I've never tried, but I've read where other people have tried and it's REALLY hard. You're INCREDIBLY lucky to get around what ranking your team should probably get in real life.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudy
Printable View
I've never tried, but I've read where other people have tried and it's REALLY hard. You're INCREDIBLY lucky to get around what ranking your team should probably get in real life.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudy
The guys saying that you get points for having a player on your board are absolutely right. I had a player around #15 on my board, didn't spend a minute on him for several weeks, and every week my lead would extend 40 points.
I think this is the case. He was an Ohio boy, and he really wanted to come to Ohio State (or Cincinnati, his #2). It just gave me more evidence that a player's Top 10 list is in some flux even if no one is going after a player.Quote:
Originally Posted by steelerfan
Based on what I've seen on other forums, you can "figure out" Heisman just like you can "figure out" AA. But it's definitely harder with less room for error. If you've got a highly rated team with solid pipelines, you should have decent success. But there's certainly less room for error.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudy
I had the #1 recruiting class in the country (and got a trophy for it). Five 5*, nine 4* and six 3* kids. The 5* kids were awesome. Two guards came in at 85 and I converted one to C where he became an 87. An athlete and a WR ended up being both WRs and both 85. I was really thin at DE until I grabbed four of them - all four are an 84! Couldn't believe it as two or three of them were highly rated 4* kids. I got two great MLBs and they are an 84 and 80. I even grabbed a 3* guard that ended up a 78. Unbelievable class on All American. I was thinking of bumping it up to Heisman but I think I'll leave recruiting at AA for now as I'm drunk on success. I had the #3 class my first year and now the #1 class this year. That's probably too easy even as Michigan so I may bump it up. Someone offer their take on this. I think something was very different though from this class and my last class. My first class was under the pre-patch ratings. I had a 4* guard come in at 64 for crying out loud. He's going to be lucky to keep his roster spot (he's a 70 now and converted to backup C) in the future.
I don't think there is any real secret to recruiting. The same things you did in the past will let you be successful in NCAA 11. You just have to be a lot smarter in targeting guys you think you can get. You have to take chances on guys you want but not be stupid and go after too many 5* kids. I probably went after less than ten of them all year and got five. Cut bait when you don't think you can do it but still persist if you think you have a shot and a need. I won a battle for a 5* DE that I thought Oklahoma was going to win for sure. I was always #2 and just behind. He even soft committed to OU but he didn't make up his mind until the first offseason week and a great visit at the Big House sealed the deal!
I need some young guys in my secondary still, my OLBs are still weak but I may convert one of my DEs to OLB next year. Tackle could be weak as well if I don't grab at least one 4 or 5* tackle but I may shift some guys around on the OL to cover it up. I don't have a big thumper at RB right now but I do have a couple quick guys and a couple young ones. The one that is pretty good has a low ball security rating and that's going to hurt his playing time. Both are redshirt frosh.
Well I switched to Heisman for recruiting. We'll see how this year goes. I haven't played a game yet but have recruited two weeks due to a bye. Haven't seen the results after the second week yet but I've never seen so many red arrows in interest after the first week before. I think Heisman may be pretty good. I pretty much ignored three star recruits last year but I think they will become much more important on Heisman recruiting to fill out the depth chart. I don't think you will have to worry about over recruiting at all on this level due to natural attrition. I had a 5* RB from Michigan hard commit and I've gotten a couple hard commits from 3* guys but it's a battle for the top guys. I lost 100 points to a 5* tackle from Michigan with LSU holding top spot. You need to go after the great ones really hard early on. That means at least 50 and probably the full 60 minutes all the time.
The nice thing for you, Rudy, is with the patch the 3*s are actually viable now. We just rolled into our first offseason in the Powerhouse OD, and I have 3 stars coming in the 60s. Post patch they're much more realistic.
FYI, for anyone recruiting kickers ... progression is awesome for kickers. I don't know if it was a fluke or what (I don't think it was), but I just had 2 Ks go +8/+8 and +6/+6 in KPW/KAC, and my P went +9/+10.
Good news on the progression, Jeff.
In the past I would concentrate only on the 4* and 5* guys after awhile since recruiting was so easy. You got greedy and wanted to pencil these kids in as 3-4 year starters (if they didn't jump to the NFL early). The recruiting slider is a fantastic option they provided this year. In any NCAA game prior to NCAA 11 you would probably get 10 5* kids every year without working too hard so I would never take a team like Michigan because dynasty would be too easy and get boring quick. On AA recruiting this year I had to work to get the top recruits and on Heisman it will be much harder. Now you have to go after lower recruits like everyone does in real life and deal with a team that has holes in certain areas. You also have to redshirt the lower recruits and build them up to where you get 1-2 seasons out of some these kids and not just the top recruit that starts from year 1 or 2. Those lower recruits are now valuable depth and not just guys you cut every year due to over recruiting.
Rudy, since I started with the 1995 Ohio State Buckeyes, I've been trying to follow the 96, 97, etc recruiting classes. It's amazing looking back and seeing who was highly touted and never played, and who was under the radar and was a four-year letterman.
