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

[JeffHCross]

Take a map of the state with county's on it and where the school is located and give a small boost to schools in their area. Just like UM when Schnellenberger was there schools had a hard time going into south Florida and pulling recruits.

Pretty sure this is what Pipeline (and Proximity to Home) is designed to do, but I agree that re-doing pipelines would be nice. No matter how many players Ohio State has from Florida, Luke Fickell is not going to have the same pull in Florida that Jimbo Fisher or Will Muschamp will. I think the A+ Proximity to Home rating is supposed to differentiate between a local school and a pipeline school, but it doesn't count for enough, imo. Or too many guys don't consider Proxmity to Home important.

Top tier recruits are not going to sign with schools that are not offering them a scholarship period. These guys know their worth and they will not accept a prefered walk on status when other big programs are offering and I am tired of seeing it happen.

Agreed, but I don't think the fix for this is in the player logic. Based on my observations, a player will only be getting interest, yet not getting a scholarship, from a CPU school if he's on the school's board but not "important enough" to get an offer.

As human players, I think most of us have three states for our recruits: Targets, Keep Him in the Back Pocket, and Not Important. It's pretty rare that I hear about an NCAA player keeping a guy on his board that he has no interest in recruiting. They're either current targets, or players that we're keeping on the board as backups in case we can't sign our primary targets. But I don't think the CPU has that middle tier. It seems to me that the CPU makes a scholarship offer to every player they want, but also fills the board with 35 targets every week. If you look at the CPU time usage, they're only talking to 10-15 players each week (maybe more at the beginning of the season).

Basically, I don't think the problem with walk-ons is that they're not considering the scholarship. I think the problem is that the CPU is keeping them on the board, even though they have no interest in signing them. That's one reason you end up with things like Alabama signing 3 5* QBs in the same season -- they sign two of them early on, and then never drop the third guy from their list. The way the point system works, 60 minutes is 60 minutes, whether or not the player has a scholarship offer.

Unless they thoroughly revamped the recruiting point system, I don't see it changing that a player will sign without a scholarship offer. I agree with you that it shouldn't happen, but I think the fix is in getting the CPU to properly drop players from their board.