View Poll Results: Recruiting in NCAA Football

Voters
57. You may not vote on this poll
  • Like it as is

    3 5.26%
  • Needs some tweaks

    30 52.63%
  • Want a new system

    24 42.11%
Page 5 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 201

Thread: Recruiting in NCAA 13 - What would you like to see?

  • Share
    • Facebook
  • Thread Tools
  • Display
  1. #81
    Hall of Fame SmoothPancakes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    16,450
    Quote Originally Posted by baseballplyrmvp View Post
    just a random question, but why arent there any minus grade's for the pitches? its all base letters and +'s.
    Because - has a negative connotation, and having a letter grade with a - attached to it could cause the recruit "irreparable harm" and bring about angry emails and letters to the editor from mothers and upset parents.

  2. #82
    Booster JeffHCross's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    South County, STL
    Posts
    12,951
    Quote Originally Posted by baseballplyrmvp View Post
    just a random question, but why arent there any minus grade's for the pitches? its all base letters and +'s.
    Heh. I've wondered that for a while.
    Quote Originally Posted by SmoothPancakes View Post
    Because - has a negative connotation, and having a letter grade with a - attached to it could cause the recruit "irreparable harm" and bring about angry emails and letters to the editor from mothers and upset parents.
    Bahahahahahahaha.
    Twitter: @3YardsandACloud

  3. #83
    Heisman baseballplyrmvp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    washington
    Posts
    3,675
    Quote Originally Posted by SmoothPancakes View Post
    Because - has a negative connotation, and having a letter grade with a - attached to it could cause the recruit "irreparable harm" and bring about angry emails and letters to the editor from mothers and upset parents.
    i thought you were actually serious up until i hit the emails and letter to the editor part. well done smooth, well done.

  4. #84
    Hall of Fame SmoothPancakes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    16,450
    Quote Originally Posted by baseballplyrmvp View Post
    i thought you were actually serious up until i hit the emails and letter to the editor part. well done smooth, well done.
    Thank you mvp. That was the very first thing that came to my mind when I saw your post. I'm not sure if that's sad or not. And even worse, I can sadly see that being true and happening in real life in some places in this country.

  5. #85
    Heisman baseballplyrmvp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    washington
    Posts
    3,675
    Quote Originally Posted by WarEagle View Post
    I'm also still on my soapbox about a weighted roulette system where a recruit's Most category has 14x more chance of coming up than his Least.
    Quote Originally Posted by JeffHCross View Post

    Absolutely. That's definitely another option for what I was saying about increasing the "Most" value. And one that I have also advocated in the past, but probably forgotten about by now. If you kept the point values where they are now, but made it so that "Most", "Very High", etc have a significantly higher chance of coming up, then I think you could have the equivalent, or maybe even an improvement, over my idea.
    "coach's choice" should also be included in that weighted system- depending on the prestige of the coach (or coach's rating if its ever added). the better the coach is at recruiting or however high his prestige rating is, the more opportunities he gets to talk about what he wants to talk about.

  6. #86
    Booster JeffHCross's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    South County, STL
    Posts
    12,951
    Quote Originally Posted by baseballplyrmvp View Post
    "coach's choice" should also be included in that weighted system- depending on the prestige of the coach (or coach's rating if its ever added). the better the coach is at recruiting or however high his prestige rating is, the more opportunities he gets to talk about what he wants to talk about.
    That's another one I hadn't thought of. I like that.
    Twitter: @3YardsandACloud

  7. #87
    Heisman baseballplyrmvp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    washington
    Posts
    3,675
    we need more variety in the recruit's positions in dynasties. its pretty bad when i'm looking at the #6 rated wide receiver, who happens to be the #8th ranked recruit in the country......or the #10 ranked wr, who happens to be the #14 ranked recruit in the country.

    i took the liberty of making a table to at least show what i'm seeing in my offline dynasties, there were 2578 recruits generated in this year's class (new recruits have NOT been included). keep in mind, this is from one sample year (year 2015).



    this is absolutely terrible....16 5* wide receivers, yet 0 5* offensive linemen? better yet, only 4 of the 33 total 5* players, wound up to be defensive players. the 6 athletes all had ratings best suited for either wr or rb. with this amount of imbalance that is present (assuming similar type numbers will be used every recruiting class), its no wonder why offense rules the game, especially down the road in future years of dynasty.

  8. #88
    Heisman morsdraconis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Huntington, WV -------------Michael Guthrie
    Posts
    8,305
    Just a cursory glance at the real commits from this year's class:

    22/50 are defensive players
    11/50 are offensive linemen
    7/50 are RBs
    8/50 are WRs
    2/50 are QBs


    Pretty interesting numbers.

    Even more interesting is the fact that there are 50 recruits in real life this year and only 33 recruits in the game. Definitely doesn't look good.