Of course, I'm also finding it utterly impossible to meet the level of those classes. I'm glad EA went away from the superstar 5* recruits, but at the same time ... where's my Andy Katzenmoyer?
I had read one guy on OS say Heisman recruiting wasn't much different than AA. I had read Mors hear say Heisman is crazy tough. I think Mors is right.
I set up my recruiting board similar to how I did on AA. I think that is going to have to change big time. I got five 5* recruits last year and nine 4* recruits. No way will I touch those numbers on Heisman. I'm competing for some highly rated recruits in Texas. I used to have a pipeline to California and Texas but lost them going in to year 3. That is a huge problem now. If you try to get a recruit in a non pipeline state that another equal or greater program wants you will probably fail. If Texas wants a Texas kid badly, Michigan ain't going to get him. It's still early to make any definitive statements but this is looking really hard. I am spending more time finding pitches than getting the max production for pitches like Texas might be doing but I'm spending 60 minutes a week on some of these kids and I'm just falling farther and farther behind. I used to be able to max out 60 minutes a week and I'd probably have a 75% chance at getting someone since I was Michigan. I bet those odds fall to less than 10% in a non pipeline state now.
According to one recruiting source, the Big 10 only had one 5* recruit last year and that was Gholston of MSU. I think I need to accept this new harsh reality and start ditching some of these high recruits on my board and go hard after the smaller ones. Even a couple 3* recruits I had rated in the low teens are dropping me down their list because I'm not spending much time on them. I'm going to keep plugging away but this is a shock to the system for sure. My recent recruiting class was probably the best class I have ever recruited on any NCAA game. This one may be the worst.
I think on Heisman I might be dropping a whole lot of potential recruits. This is tough. Being down by 300+ with tough teams in front is looking hard to win. I have one recruit out of Michigan where LSU is #1 and I'm #2. I'm down 220 points (5* tackle) and I have to think LSU does not have Michigan as a pipeline. Who knows? I know Miles has a Michigan background. Anyway, I earned 600 points in my 60 minutes with him and also gave LSU -40 points through a couple comparisons. 640 point swing and I only gained 80 points on LSU after the week. That was a bit hard to swallow.
I have the #1 CB, 5*, as my #1 player and my lead stayed the same although Iowa made up more ground after a 448 point visit. The #2 player, an OLB from Texas, I got 504 points (plus -21 for OU) but only gained 40 points on Oklahoma. I went from 400 down to 360 down. I'm going to give it one more week as he's scheduled for a visit but I'll drop him after that. In fact, I have almost all my top recruits coming in for Week 4 against Pitt in the hopes I can gain ground really quick. If not I'm going to be making some hard decisions.
The #1 FS out of Texas is still 320 points away - probably not going to happen.
Another OLB out of Texas is over 400 points away. I will keep him one more week but this one ain't happening. I'm going to try and pick up some scrubs from Texas to re-establish a pipeline.
One bright spot - a 4* SS had me at #1 and my lead grew from 140 to 320.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LastXit
A strategy for Heisman recruiting that apparently works pretty damn well. I'm in the process of testing it out on Varsity (the level I recruit at in my singleplayer offline teambuilder dynasty) so I'm not sure how well it works for me yet but several people over at Utopia have said it works REALLY well so I'd definitely give it a try.Quote:
Originally Posted by LastXit
I have a recruit that has a "Most" interest in 3 categories! I've never seen that before.
I had a recruit with "Most" in 5 categories. Unsure why this happens, since when I recruit them I only see one "Most" for a given topic. It's only when I'm bringing a prospect in for a visit do I see these multiple "Most".
It's the bug that's happening in offline dynasty recruiting when you sway a topic it causes either random or pretty much all of your topics to increase to Very High or Most (maybe just increases all of the categories by a set amount, not entirely sure).Quote:
Originally Posted by Roy38
It definitely makes recruiting against the CPU a bit easier.
Multiple "Most"s can happen naturally (well, naturally with Sway Pitch) even without the bug ... but with the bug it's definitely a lot more common. Insanely common.
This is in an online dynasty.Quote:
Originally Posted by morsdraconis
I saw this in my offline dynasty. Never knew that bug existed. I don't try swaying too often.
Interesting. To be honest, I tried to cause it in my Online Dynasty last year, but it definitely didn't happen. I expected it was an offline only bug.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roy38
By any chance are you the commish?
I am. Like I said earlier, I'm only seeing this when I bring a prospect in for a visit. During normal recruiting, I'm seeing the same data everyone else is - one "Most", two "Very Highs" (unless I've swayed a "High"), etc.
This might be the factor.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roy38
If you look at some of the menus around the Online Dynasty this year, it's almost as if Online Dynasty is treated as a single-team Dynasty. In statistics this is particularly noticeable, since only the Commish's team is up at the top of the list. In year's past, you'd see all of the user teams at the top of the list. This year it's just the Commish's team.
If I have some free time over the holiday weekend, I'll fire up an OD and give this a try. I know it happens on Offline Dynasty, and not just on user visits. I'm also confident it doesn't happen on Online Dynasty, but I'm not the commish.