent to make all kinds of adjustments. To me, if you have good talent on your team, you should have a pretty good team both in real life and in a sim, so for me it is important to spend the time in recruiting. Unfortunately, like it was mentioned, this can be tough if you are not one of the elite. It may not be impossible, but frustrating enough that the average guy might not stick around after a few seasons of not feeling like he is making any progress. I also agree with Michael Courtney as far as maybe having some sort of learning center. There are definitely a few coaches who obviously know what they are doing, so it would be awesome to have some of their thoughts and ideas written down someplace. I have read through all the help files on the game several times and have even read through the forums looking for all sorts of differnet information and advice, but my team continue to be inconsistent even with what seems to be some decent talent. With TCU, I've hovered around the #50 mark and have beat some top teams only to turn around and lose to a team that is ranked at #150 the following week. I'm not sure why this is and not really sure if my wins are cause I'm doing something right or cause I'm just lucky-LOL I'm one of the type of coaches Chris referred to as being too shy to ask anyone for help-LOL I always feel like I'm bothering someone and don't want to come across like I want someone to do all the work for me. So I just basically keep chugging along hoping that it will finally "click," for me, but so far I'm only about a .500 coach. For this reason I really like the whole "Dayton project" idea. I think it could be a great opportunity for some of us average coaches to get a better feel for the how's and why's behind the game. All in all, I really enjoy this game and appreciate the hard work Andrew and Chris put into our league as commissioners as well as the dolphin-man himself :) Scott Kramer, TCU Date: Mon Jan 14 10:08:30 2008 Sender: Jay Schlegel I think the Dayton Experiment will be helpful for most everyone. And likely entertaining also, with Dave doing the write up. I too will offer to field/answer questions. It would probably be useful for someone(s) to troll through the archives and compile the useful bits into something that could be added to the help pages permanently (a summary, not just the links, though that would be better than nothing). It can sometimes be hard to find things in the archive even if you DO know what you are looking for (this is true of any archive). Date: Mon Jan 14 10:35:34 2008 Sender: Brian Steinberg I guess two quick hitters: 1. Find a way to help newbies ramp up quicker. Handing them our "magic templates" would certainly work but may not let them understand the nuances that keeps owners from getting bored quickly. 2. Work with Andy to look into some long-discussed tweaks to make coaching more important. Right now most coaches take the same zone defense and use it all season in all situations. If we use multiple defenses we get penalized. I would like to see more benefit to those willing to make daily tweaks. That said, most daily tweaks available seem more apt to hurt than help thus most veteran coaches don't bother. Date: Mon Jan 14 11:45:36 2008 Sender: Larry Newdorf 1) Why do YOU think that coaches are leaving CBEL? Their team isn't performing as well as they would hope. They don't see any real improvement. Low prestige and hard to recruit the blue chip players. 2) What do you think we could do to bring back the excitement and enthusiasm that once existed? Tweak the game system. Speed up the season some how. Seems like a lot of downtime if your team did not preform and did not make a tourney. All non-Bob coached teams should find some sort of tourney at season's end. Maybe make a tourney creator to help the postseason go by for those teams or teams that were bounced early in the post season? More inner conference PR. I still miss the St.Bonnies (now UNLV) press releases with the player rankings. Those were fun. 3) What is it that has made this sim turn to being boring, going thru the motions, like Chip suggested in not changing his settings, and doing the same couple of things each season and then watching? I admit that the only reason I tweak my settings is in case of injury. I don't even think I have the best settings but my team does well enough that I leave it alone. A new tweak to the game might make people play around with their settings some more. 4) Why the decline in traffic that Jay mentioned? Personally I think as the long standing coaches are still around, we have less time for the league and we're not gaining as many new people who stay around. 5) Does everybody agree with the Dagger-man in that there is a direct correlation between the CBEL downtrend and the loss of colorful PR's? Somewhat. I just think the PRs add a little something extra to the league. 6) How much more interest would be generated if a new rule - a PR bonus rule dubbed the Dagger-Dave Rule (lol) was put into effect? Anything to help get more press releases going is good. I think we need extra bonuses for newer owners. Make PRs worth more to them. 7) I've always been tossing around that idea of adding double-dipping. How much of an effect do you think this would have on the league? I don't think it would have any other than fill up bottom tier teams. In fact it might depress new people finding their teams trounced by long-time double dippers out of the gate, unless we kept that subdivided or something. 8) ANYTHING...OPEN FORUM man...voice any comments, suggestions, gripes, whatever that you have. Please...open up and let us know...is it because there have been no changes to the sim? If so, what? Is it the commishes? Is it because other coaches have left CBEL? How about because many other coaches have left DEL in general over the past year? Talk!!! I wish there was a quicker turnaround at season's end. I always thought it would be cool to have recruiting going on during the season. Maybe invite round one week, recruiting round the next? The league would have less downtime. Easy to say, but hard to do I am sure! The downside is if a coach doesn't recruit well he would be less likely to return the following season. Just thinking out loud :) Date: Mon Jan 14 11:46:45 2008 Sender: James Mathis A lot of good stuff here. Here are my observations: 1) I think a lot of things about the sim need to be more transparent, namely: A) How big is the penalty for switching defenses. Are the percentages given in 'View Orders' to be taken at face value? B) How would one best attack a matchup zone in Andy's and the sim's eyes? More motion? Less motion? Drive-heavy offense? Slower pace? There are a lot of types of matchup zones in real life, not just one. In fact, even Temple's match-up zone is not just one defense. Sometimes it's a 1-3-1; sometimes its a 2-3. C) What effect and how big an effect do the player-specific settings (rebounder, shooter, passer, depth) have on an offense? I'm not asking for formulae; that wouldn't be appropriate. But in a short season like CBEL, experimenting can cost you a tournament berth. Short of a better explanation of sme of these question, which would be preferable, IMO, maybe a more robust prototype scrimmage would be an option? Currently, the only variables in a prototype scrimmage are pace, motion, press, and trap, and type of defense. Could we get the opportunity to specify match-ups and player depth and shooter/passer/rebounder? 2) I think that the penalty for changing defenses should be eliminated. Maybe it's realistic, maybe it's not, but even if it is, I think it should be eliminated for playability purposes. The perception is that changing defenses isn't worth the penalty. That, plus the perception that the match-up zone is too powerful, leads to a league where most of the non-Bob teams play matchup zone. My thought process is that I know how to attack a man-to-man: use more motion. I don't know how to attack a match-up zone in the sim's eyes. 3) My view is that the lack of upsets in the Tourney are more a symptom of the exodus of human coaches rather than the root cause of it. I'm not a great game planning coach, but I upset two #1 seeds, if memory serves, as an 8/9 while at Providence. With more human coaches in the sim, recruiting will be harder, which will make the top teams not quite as good over time. I took a few seasons off after getting demoted at Oklahoma State (good luck, Loren!), and find it much easier to recruit now, even at Tier II with a lousy prestige, than I did a few seasons ago at Tier I with a higher prestige. Date: Mon Jan 14 12:33:36 2008 Sender: Josh Sherlock I've tried to read through everything here, but its kind of going all over the place. To address the original post, I gave it some thought and here are a couple ideas I had for making people more interested(note: for examples and whatnot, I'm going to reference the Pac10 alot, because thats what I know best): 1) More rivalries. A couple people mentioned already that rivalries typically tend to come out of two teams being similar programs, or even two coaches barking at each other on a message board quite a bit. The root cause of the rivalry doesnt matter, but we need MORE of these. For example, Neil Stickels and I started an Arizona/ASU rivalry. Sure we already play at least twice a season, but we created a fictional 'trophy' that we pass back and forth and started keeping track of our records in these games. I certainly get more fired up to play those games than most others, so it certainly works for me. How do we get more rivalry? Maybe several coaches all send out an email (or a post) and say hey, i'm looking to create a rivalry with a team similar to mine, any takers? Simple enough. How much more involved you want to get beyond setting up an ongoing rivalry is entirely up to you. But those are the games that get circled on the calendars and get extra attention 2) More Interactions. No offense, but this message board system is pretty generic/plain and as a result it doesn't lend itself to 'nitty gritty' posting. It appears to be more of a 'help' board, which is certainly fine, but where do I go if I want to talk about the race for the Pac10 crown? or which current top10 team is a fraud? We need some way to have these conversations, as that certainly drives up my interest. 