1. If you haven't seen already, TSO is now powered by Discord! This means that we will eventually be disbanding the embedded chat on the main forum page. Head to this page to learn more on how to integrate your TSO account with discord! https://traditionsportsonline.com/wiki/discord-integration/

Sim Scheduling Idea....Hear Me out!!!

Discussion in '4th Horseman' started by Five_Fifs, Jun 23, 2012.

  1. Five_Fifs

    Five_Fifs Walk On

    May 27, 2012
    Hey there fellas,

    As most of you all know, I'm a first time online simmer. I've been reading some of the other groups forums and have noticed alot of the rules regarding recruiting, gameplay, playbooks, and sliders. However, one thing that I've yet to see on anyone's rules is anything regarding scheduling.

    I think that the actual scheduling of games could have as much to do with the 'realism' of our league as the other factors that already are under some sort of regulation. So that got me to thinking about how our league can add a layer of depth through our scheduling.

    The object to be avoided is the scheduling of 4 or 5 "top ten" teams in an effort to "manipulate" the rankings, meaning moving up unrealisitcally fast due to abusing the 'modify your schedule" feature to cherry pick whoever the top teams are entering that season and scheduling them all early on in order to have more valuable victories on their resume'.

    Plus, we'd be able to distinguish T4 as the most innovative of the leagues by adopting sim ideas that create depth in the sim experience.

    This is what I propose.

    To simulate what we see in real life, I suggest that we submit our requested out of conference opponents to the commissioner (or whoever he delegates the responsibility to) at least three seasons ahead of time. We also would request when the game would be played (August, September, October or November). The commish would "hold" these request until the season in question and then would schedule the games accordingly. If he suspects any cheesing going on in the selection (for instance, a Sun Belt School requesting a 4 September games against LSU, USC, Michigan and Notre Dame), then he holds the right to reject the request for cause and ask the member to resubmit. For our purposes, this would mean that we would now be submitting our request for the 2016 season and beyond. And just living with the results, of how your opponents are ranked come 2016.

    Further, if you control a school in a BCS conference and you request a game against another school in a BCS conference, then there will be a 2 year committment for the game (a home and away game). The same rule would apply for Non-BCS schools scheduling games against other Non-BCS schools. (This is like real life where teams who have the same to gain from playing each other each host one another)

    BCS vs Non-BCS games would not require the home-away 2y commitment and would only be a 1y commitment. (This would prevent scenarios that would likely never happen, like UGA traveling to Idaho. Reflects those situations where mediocre programs get large paydays in exchange for taking a trip and a loss on the column).

    An exception to the 1y commitment for BCS-NonBCS matchups would be made for matchups between 4* prestige or better non-BCS programs and BCS programs or where the Non-BCS school's prestige exceeds that of the BCS school. (Think Boise State playing a home and home with Colorado or Miami, for instance)

    Finally, if you have a 'rivalry' game you would like to establish with a team who isn't an existing rivalry, Submit a request to have it scheduled annually with a reason that this team should be become a rival. For example, I'm UMass and I want to have an annual rivalry game with Boston College because we're in the same state. Or if you've had some memorable bowl games and/or regular season matchups. Or whatever reason you have.
    One final idea that related to scheduling but also ties into moving from conference to conference. If you have a non-BCS team and want to move to the ACC-SEC-BIG10-BIG12-PAC12-BIG EAST, then you would have to EARN your way into the conference by playing 75% of your out of conference games against members of the desired conference for 3 seasons and posting a .500 or better record against them.

    If your team doesn't record a .500 or better record during the 'test schedule' time, then you cannot apply to another conference again for two seasons. The 3y "test" period would prevent disruptive conference hopping while also encouraging the building up of programs. Even with dynamic conference prestige, there is still a dependency on other's in the conference having success. This would give coaches who are building up low prestige programs the opportunity to escape conferences that just don't have enough big guns to improve significantly).

    This system, in general, would hopefully keep members from making unrealistic jumps from non-BCS to BCS conferences. And also would keep worthwhile teams in the lesser conferences. (Maybe the Big East needs to be treated differently somehow? Being that it is a BCS Conference but is starting to look more and more like a non-BCS conference)
    Again all of this is just a proposal and all ideas are welcomed. I think it brings another level of strategy and realism to our simulation. If you desire a tough OoC Schedule and the chance to use your schedule to move up in the rankings, I believe you should have to earn that right by smart scheduling as opposed to just looking at the top 25 and picking out who you would like to play. (Knowing you will probably win that contest)

    Last edited: Jun 23, 2012
  2. Wyrmreaver

    Wyrmreaver Ready for Madden 15 on Xbox One, lets get it on!

    Oct 31, 2011

    I like the idea, in principle. I don't know that it is really workable for us though.

    Since out teams will be widely spread among different conferences I will be using the non-conference scheduling primarily to create user games or continue established rivalries. I definitely wont just through a bunch of ranked teams on peoples schedules to help them climb the ranks.
  3. The Parrothead

    The Parrothead Walk On

    Jun 23, 2009
    I like the idea in principle, too, but what happens when you're able to switch positions and you take advantage of it? Now you lose the x number of years ahead scheduling. Just because the coach moved doesn't mean the opponent went with it. The other issue I see is keeping up with it. Realizing we can post online would help, but you're takling 3 seasons out, which means come three seasons from now, each coach has ANOTHER 3 seasons potentially scheduled. Just some first thoughts that came to mind.
  4. papaloke

    papaloke Fifty Shades of NCAA

    Aug 9, 2011
    Yeah, great idea but if things work like they did last year then most of the non conference games will be user games. Wyrmreaver will control the schedule so he'll get to determine if one user is getting more top ten teams than others.
  5. Five_Fifs

    Five_Fifs Walk On

    May 27, 2012
    @Paploke and Wyrmreaver Oh ok, understood. Hadn't done an OD before, so I wasn't aware of Wyrmreaver did all of that.

    @Parrothead The way I imagined is that in real life if a coach switched a school, he wouldn't really have any say in future opponents for a few years anyway because schedules and OoC matchups are often made a few years in advance. However, I think for our purposes, if it's an issue, then a "waiver" of some sort for a coach who switches teams allowing him to request opponents would probably be an easy solution to that.

    And in terms of how it would actually be carried out, that prior to starting this first season we would have to post any request for 2016 season opponents to a dedicated thread. And prior to the beginning of next season, our request for 2017 opponents would have to be posted in the same manner. Our request would continue at the beginning of each season in the same kind of way.

    What did you all think of the idea concerning changing conferences????

Share This Page