I know! The week before I had +1034....and I still didn't sign him. I finished in a 7-team tie (game said 8th) -1 pts behind. The big weeks did vault me into his Top 10, though.Originally Posted by ebin
For some reason, I find it hilarious that you got that kind of point total on a punter.
Through 7 or 8 games I have the #2 class in the country and I've got four 5* kids, four 4* kids and three 3* kids. I focused on quality over quantity. After this season I think I'm going to increase the recruiting difficulty to Heisman and see how I do for fun.
Pfft. I've done that several times.
Twitter: @3YardsandACloud
does anyone think there could be a connection between the amount of points you get from a promise and what the recruit thinks about the promise? ie: if your school had an A+ in championship contender, the recruit's most important pitch was the championship contender pitch, and you offered him the "guarantee national championship during his first year" promise.....would you receive a higher point total from that combination, versus your school being an A+ in c.c., the recruit only had low-average interest in the c.c. pitch, and then you offered him the "guarantee national championship....." pitch?
it should be this way in theory, but i was just wondering if anyone has come across this.....(whether by just playing around or by actually testing it).
I never promise those things so I don't know but it would seem to make sense. I only promise "no redshirt" first year and winning record against rivalries since I can almost guarantee that with Michigan if I have Minnesota on the schedule.
I haven't noticed any correlation between promises and pitches, but I haven't gotten to the second tier of promises yet.
One thing I did notice, was in a recent offseason I promised No Redshirt, then Winning Record against rivals, then Conference Championship. The bonus for the latter two was significantly higher than No Redshirt.
Twitter: @3YardsandACloud
Conference Championship is ALWAYS like 150 points or so (and a REALLY good one to promise if you can back up the claim).
Later down the road, promising Top 10 for 1-2 years is also a good one if you can back it up as well.
I do think there is some correlation with Redshirt and Playing Time though. I've promised them to guys that have playing time really high (very high or most) and it gets more than 50-70 points like normal.
Okay, that's what I was wondering ... if it was the actual promise of the fact that it was my second/third promise.
Twitter: @3YardsandACloud
I've been putting together some recruiting information over the last several weeks, but this little tidbit I found couldn't wait for the full write-up.
First, the particulars:
Game Difficulty: All-American w/ Slider adjustments
Recruiting Difficulty: Varsity
I'm looking to add a mobile QB prospect for my online dynasty. I'm not really liking any of the prospects that are interested in my program, but I throw one on my board as a fall back option. By week #3, I decide to take a look at what's available. Low and behold, a monster 5* QB from California (which isn't a Pipeline state for me) is dangling out there. I'm talking B+ Speed, A+ Acceleration, C+ Agility, B+ Throw Power, B- Throw Accuracy. I go into the Recruiting Reports to see how much time each team on his top 10 list is using to recruit him and...not one single team had him listed on their recruiting board. I immediately put him on my recruiting board and over the next three weeks, I spent 60 minutes of recruiting time each week in an effort to land him. With each passing week, I continued to lose ground (based on the number of points his 10th place team was behind each week). -380 points week #3, -400 points week #4, -420 week #5 and still, not one single team on his top 10 list had him listed on their recruiting board. Then, it happened, week #6 came around and I found myself down -520 points. His top team, USC, finally offered him a scholarship. I went back into the Recruiting Report and found that USC and Oregon had both added him to their respective recruiting boards, but neither team had spent any recruiting time that week. Therefore, the CPU can offer scholarships without spending any recruiting time.
Is this a new one for you? CPU has always been able to sign players without talking to them , or even offering them that has been in the game for as long as I can remember on this gen anyway.
That aspect/item/tidbit of the recruiting report has been reported before. However, I proposed that it was possible that the CPU teams recruited him for 10 minutes and only offered a scholarship ... and that may not show up as such on the recruiting report. Without knowing how the recruiting report is coded, it's possible that only time using pitches is counted.
Thought, on that subject ... I added a 2* HB to my board today in the offseason ... and I was still his #1 team, was deep into the green on interest ... and I'd never added him to the board or spoken to him all season. So maybe the top teams on a player's list get automatic points without even adding a player to the board. I saw something that suggested that over the weekend, but I can't recall what.
Twitter: @3YardsandACloud
There's no question all teams get some level of "soft" recruiting (i.e., recruits gaining interest even though no recruiting time is spent). How much that is, is a bit of a mystery. For example, I'm recruiting a 3* CB prospect. I added him to my recruiting board week #3 because he was a decent player and I was 6th on his top 10 list and -120 points behind his leader. Here's a breakdown from the last four weeks of recruiting:
So by Week #6, I had moved into first place by 20 points without spending any recruiting time (and neither did Mississippi State). I'm sure there are several variables involved in this process such as recruiting time spent, scholarship offer, promises, school prestige level, pipeline state, W/L record, etc.
The point I was making was how valuable a prospect this kid was, yet no one within his top 10 list had him on their recruiting board. Even though I was recruiting him hard, 60 minutes per week, I was losing points every week to schools that had zero interest in him. I was getting anywhere from 200-400 points per week from my phone calls. One could make the assumption that you get "soft" recruiting points whether or not the prospect is on your recruiting board or not, but enough to offset my recruiting time spent? Granted, the kid could have zero interest in my program and would rather fall out of a truck than go to my school - but if only one school in the country (figuratively speaking) wants you, and you want to play football with the goal of playing professionally (which this kid had the skill set), wouldn't you be listening pretty seriously?
:rolleyes: I've been around the block since the Bill Walsh days, so you could say I have some experience with the game and the series. Good talk, bro.
I think you simply get a set of points each week for having a guy on your board and that it's tied to the ranking system on your recruiting board. That's why it's crucial to list those 5* players at the top of the board or it hurts you. The higher the ranking the more points you will get each week in addition to the actual recruiting time spent.
^^^ Every bit of this is absolutely true.
As for what Jeff saw, I'm not sure. Jeff, were you in the green before you added him or immediately after? Was he from a pipeline state?
Maybe he 'knew' where he wanted to go and no one else paid him any attention all season?
So is that where those points come from? The ones that say, like 50-65 points for this pitch? You are saying this is based on how high on your board a guy is? Hmmm...I wondered where in the heck they came up with those.
No, those are set based on the pitch rating for your school and how much the recruit likes that pitch.
He's talkin' about not spending any points on the recruit and still getting points. Apparently, that is based on what position you have them on your board.
Yep, you get points every week just for having guys on your board. That's why your board should always be full during the season. The bottom 10 - 15 guys on my board are usually 3* guys (or 2* if warranted) from pipeline states that have me in their top 3 schools. I keep them around in case I need to fall back on them later. EA has confirmed this multiple times since the advent of "next gen" recruiting. They've also said recruits 'know' where they rank on your board (hence more free points if they're ranked highly). It's been said that having too many players of a particular position type is 'viewed' by recruits as a negative as well.
How many have recruited a lot on Heisman? I've got the #1 class before the offseason although TCU is right behind me. I may boost it up to Heisman for my next year.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks