This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
2/24/2013 9:46 PM
I also came back into the game recently and I was wondering what jobs I would qualify for so I am somewhat in the same position.  If I had been told that I needed to start again at D2, I would have not been happy but I think I would have accepted it as I did take a lot of seasons off.  Maybe not the same situation but if D1 isn't a considered a special place and something to work towards, then I think the game has been cheapened.  As an aside, I think the only reason D2 is considered a good place in this game is because baseline prestige is so important at D1 and people have a hard time breaking through that.

Sometimes lowering the standard to make an extra buck ends up cheapening the entire brand and the loss is greater than the gain.  I often (and I mean often) disagree with CS, but in this case, it's the correct decision.
2/24/2013 10:04 PM
I'm not asking for the standard to be lowered, I'm just saying once you reach it, it can't/shouldn't be taken away.  My case in Tark is much stronger than tcochran's, just saying.
2/24/2013 10:15 PM
I agree and disagree with you colonels.  You have a better case but I don't think someone who barely qualifies for D1 and then "fails" there, should be given a D1 team automatically if they come back.  I'm not even sure you should be able to continue failing there and maintain it but that's going too far from a WIS business perspective.
2/24/2013 10:50 PM
Posted by colonels19 on 2/24/2013 10:04:00 PM (view original):
I'm not asking for the standard to be lowered, I'm just saying once you reach it, it can't/shouldn't be taken away.  My case in Tark is much stronger than tcochran's, just saying.
Gotta disagree Trev.  For example, let's say after several years at low and mid-major D1 jobs, I finally become eligible for an A+ prestige big-boy BCS school.  I get my school and discover that playing against a bunch of really good human coaches is a lot tougher than fattening up my record against mid-major Sims and I fail miserably.  So bad that I'm actually in jeopardy of getting fired (I know, I know, bear with me).

Instead of getting fired, I decide to take a hiatus from the game, say six or seven seasons.  When I decide to come back and reserve a team for the following season, lo and behold, there's another A+ school that's available (and yes, I have personally seen more than once when I went to reserve a team that an A+/A prestige level was open.  Turns out the previous coach had switched jobs right before the deadline and there hadn't been enough time left for anyone else to apply to his old school.  It's rare, but it's happened.  Shocked me that a school with a prestige like that was available and I had to find out why).

By your reasoning, I should be able to take over that school since I reached that level previously, even though I failed miserably once I actually got to that level.  See any problem there?
2/24/2013 11:18 PM
I'm simply saying, if you've coached D1 before, you should be eligible for D1 jobs, and I'm talking D- jobs...no way in hell should you get an A or B prestige job at D1 after just getting fired...no way.

When I say level, I mean division, I'm sorry if I didn't make this clear previously

2/25/2013 12:12 AM
OK, I'm still new to this game, but I find this conversation intriguing and, therefore, want to inject my opinion. Whether or not your team went on ghost-pilot, those years should still count towards your resume, which drug down his stats and currently makes him an unqualified candidate for a D1 school. As for the "real life examples," the guys mentioned had long, successful careers prior to their last job. If someone said they had played D1 for 20+ seasons and then had a few bad seasons, took off and now want to come back, I would say he deserves a shot at a mid-major as he has proved he has at least at one time proved he can coach at D1, but to simply have coached at D1, totally blew it, and then want to just pick up where he left off, I believe to be illogical. Just my opinion, of course.
2/25/2013 12:20 AM
Posted by colonels19 on 2/24/2013 11:19:00 PM (view original):
I'm simply saying, if you've coached D1 before, you should be eligible for D1 jobs, and I'm talking D- jobs...no way in hell should you get an A or B prestige job at D1 after just getting fired...no way.

When I say level, I mean division, I'm sorry if I didn't make this clear previously

But colonels, not taking a position here other than playing devil's advocate(in other words, I can see both gillespie's position and its opposition)... Why is there a sharp line delineator between d2 and d1? If failing at higher d1 means you should no longer be eligible for higher d1, why shouldn't failing at low level d1 mean ... You are no longer eligible for low level d1? Are you saying that once you have taken any division one job, no further level of ineptitude, ever, should make you unqualified for low level d1 ever again, however lenient you might want that standard to be?
2/25/2013 12:31 AM
I just recently came back after 30+ seasons off...the worlds I was qualified to coach D1 in I was able to pick back up in D1...there is NO penalty for sitting out seasons...However in the world I most wanted to return to D1 in I had a few bad seasons at D1 right before I quit so I wasn't able to return straight to D1 there...I don't see a problem with the way it's done.  If you are qualified to coach D1 they will let you no matter if you've missed 1 or 40 seasons
2/25/2013 6:48 AM (edited)
Posted by a_in_the_b on 2/25/2013 12:20:00 AM (view original):
Posted by colonels19 on 2/24/2013 11:19:00 PM (view original):
I'm simply saying, if you've coached D1 before, you should be eligible for D1 jobs, and I'm talking D- jobs...no way in hell should you get an A or B prestige job at D1 after just getting fired...no way.

