I appreciate the previous responses, and I was probably a little strong saying that I would not play again. This game is a lot of fun. I guess part of my frustration was that it seemed that players do not progress very much from their starting rating, but I am finding that they progress more than I thought.
I had a down season with a bunch of freshman, but a few improved their overall rating by 1 between seasons (while some stayed at 1 overall), and the next season I recruited a few players with extra focus on their performance at camps. I ended up with some lower ranked players who had high ratings as freshman (3.0 or 3.5 stars), which is a good level for the Ivy League and allowed my program to progress. In the next 3 offseasons I still have not bagged an "A" rated recruit, though I got my best player #63 nationally, so hopefully he pans out. At this point I am dominating most conference games even though my player ratings are not that much higher than my opponents, so maybe those ~100 ranked B players are noticeably better than the ~1000 ranked C players even if the scouts cannot tell the difference.
I understand that most freshman are not ready to be D1 starters. From my first seasons at Harvard and my seasons at Maryland, it seemed like players did not really improve (maybe because of coaching and facilities at Harvard and bad temperament at Maryland). But my subsequent recruits have developed over four years to be starters. Also, I have been playing on normal recruiting difficulty with high coaching attributes, in case anyone is wondering why my recruiting is so successful.