Grey Dog announces Bowl Bound College Football

[Huckleberry]

Arles -

What does the offensive and defensive variety look like? Will schools change offensive and defensive philosophies with new coaches? Will a larger numbers of teams tend to install an offense that has been successful in the league universe over the past few seasons?

Might be hard to program, I wouldn't know, but just curious.

[KWhit]

One thing that I've harped on in the past (and has made me leave the EA NCAA series) is the ease in which the non-bcs conference teams can become national powerhouses.

What seemed to happen in the EA games was that teams like Marshall, TCU, Louisville, etc. would be able to start a trend where they won quite a lot of games per season because of the low level of opposition in their conferences. Their records were good, so they were able to recruit unrealistically well, and after just 2-3 seasons became a powerhouse that would constantly get one of the at-large BCS bids.

And this (of course) was a single-player league in which these teams were AI controlled. It would have been even easier had I taken over one of these teams.

Somehow, you need to try to insure a realistic approach is taken toward these types of programs - almost code in the bias against these schools. If a team like North Texas catches lightning in a bottle and wins a ton of games in a season, they shouldn't automatically get bumped to #1 in the nation, get a birth in the championship game, and then parlay that into becoming the end-all be-all of college athletics.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by Huckleberry

Arles -

What does the offensive and defensive variety look like?

It's pretty varied, although Option is certainly the most rare, same with the 4-6 on D. But, you could see any number of teams in any specific offense or defense in a given year. A lot depends on the assistants and personnel.

Will schools change offensive and defensive philosophies with new coaches?

They may change with the same coach. If a certain major talent shift occurs in their roster or they hire a new OC/DC, a head coach could opt to change in camp to better fit his personnel. And, remember, this isn't like TPF where certain offenses have no access to certain formations. All formations are valid for each offense/defense. It's just that some will be practiced more in camp and you will get penalties/bonuses for using certain ones in the season.

Will a larger numbers of teams tend to install an offense that has been successful in the league universe over the past few seasons?

No, it's based more on personnel. If you were a smash mouth team but had your stud RB and road-grating guard graduate, you may see that team switch to a more balanced offense if they have an up-and-coming QB to better suit their team.

[HomerJSimpson]

Originally Posted by Arles

It's pretty varied, although Option is certainly the most rare, same with the 4-6 on D. But, you could see any number of teams in any specific offense or defense in a given year. A lot depends on the assistants and personnel.


They may change with the same coach. If a certain major talent shift occurs in their roster or they hire a new OC/DC, a head coach could opt to change in camp to better fit his personnel. And, remember, this isn't like TPF where certain offenses have no access to certain formations. All formations are valid for each offense/defense. It's just that some will be practiced more in camp and you will get penalties/bonuses for using certain ones in the season.


No, it's based more on personnel. If you were a smash mouth team but had your stud RB and road-grating guard graduate, you may see that team switch to a more balanced offense if they have an up-and-coming QB to better suit their team.

Sounds goodf. All I have to say is please, oh please, oh please, let people hire new coaches at the begining of the game. I hate having to use the default coaches for a year before I can hire new coaches. Realistically, a head coach brings in his staff, even if he keeps a few from the old staff. Honestly, you should be able to hire and fire staff at any time, but only FM gets that right.

[Huckleberry]

Thanks for the response, Arles. I can see how that would be the better way to get the game going.

I do think, though, that it would be nice to see a coach come in and install his own system regardless of the current personnel, especially with position-switching available. This would then change that team's recruiting focus and they would intentionally target different recruits in the following years.

For example, I'm currently signed up to take Air Force in the FOFC BBCF league. Once I saw that my usual set of schools were already taken, I picked Air Force for two reasons. First is that I like Colorado Springs. Second is that I'm going to transition Air Force into a passing team no matter what it takes. For crying out loud they're the Air Force. We certainly won't be very successful at first and I understand that. But I would hope that my success at recruiting the second-tier passing QBs could go up when they see the number of pass attempts we're throwing.

I'm not planning on winning big or anything. I plan on treating it more as an experiment in our multiplayer league.

[Arles]

Don't forget to check out the chat - it begins shortly.

Go here for instructions on how to attend:

http://www.greydogsoftware.com/forum...ead.php?t=4429

[jbmagic]

will there be a chat log after?

i forgot all about it.

thanks

[maximus]

For some reason I cannot conect and I really wanted to join.

This sucks.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by jbmagic

will there be a chat log after?

i forgot all about it.

thanks

yeah someone asked this before. i think danny said he'd be doing a chat log like he normally does.

