Next Level Recruiting

Discussion in 'After Midnight' started by Jayrah, Jan 8, 2012.

  1. Jayrah

    Jayrah AllCougdUp.com Editor - A.M. avatar Guru

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    4,335
    After thinking about this forever and playing 8 seasons here, I've figured out the biggest problem with recruiting: No connection to play style. There are 3 things I really wanna see here that would change all aspects of a dynasty with recruiting being the common denominator. Let's delve in.

    1: Adding 2 play styles with even more specialized rating values per position. Let's use RB's and WR's as an example. Currently there are the "power", "speed" and "balanced" RB, and the "speed", "possession" and "balanced" WR. Adding a "Breakaway" (DeAnthony Thomas or Lamicheal James of Oregon) and "Bruiser" (Laveon Bell of Mich St) RB type and a "playmaker" and "team player" (WR who would be more likely to improve blocking skills for down the field blocking) WR type would add more depth to creating your team philosophy. This needs to be the case for offense before and more importantly than defense, but both would be preferable and extremely beneficial. With this the current ratings don't necessarily have to change, but I would like to see more discepancy between certain attributes. Also select attributes need to carry more weight towards overall rating. In general I think with added player types you could begin to also seperate player rankings into "player type" rankings, so that we'd have 3 levels, including Overall recruit rating, position rating and player type rating. If you're the #23 receiver but the 3rd best "team player" wr, Stanford would look at you and conversly you should be interested in Stanford. If you're the #5 rank overall and #1 ranked "breakaway" Rb, you shouldn't probably be interested in Washington State. However, a small percentage of recruits are interested in schools that don't fit, for a reason such as in-state ties or something like that, so the chance of a "pipeline" giving you a chance at a recruit that doesn't fit your style needs to be available too.

    2: The game needs to classify your play style as it classifies a playbook. The cpu plays (or sims) like their playbook dictates their style to be. But with a user, it needs to track the plays you call and depict what you are doing. If you have a run and shoot pb but run 60% of the time you are a spread run team. If you throw 10-12 times a game and run 40-50 times you are a power run team, and Vise-versa you are a Pass Attack team. This is important for point 3.

    3: This is where recruiting brings it all full circle. A very small percentage of the extreme player type (Breakaway RB/Playmaker WR) Will want to play for the opposite extreme play style (Power Run style team). This would be the case consistently regardless of where a team is located in relation to a recruit or any other factor. But as i said, sometimes it does and should happen in the game. THE MAIN SELLING POINT FOR RECRUITING ANY PLAYER IS YOUR PLAY STYLE AND HOW IT RELATES TO THEIR PLAY STYLE. A "Blocking" TE should be more prone to look at a Running offense (unless said Running offense throws the heck out of the ball to its TE's: see Stanford).

    The main problem with the game as it relates to dynasty is that it's far to easy to stack a team based solely on prestige rating. You should have to stack a team based on your play type regardless of the rating of players vs school. This also means that the second and third tier schools have too much problem catching up, even if they are "better" at recruiting to their style of play and coaching/playing games. This is what would change the game in dynasties, especially for ODs. As long as Cheez and MaxATX34 keep winning, their ratings will always b A+ in all areas because the top 5 recruits at every position are always interested regardless of anything, which makes them impossible to beat. As we all know real life teams fluxuate all the time between winning and losing (or not so winning) seasons. This should be the case in game. It would make a dominant team more worthy and more admirable.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  2. Cheez

    Cheez TSO's 1,000,000th Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2010
    Messages:
    8,933
    Shaun Mason

    i saw you were looking for ideas from the community - here ya go
     
  3. Hellisan

    Hellisan Schemin 'em up

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    10,590
    I just think you have to be very careful of classifying it black and white in terms of what type of player a team can get. I didn't read every word you wrote because it's late and I gotta get to bed (I will tomorrow) but what of Oregon and LaGarrette Blount, for instance? I am all for adding certain things to add some personality to players, teams, and the game. Scouting players, for instance, instead of just seeing all their ratings outright... Ratings for effort and character, etc... would love to see that.
     
  4. Jayrah

    Jayrah AllCougdUp.com Editor - A.M. avatar Guru

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    4,335
    Then maybe adding player preferences would be a better idea. Most players have a few things they want concretely before schools start vying for them. It shouldn't be the same for every player in a certain category, so it could even be random. But adding preference for play style and/or certain offensive/defensive "goals & expectations" (similar to coach carousel goals but for incoming recruits) would break it up enough so that the elite teams can't just cherry pick their top 3 at every position. The player has to want you too and its a lot deeper than just having a top 10 list. Maybe throughout the year a recruit will fluxuate based on the stats you're accumulating vs his other top 10 and how they're doing in the major areas that pertain to his position, player type and expectations for the school he would choose. Of course the current recruiting structure can still be maintained, but this is a whole new level that adds an actual calculable variable for you as a user to gain or lose the "trust" of a recruit. Its important that the best teams earn their players. Right now they largely are given players based on prestige. This is also good for smaller schools to be able to reach into the talent pot and become competitive (both user and cpu).
     
    Last edited: Jan 9, 2012
  5. gowazzucougs

    gowazzucougs WSU is better than UCLA

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2010
    Messages:
    6,260
    Jayrah

    They use to have something called coaching philosophy. If they had it in this year's game, there is no way Cheez would have all the top receivers.
     
  6. Hellisan

    Hellisan Schemin 'em up

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    10,590
    It would be nice if the coach lost "loyalty" or credibility if he was constantly cutting good players. And it would be nice if players that were cut would filter down to other teams as transfers if they needed them.
     
  7. MaxATX34

    MaxATX34 Texas Football

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    4,719
    Saban doesnt suffer at all when doing this.
     
  8. Hellisan

    Hellisan Schemin 'em up

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    10,590
    Yeah, winning conquers all... I like the story of him stepping over a player that was unconscious to go up to his office or whatever...
     
  9. Jayrah

    Jayrah AllCougdUp.com Editor - A.M. avatar Guru

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    4,335
    Yes that's what I'm talking about. Coach Philosophy is really good, IF it makes a difference in recruiting
     
  10. Jayrah

    Jayrah AllCougdUp.com Editor - A.M. avatar Guru

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    4,335
    This is my thought in response to some more discussion at TGT in the importance of off season recruiting vs the current over emphasis on in season recruiting.

    The first 6 weeks of the season needs to be alloted time for scouting only. Instead of just knowing what the skills of players are. We should see what their ranked by Scouts or whatever but not see their ratings. For the first 6 weeks, you get to scout 2-3 states per week. You automatically receive the ratings of ALL interested recruits in your pipelines and get alloted time to scout any others within the state. For non pipeline states you have to be judicious with your time, although we can still see who's interested within the selected state.

    Most importantly, this puts an emphasis on certain regions so you have to decide who and specifically where you are going to recruit. After the first 6 or 7 weeks you can still go out and recruit 1 extra state per week, till the offseason, but you'll wanna spend most of your time on guys that you already know the ratings for. Also, I think it important to limit the time to talk with any recruit to 30 minutes per week and let us talk about whatever we want as far as pitch. You'll still want to know their interest pitches so this will make it a mad scramble to find that out. Once the season ends, you can talk to any single recruit for an hour, as is the case now.

    Its necessary to update recruiting imo to favor a good recruiter over a bad one, just to include all of the aspects of coaching to make dynasty (especially online) more fun.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. MaxATX34

    MaxATX34 Texas Football

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    4,719
    I get what you're saying, but some schools already have commits for the 2013 class IRL right now. Recruiting is a year round thing. I think we should still be able to recruit players during the year, but not sign them until National Signing Day. We should scout players as Juniors... and "recruit" them as Seniors. Some Juniors should slump their SR year and not pan out like you thought, and some juniors should explode onto the scene as Seniors.

    I agree that something needs to change w recruiting. I like it, but it has gotten stale IMO
     
  12. Jayrah

    Jayrah AllCougdUp.com Editor - A.M. avatar Guru

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    4,335
    Nothing is final till signing day, after the season... those commits are soft. That's how the game should portray it.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Jayrah

    Jayrah AllCougdUp.com Editor - A.M. avatar Guru

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    4,335
    Also id like to see hs stats and all-league, all-state participants, just for storyboarding and a little more individualization. Gives more of that "bonding" feeling between recruit and coach. Also makes recruits a little less generic, and if those types of things could be consistent with the players skill set, it would make an amazing recruiting experience imo.
     

Share This Page