  9. #89
    Heisman ryby6969's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Orlando, Fl
    Posts
    2,464
    I would also say the chances of the most of the 6 ATH being a WR is very good also. It is also a shame that it is very rare that there are any LB's ever. When the number of receivers and corners is that lopsided, it makes it damn near impossible to stop the passing game. They also need to make ATH's that are RB's be able to play LB also. A good portion of the time if a player is a RB but considered a ATH, he plays LB also. (Think Wilder) Also, get rid of ATH's who are basically just FB's.


    Edit: Just read the rest of he post and noticed that you said the ATH's were either WR or RB. That is just unacceptable to have basically half the top recruits as WR's.

  10. #90
    Booster JeffHCross's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    South County, STL
    Posts
    12,951
    Quote Originally Posted by baseballplyrmvp View Post
    with this amount of imbalance that is present (assuming similar type numbers will be used every recruiting class), its no wonder why offense rules the game, especially down the road in future years of dynasty.
    Based on some tests I did on NCAA 11 with this, this kind of stuff varies a ton from season to season. But I never saw that much of imbalance either, so maybe something changed.

    Quote Originally Posted by morsdraconis View Post
    Even more interesting is the fact that there are 50 recruits in real life this year and only 33 recruits in the game. Definitely doesn't look good.
    Who the hell lists 50 5* recruits this year in real life? Rivals only has 32 and 247sports has 25. Plus, the 32 that Rivals has is the highest number they've had since 2009 (33).

    Even ESPN only shows 11. And as much as I have a problem with some of their player grades, that actually seems more logical to me than 33.
    Last edited by JeffHCross; 02-05-2012 at 10:36 AM.
    Twitter: @3YardsandACloud

  11. #91
    Heisman baseballplyrmvp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    washington
    Posts
    3,675
    here is the next season's recruiting breakdown in that same offline dynasty.


    at least there were some more 5* defensive players this year. however, out of the 37 5* players, only 9 of them would have played defense, and 16 would have been wr's.

    additionally, 3* players account for 45.7% of the recruiting class, while 2* players accounted for just under 25%!

  12. #92
    Heisman psusnoop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    State College, PA
    Posts
    9,960
    Something I posted in a different thread, but for me I like this idea

    I'd like to see "committed" recruits still be able to be swayed to the point of de-committing from a school. Like after the season you have all these coaches changes now it would be nice to have recruits change their mind and de-commit.

    Maybe after a recruit commits to your school you still have to maintain contact with him and it will show a bar with his level of his decision, if you ignore him or have coaching changes at years end this recruits bar goes down and can be swayed by a different team. Now I'd think there would maybe need to be slightly more time available to keep interest at its peak, or a separate time for committed recruits that you'd have to use but this would add lots to recruiting and I think it would be lots of fun too!

  13. #93
    Booster JeffHCross's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    South County, STL
    Posts
    12,951
    Quote Originally Posted by psusnoop View Post
    I'd like to see "committed" recruits still be able to be swayed to the point of de-committing from a school.
    The only way I'd agree to that is if they made it an option to turn on/off. Simply because there are a lot of people out there that don't "enjoy" recruiting as it is, and I don't think the potential for decommits would do anything but make that worse, for those people.

    Personally, I like the idea (as long as it didn't take tons of in-game time to keep a player interested), there's just a lot of things that need to be considered for something like that.
    Twitter: @3YardsandACloud

  14. #94
    Heisman morsdraconis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Huntington, WV -------------Michael Guthrie
    Posts
    8,305
    I think, as the school that the prospect is committed to, you shouldn't have to do anything extra to the prospect to keep him interested in your school, but there is a small percentage chance that a school that lines up perfectly with what he's interested in could get him to decommit to the school that's he's currently committed to and resume the fight over the prospect. The school attempting to force the decommit would have to spend 60 minutes per week and, again, be PERFECTLY (A- through A+ in the recruit's Most and two Very High categories) lined up with what the recruit wants (basically, the only schools that are going to force a decommit are going to be prestige schools or maybe or recruits that just so happen to line up perfectly with the recruit's wants).

    So, it COULD happen, but the school that got the original commitment would have a DISTINCT advantage throughout the process, even with the small percentage of the decommit happening.

    The behind the scenes application would be to continue to keep count of what points were accumulated by the school attempting to force the decommit and use it as a basis of how much the school forcing the decommit would be behind the originally committed school once the process renews for the fight over the prospect since it's obvious that there is an arbitrary number that is needed for the prospect to commit to a school (even an instant commit has the +5000 thing).
    Last edited by morsdraconis; 02-06-2012 at 09:50 PM.

