Vote for recruiting start level

Discussion in 'Thread Archive' started by Michael Woodward, Jun 8, 2011.

?

What level should recruiting start on?

Poll closed Jun 22, 2011.
  1. Varsity

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. All-American

    100.0%
  3. Heisman

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. Michael Woodward

    Michael Woodward Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2011
    Messages:
    3,237
  2. Twister18

    Twister18 I aint got time to bleed!

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,134
    I say AA until we figure if the recruiting has changed much.
     
  3. QBKILLAR

    QBKILLAR If you only win one, please let it be Ole Miss.

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2011
    Messages:
    320
    Since I consider myself an All American I'm gonna roll with that.;)
     
  4. makinpropel

    makinpropel Go Big Red!

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2011
    Messages:
    1,432
    AA to start, and i agree with @Abominatrix , we should not go any lower during the dynasty. Only go higher

    Would also like to see recruiting restrictions, like oversigning, be added for '12.
     
  5. Abominatrix

    Abominatrix Walk On

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2011
    Messages:
    717
    I agree with recruiting restrictions, even though I'm one of the worst over signers in the dynasty >_> <_<

    It sucks when people just recruit players because they can (again, not pointing fingers, cuz I do this too much, too), because a lot of us end up with 5 stars sitting behind more 5 stars for their whole careers. Examples: Stanford's RBs, Kansas' safeties, Iowa's O-linemen, Maryland's QBs, and my own D-line have had times when our backups could start ANYWHERE. Ideally, EA would make it so that highly-rated players try to avoid depth chart logjams like that, or transfer out of the situation, but they don't. Also, it would keep the competitive balance. Just to use myself as an example, my 2 recruiting priorities ATM are: 1) Get who I need and 2) Get who Maryland needs, just because I'm a jerk recruiter like that. We should have rules to stop people like me :p
     
  6. Twister18

    Twister18 I aint got time to bleed!

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,134
    Maybe we need to set a 4 5 :5stars: limit? Then the rest are free game?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. QBKILLAR

    QBKILLAR If you only win one, please let it be Ole Miss.

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2011
    Messages:
    320
    That sounds like a good idea twist. Should keep all the user teams balanced and help the cpu teams sign some 5:5stars:'s of their own.
     
  8. areohhwhy

    areohhwhy Walk On

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2011
    Messages:
    293
    AA, And i'm cool with restrictions, my QB situation is a prime example about my over-recruiting. And @Abominatrix, I'm gonna make sure we won't be in the same conference in 12' lol.
     
  9. Michael Woodward

    Michael Woodward Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2011
    Messages:
    3,237
    Honestly, I've never even been interested in being in dynasties with recruiting restrictions, #1, there aren't any in real life, and #2, it makes the off season recruiting dull because you either have all the people signed you can get or have to pass on someone decent hoping there will be someone in the offseason and that you will actually be lucky enough to sign that person. I can deal with saying you can only sign 20 people or only sign so many people at each position per certain amount of years, but I don't really want to be told I have to pick and choose who I go after hard only to not get them anyway. It happens in real life. Alabama signed 4 four-star defensive ends this year. Can you play four defensive ends at the same time? No. Plus, they signed 2 four-star defensive ends last year. Another idea, if you sign more than one 5 star at the same position where you can't play them both, maybe we can make the same promise to both of them and break it to the one we won't play so that he most likely transfers.
     
  10. makinpropel

    makinpropel Go Big Red!

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2011
    Messages:
    1,432
    I think we just mean no oversigning
     
  11. Michael Woodward

    Michael Woodward Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2011
    Messages:
    3,237
    But how do you define "over signing"
     
  12. makinpropel

    makinpropel Go Big Red!

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2011
    Messages:
    1,432
    You have 17 seniors. You sign 18+ recruits
     
  13. Michael Woodward

    Michael Woodward Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2011
    Messages:
    3,237
    But what if some of your freshman are walk ons?
     
  14. makinpropel

    makinpropel Go Big Red!

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2011
    Messages:
    1,432
    They do not put walk-ons on the roster unless you are in need of one at a certain position
     
  15. Michael Woodward

    Michael Woodward Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2011
    Messages:
    3,237
    That's my point....you really need one so he's on the roster but you want to replace him with someone that's worth a damn but only have 5 seniors and replaced all those people already.......then what? Stuck with a walk on?
     
  16. makinpropel

    makinpropel Go Big Red!

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2011
    Messages:
    1,432
    If you need a walk-on for a position, you likely are under the roster limit. How most work is number of seniors, plus how ever many needed to reach 70= number of scholarships available.
     
  17. Michael Woodward

    Michael Woodward Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2011
    Messages:
    3,237
    Well you guys are complaining about me oversigning and I've rarely had to cut anyone. In fact, I think the most I've had to cut the entire dynasty is 1 player.
     
  18. Twister18

    Twister18 I aint got time to bleed!