3) The game itself. I told a friend of mine about this sim, and he was really fired up. He was convinced he'd have me beaten in a season or two, and already started talking trash. It was great! He started asking me questions like crazy on how the game works, and I explained everything and he really seemed to get it. About ten games into the season, he had tweaked everything he could and found a good formula. However, he started complaining that he wasn't really doing anything anymore. That it had went from a coaching sim to a 'GM' sim (In effect you're a GM, even though we aren't in the pros obv). That once he had everything set, he never changed anything. I told him how I'm always making some minor change or another, but he didn't see it that way and soon quit. I think others have mentioned this in the thread as well, but its like you get penalized a lot for drastic changes, and really I think you should. But I also think my friend had a valid point and teams really do go on autopilot a lot here, which leads to less involvement obviously. We should find a way to allow for more 'coaching', and maybe thats lowering the penalty for changing things, or maybe adding more options/deeper choices to choose from? Of course you run the danger of making the game too deep for a new comer, but I'm struggling on how to counteract the 'GM' sim label that my buddy complained about. Date: Mon Jan 14 15:04:27 2008 Sender: Neil Stickels I have been a coach in the league for some time now as well, and I will admit that I am one of those coaches who also has had his interest in the league wain drastically the last few seasons. For me, there are several reasons: 1. Real life. a) I am a consultant, and the last couple of projects I have been on, this meant being at a government site with limited internet access. When I am done at work all day, there are other things I want to do to unwind than getting on my computer from the hotel with a crappy internet connection unless I absolutely had to. b) I managed to get a lot of my friends to sign up for the league as well, and we all congregated in the Pac 10. This was back during the whole gmail scandal that Rod Steele wrote about in the Pac 10. But that was the whole reason that I switched to Arizona was to be in a conference with all of my friends, and we would banter all of the time about our games against each other. However, some of their interest started to fade, and when I was on the road traveling, I also didn't get the chance to talk to them all of the time about the game. 2. Recruiting promises. Much like Scott was saying, I think that the whole promise scheme in recruiting is ass-backwards. The problem is that there is not a distinction between the message you get from a recruit who honestly doesn't believe you when you make a promise for PT, a recruit who believes you would give him PT but would never ever go to your school, and a recruit who honestly doesn't care at all about PT promises. All of them simply come back as "Your Momma is ignoring your PT promise." From my experience, the largest number of responses I get from this are actually in the second group. The biggest problem too is that when these complaints were voiced to Andy in years gone by, the response has always been "I never have problems with people believing my promises." That is all well and good, but that is because his team is always the #1 rated team, so he doesn't suffer from the impact of the second group like most of the coaches do, so of course he won't see the same results. Just to make this more qualitative, in the years that I have been at Arizona (like roughly 8 CBEL seasons I think) I have hovered between a 17 and 19 prestige the entire time. In that time, I have averaged 1-2 players a season believing my PT promises. I know from my experience in talking to other coaches, this was even high compared to what others saw. However, this is nowhere near the number that teams like UMass, Louisville, Kansas State, etc get. 3. Season 50. In Season 50, I went 18-0 in my conference and won the conference tourney. I was 28-4 entering the CBEL tourney, and was ranked like #6 in the nation in most polls. However, I was given a 3 seed in the tourney, mostly because the Pac 10 is a weaker Tier I conference. I don't want to get into all of the specifics, but I know that Chris Smith probably vividly remembers my complaints about this seeding. I can understand why it happened, but it very clearly illustrated something to me, teams in a weaker conference are not on a level playing field. To make matters worse, when I was playing the #2 seed (South Florida) in the sweet sixteen, they won with the nice pod bonus, as it was an overtime 1 point victory. It is better for a team like Notre Dame to lose at home to Louisville than for me to beat Washington State on the road. I don't know the answer to this, but I know that I was heavily burned out by that season. 