  15. #95
    Heisman baseballplyrmvp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    washington
    Posts
    3,675
    Quote Originally Posted by morsdraconis View Post
    you shouldn't have to do anything extra to the prospect to keep him interested in your school,
    i dont really agree with that, but there are some things that could be done to make sure it takes minimal effort to secure your recruits. when the recruit originally commits, he's given a percentage of how solid his verbal commitment is (maybe it starts at 50%?). at this point, you can continue to talk to him to further solidify his commitment, or just let him be, in which he'll remain at 50% if no other schools are talking to him. if this percentage drops below, lets say 30%, that recruit officially decommits, and is now fair game with however many schools are going after him, with those now interested schools being -1 point behind the originally committed school.



    Quote Originally Posted by morsdraconis View Post
    So, it COULD happen, but the school that got the original commitment would have a DISTINCT advantage throughout the process
    i agree. i'd think an easy way to do this would be to offer 1.5-3X per recruiting pitch if you continue to talk to a recruit, as i listed above. this gives an easy advantage to the committed school, as they should have an easier time securing the commitment, when there are only 2 schools vying for the recruit. however, the more schools involved in recruiting a kid, the harder it should be for the school to solidify his commitment (like a 6 vs 1 battle, shouldnt last more than a couple weeks between the top schools).


    Quote Originally Posted by morsdraconis View Post
    The behind the scenes application would be to continue to keep count of what points were accumulated by the school attempting to force the decommit and use it as a basis of how much the school forcing the decommit would be behind the originally committed school once the process renews for the fight over the prospect since it's obvious that there is an arbitrary number that is needed for the prospect to commit to a school (even an instant commit has the +5000 thing).
    again, referring back to my responce above, once a kid commits, (and his verbal starts at 50%), the points from all schools are added up. whatever percentage your school's points are of the toal either increases or decreases the verbal percentage. (ex: your school earns 300 points, another school earns 200 points. 500 total points, but you had 60% of em...since you had 10% more than half of the points, that recruit's verbal goes up 10% toward your school. if points are equally earned between you and another school, no change is made.)
    Last edited by baseballplyrmvp; 02-07-2012 at 08:30 AM.

  16. #96
    Booster JeffHCross's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    South County, STL
    Posts
    12,951
    An alternative, and simpler, change (though along the same lines as what you guys are talking about) would be for the "Verbal - Soft" stage to last longer, and be slightly more complex than just "hit the # first!"
    Twitter: @3YardsandACloud

  17. #97
    Heisman baseballplyrmvp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    washington
    Posts
    3,675
    Quote Originally Posted by JeffHCross View Post
    An alternative, and simpler, change (though along the same lines as what you guys are talking about) would be for the "Verbal - Soft" stage to last longer, and be slightly more complex than just "hit the # first!"
    +1

    i wouldnt mind seeing the soft verbal last longer....all season long, if you get a certain kind of recruit?

  18. #98
    Heisman psuexv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Central PA
    Posts
    8,037
    Quote Originally Posted by JeffHCross View Post
    An alternative, and simpler, change (though along the same lines as what you guys are talking about) would be for the "Verbal - Soft" stage to last longer, and be slightly more complex than just "hit the # first!"
    I think if you are going to do that you definitely need to give more time per week. If you have to talk to these kids longer or all year then class sizes will be too small. As it stands now, you are able to lock a kid up and then use that time on more people.

  19. #99
    Booster JeffHCross's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    South County, STL
    Posts
    12,951
    Quote Originally Posted by psuexv View Post
    I think if you are going to do that you definitely need to give more time per week.
    I agree that, overall, things would need to be re-examined if Soft Verbals were lengthened. However, specifically in response to "you definitely need to give more time": Not necessarily. It wouldn't make sense for a player that has a +300 pt lead to arbitrarily increase the length of his soft verbal. It should only be in cases where the player's commitment feels ... fast. Like when a guy with three -1 schools decides to commit for no apparent reason. That would increase the chance of flips and decommitments, while not increasing (too much) the necessary time expenditure.

    It would also force people to reevaluate their recruiting strategies and maybe avoid the drawn out battles for every prospect they want to go after.
    Twitter: @3YardsandACloud

  20. #100
    few things I have to add that are probably already in here but I will put here:

    1 - Do away with the ATH position, its horrible and makes searching through stuff near impossible when I have 160 lb guys in my OT list
    2 - Show the ratings/grades of every player at every position when being recruited. Meaning, I should be able to see how an OT would be rated at OG when recruited
    3 - Make SIZE matter!!!
    4 - Add some sort of ceiling/risk rating factor so some guys (hopefully the bigger frame guys) might have a higher ceiling but often times less probably of panning out or getting better
    5 - Make stats and how you PLAY factor HUGELY into recruiting. Drop back gun slingers should not want to play for Navy

    These are the ones off the top of my head.

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •