Posted by slid64er on 4/25/2014 10:34:00 AM (view original):

Posted by dublinuf on 4/24/2014 6:16:00 PM (view original):
Not only do I agree 100 percent with Casey, I would add that this makes it easier to maintain a dynasty at DIII if you already have the vision, not harder.

Really?  Taking advantages away will make it easier to maintain a dynasty?     

I get that a lot of veteran coaches look down on D3.  I happen to like D3.  I like the playoffs.  I like player development.  I especially like recruiting because of the limited budget and strategy involved.  D2 has always been relatively empty.  D1AA has always been a ghost town.  I like D1 because of the competition.  All things being equal, I would love to have D1 level competition with D3 players, budget and playoffs, which is essentially what we had in 1.0.  

I understand the frustration of coaches being forced to move from D3 to use the all engine levers as intended.  IMO, it's a bad move because it basically removes a very fun division for serious coaches.    

Why couldn't/wouldn't this change make DII the new DIII?  
There is very little appreciable difference between $6,000 per scholarship and $3,000 (when your competition is all receiving money at the same rate), and if this change has WIS's apparent intended effect, DII will be as full or more full than the current DIII level.  
Player development doesn't really change between levels, except at DIA, where there are players that are at the 90-point rating cap to begin with (players can go beyond 90, but they do regress back towards 90 in the off-seasons).

Posted by kcden on 4/25/2014 11:45:00 AM (view original):

Posted by slid64er on 4/25/2014 10:34:00 AM (view original):

Posted by dublinuf on 4/24/2014 6:16:00 PM (view original):
Not only do I agree 100 percent with Casey, I would add that this makes it easier to maintain a dynasty at DIII if you already have the vision, not harder.

Really?  Taking advantages away will make it easier to maintain a dynasty?     

I get that a lot of veteran coaches look down on D3.  I happen to like D3.  I like the playoffs.  I like player development.  I especially like recruiting because of the limited budget and strategy involved.  D2 has always been relatively empty.  D1AA has always been a ghost town.  I like D1 because of the competition.  All things being equal, I would love to have D1 level competition with D3 players, budget and playoffs, which is essentially what we had in 1.0.  

I understand the frustration of coaches being forced to move from D3 to use the all engine levers as intended.  IMO, it's a bad move because it basically removes a very fun division for serious coaches.    

Why couldn't/wouldn't this change make DII the new DIII?  
There is very little appreciable difference between $6,000 per scholarship and $3,000 (when your competition is all receiving money at the same rate), and if this change has WIS's apparent intended effect, DII will be as full or more full than the current DIII level.  
Player development doesn't really change between levels, except at DIA, where there are players that are at the 90-point rating cap to begin with (players can go beyond 90, but they do regress back towards 90 in the off-seasons).

There's a big difference between $3k and $6k per schollie.  $6k allows for many more mistakes, you don't have to be as precise or efficient.  Along with the division being more empty than D3, it's the primary reason many coaches can win at D2 while having little/no success at D3.

Player development does change between levels.  But you're welcome to believe what you want and spread misinformation, it makes my job easier.

Posted by slid64er on 4/25/2014 10:34:00 AM (view original):

Posted by dublinuf on 4/24/2014 6:16:00 PM (view original):
Not only do I agree 100 percent with Casey, I would add that this makes it easier to maintain a dynasty at DIII if you already have the vision, not harder.

Really?  Taking advantages away will make it easier to maintain a dynasty?     

I get that a lot of veteran coaches look down on D3.  I happen to like D3.  I like the playoffs.  I like player development.  I especially like recruiting because of the limited budget and strategy involved.  D2 has always been relatively empty.  D1AA has always been a ghost town.  I like D1 because of the competition.  All things being equal, I would love to have D1 level competition with D3 players, budget and playoffs, which is essentially what we had in 1.0.  

I understand the frustration of coaches being forced to move from D3 to use the all engine levers as intended.  IMO, it's a bad move because it basically removes a very fun division for serious coaches.    

You know I am not one of those coaches. I coached my last 25 seasons before quitting in Yost against you at DIII. Maryville racked up a lot of titles coming through Ohio Wesleyan.