4. Right after the previously mentioned problem, when season 51 was starting, I ran into the final straw. Much like David Smith said earlier, I had kept detailed records since I started CBEL. This included the game results for every game my team had played, the individual stats of all of the players that had played for me by season and by career, as well as highs for each player for each season for every statistical category kept in CBEL, and for game records for every statistical category by season and overall, for individual players, the team, etc. Simply keeping this up to date forced me to have to at the very least check in every few days, even when I was on the road with a crappy internet connection. However, near the start of season 51, I was working on another spreadsheet for work, and I was thinking about how I needed to update this spreadsheet, so I accidentally clicked on my arizona_stats sheet, and saved the work sheet as my arizona_stats spreadsheet. Luckily, this was with the new Office 2007 as well, which now uses xlsx as the default for excel files. The reason that I said that was that there are countless programs out there which can find old .xls files on your system, and I could have probably found an older version of, if not the last copy of my arizona_stats spreadsheet. However, those programs at least at the time didn't exist for Office 2007, and none of the programs that I found for finding recently deleted files on your system could find it, so it was lost. Upon losing that file, I no longer had an excuse which forced me to login to check my team, so I could go weeks at a time forgetting to see how they were doing. I don't know how to fix a lot of these things. In terms of the first thing, there is absolutely nothing that anyone in CBEL can do. In terms of the others, there are a few things I can suggest, but I don't think either would make revolutionary changes in either myself or in others. But first and foremost, I think that the whole thing with playing time promises should be changed. A recruit shouldn't doubt your pt promise unless you have a history of reneging on playing time promises. Now that doesn't mean that a belief in your pt promise should affect whether that player decides to attend your school. In real life, if there is a top recruit coming out of the Detroit area, and Eastern Michigan promises they will start all 4 years, but Michigan, Michigan State, Indiana, Duke, and Kentucky simply say he will get a scholarship and has a chance to start if he is as good as advertised, there is no way that the recruit is going to pick EMU. But then there should be a different message that the Eastern Michigan coach gets to let him know. That way, he knows that he is wasting his time even inviting the guy, and can invite someone else. Otherwise, he is left wondering if maybe the guy just doesn't want to listen to any PT promises, he just wants to see what is out there or if the guy doesn't believe that he actually has a slot open for him on his team. I think the idea of having a group of coaches to help out newbies isn't a bad idea either. In thinking about it, I think the best way actually would be to create some mail alias that coaches could opt into. Then a newbie could send a mail to CBEL-veterans@dolphinsim.com and it would go to all of the coaches on the list, and if someone has something they want to say, they could, but they aren't obligated to respond. Date: Mon Jan 14 15:39:54 2008 Sender: Loren Smith Neil, was it you who developed a java scoreboard? I had recently taken a hiatus from CBEL, so never did use it after I found out about it. I did think it was a pretty cool idea that added a certain realism to the sim. The PbP, score and current players were shown on the board, with the running score. The link is probably in the basketball archives somewhere. Date: Mon Jan 14 15:50:31 2008 Sender: Neil Stickels Just thinking about what Josh said, and the more I think about it, the more I agree. I know that others have mentioned removing the penalty for switching defenses, but I think Josh is right, it needs to be all of the penalties. Remove the penalty for changing positions. I know there have been times that I have a guy who is like 6'9" and I have him at SF or PF, but have thought that he would make a better PG than the one I have out there, but I don't want to change it mid stream, because I know that changing positions mid season incurs the position change penalty. Plus, since the penalty isn't clearly defined, and I do change him for a few games, I don't know how to weigh the results. There are already enough questions when trying to compare two players without having to also wonder about how much impact a change of position penalty is affecting him. Besides, unlike most other sports, basketball I think has the least amount of positional specific things a guy needs to know. Another idea would be to somehow tweak the depth settings at guard. Maybe I have totally misinterpreted my results, but it seems as if when you have two guys simultaneously in there with a playing depth of SG for example, they will tend to interfere with the other, and make it easier for a single man to cover both of them, etc. This makes sense for a C or PF depth setting, but at SG, there is a lot of room on the perimeter for a guy to run around, so you should be able to have 4 guys out there really, and not have anyone interfering with anyone else. This would I think help open up more flexibility in offense for running multi-guard sets and to do more things. Date: Mon Jan 14 15:56:09 2008 Sender: Neil Stickels Yes that was me. I still have some open bugs with that that I should get around to fixing some time, but yeah, that is the only way that I watch my games. It used to be that I would ritually open that up and read the play by play when I got back from lunch. However, with the previously mentioned traveling, I don't have as much time for that, so now I am relegated to just looking at box scores, which doesn't let me get the some level of understanding as to what is going on with my team. Date: Tue Jan 15 11:21:34 2008 Sender: Jay Schlegel For another idea on how to increase coach interest, check out the thread I resurrected on the General thread re World Cup competition. Date: Tue Jan 15 20:43:34 2008 Sender: Andy Dolphin Regarding defense effectiveness, I'll go ahead and take that out of the sim. The penalties for changing player positions, however, have to stay there so that an opponent can't get blindsided by radically altering your lineup the day before a big game. (One needs to realize that opposing coaches don't have the chance to adjust during the game the way that a real-life coach would...) The other question, regarding the Dayton experiment, absolutely gets my approval. Date: Wed Jan 16 01:57:19 2008 Sender: Eric Opperman I've been in CBEL about as long as there's been a CBEL... I burned out for a while at the end of the e-mail template era (how many other people still in CBEL remember what it was like even before that, or before recruiting points?) until the current order system made it so much easier to do... My interest tends to go up and down with how good or bad my team is. I had a stretch where I missed recruiting a couple of times in a row because I was out of town, it totally wrecked my team and got me demoted. I was able to get right back to Memphis, and I steadily kept pushing it a little better, a little better, won a conference (tournament) championship...and then I aimed too low in recruiting for a couple of spots, had my scholarship recruits tank, ran out of scholarships this year, and now I'm just hoping I don't lose 20 this year... I'm not going to quit the league over this, but I'm less motivated to pay as much attention to it as I did 2-3 seasons ago. I didn't even look at box scores for some games this year, much less read pbp, because I knew what would happen. (Maybe scheduling Louisville wasn't such a good idea...) Hopefully I can dig myself back out of this mess again and I'll get back to caring again...but honestly, when the best-case outcome, barring a TC miracle, is an NIT berth, I'd rather spend that time worrying about CMEL and CCEL. Date: Wed Jan 16 15:58:49 2008 Sender: David Rogers Oh man, I was going to dump KSU and go to Dayton next season. Now I will have to wait 8 whole seasons. (JK) Date: Wed Jan 16 20:33:07 2008 Sender: Dave Ayres Andy: You da MAN! Thanks for the go-ahead on the Dayton Project! You realize, of course, that this will be the end of the UMass dynasty as we have known it, and that the A-10 will now become a satellite franchise of the Big East! All the athletic offspring of former Big East all-stars from Louisville and Notre Dame will now appear on the Flyers' roster! Be very afraid of all the talent that shows up on the Dayton campus Thursday afternoon! As for David Rogers, I guess he went back to Ohio, but Dayton was gone . . . Date: Thu Jan 17 14:01:05 2008 Sender: Jay Schlegel Speaking of suggestions for helping with the recruiting learning-curve... how about permanently adding a link for the background inviting info (that lists the info for all who invited, not just the top-5) so that it will be easier to find (i.e., a level playing field)? I only think of this page after invites have run and I wonder about why some punk didn't visit me, so I have to troll through the message board to find the link from last time, etc. Then imagine instead the newbie coach who has no idea what I'm even referring to! It would be nice if this link contained an archive for the season, for each round, so that later on (say prior to next season init, or maybe even next season's invites) you could look back and see how recruiting went last time. Date: Thu Jan 17 14:25:36 2008 Sender: Red Burley Just to clarify what i was saying about recruiting: Seeing the invites are great, but Id also like to be able to see the offers other teams made for guys who visited me. Why? Lets say a recruit has me listed as his second choice at 4s. His first choice is Team A, also at 4s. His third choice is Team B at 3s. If he choses Team A, was it because they have 19 prestige and I only have 17? Or was it because they offered 40 points against my 20? I realize there are some intangibles in the recruiting system (which makes it more fun) but if I could see the offers, I might be able to make a more educated guess as to why he dissed me like a roach, and make better choices next time. Date: Thu Jan 17 14:45:13 2008 Sender: Dan Hilsgen http://www.dolphinsim.com/cbasket/cbel/invites.htm Date: Fri Jan 18 13:10:09 2008 Sender: Rick Harmsen Here's why a relative newbie is about to leave the league. 