Going from 0 rated coach

[PointGuard]

Does calling to unlock interests in itself affect a prospects interest in the team or is it's purpose simply to uncover their interests?
*If they accept your call, they will go from No Interest to Cool. Going further up the interest scale normally comes from other things you do.
I'm assuming you have to have what you pitch for it to work - you can't pitch academics because its a prospects #1 if you don't have academics?
*You can pitch whatever you want, but it definitely will be more productive if you're telling the truth.
Hosting and Visiting a prospect will always move a prospects interest one level up or down - no neutral result?
*No, it may move it one way or not move it at all.
Your recruiting assistant calls your call list and can potentially increase interest level, more so if they're good at recruiting?
*I don't know the interworkings of the game, but I believe that's correct.
If you have poor facilities, should you avoid hosting players or does that not affect the rate of good/bad visits?
*No, have them visit your camput, you've got other things they might like and they may like you, your coaches or your players.
Does watching film affect a prospects interest at all or simply uncover/refine scouted ratings?
*No, it won't change interest...they don't know you're watching film of them.

[Wayne23]

Onboard with PG all the way here. I have found that the single most likely to be helpful thing is Visiting with a pitch to one of your team's strengths that the recruit has high interest in.. Doesn't always work, but nothing always works in this game.

[TripLykely]

Awesome, appreciate the clarification. The way Wolverine went about modeling the real recruiting process is elegant while giving a similar feel to real life. While I love the recruiting, I also want to win games. If you haven't tired of enlightening a noob I'm curious on any insight to strategy. What do you find as the best way to evaluate your strategy - compare results to the scouting report/pt spread?

I've spent absurd time on FOF creating plays and game plans tinkering with strategy but have been an avid NFL fan my whole life. While I've played ball a bit, I've been more of a casual 'its March' type of fan for college ball. My understanding is that the game models real strategy pretty well and you need to synergize player skill, proficiency, and scheme with some interpersonal issues mixed in. But whats the best method for me determining if I'm doing something right or wrong?

[Wayne23]

I settle on 2 offenses against man to man, and stick with them, matching strategy to practice time. I like Princeton (20 minutes practice time) and Triangle (15 min.) or Motion (20 min.) and Flex (15 min.). As to D when I coached in real life I went mostly with man to man but here i find that if i do that for more than about 60% of the time I get in constant foul trouble so I go 60% Man, 20% 2-3, 20% 3-2. Not sure that's the best but it works. I only press if I'm behind and it's close late in the game but I practice a man press for 5 minutes every practice. I don't screw around with O or D based on my opponents. I follow the philosophy of, "I'm going with what I do best. Let the other coach adjust to MY strategy."

[PointGuard]

Awesome, appreciate the clarification. The way Wolverine went about modeling the real recruiting process is elegant while giving a similar feel to real life. While I love the recruiting, I also want to win games. If you haven't tired of enlightening a noob I'm curious on any insight to strategy. What do you find as the best way to evaluate your strategy - compare results to the scouting report/pt spread?

I've spent absurd time on FOF creating plays and game plans tinkering with strategy but have been an avid NFL fan my whole life. While I've played ball a bit, I've been more of a casual 'its March' type of fan for college ball. My understanding is that the game models real strategy pretty well and you need to synergize player skill, proficiency, and scheme with some interpersonal issues mixed in. But whats the best method for me determining if I'm doing something right or wrong?

Staying clear of this one. I said that different CB game players approached and handled recruiting in a wide variety of ways. Well, I think there is even a greater diversity in selecting strategies and playing out games. There are many threads in the CB2020 forum and a few in the CB2021 forum that discuss strategy/game play...and as you will see one person feels X is the best way and another thinks Y is better. It's probably just best to try different things you think will work and adjust as necessary until you find the ways you like and that work for your team.

Maybe others can chime in here who are more X & O type of guys or have developed strategies and game play they feel works great.

[TripLykely]

I settle on 2 offenses against man to man, and stick with them, matching strategy to practice time. I like Princeton (20 minutes practice time) and Triangle (15 min.) or Motion (20 min.) and Flex (15 min.). As to D when I coached in real life I went mostly with man to man but here i find that if i do that for more than about 60% of the time I get in constant foul trouble so I go 60% Man, 20% 2-3, 20% 3-2. Not sure that's the best but it works. I only press if I'm behind and it's close late in the game but I practice a man press for 5 minutes every practice. I don't screw around with O or D based on my opponents. I follow the philosophy of, "I'm going with what I do best. Let the other coach adjust to MY strategy."

This is close to what I was thinking regarding 2 offenses against m2m; still playing around with which sets I like and optimal players for them. Along with recruiting, developing and fine tuning my system is what I'm looking forward to over the many season grind. It appears, at least until you're highly rated as a coach, that having a narrow focus scheme and practice wise is best - what the sets/scheme is can vary widely, but sticking to a few concepts seems optimal. Maybe with a very high rated O&D concepts and player development you could coach up proficiencies well enough to mix up defense based on opponent but I'd think offense should stay the same all season as its more heavily tied to personnel. General skills help with defense but you need specific offensive skills to run sets well.

Staying clear of this one. I said that different CB game players approached and handled recruiting in a wide variety of ways. Well, I think there is even a greater diversity in selecting strategies and playing out games. There are many threads in the CB2020 forum and a few in the CB2021 forum that discuss strategy/game play...and as you will see one person feels X is the best way and another thinks Y is better. It's probably just best to try different things you think will work and adjust as necessary until you find the ways you like and that work for your team.

Maybe others can chime in here who are more X & O type of guys or have developed strategies and game play they feel works great.

I've dug through the CB21 forum but need to check through CB20. From a strategy standpoint, has much changed from last year's version? And I certainly don't expect - or want - a universal answer to either the recruiting or strategy puzzle. Both appear to be and should be black boxes of sorts where nothing works all the time and there is uncertainty in what you think you know. While I certainly am curious how others strategize, I'm mainly curious how they've tested those strategies. I'd imagine spending some time in the open modes controlling strategy for both teams would yield some interesting observations.

Part of the 'fog of war' appears to be scout margin of error in who's favored in a matchup so judging my strategy based on that seems less than accurate. I fully expect there isn't a perfect solution to testing strategy - which makes sense as is accurate to life - but any less than obvious methods from veteran players wouldn't hurt.

Can't thank you both enough for taking the time, probably best for me to dig through boards and such while enjoying the game.

[Wayne23]

I tested offenses extensively last year (nothing has changed in this regard this year) and felt like the offensive sets I mentioned worked best. And I just think college players do better only needing to learn and improve on 2 m2m sets.

[TripLykely]

Between your testing and coaching I’m all ears. Would you mind expanding on the synergy between Princeton&Triangle along with Motion&Flex. I’ve been running mostly Motion&Triangle thinking they’re more traditional and not complex like the Princeton - was wary of the description and having smart passers. How do you determine set percentage or to favor inside/outside?

[Wayne23]

I think Motion and Triangle is a great combo. I just might go with that on my next association.

I usually go basic rather than favor inside or outside, BUT if I have a team that is definitely weighted inside, I'll go with that, either favor, or (rarely) Heavily favor. That's probably due to my coaching philosophy- the nearer the basket the higher the likelihood of making the shot! When I coached it was always, "Bang it inside!" Of course it takes more work and more time to develop a really good inside player, even at the college level, so there's that. I go 57% with my #1 O, 43% with #2. Then 5 min. each with the zone offenses, as recommended. I have done 10 minutes each for my #1 m2m, my #2 m2m, and the three zone defenses, and that can work, too. There are SO many ways to play this game.

[TripLykely]

Your last line is key, and I’d add, I’m certain there aren’t many ‘best’ ways to play. It seems recruiting has best practices depending on school and coach but results may vary. Strategy seems more nuanced but similar in that regard.All good aspects of a simulation.