Off-Season Wants and Needs

Discussion in 'Thread Archive' started by Archie Griffin, Feb 21, 2011.

  1. Archie Griffin

    Archie Griffin Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    5,738
    Here are some questions about the off-season:
    1. We doing the two-night thing again?
    2. Anyone out of town?
    And some questions about next year:
    1. We going to Heisman Recruiting?
    2. We scheduling 6 week one user games to pick up the pace?
    3. Want any other changes for next year?
    Let's start there and see where the discussion goes.
     
  2. carolinaeasy

    carolinaeasy Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2010
    Messages:
    2,418
    I am not for the Heisman recruiting...I guess knowing that I have a huge need year coming I am against it because of the watering down of the pool and the extra difficulty...
     
  3. egofailure

    egofailure Sim habits die hard!

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2010
    Messages:
    3,309
    I would love Heisman recruiting, but I won't die if it doesn't happen. No big deal.

    I'm a bit confused by #2 ... can you please clarify?
     
  4. carolinaeasy

    carolinaeasy Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2010
    Messages:
    2,418
    Arch suggested putting all of the OOC user-user games in week 1 so we don't have a user game holding us up every week.

    It is an attempt to pick up the pace.
     
  5. justadude

    justadude Walk On

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2010
    Messages:
    116
    Heisman recruiting is not something I would look forward too.

    I am not really sure how scheduling works. One OOC and whatever user controlled teams your conference has I would venture from looking at my schedule? Would it be possible to make user game weeks at certain points along the season?
     
  6. TD351

    TD351 Walk On

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2010
    Messages:
    516
    I would prefer OOC user games during the last week instead of the first- everyone has a better feel for their teams at that point- but either way is fine
     
  7. OnIowa

    OnIowa Zeroes to Heroes

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2010
    Messages:
    1,455
    Im up for anything, but just a heads up, I will be out of town Friday morning until Sunday early evening (Big Ten Track and Field Meet)
     
  8. the_rhinoceros

    the_rhinoceros Walk On

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2010
    Messages:
    370
    I'm not a fan of Week 1 User games since usually half my team are new starters. I could roll with Week 2 User games though.

    I don't have a strong opinion on Heisman recruiting, but it does make a little nervous since Tennessee doesn't have very much depth right now and some of the other fellas' teams are stacked.
     
  9. Archie Griffin

    Archie Griffin Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    5,738
    I think some of us are too stacked. Some of us are 85+ two deep down the roster at every position except for kicker. I'm happy for the success, and applaud the attention to detail, but I think everyone should have to develop the occasional three star, and some of us just don't have to bother.

    What if we started on AA for the player generation and such, and then moved to Heisman for the increased competition, say, in week 2? If we still park eight of the top ten classes, then we move to Heisman from day one the next season. Could we see that working out?

    I don't want crushing difficulty ... just a little more CPU competition than we're getting now.
     
  10. nkmi1984

    nkmi1984 Walk On

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2010
    Messages:
    510
    Im all for the 2 night thing if we can have some idea on which day it would be so we can plan accordingly.
     
  11. carolinaeasy

    carolinaeasy Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2010
    Messages:
    2,418
    If you are concerned with teams being too stacked then why don't we limit the number of 4 stars that you can get if you are a 6 star team? Put the limit at 6 and be done with it. You could still put up 9 players 4 star or better each year, but it would spread the wealth a bit more.
    I know how hard it was this year being a 5 star team trying to bring in 4 star talent. There was a ton of competition from other user schools and most of those players I missed out on. So to make sure I didn't lose roster spots I had to offer 3 star players. If you only had a few 4 stars you would do what you do with 5 stars.

    I am against the Heisman thing because I have played dynasties on Heisman to get better at recruiting, and it can be brutal. I can't imagine what it would be like with 11 other users recruiting as well.
     
  12. TD351

    TD351 Walk On

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2010
    Messages:
    516
    It might make things interesting if guys with stacked teams actually had tough CPU games- right now it seems like many CPU games are just bye weeks between the User games-
     
  13. Archie Griffin

    Archie Griffin Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    5,738
    This part is really tough to manage. The conference games are locked, and the non-con stuff usually includes a user and a tough CPU game. If we add more, we start getting into schedules that are much different from reality, not to mention the fact that we hinder our competition by putting more losses on them than they would normally have, knocking down their star rating and their ability to recruit against us over time. Short term good - long term not so good. However, given the fact that we only have a few more seasons to play, maybe we could do this and not feel the future effects.
     
  14. TD351

    TD351 Walk On

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2010
    Messages:
    516
    Arch I was commenting more on making the CPU tougher than changing the schedules (heisman recruiting may be good)- it seems like a lot of guys breeze through conference CPU games that "should" be tough.
     
  15. Archie Griffin

    Archie Griffin Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    5,738
    We did this last year. It was called the 1-7 rule. Everyone got one 5 and seven 4s at the beginning of each season. Then we added based on their success the previous year. This used to give us a pretty reasonable balance, but AA recruiting has limited our need for it this year. However, with more guys capping out on fives, and with us once again dominating the recruiting game, it might be time to look at something like this again. When our only misses are against each other, then we've outgrown the level of competition, I think.

    Personally, I'm for Heisman IF we're allowed to sway. I think it would add some tension to the recruiting game. I'm also in favor of the smaller number of top propects, even if it means I start guys in the 70s when I miss on recruits. It happens, even at the top programs.
     
  16. Archie Griffin

    Archie Griffin Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    5,738
    OK - we could look into a slider tweak. Any idea what could get a little tougher?
     
  17. carolinaeasy

    carolinaeasy Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2010
    Messages:
    2,418
    But aren't there known problems with the sway feature? I would hate for that to creep up in this dynasty and imbalance things.
     
  18. TD351

    TD351 Walk On

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2010
    Messages:
    516
    You guys know more about sliders than me- I just liked the heisman recruiting idea... some of the teams look like all-star teams so I think that making the rosters more realistic is a better option than making average CPU teams able to compete with stacked teams by using sliders.
     
  19. Archie Griffin

    Archie Griffin Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    5,738
    I think Tom's right - some of us have all star teams. Some college football teams are very good, but I think many of us are better than that. I think we benefit from the fact that while some schools get classes comparable to ours, we recruit strategically, whereas the CPU may get players they don't actually use. They just pick up who they can pick up, while we get exactly who we need, and exactly where we need them. So, even if a CPU class is in the top ten, the numbers are a bit misleading.

    I think easy's right about not swaying, now that I think about it. The idea of a major glitch creeping into our dynasty could be a real killer. We should avoid that at all costs.

    We're in a good position to make changes. Most of us are graduating the freshmen we started the gaming year with - and these guys ended up very highly rated - so most of us will see a significant drop-off going into next year. I think we're senior-heavy as a group. This is good. It brings us back to reality. If we're going to put in a balance-restoring setup, it's a good time to do it.

    I'm going to quote one of the first recruiting discussions ever posted here. It outlines the system we had in place at the end of last year. The idea was to encourage user-user competition in the recruiting game, and to add a new component to the game. Since most of us are now highly rated star-wise, we match up pretty well. Maybe it's time to start competing with each other more. Have a look at how it was set up:

    If we did it, the recruiting thread would become a list tracking the "bonus" recruits, and we could only get those recruits and create great classes by beating each other. 1-7-70 was a fun thing. It just takes a little getting used to. Let me know if you guys might want to go this route. I know new rules and such muddy things up a bit, but the idea of beating out Michigan for a kid, and knowing that Michigan's class will get worse as a result, while mine will get better ... that's just good fun. Right now, we can avoid each other and build classes that don't really suffer. The idea that I steal a five, and make my rival pick up a three rather than just grabbing some other five - that's separation, and it's another way to beat your rivals. Think it over. We can do whatever you guys want.
     
  20. Archie Griffin

    Archie Griffin Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    5,738
    Keep in mind that this would also eliminate our +5 overflow, meaning that when we miss, we have to live with it. It also lets us sim through cuts, since there won't be any.
     
  21. carolinaeasy

    carolinaeasy Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2010
    Messages:
    2,418
    Arch...I like the above proposal much more than any other set up. I think it balances things out much better than relying on the "Heisman" difficulty to do it for us. We have to remember that there are users in this dynasty who struggle to recruit effectively. I used to be one of those guys and it wasn't fun being unable to bring in a single decent recruit (think back to my first days here at USC). I think the 1-7-70 rule would balance things out and make for some good clean fun. Place my vote here for 1-7-70.
     
  22. carolinaeasy

    carolinaeasy Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2010
    Messages:
    2,418
    How would we handle the post season recruits? Some of those guys come in and bump the "bonus" guys down or up based on rankings...we might need to be proactive on that one.
     
  23. Archie Griffin

    Archie Griffin Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    5,738
    In the past, we kind of "appointed" the creator of the system as our post-season guru. He assigned new bonus guys each off-season. The in-season bonus guys will be well known, even if their ranks shifts in the off-season. Plus, almost all of them will be signed already. Given the higher difficulty of AA recruiting, we could just see how the season progresses, and make a call before the off-season. I could see the real possibility of all post-season guys becoming bonus recruits, since they're tough to land, and many of us will have draft guys and transfers to replace, which will open up scholarships.

    No telling until we get a season under our belts, but we could wait to make a call on that.

    Long story short, the system does what it intends to do - it encourages competition between users, and attaches a real incentive to compete. Also, with more user-user comp, the CPU will have more success, since we'll have a little less time to spend on User-CPU battles. We've had good results in the past, but it takes some getting used to.

    It also self-polices a bit. For example, if you sign over 70, I don't have to crack down as much. I just let the CPU do your cuts. There's no telling who they will cut, so the only way to keep the guys you want is to stay at or under 70. Go over, and you may lose a guy you really like.
     
  24. OnIowa

    OnIowa Zeroes to Heroes

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2010
    Messages:
    1,455
    I like the idea, but agree with easy that being proactive would be essential
     
  25. TD351

    TD351 Walk On

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2010
    Messages:
    516
    Random idea- What about just reducing the amount of recruiting time that you can use- for example everyone has to leave 1 hour (or something) on the board. Is this policeable?
     

Share This Page