1. I can read. I can process information. Recruiting is nearly impossible. If success at recruiting is such a big secret that I have to ask further what to do, then you guys can keep your clique and I'll go elsewhere. 2. The Helpful Hints board plainly states that players will improve during each off-season, so they'll be pretty good after 4-5 seasons. They do not improve. Maybe 1 point in 1 category for a few players out of the 15. 3. The sim does what it wants. I applied what Chris Smith suggested I do for "immediate results" and there's no difference. The sim plays who it wants to, stamina or no. 4. I had 2 NCAA-caliber teams both decimated with injuries. Realistic? Could happen? So what? It's hard enough to assemble a team and compete without having it all wiped out. Let them play. Don't carry injuries for more than 1 game. 5. Then with weaker players, but still Tier I types, we constantly lose to vastly inferior teams. I manage according to what worked best in scrimmages - we lose. I let Coach Bob manage its way (still my defense) - we lose. Why should I stay? 6. I did not join a writer's club. I don't care to write PR and I don't want to read PR. I watch the league schedule, read the season results, and check my box scores as we go. That's it. I'll see what happens this season with 13 returning players. You asked - that's my impression. Date: Fri Jan 18 15:02:27 2008 Sender: Dan Hilsgen Rick, I will try to best reply to each of your statements. 1. What, if I may ask, is your recruiting strategy? I only ask this because you seem to be almost ready to leave the league so I figured I'd see if I could help out in that respect. It is not a "clique." When I entered the league I merely asked the comishes (the current ones) for help and adivce and they were very helpful. Another coach, again when I asked for help, offered his insight on how he felt I should recruit. I took his advice and it has payed off quite well, I am sure with a bit of luck too. 2. Improvement is slower than you might think and is not guarenteed to move quickly. Some players will improve fast, I give you that. Just like some players in the real college game adapt quickly and improve quickly. Some will actually regress after their first training camp...again...just like some real life players are not what people expected them to be. Mostly, it will be a gradual improvement in player attributes. Think of each attribute point as 10 subsections. A player his freshman season may have a SC of 6 showing but his real rating is a 6.1. Then, entering his sophomore season his SC attribute still is a 6 but his real rating is really a 6.9. Then, entering his junior year lets say he improved even more that from the freshman to soph year so he shoots up to a 8.0 which would display as an 8. Well, he really didn't improve 2 whole points that training camp it was a combination of the two. 3. I have not had this issue. There is stamina and the sim will sub players in when it sees others are tired. But, then again, any coach would sub when a player is tired. Other than that, the sim seems to follow my orders as much as I can tell. Maybe someone else is better to help you on this. Not sure why it isn't working for you. 4. Yeah, injuries suck and it seems like they have disproportionately hit your team, which, I can see the frustration of that happening. But it is a part of the game. I agree though that there seem to be more long term injuries in CBEL than in real college basketball. 5. I am not the coach others are. I seem to be great on the recruiting trail but am relatively untested in the coaching department. Maybe someone else can help. Are there other coaches out there willing to give him some suggestions either on here or via email? 