Heisman Hopefuls - Welcome and Setup

Discussion in 'Heisman Hopefuls' started by bravejaf, Jul 10, 2013.

  1. bravejaf

    bravejaf Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    8,919
    thebouncer24
    xGRIDIRONxGURUx
    BigJim11
    gnittio
    cadepetty247
    G_T_G
    ThaBayouChef
    ElectrifiedZombies
    MiaFLSurf
    CTfromDC
    boil16

    We now have a full league and our own forum space. Lets start off with the format we want to use. I want to use a 2 conference setup but the specific conferences and the available teams are up for debate.

    I know the early conversation on conferences centered around 4 different conferences: ACC, B1G, Big 12 and Pac 12.

    In terms of restrictions there are several options available.

    Choice 1: Open, no restrictions
    Choice 2: 5-star team prestige and below, 6-star schools not allowed
    Choice 3: 4-star team prestige and below, 5 and 6-star schools not allowed
    Choice 4: 3-star team prestige and below, 4, 5 and 6-star schools not allowed

    ACC:
    6 star - 0
    5 star - 4 (Clemson, FSU, Miami, VT)
    4 star - 3 (GT, Louisville, UNC)
    3 star - 5 (BC, NC State, Pitt, Syracuse, Virginia)
    2 star - 2 (Duke, Wake Forest)
    1 star - 0
    Overall this is one of the most balanced conferences, and is almost certainly a must use if we block 6-star or 5-star and above. If we decide to allow 6-star schools it is a less formidable conference.

    B1G:
    6 star - 2 (Oh. State, Michigan)
    5 star - 3 (Nebraska, PSU, Wisconsin)
    4 star - 2 (Iowa, Michigan State)
    3 star - 4 (Illinois, Northwestern, Purdue, Rutgers)
    2 star - 3 (Indiana, Minnesota, Maryland)
    This is a balanced conference with 2 giants, a few perennial favorites and a decent middle tier. This dynasty is a decent choice with 6-star schools allowed, but is a poor choice for 5 and below. It is a decent choice for 4 star and below since there are 6 decent squads that can be built.

    Big 12 (if we go this route I will likely toss in BYU and Houston to make it 12 team conference)
    6 star - 2 (Oklahoma, Texas)
    5 star - 2 (Ok. State, TCU)
    4 star - 2 (BYU, West Virginia)
    3 star - 5 (Baylor, Iowa State, Houston, Kansas State, Texas Tech)
    2 star - 1 (Kansas)
    1 star - 0
    If we choose 4 star and below this would be an ideal conference along with the ACC. There are 7 schools ranked between 3 and 4 stars. This is not a great choice for 5 and below because we'd have people spread out at 3 different starting prestige levels, same if we allow all schools.

    Pac 12:
    6 star - 3 (USC, Oregon, Stanford)
    5 star - 0
    4 star - 2 (Utah, Washington)
    3 star - 5 (Arizona, Arizona State, Cal, Oregon State, UCLA)
    2 star - 1 (Colorado)
    1 star - 1 (Washington State)
    This is a terrible choice unless we opt to only allow 4 star and below prestige teams. There is a decent middle tier with Washington and UCLA both fitting the label of sleeping giants. I am very surprised Stanford made the jump to 6 star prestige after only being relevant for a few seasons.
     
  2. G_T_G

    G_T_G BEAR DOWN

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2010
    Messages:
    2,963
    I like choice 3 (4 and below) w/ ACC and either the Big 12 or B1G
     
  3. boil16

    boil16 Walk On

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2011
    Messages:
    243
    I would prob vote for 4* and below. I think that would give us a good amount of programs to choose from regardless of the conferences we choose. I'd be happy with any of the conferences listed.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. gnittio

    gnittio Walk On

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2013
    Messages:
    47
    My vote is ACC Big and Big 12 4 and below
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. boil16

    boil16 Walk On

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2011
    Messages:
    243
    I'll vote ACC and BIG for conferences.
     
  6. ElectrifiedZombies

    ElectrifiedZombies Walk On

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2012
    Messages:
    177
    I say pac 12 and B1G
     
  7. cadepetty247

    cadepetty247 Walk On

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2009
    Messages:
    1,843
    I vote Choice 1 or 2 and BIG12/B1G
     
  8. CTfromDC

    CTfromDC Where my money?

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2012
    Messages:
    2,658
    I vote Choice#1...B1G and Big 12...I've been in 1* build 'em dynasties, which are usually for the hardest core NCAA ballers, usually fizzles out after season 2...I done mid tier 3-4*, which carries good interest, but usually the elite players will still be ranked top 10 while the subpar players, such as myself will struggle to crack the top 25...I think choice 1 with no restrictions may be cool, simply because, every program will have legit shots at landing good recruits, and all squads will have talent. Those who want more of a challenge can just pick a 5* squad or 4* squad. Truthfully, any one can be successful with a 4* or better program...Just my 2 pennies, but I'm cool with whatever the commish and league decides
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. bravejaf

    bravejaf Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    8,919
    I prefer options 2 or 3, and I think the best options for either format is probably ACC and Big 12. I don't want to use B1G if I can't get my Buckeyes :).
     
  10. G_T_G

    G_T_G BEAR DOWN

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2010
    Messages:
    2,963
    Maybe we should have an official poll/vote on the prestige issue and then move on from there.
     
  11. MiaFLSurf

    MiaFLSurf Losing in the 90th

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2012
    Messages:
    1,592
    I want acc and 5 star so I can be the canes or noles.
     
  12. boil16

    boil16 Walk On

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2011
    Messages:
    243
    Are we allowing custom playbooks?
     
  13. bravejaf

    bravejaf Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    8,919

    Probably not, I hate custom playbooks and the problems they can bring to dynasties. There are far too many ways to create an unfair playbook and there is no good way to know exactly what formations are included in that playbook. There are plenty of options with default playbooks.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. ThaBayouChef

    ThaBayouChef Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2012
    Messages:
    2,376
    Agreed^^^
     
  15. xGRIDIRONxGURUx

    xGRIDIRONxGURUx GO DUCKS. WIN THE DAY.

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2010
    Messages:
    723
    that is a bummer
     
  16. bravejaf

    bravejaf Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    8,919
  17. xGRIDIRONxGURUx

    xGRIDIRONxGURUx GO DUCKS. WIN THE DAY.

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2010
    Messages:
    723
    read and understand... I need to enable email on tags for this site since I use tapatalk primarily... it doesn't tell you when youve been tagged
     
  18. MiaFLSurf

    MiaFLSurf Losing in the 90th

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2012
    Messages:
    1,592
    I read them and understand.

    However, I think the advance is way too quick.

    Most leagues do 72 hours, I dont think I can handle a 36-48 hour advance.

    I work 16 hour days, cant play every night. Just my 2 cents.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. ElectrifiedZombies

    ElectrifiedZombies Walk On

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2012
    Messages:
    177
  20. cadepetty247

    cadepetty247 Walk On

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2009
    Messages:
    1,843
  21. G_T_G

    G_T_G BEAR DOWN

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2010
    Messages:
    2,963
    Understood.
     
  22. boil16

    boil16 Walk On

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2011
    Messages:
    243
    Got it
     
  23. gnittio

    gnittio Walk On

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2013
    Messages:
    47
    read and understood
     
  24. CTfromDC

    CTfromDC Where my money?

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2012
    Messages:
    2,658
    read and understood, would definately like a 72 hour advance rate if possible
     
  25. bravejaf

    bravejaf Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    8,919
    I can scale it back to 48 hours for CPU games, and 72 hours for user games but that is slower than any recent league I have participated in on TSO.
     

Share This Page