PAC12 Bonus Recruit

Discussion in 'Thread Archive' started by carolinaeasy, Dec 18, 2011.

  1. carolinaeasy

    carolinaeasy Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2010
    Messages:
    2,418
    Is 4 star OT Andre Garrett feom Altadena, California. All PAC12 teams are able to aquire bonus status if they land Mr. Garrett.
     
  2. bdub

    bdub Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2010
    Messages:
    2,065
    This dude has Arizona 2nd and Washington at 4th. I thought everyone in the conference had to be in their top 10 or none of them?
     
  3. egofailure

    egofailure Sim habits die hard!

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2010
    Messages:
    3,309
    From what I read in the PM, for the conference bonus player, all four of us in the PAC-12 have to be in the Top 10. So you're right, 'Dub.

    It looks as though the bonus player should be ... CB Marcus Moore from Santa Clarita. He's rated a bit low ... because it's hard to find a recruit that is interested in both Utah AND Cal. ;-)
     
  4. carolinaeasy

    carolinaeasy Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2010
    Messages:
    2,418
    That never made the final draft of the proposal so it never went into effect. Because of this Andre Garret is still the PAC12 bonus player.
     
  5. bdub

    bdub Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2010
    Messages:
    2,065
    Oh had no idea it changed, I thought that was the reason we changed how bonus recruits worked? Make it fair to everyone? The way this is setup makes the great teams better by giving them extra recruits.
     
    Last edited: Dec 18, 2011
  6. carolinaeasy

    carolinaeasy Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2010
    Messages:
    2,418
    Then do what we did and turn your team into a "great" team. And the reason I developed this proposal was to create a smaller list that would force teams to fight it out over the scarce commodity of bonus guys, not for fairness. College football is not fair as a Ute fan you know this as well as anyone.
     
  7. bdub

    bdub Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2010
    Messages:
    2,065
    I'm working on it and yeah its not supposed to be fair I get that.
     
  8. egofailure

    egofailure Sim habits die hard!

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2010
    Messages:
    3,309

    The greater the presitge disparity within a conference, the less likely all participants will have a crack at the bonus recruit. If Easy had created the list like first thought (all four teams in in the top-10), we would have had a bonus recruit who wasn't really worth fighting for ...

    If you can get Utah to that 5-star prestige level, it'll be a whole 'nother ball game.
     
  9. Goose

    Goose Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2010
    Messages:
    3,164
    Can we find an extra bonus recruit that Utah and Cal can fight over? bdub check and see if their is a 4* that has you and cal in their top 8 Why can't the "have nots" have a bonus recruit?
     
  10. egofailure

    egofailure Sim habits die hard!

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2010
    Messages:
    3,309
    That's not a bad idea, especially since the PAC-12 is the only conference with 4 members. As I mentioned above, with the divide in prestige being what it is at the moment ... this might help.
     
  11. jca312

    jca312 Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2009
    Messages:
    2,832

    4-star WR Freddie Johnson of Glendale, CA meets this criteria. He is the #180 recruit, has Cal 3rd and Utah 6th. Washington and Arizona are not in his Top 10, so it seems like a perfect guy for those two schools to battle over.
     
  12. Goose

    Goose Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2010
    Messages:
    3,164
    Thanks jca312 and thanks for helping me out yesterday. :)
     
  13. carolinaeasy

    carolinaeasy Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2010
    Messages:
    2,418
    I am against because there is the clause about a conference must have 3 members in order to have a conference bonus recruit. What you guys are proposing is a bonus recruit for two teams, and then a bonus recruit for the other two teams. Like I said before this was not intended to be "fair" it was intended to create some competition. And in competition there are winners and there are losers, if we are going to do this we might as well do away with bonus playera and give everyone 1 extra 4 star and make this what some folks want a system with no competition.
     
  14. Goose

    Goose Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2010
    Messages:
    3,164
    How's it competition if two guys aren't even on the list? Make the bonus recruit someone that has none of them in the top 10.
     
  15. carolinaeasy

    carolinaeasy Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2010
    Messages:
    2,418
    Then they can fight over a recruit that isn't worth adding? Listen bottom line is nothing we do here is going to be fair, if you guys want to water it down and make everyone a winner go ahead, but I call bs.
     
  16. Goose

    Goose Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2010
    Messages:
    3,164
    How are Ryan Joseph Wr, Kevin Shultz HB, Terrence Leonard CB recruits that aren't worth adding? These are all guys that have none of them in the top ten. If they want the bonus they'll have to work for it. You are taking this way too personal.
     
  17. carolinaeasy

    carolinaeasy Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2010
    Messages:
    2,418
    I am not taking it personal goose, I hope you don't get that impression. We agreed on something prior to the season, you din't change it after the fact because someone feels it is unfair. Everyone had a chance to speak up and help shape the final draft, it isn't my fault many folks ignored tge discussion. I personally gain nothing from this, keeping good players out of JCA and EGO's hands helps me since I play them more often than Bdub and county5. But what happens if you change this here is where does it stop? Does the BIG 10 get upset and want something chanfed? Maybe you feel I have picked a recriit that unfairly benefits me. With what we are currently doing the cpu sets the list and we find the player who fits it, regardless of the top 10 list. Everyone had a chance prior to the start to know this.
     
  18. bdub

    bdub Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2010
    Messages:
    2,065
    The problem is besides me and Cal I believe every team is now a 6 star team. Maybe I should move to USC or something like that.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  19. carolinaeasy

    carolinaeasy Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2010
    Messages:
    2,418
    That is a legit solution, lol.