6. That's cool. Everyone likes different aspects of this game. Thanks for speaking up and giving the point of view of one coach who is looking to leave the game. Hopefully the "clique" can help you out! Date: Sun Jan 20 14:11:34 2008 Sender: Scott Kramer Rick, in regards to #5 I have felt the exact same way. Seems like one week I can upset a team in the top 15 and the next week lose to a team coached by Bob who is very inferior. My last couple of seasons have been plagued with inconsistency and I'm not quite sure why. Scott, TCU Date: Mon Jan 21 10:43:20 2008 Sender: Jay Schlegel Some responses to Rick's comments. re 1. I don't think recruiting is impossible or that there is some mysterious secret (if there is, then someone tell me already!). If there is something that you think is a secret, then write it up and have Andy add it to the help pages. However, I do think there is a steep learning curve to recruiting (and to the sim overall). I suspect that much of the frustration in recruiting is that coaches move up to tier-1 and immediately expect to be able to compete with the top teams for the top recruits. These coaches are not thinking realistically or pragmatically. Think the new coach at RW Michigan was able to go toe-to-toe with Coach K and Duke for top recruits this past year? No way. Doesn't happen in CBEL either. But it is certainly possible to grab good players through the judicious use of scholarships. Translate that into wins on the court and you can later go after the top players. re 2. Yes, most players' attributes do improve over time. But that is true for every team in the league. It is also true that some players do not play up to their attributes. And some few players will regress during training camp. And not every player will get better in every attribute each season. Frustrating? Yes. Realistic? Also yes. re 3. The sim does what you tell it to do in terms of depth charts and substitutions, with stamina and injuries modifying it. Unless of course you have auto-coach turned on, in which case the sim will indeed do what it wants. The key is to learn what the sim will do in each situation or with each option you choose. Yes, the sim has limitations and is not exactly like RW basketball (e.g., I cannot call a TO with my team down by 10 to shake things up and get someone else into the lineup, or to rest my starters for the final seconds, or even tell my SG not to take any more shots if he is 0-10) but there is still a fair amount of coaching control and flexibility. re 4. I agree that injuries are probably the most frustrating part of the sim. Unfortunately pretty realistic, but yeah it sucks. re 5. Well, name me one veteran coach who has not lost a game to an inferior team that they thought they should have easily handled. Notice I did not specify whether I was referring to DEL or to NCAA, or to the pros for that matter. The frustrating thing for me is that in DEL this seems random, not due to something specific the inferior team did correctly or something specific the superior team screwed up. Such randomization can be said to simulate psychological factors which are not otherwise mirrored directly in the sim. Even so, at some level you have to accept this so as to not blow a fuse or not quit as a coach, or even as a fan. That said, can you tell from the boxscore why your team lost? Poor shooting? Foul disparity? Out-rebounded? Miracle game by one opposing player? (but who was guarding him?) Last-second shot? Too many turnovers? Not enough turnovers from the opposition? Did you read through the PBP to see how the game flowed? Useful information can be gleaned from such analysis. Yes, CBEL is limited in that you must play the season with the players that you have, unlike the pros if someone is bad you cannot get a new player to replace them. But you can alter the game options and depth charts to try to get different results. This trial/error process is the only way to really learn the sim (both the sim mechanics as well as what your players are capable of given various situations). Scrimmages help too, but cannot tell you everything. re 6. Certainly there is a reward for writing PRs. I think this is as it should be, as I think that the PRs help build community/interest. Yes, it could be better, as pointed out elsewhere. But I also think coaches can succeed without writing a single PR -- the biggest factor in building prestige is Ws, not PRs. Hopefully this helps. I certainly have experienced my share of sim frustration over the years. If you have specific questions, unfortunately yes you do have to voice them. The help pages were largely written by your fellow coaches, and so are incomplete and imperfect by definition. Only you can help to make them better. Date: Sat Jan 26 19:29:26 2008 Sender: Dave Wick As a coach that almost left CBEL, I can say that after a certain amount of time, I had gotten a bit bored with the league and my team. Could I have poured a little more time and effort into the team and gotten them back to the elite level? Maybe, maybe not. I've never been a great coach, though I did have a stretch of 3 Final Fours and one title. But, without having the desire to spend more time, I knew staying at Michigan State was not going to ignite any fire in me. I had every intent of leaving CBEL if I got to 700 career wins. I finished at 701 a couple of seasons ago, and expected to leave. But, after thinking about it more, I thought maybe I just needed a different challenge. So, I decided to step down to tier 2 and see if I could build up a tier 2 team as a different challenge. I had made a similar move a few seasons back in CCEL. After trying to rebuild Miss St, and building up their talent from horrible to decent, I realized I didn't have the coaching