10 attempts in and I still suck

[Drewdaddy]

If I am recruiting B/C defensive players... should I still stick with zone defense? I guess as a greater question, at what point is it better to use zone or man 2 man?

Btw, you the man

[Wayne23]

Thanks. I usually go with 50% man, 25% 2-3, 25% 3-2. That works for me. BUT, that's not a magic formula. I know guys who do well with either all zone (any zone) or all man. With a weak D team I would go about 2/3 2-3, 1/3 3-2, but that's not a magic formula either. It should get you fewer foul calls and might be a little better. In real life I like man, but I've found that going 100% man in this game doesn't really work for me that well.

As a newcomer I liked going with good to very good schools. I liked winning while I was learning. And again, I was quick to dump associations after I figured i'd learned something that i wanted to apply to the next one. It was months before I kept an association for several seasons.

Now I sometimes start with an awful school, other times with a mid-major or just below a mid-major, and work my way up.

[Your_Imaginary_Friend]

What does a C translate to when he joins your team? A 4-5 defense?

You need to remember that a C potential is just that: Potential. It says nothing about how good he will be as a Freshman--particularly if you are at a lower prestige school. For example, my best recruit at Jacksonville was a B potential. He showed up 10/58. So yeah, thanks for the potential that he will never achieve at Jacksonville.

Generally, the higher the recruit ranking the higher the current ratings. But when you are sweeping up crumbs, not so much.

[Drewdaddy]

How are you doing at Jacksonville?

[vols410]

Thanks. I usually go with 50% man, 25% 2-3, 25% 3-2. That works for me. BUT, that's not a magic formula. I know guys who do well with either all zone (any zone) or all man. With a weak D team I would go about 2/3 2-3, 1/3 3-2, but that's not a magic formula either. It should get you fewer foul calls and might be a little better. In real life I like man, but I've found that going 100% man in this game doesn't really work for me that well.

As a newcomer I liked going with good to very good schools. I liked winning while I was learning. And again, I was quick to dump associations after I figured i'd learned something that i wanted to apply to the next one. It was months before I kept an association for several seasons.

Now I sometimes start with an awful school, other times with a mid-major or just below a mid-major, and work my way up.

+1 on the good team part. Or if you feel cheap taking a tip-top team from the get-go, pick a team in the 40-50 prestige range in a bad conference. It's good enough to win some good recruits, you'll see the improvement in the conference year to year, and then you can start making noise in the tourney.

[23Zone]

Another way to grab some wins is how you schedule in the pre-conference part of the season. Try to get your AD to get most of your games at home and then switch them out for teams that are maybe just a bit better than you. You will still have a great chance of winning because of the home court advantage.

[Your_Imaginary_Friend]

How are you doing at Jacksonville?

Results on the court: great with a first round NCAA win. However that is entirely due to 'rolling' a great starting squad, now depleted with 4 graduating.

Recruiting was rugged, but I got 4 with decent skills, mostly rebounders. We'll see how increasing Prestige from 12 to 20 does at second year (only 2 schollies) recruiting. The SG above was the best, and he will likely need red-shirting due to low current/high potential.

[Seejayh]

This is a very helpful thread...I'm coaching App State, my alma mater....we suck. Fourth year in and my coach goal has JUST now raised from "don't finish last in the conference" haha.

Couple other newbie questions here: I've obviously been spamming the "pitch focus: location" on recruiting, and actually have been recruiting pretty well on "hard" recruiting difficulty. Managed a top-100 class last year with 4 recruits, which, at real life Appalachian State would be something of a miracle.

BUT: It seems like most of my recruits regress, even when redshirted, and especially in their sophomore year, or their first year of eligibility after redshirting. Is this a sign of poor coach/assistant coach/facility rankings? And does one of those three tend to have a greater impact? This is obviously still my first association, haven't done a lot of independent variable testing as of yet. Seems like even the other Sun Belt teams develop recruits better than I do. I'm thinking about not redshirting at all if my players are just going to get worse.

Also, something I noticed: sometimes the player OVRs on the "ratings" page do not always match the OVR ratings on the "roster" window on the bottom right of the screen. Is there a specific reason for this?

[Perfekt]

This is a very helpful thread...I'm coaching App State, my alma mater....we suck. Fourth year in and my coach goal has JUST now raised from "don't finish last in the conference" haha.

Couple other newbie questions here: I've obviously been spamming the "pitch focus: location" on recruiting, and actually have been recruiting pretty well on "hard" recruiting difficulty. Managed a top-100 class last year with 4 recruits, which, at real life Appalachian State would be something of a miracle.

BUT: It seems like most of my recruits regress, even when redshirted, and especially in their sophomore year, or their first year of eligibility after redshirting. Is this a sign of poor coach/assistant coach/facility rankings? And does one of those three tend to have a greater impact? This is obviously still my first association, haven't done a lot of independent variable testing as of yet. Seems like even the other Sun Belt teams develop recruits better than I do. I'm thinking about not redshirting at all if my players are just going to get worse.

Also, something I noticed: sometimes the player OVRs on the "ratings" page do not always match the OVR ratings on the "roster" window on the bottom right of the screen. Is there a specific reason for this?

So, I think player development is tied to the assistant coach and yourself, the facilities, and the seemingly most important: work ethic. If I am recruiting at a smaller school, which I almost exclusively play, I would search for guys whose coaches say has "tremendous work ethic". These guys, in my experience, are 4.0 potential and hit it. "Hard Working" seems like 3.0 guys who also get there. Not sure if that is exactly how it works, but it seems like it to me.

[Your_Imaginary_Friend]

BUT: It seems like most of my recruits regress, even when redshirted, and especially in their sophomore year, or their first year of eligibility after redshirting. Is this a sign of poor coach/assistant coach/facility rankings? And does one of those three tend to have a greater impact? This is obviously still my first association, haven't done a lot of independent variable testing as of yet. Seems like even the other Sun Belt teams develop recruits better than I do. I'm thinking about not redshirting at all if my players are just going to get worse.

Also, something I noticed: sometimes the player OVRs on the "ratings" page do not always match the OVR ratings on the "roster" window on the bottom right of the screen. Is there a specific reason for this?

Yes, I see the recruit regress often. Red-shirt guys in particular. Less often is down-up-down-up patterns, but they happen, too. I don't know why this happens and every time I think I'm getting close to an answer, it proves wrong. Also, guys who increase across the board in attributes, then drop a star on current overall rating, like 2.5 down to 1.5. There is also a very weird rating change that may occur between the time you first see the new recruits and the coming of new walk-ons for all teams. I think this one derives from a combination of getting a new scouting coach and increases in 'your' and/or your continuing scout's rating.