    But do you see the problem then? You two are outliers and creating rules that cater to you specifically will create another set of problems. Bdub we both selected 4 star prestige programs for a reason and it wasn't because the recruiting was great. You simply have to find a way raise that prestige, or you could come down to the SEC and play in the big leagues ;) We have UGA, UF, BAMA, and LSU open.
     
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2011
  20. bdub

    bdub Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2010
    Messages:
    2,065
    Yes I see what your saying but I still don't like it ;)
     
  21. The Dude

    The Dude Professor of Dudanomics

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2011
    Messages:
    786
    It's hard because the only six stars left are users, and those users are everywhere in recruiting. I'm a five, and I'll get what I want out there, but I can't go head to head and win in most situations. What if we just eliminated all restrictions for four star and below teams? What damage can that really do? Leave the bonus structure as is, but open up any and all other recruits. Just a thought, but I think it would appease without dulling the competition for the teams that really are going to duke it out. Face it, bdub isn't going to win a battle with six stars, or at least not often enough to make burning the time a good idea.

    I'm just thinking out loud here, so don't shoot me.

    I also think multiple championships should require a team change - but that's a different conversation.
     
  22. Goose

    Goose Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2010
    Messages:
    3,164

    I agree. Leave the 72 recruit max for all schools. This will also help in getting the 4 stars back to 5 and above, sometimes it's really tough when everyone else is getting better because of recruiting.
     
  23. carolinaeasy

    carolinaeasy Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2010
    Messages:
    2,418
    My thoughts are you choose to be a 4 star team so you need to be realistic about it. You won't win those battles in real life so why should we create an artificial system that makes it easier on them? I think too many of us view recruiting like losing to the cpu, we dont see it realistically and feel like we should win every time. And I say this as someone who had a 4 star program. I had to turn it around but even when I did I still lost games to teams that had two years of a head start on me in 6star recruiting (remember the wild west days of the first bonus list? Goose should he is benefitting from it still). I took my lumps and dealt with it, I didn't throw a fit and blame the system. I also won a national title and got cpu f'd out of the recruiting uptick that comes with it, again I dealt with it and none of you ever heard me bitch (right dude?). So I can relate bdub, but I can't agree.
     
  24. carolinaeasy

    carolinaeasy Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2010
    Messages:
    2,418
    On the bright side, isn't it nice to see activity on the board all day again? That was a goal of the bonus lists too.
     
  25. egofailure

    egofailure Sim habits die hard!

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2010
    Messages:
    3,309
    As usual, the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

    The prospect of competing over "bonus recruits" always works better when teams are on equal ground. If we were all 6-stars at present time (or even 3-stars), this system would be at it's best. The problem? In time, some of us are going to win more games and recruit better than others. As a result, some teams will drop in prestige; and suddenly, we're right back where we are now.

    The biggest issue I and some others had with Archie's original bonus list, was that it was too long and took too much talent away from the CPU. I supported Easy's proposed bonus list because it was significantly shorter. All and all, no matter what happens, only 9 additional players are being removed from the board. Spread among 5-7 users (or more), the impact shouldn't be too great for any one team, and in return, we have a little extra somethin' to talk about on our forum.

    As Easy mentioned above, there's no way to make a bonus list system completely fair. If you're a 3 or 4 star competing with 5 or 6 stars, it's always going to be tough. You can either see this uphill battle as a challenge and part of the fun, or you can see it as an unfair disadvantage and let it ruin your fun.

    Bdub, while I understand your frustration, I'd also like to see you accept some accountability. In looking at your team's ratings, it's clear that you've struggled a bit with recruiting. You also began this dynasty as a 4-star, while the other PAC-12 users took Arizona and Washington (3-stars) and Washington State (1-star). No one in your conference took the easy road, and building up a program takes time. As we have seen with Alabama (now at 4-star prestige), even a 6-star program can suffer due to failed goals and poor recruiting.

    If I were you, I'd take advantage of other users spending time chasing bonus recruits, and do my best to fill out the one 5-star and seven 4-star recruit slots this season. Why concern yourself with extra when you haven't even reached your 1-7-72 limit the last two years? By just doing that, you're team will improve dramatically. (Don't forget, you can also earn bonus 4-star scholarships by winning your conference or being awarded the SN COY Award.)

    Make no mistake, though, Utah's a tough gig'. Perhaps the hardest amongst users. No matter what Easy says, South Carolina (with Lattimore and Jeffries) was in much better position to succeed from the start. Also, as part of the SEC, they're always going to get more recruiting interest than most, especially compared to a program located in Utah. So if you're looking for a better job, I'm fine with that.

    But since I've taken over as commish, I've only offered lateral moves when users have inquired about a team change. For isntance, Arch' and I discussed him leaving ND for LSU last year, but I asked him to wait, because the Irish were a 4-star and the Tigers were a 5-star. When Notre Dame got bumped up to a 5-star after this past season, Archie took Auburn instead, another 5-star team.

    If you're interested in grabbing a team in the SEC like LSU (now a 4-star), you can. They're presently 3X's as talented as Utah, and you'll be able to recruit a lot easier. I typically don't allow people switch teams during the season, but since we're still in Week 1 (and because you've been a great board member), I can make an exception.

    Let me know what you'd like to do. I want to make sure that you're enjoying your place in the league.
     
    • Like Like x 2

Share This Page