But here is my logic.

If
A) The two things that affect winning the most are recruiting and coaching
B) The budget for recruiting is smallest at DIII
C) Vision is much better for the good teams than the poor teams at DIII (and DII for that matter)
D) WIS removes elements to out-coach people

That will intrinsically make having better vision that much more important than before.

Both teams at crap programs and National Championship level have the same opportunity to use all the coaching tools. They do not have the opportunity to recruit the same players. So if I remove some elements of the side of the equation where everyone has the same chance, then it by definition it widens the advantages that teams have from the other side of the equation.

To put it into math.

Let's say coaching is on a scale of 1-100 and recruiting is 1-100. And your talent plus your coaching is compared for a number.

If Team A has 100 talent
and Team B has 50 talent.

Then team B has to really out-coach team A to win. Of course, this is almost never going to happen, as Team A likely didn't get to 100 talent without great coaching.
But let's take the scenario that a classic 0-13 coach lateral moved to the 100 talent team, and you have just taken over the 0-13 team he left Reid (sp?).

It is possible that you put out a 95 coaching effort and he has a 30 and you manage to win anyway. Unlikely, but possible.


Now, same scenario, but coaching now scales to 80 because there just aren't the extra features to push it to 100 anymore. You play near perfect and get a 79 out of your team. Well 79 + 50 is 129. 30 + 100 is 130. So he just edges you out.*

*I recognize that the numbers are far more complex than that.

There's a big difference between $3k and $6k per schollie.  $6k allows for many more mistakes, you don't have to be as precise or efficient.  Along with the division being more empty than D3, it's the primary reason many coaches can win at D2 while having little/no success at D3.

Player development does change between levels.  But you're welcome to believe what you want and spread misinformation, it makes my job easier.

Please explain this, because my recollection of the lower levels is that you have 180 minutes of practice to spread how you see fit, players with a growth potential and work ethic and 60 minutes per game of playing time in order to develop your players, just like DIA.

Did something change at DIII of which I am unaware?

Posted by kcden on 4/25/2014 3:01:00 PM (view original):

There's a big difference between $3k and $6k per schollie.  $6k allows for many more mistakes, you don't have to be as precise or efficient.  Along with the division being more empty than D3, it's the primary reason many coaches can win at D2 while having little/no success at D3.

Player development does change between levels.  But you're welcome to believe what you want and spread misinformation, it makes my job easier.

Please explain this, because my recollection of the lower levels is that you have 180 minutes of practice to spread how you see fit, players with a growth potential and work ethic and 60 minutes per game of playing time in order to develop your players, just like DIA.

Did something change at DIII of which I am unaware?

The methodology doesn't change, but the upper cap on players at D3 is, percentage wise, much higher than at D1A.  Now of course the RAW number for the D1A recruit's attributes over their career will be higher, but the difference (starting attribute to final attribute) is certainly to be a higher percentage growth at lower levels, and in many cases the actual difference will be higher too.

Posted by kcden on 4/25/2014 3:01:00 PM (view original):

There's a big difference between $3k and $6k per schollie.  $6k allows for many more mistakes, you don't have to be as precise or efficient.  Along with the division being more empty than D3, it's the primary reason many coaches can win at D2 while having little/no success at D3.

Player development does change between levels.  But you're welcome to believe what you want and spread misinformation, it makes my job easier.

Please explain this, because my recollection of the lower levels is that you have 180 minutes of practice to spread how you see fit, players with a growth potential and work ethic and 60 minutes per game of playing time in order to develop your players, just like DIA.

Did something change at DIII of which I am unaware?

Yeah the closer you get to 90 in attributes, the slower you grow, so at DIII where everyone is furthest away from the hard cap at the top, the potential for growth is highest.

I.E. The DII RB I recruited that came in with 82 Elusiveness and little else with high potential finished his career with 90 Elus (8 point improvement) but improved Speed and Strength more than 20 points over his career, because they were so low to start with.

Quote post by slid64er on 4/25/2014 12:08:00 PM
This.