When I say level, I mean division, I'm sorry if I didn't make this clear previously

But colonels, not taking a position here other than playing devil's advocate(in other words, I can see both gillespie's position and its opposition)... Why is there a sharp line delineator between d2 and d1? If failing at higher d1 means you should no longer be eligible for higher d1, why shouldn't failing at low level d1 mean ... You are no longer eligible for low level d1? Are you saying that once you have taken any division one job, no further level of ineptitude, ever, should make you unqualified for low level d1 ever again, however lenient you might want that standard to be?
when i said someone who made d1 should be let back in d1, forever - that went too far. really, i think someone who made d1 should not be disqualified from 1 bad stint, and maybe 2. after many failings, i dont really see a problem bumping them back down. but i still would like to see d1 take a bit more success to reach.

to address the issue of why should low d1 schools not suffer from bad seasons when good d1 schools do, i wouldnt actually just limit this to being able to make d1 or not. simply being able to grab a d- school and nothing else, isnt really a great solution, either (im not for just drawing a line). i think a similar type of consideration (but with a different magnitude of impact) should be given to ALL coaches at ALL levels. id even give this consideration to A+ prestige d1 coaches, not to say they should be able to tank and return to an A+, but instead that if they were burnt out, crashed, and then dropped the team 3-4 seasons later, i wouldnt want them to have to pick up a d+ d1 school - i think something in between, like a b- bcs school, would be appropriate. i think my opinion rests primarily on 3 factors:

1) coaches often get burnt out and as a result, have a few bad seasons before dropping that world completely. these seasons are usually uncharacteristically bad. coaches are more likely to return, and to stick around a while, if they can pick up near where they left off (opinion, but i believe it strongly)

2) the game does not do anything close to a satisfactory job of incorporating the quality of the situation in the success equation. picking up a massive d prestige rebuild, and having a couple bad seasons, is effectively par for the course - but its treated similarly to someone taking over a good program, and completely tanking. this is unreasonable, and results in undo penalization of coaches who take over rebuilds - both those who rebuild successfully, and those who do not. at least successful rebuilders are just a little behind after a couple good seasons, because the "bad" (par for the course) ones early on are weighted less, being a couple seasons in the past. unsuccessful rebuilders are screwed, with their last few seasons being bad and weighted very heavily. 

3) long term success is undervalued. this was mitigated to some degree with the recent change to d1 prestige/jobs. however, it is still true that a long, long string of success, followed by a couple bad seasons, results in a severe hit - which i believe in some cases, is overly severe (another opinion, and it varies wildly, case by case - but i think most of us would agree, the hit is too severe at least in the 10% or so of most severe cases)

in reality, if i could fix this problem any way, i would do so by fixing #2. i guess id fix #3 as well, but i think #2 would have a much bigger impact. if a coach could take over a crap program, and do crappy, and have that treated like par for the course (at least for the first couple seasons - the expectations should obviously raise over time - and eventually continuing to do poorly should count against you) - then i don't think there would be a need for the kind of change we are talking about (letting d1 coaches who dont do well, return, despite not being qualified by the current standards). this would resolve most of the situations like those encountered by the OP and colonels, or the many coaches who pick up a BCS total rebuild and fail, and then cannot get even a halfway decent d1 job. it wouldnt help coaches of high end, long term programs, who inevitably get burnt out, but fixing #3 would (by giving them more credit for long term success). i know cushioning a+ prestige d1 coaches will be controversial at the least, but i feel like getting burnt out is an inevitable part of the HD lifecycle, and as its hard to let go, some leniency should be applied. the focus should be on making it more likely those coaches will return, hopefully to a suitable situation that gives them a better chance of enjoying it, and staying. 

however, outside of fixing those issues (suppose its too much work), i think it would be reasonable to hack in a stop-gap for everybody, similar to what colonels mentions, that allows new d1 coaches who struggle, minimally, a second chance at d1. but beyond that, as i mentioned up front, id also have a similar mechanism (less impact) for all coaches at all levels. maybe a coach at a new program can minimally get a job a little under his qualifications when he arrived (say, they can get a job 1 partial grade lower, per prestige grade - so D prestige only drops 1, C drops 2, etc). coaches at programs for longer periods of time, say over 5 seasons, could get a job at a similar reduction, from their resume from 5 seasons ago (or something). for example, a guy at an a+, qualified for an a+ for a long time, who has a couple mediocre seasons and then totally tanks for a couple more, would be capped at minimally qualified for a b prestige job - instead of being in the d+ type situations.