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,134
    I dont think it is wrong to sign up to your limit of 25 and have to cut 8. I think that you should limit the cream of the crop of 5 stars if you do any. I can build a pretty decent team of mostly 4 stars.
     
  19. Michael Woodward

    Michael Woodward Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2011
    Messages:
    3,237
    Yes but 4 stars are often just as good as 5 stars so it really doesn't matter. And even if the goal is to keep the other teams competitive, there are only like 30 five star recruits. We have 12 user teams usually. If each user gets 2 five star recruits, they're pretty much all gone. And really, I remember playing Texas about two seasons ago and they had 4 wide receivers over 97 overall. I've never had receivers that good. So are we really cheating the cpu of talent?
     
  20. Abominatrix

    Abominatrix Walk On

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2011
    Messages:
    717
    :confused:. My thought was that signing 25 each year WAS wrong. The thing I want to get out of recruiting restrictions is as little cutting as possible. If you cut a 4 star, he doesn't exist anymore, and that's a 4 star that a Duke/Wake/NCSU can't use, even if he could've been a 4 year starter there. IMO, if you can only sign as many players as there are leaving the upcoming year, then its up to YOU to figure out how to manage your offers and roster. The system I'm thinking of off the top of my head is that you can only have a max of 71 players (1 single cut to do, and subject to adjustment). If you go over, you lose that many the following year. If you want to replace 2 walkons, too bad, because we can all see those roster holes coming a year away. If you REALLY want to replace 2 walkons, go ahead, and you'll incur the penalty next year.

    I don't really care too much about the talent acquisition part, because we all have the right to recruit who we want. Its the cutting of decent players that makes the talent gap too big. If Duke picked up every single player I've cut, they'd be a solid team. And the Texas argument is weak, because you'll NEVER rob Texas/OU/Bama/OSU/USC of talent. They're probably the worst oversigners of all, cuz the CPU doesn't care :p
     
  21. Michael Woodward

    Michael Woodward Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2011
    Messages:
    3,237
    Then you and twist can figure it out for yourselves because you two are the only ones that have had to cut anyone consistently. How would I even manage that? That would be a lot of work for me to keep track of every single team's scholarships and what not. And this started as a complaint about signing too many 5 stars and has moved on to having to cut too many. I agree, it is ridiculous if we get to cut players and you have to cut 10 players. It happens in real life though. Last season (I think it was), Ole Miss signed 36 players. That means they had to cut about 11. As far as cutting four stars that could go to Duke, in reality, how many 4 stars do Duke ever sign? Duke has signed 5 four stars since 2002. That's five players in ten seasons. Texas signs good players because they do in real life. If you expect Duke to sign the 4 stars that you cut, you're mistaken. Oklahoma State is a very good football team, in real life, they signed 0 five star, 2 four star. Michigan State only had 2 four stars. Kansas is only 3 years off of an Orange Bowl win and they only had two 4 stars. Miami only had two, same with Utah. The big teams take all the 5 and 4 stars. Players want to win. Our teams win in the dynasty and that's why we sign these players. There are 4 and 5 star athletes that get cut to make room for younger prospects. I believe at Miami, their second leading tackler was cut to make room for a highly rated prospect after over signing. It happens. We can make a rule about it, but for the most part, it'd have to be run on an honor code. You know when you've signed a little bit too many.
     
  22. makinpropel

    makinpropel Go Big Red!

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2011
    Messages:
    1,432
    Valid points, but those guys can move onto other schools and play. In the game, these players are gone, leaving a huge talent gap. If you don't go over 70, there is no big deal, you are not in any danger of hurting the recruiting rules.

    And how most dynasties monitor is they post their seniors, and then how many roster sports they have until 70, and then they add those up. As they have the season go on, they post all the their recruits, and then people can check that original thread to see if they are going over.
     
  23. Twister18

    Twister18 I aint got time to bleed!

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,134
    I think that cutting a ton of players was more of a problem last year as you could fill up your roster in the offseason where now, you are lucky to get 2 and even fill a need.
     
  24. Michael Woodward

    Michael Woodward Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2011
    Messages:
    3,237
    A lot of people that 'move on' in these situations go to d1aa schools so they don't have to sit out a year. Rhett bomar went to sam houston state, colin garrett went to northwestern louisiana state, and the second leading tackler from miami went to a school also like that, can't remember which one, maybe elon? How do we know that in this years game, cut players wont just transfer? We don't know how they made this years game yet.
     
  25. pnc

    pnc Walk On

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Messages:
    649
    I agree with makinpropel. In another league we would post a preview of our team in week 1 then show recruiting and add to it as we get commits.

    If you have 68 on your roster and 15 seniors leaving then it would look like 15 seniors + 2 roster = 17 total. We had a plus two setup in case of early draftees or transfers so mine would be 15+2+2 for a total of 19. Once you had 19 seniors sign, then you had to stop recruiting. the most you would ever have to cut in a season is 2. we could even do away with the plus 2 or make it plus 1. Whatever everybody agreed on.
     

Share This Page