Players Leaving Question

Discussion in 'The Experience' started by edge7771, Jan 29, 2012.

  1. edge7771

    edge7771 Walk On

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Messages:
    1,944
    JCspartan2, dakota7, Big Suge Knight, GoGators, UofCWildcat, Masler, Randiesel75, controllerabuser, blLL flo, Darkwing

    If most don't think this will be an issue no problem, but I would like hear some thoughts. If were not going to be talking players back than I think we need to look at those open scholarships. I'm sure most will leave them open and carry them to next season since you don't get a ton on new recruits after bowl season. All this is going to do is allow the top schools load up on more of the top talent the next season and widen the gap between the schools. Maybe we should keep the kids that cpu signs only for the kids leaving? Not keeping kids is supposed to bring the schools closer. I only think that will happen if were not allowed to carry those scholarships over for 4 or 5 start kids the next seaon.
     
  2. blLL flo

    blLL flo BTFU!

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Messages:
    2,655
    I don't think there is any way you are going to convince me that I should have to keep a recruit the CPU signed based on need because my players performed well enough in the season prior to go to the NFL.

    If I was able to keep the players that left (theoretically) my team will have a higher overall next year and be tougher to beat. So would you rather me have a higher overall team from year to year, but more recruits to go around? Or sign anywhere from 1-4 more guys because players left early, but have all teams (user and CPU) be closer in overall rating?
     
  3. edge7771

    edge7771 Walk On

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Messages:
    1,944
    Not you all of us, if we're allowed to just load up on recruits the next year we should just keep the kids.
     
  4. blLL flo

    blLL flo BTFU!

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Messages:
    2,655
    You still can't recruit over 70.

    But for example, you lost 4 guys that could have been swayed back. If you have to keep a crappy 1* or a walk on based on EA's requirements, you will be able to over recruit and cut the crappy player. This is really the only drawback.

    We will benefit by having younger teams, which will be more evenly balanced, and it should lessen the amount of red shirts because of the need to play younger guys.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. jello1717

    jello1717 "Those who stay will be champions." -- Bo

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2009
    Messages:
    13,617
    The smart thing to do, and I know that at least myself, dakota7, and blll flo do this, is to go after guys towards the end of the season that you can't sign due to lack of schollies, but that you'd like to sign if some open up in the offseason. You should also go after guys from positions that you expect to have an "unexpected" vacancy as well.

    dakota7 held off me, Suge, and JC for the #3 SS without an offer, and in week 1 of the offseason, when he had a scholly open, he signed him. I got to -1 for the #11 HB just in case Stephens went pro. He didn't go pro so I removed #11 from my board, but if he did go pro, I was in great shape to replace him.

    I'm always baffled when I see guys leaving recruiting time on the board. There's ALWAYS someone that you should be talking to towards the end of the regular season.
     
  6. GoGators

    GoGators GT: KSherm

    Joined:
    May 19, 2009
    Messages:
    7,893
    You make an interesting point. It should balance itself out though right?

    I think Wisconsin lost the most so let's use them as an example. Wisconsin lost 4 guys that they weren't expecting to leave. Of those 4 extra scholarships, I'd imagine he fills at least one of them this offseason. So say next season he's at 67 rather than 70. He gets to sign 3 extra guys, but he's given up 4 guys that were far superior (likely 90 overall players after progression).

    Then, even if he does sign studs the next season to replace those that left early, he's still pulling 80 overall guys compared to 90 overall guys. Plus, it's a year they're not on the roster so he's missing progression. Meanwhile, the CPU has rostered guys from this season that will get that year of progression.

    Like I said, I think you make a good point and it's something to keep an eye on. I think it should right itself though over time. We shall see.
     
  7. dakota7

    dakota7 Former Blue Chip Recruit

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    12,443
    It was 5 and I filled them all.
     
  8. jello1717

    jello1717 "Those who stay will be champions." -- Bo

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2009
    Messages:
    13,617
    It's rare for me to not fill my newly opened schollies.
     
  9. dakota7

    dakota7 Former Blue Chip Recruit

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    12,443
    Its like xmas morning....more recruits!!
     
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page