chops to get that team over the hump. So, in CCEL I returned to my first team SMU and have enjoyed that team and conference. When deciding to step down in CBEL, I wanted a team that might mean a little something to me. I recalled the Loyola Marymount teams from the late 80's that were all run and gun. I had changed up my offense in the last couple of seasons at MSU to increase scoring and concentrate less on defense. Whether or not it led to more wins, it was fun to watch the players score more. So, with the idea of wanting to score more, and recalling LMU as a scoring machine, I thought it was a good match to move there and see if I can turn them into a high scoring team. Will I win a title at LMU? No. Will I even likely advance that far in the tourney? Not consistently. But, my team talent is up to the highest in tier 2. I'll only lose two seniors after this season (one a backup senior transfer I just added this season). I had a pretty good recruiting class this season and had a solid camp with the recruits. I think I can make another jump next season in talent and maybe win a couple of games in the tourney. So, for me, winning a couple of games in the tourney with a tier 2 team will be more rewarding than hoping to win a couple of games with MSU, knowing I wasn't necessarily going to do more than that with them. Usually, when long term coaches make a change, they just quit. Hopefully, if there are other long term coaches out there that may be thinking of quitting, they will decide to try a new challenge rather than just leave. Date: Sat Jan 26 20:59:43 2008 Sender: Loren Smith Speaking along Dave Wick's line. I left CBEL a few seasons ago after making it to Tier I and Ok State. I wasn't able to really put in enough time to figure out what makes the sim work. A short time later, while sitting and watching the real NCAA tourney, I found myself missing CBEL. I knew I likely couldn't devote the time that it would take to build a top notch program, so I deliberately rejoined with one of the worst teams in Tier 3. I told myself (and my pseude-recruits) that I would stick with the team until I got them to the CBEL Tourney. Once I did that, I took the promotion to Tier 2 and again decided that I'd stick with them until we made the CBEL tournament...I almost decided that I'd stay until we WON a CBEL tourney game; but, after I made the tourney, I noticed that Ok State was again available and was one of the worst teams in Tier 1. Ah, another challenge ahead... Date: Sat Jan 26 23:38:48 2008 Sender: Christopher E Smith Sorry I basically disappeared from this thread this past week guys. I was just diagnosed with diabetes 2 weeks ago, so that has greatly affected my time online while adjusting to it and messing around with medications. I do want to say that I am very pleased with the amount of participation that this thread has gotten. I plan to copy this entire thread to have for a record so I can go back and not miss a single comment. None of these subjects will be left unanswered, although it may take longer than I initially thought. I am very excited that we now have the Dayton Project underway, and also that Andy took care of the defensive effectiveness issue. The Dayton Project alone should generate a great deal of interest from the entire league. I hope that many coaches follow the progress of Dave & Dave's Flyers. Lesser experienced coaches in recruiting and/or building a program can also learn a lot just from following. I'm also thumbs-up on the idea of having experienced coaches volunteer to help newbies or others upon request. Jay Schlegel has already volunteered his services above. If any other coaches would like to volunteer please just drop an e-mail to me and/or Andrew. I will then send out a notice to the league for newbie coaches with questions to ask me for a "tutor", at which time I'll be able to play the role of "match-maker." I began to address each comment from Rick Harmsen's post above, but stopped after I read the series of excellent responses to that post. I will just add the following: Rick... For starters, if you are looking for the very best sports sims available to play online you've come to the right place. I, along with other coaches, have tried many other sims, and while some of them may be "pretty" with graphics, none of them compare to the detail of these sims. With that said, due to the detail and attempt to closely mirror real life, these sims are not exactly easy games. They're also not extremely difficult. But they are complex. With complexity you need patience. If you play one of the college sims you need to take your time, get advice, and learn the recruiting system. There is no exact science to recruiting, and many veteran coaches stumble. But that's all a part of the game. If you opt for a pro sim you need to master the draft, free agency and finances. Same as recruiting - there is no exact science - it takes time and patience, advice, and again many of us are left scratching our heads after we have a lousy FA signing day. So, for the most part, these are not