2/25/2013 7:22 AM
one final note, i dont really think real life examples have much relevance here. of course, coaches who fail at a new job have to take a step back, and often its a pretty damn big one. but i dont think real life is a common sense standard to apply here. saying the sim engine should be realistic is one thing, but to apply similar job expectations profession coaches (in some cases payed millions per year) have, to fake coaches who play for fun, seems a little ridiculous to me. 

additionally, even if the goal is to mimic real life, i dont feel these are apples to apples comparisons you guys are making. d1 coaches in real life dont get burnt out and spend 3-4 seasons deciding if they want to stay, while they half *** everything and considerably lower the short-term success of the program. its unreasonable to do that when you are paid a few hundred thousand to a few million per year. an HD coach is payed 0 and is here for fun, if they take a few seasons to decide what to do while half assing everything, there arent even real life scenarios to compare to. in other situations, the way HD measures success for low end d1 programs is totally different than how low end programs measure success in real life (same goes for mid and high d1 programs), so to compare what HD considers failure at a major rebuild low end school, to a real life example, is somewhat meaningless. besides, you see low/mid d1 coaches who did nothing great get hired for other low/mid d1 openings, all the time really, im not convinced that is the exception to the kinds of cases others have pointed out.

long story short, i dont think there are good apples to apples comparisons from real life to HD. furthermore, even if you have a great real life example, and we pretend HD coaches get paid fake money, to allow a stronger parallel, how much does that matter? HD is for fun, and there is merit to colonel's claim that you should try to make coaches happy and get them playing/paying. no, that doesn't mean the guy who wanted the A+ elite school should be given it - but it doesn't mean making coaches happy is a non factor, either.
2/25/2013 9:31 AM
I don't believe you can totally ignore real life examples. One of the things I appreciate about the game is the realistic approach it strives for. Obviously, it's not perfect, but they try. I have heard the same paying customer argument when someone loses to a Sim team. I guess what I'm saying is WIS has to make a decision in which paying customers they want. If this were a pay your way, get an A system, I would have played one season and quit, and I can't be the only one that feels that way.
2/25/2013 9:44 AM
Also, I'm no psychologist, but reading between the lines, it sounds to me like he paid for a season, regrets it, and is looking for a reason to get his money back. If you enjoy playing the game, what's the difference in finding a good D2 team in a good D2 conference as opposed to a terrible D1 team in a terrible D1 conference, unless of course, your real life perception of a college comes into play.
2/25/2013 12:29 PM
I harken back to what I said early in this thread --- I can almost guarantee that if the OP had reserved a team ahead of time, he could have reserved a D1 team, instead of waiting for the applications process.  In fact, I am specifically aware of a coach being rejected for 4 D- jobs during the application process, and then being able to reserve a D job during the "reservation" process immediately after the application process ends.
2/25/2013 12:57 PM
Posted by bighiggy79 on 2/25/2013 9:31:00 AM (view original):
I don't believe you can totally ignore real life examples. One of the things I appreciate about the game is the realistic approach it strives for. Obviously, it's not perfect, but they try. I have heard the same paying customer argument when someone loses to a Sim team. I guess what I'm saying is WIS has to make a decision in which paying customers they want. If this were a pay your way, get an A system, I would have played one season and quit, and I can't be the only one that feels that way.
im not really saying to *totally* ignore real life, as much as im saying, real life has a wide variety of applicability to the game. the job hunt is one of the most impossible things to make realistic, and thus, i think the most basic imitation of real life (which is questionably more than we have today) is plenty. and besides, low end teams take chances on coaches all the time, im honestly not buying its more realistic to hit every coach so hard for the first couple seasons of a rebuild. i just feel its sort of a moot point. this isnt real life, its not realistic for coaches to coach 50 seasons, retire, and want to come back. but in HD, it happens - why try to handle a situation that simply does not exist in real life, like it would be handled in real life?

i agree that you dont want to dumb the game down, let everyone get what they want. i loved that challenge, coming up, coming from behind - probably embraced it as much as any coach. however, i dont see the need for stuff that basically just ****** you off, for the sake of realism. case in point - injuries. are they realistic? no. they could be made to be realistic, though. but i think that would be HORRIBLE for the game. lose a stud going into the NT, with a great team, and it ruins months of planning and prep. without a doubt, i'd leave injuries out of the game altogether. i know some coaches disagree, but i dont know any who lost a stud going into the NT with one of their best teams, and disagrees :) i dont see how those thing enhance the game, nor how removing them detracts from others. similarly, i dont see how letting a human coach who made d1, gave up too early, and wants to try again - actually come back to try again - hurts anyone. not after we lost a third of the d1 population and two thirds of teams are sim run... seems like it just makes the game better for those people, and maybe for everyone else playing d1, too. i just dont buy that realism for the sake of realism is worth detracting from the game - its got to enhance the game - and i dont see how realism enhances the game, when the job process is so very unrealistic already.
of 5

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.