West Startup Thread

Discussion in 'Thread Archive' started by Archie Griffin, Mar 21, 2009.

  1. Archie Griffin

    Archie Griffin Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    5,738
    West Startup Thread

    1. See the new rules (look for the bold print):

    2. Get your recruiting and game summary threads up (just do a quick preview and needs list, if you're short on time. We're not looking for anything big at all)

    3. Give your opinion on whether or not we should add an three extra 3-star and under recruits (the +3 rule), to account for transfers and players leaving early. This is the only recruiting discussion open. We will all have access to one five-star guy in year one, with bonuses kicking in after this season.

    When these things are done, and preseason changes tasks are complete, we will move forward.

    AG
     
  2. Basis4aDay56

    Basis4aDay56 Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    Messages:
    5,421
    "Give your opinion on whether or not we should add an three extra 3-star and under recruits (the +3 rule), to account for transfers and players leaving early."

    My vote is no on this. As long as you fill your needs (that the CPU tells you), you don't need 70 guys. Then the next season you will have more scholarships available to try to fill. I think going to the exact number makes it more fun and challenging, because there is an element of chance at the season's end.
     
  3. Big Suge Knight

    Big Suge Knight Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2009
    Messages:
    6,263
    Featured Threads:
    1
    I vote yes for replacing players leaving early with a 3*.
     
  4. I agree with Basis on the additional 3* players.
    I vote no
     
  5. Shaun Mason

    Shaun Mason Keepin' it 1hunnah.

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2009
    Messages:
    24,902
    Featured Threads:
    4
    I am kind of have mixed feelings about this.

    The only reason for that is the following scenario:

    You have the minimum of players at a position, all underclassmen. Because they are not very highly rated, you plan to wait until next year to fill the inevitable gap gradution will cause.

    Then one has a successful year and declares for the draft. We don't have the option to sway players.

    So, if you have used all your recruiting spots, you get a walk-on.

    I hate walk-ons.:)

    I hate them because they get scholorships. So, we are bound to not cut them. IRL, a walk on does not get a scholorship until they earn it.

    If we could cut walk-ons if they didn't pan out, then I would say no to +3.

    Otherwise, I vote yes.:)
     
  6. Actually, when the commish does players leaving and you see that underclassman declare, I think the commish can sway for us. We just need to tell him how many minutes to try.
     
  7. Basis4aDay56

    Basis4aDay56 Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    Messages:
    5,421
    The CPU only places walk-ons on your roster if you don't fill a "need", I believe.
     
  8. Archie Griffin

    Archie Griffin Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    5,738
    If this is true, I didn't know it. I'm actually OK with doing this, but I think we might want to think about whether or not we want to regulate it, because I don't think I've ever lost a guy I was willing to spend time on. I could see making award winners or guys who get Heisman votes ineligible for this kind of influence. However, there's really no telling who will leave. Beanie went, Bradford came back. It's a toss up, I guess.

    AG
     
  9. Razcalking1978

    Razcalking1978 OFFL TeamBuilder Commish

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    Messages:
    1,830
    Yep, it works if the Commish takes it offline.

    Most leagues, include Tradition, won't let you sway a guy if he's 90 OV or higher or if he won an award.
     
  10. Archie Griffin

    Archie Griffin Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    5,738
    So the commish takes it offline, sways guys, and then what? Does he retire and re-host?
     
  11. I have never done it but theSandman at Tradition has done it

    I put 45 min each into two guys . I lost both.
     
  12. Archie Griffin

    Archie Griffin Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    5,738
    OK, it's been a couple days, and we've only got 3 summary threads, and three recruiting threads.

    Hoops is on pause until Thursday. Let's get caught up.

    AG

    I got 13 of the sweet 16, by the way. Wake and Clemson really hurt. I thought Clemson was going to be the pick that made me a genius.
     
  13. Colemanchu

    Colemanchu GOAT SPLITTER

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    7,707
    If commish is going to take it offline and sway players then I vote no. If we are just going to accept the glitch then I vote yes but maybe a plus 2 instead.
     
  14. Shaun Mason

    Shaun Mason Keepin' it 1hunnah.

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2009
    Messages:
    24,902
    Featured Threads:
    4
    I lost Wake, Illinois, and Washington. I'll take 13/16 though.:) I had those three teams losing in the sweet 16, so if my picks work out, I will be in good shape.
     
  15. Basis4aDay56

    Basis4aDay56 Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    Messages:
    5,421
    I like the idea of being allowed to sway non-award winners. I wouldn't mind allowing RS-Sophomores to be talked into staying, either -- those are sometimes pretty random.
     

Share This Page