[jbmagic]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

yeah someone asked this before. i think danny said he'd be doing a chat log like he normally does.

thanks

they are stil chating, so i am catching some of it now

[Emiliano]

Chat transcript

[Huckleberry]

Sounds pretty good. How hard would it be for Florida/Georgia and Texas/Oklahoma to be neutral?

And why 66 scholarships and 80+ rosters? Is 85 scholarships and 100+ rosters simply not feasible because of database size?

[Arles]

Originally Posted by Huckleberry

Sounds pretty good. How hard would it be for Florida/Georgia and Texas/Oklahoma to be neutral?

It's a great deal of complexity for minimal game. Remember, BBCF doesn't "hardcode" teams so you'd have to setup a tracking method for identifying these games.

And why 66 scholarships and 80+ rosters? Is 85 scholarships and 100+ rosters simply not feasible because of database size?

66 scholarships gives you a great deal of roster flexibility and certainly enough to redshirt 8-10 players and still have 3-4 strings of scholarship guys. If you go to 85/100+, not only are you bringing up storing and performance issues, but you are also adding a great deal of additional work to recruiting, offseason training, player monitoring and making multiplayer leagues much more time consuming. In the end, it's another case of more effort (by both the gamer and developer) for a very small gain.

[Ben E Lou]

Q: How many rivals will each team have? One or more?
Arlie Rahn- Just one, but you can use the "permanent schedule option" discussed above to have more than one yearly non-conf foe.

OK, but what about conference foes in the opposite sub-division. The obvious one I'm thinking about here is Georgia-Auburn. I'm assuming that Tech will be Georgia's rival, and that we'll play everyone in the SEC East every year. Can Auburn be set up as a "yearly non-conf foe," or is that limited to someone out of your entire conference?

[HoosFan]

On the recruits screenshot- what do the green and yellow dots to the left of the player's name represent?

[Ben E Lou]

Q: Is there any aspect or feature of the game that hasn't received much attention in the forums that you're particularly excited about?
Arlie Rahn- There are a few. One is the level of stat tracking done in the game. At any point in a career, you can go back and look at stats for any player that ever threw one pass for any team or made one tackle, ... All this is stored in a collection of database tables and should allow numerous modding options without the need to read binary or other complicated coding in addition to the screens in the game

[vex]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

OK, but what about conference foes in the opposite sub-division. The obvious one I'm thinking about here is Georgia-Auburn. I'm assuming that Tech will be Georgia's rival, and that we'll play everyone in the SEC East every year. Can Auburn be set up as a "yearly non-conf foe," or is that limited to someone out of your entire conference?

That was my question there, and exactly the scenario that caused me to propose it.

[MrBug708]

Arlie, I'm going to assume you are going to make sure the PAC-10 plays every team now instead of the usual miss? It's going into implemation in 2006, but not next year. Certain teams in the PAC-10 currently miss some teams but others dont. The rivals dont miss each other UW and UCLA dont miss each other, same with UW-UO. I'm assuming it would be easier to schedule all 9 opponents anyhow

[Arles]

Originally Posted by vexroid

That was my question there, and exactly the scenario that caused me to propose it.

This is an interesting question and I do not think it would happen by using that table. Those have to be nonconference opponents.

This is a great example where allowing customization may impact a specific case in "real life". Given the game is setup to allow numerous conference sizes, there's no real way to peg an "Auburn-Georgia" as non-rivals in different divisions that play every season. One workaround could be to put the GT-Georgia game in the table and have Auburn and Georgia be rivals - but that may not be a preferred way either.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by HoosFan

On the recruits screenshot- what do the green and yellow dots to the left of the player's name represent?

Player ability. Blue - very good, green - good, yellow - ave, orange - below ave and red - poor. For recruits, they mean 1-5 stars. It's a quick way to get a bird's eye view on a player independent of the filter used.

[Wolfpack]

Originally Posted by Arles

This is an interesting question and I do not think it would happen by using that table. Those have to be nonconference opponents.

This is a great example where allowing customization may impact a specific case in "real life". Given the game is setup to allow numerous conference sizes, there's no real way to peg an "Auburn-Georgia" as non-rivals in different divisions that play every season. One workaround could be to put the GT-Georgia game in the table and have Auburn and Georgia be rivals - but that may not be a preferred way either.

Have you considered having two different twelve-team arrangements, one with fixed cross-division rivalries and one without? I think this needs to be addressed because the ACC as it is structured now depends on those cross-division rivalries to keep some long-standing contests going on a yearly basis. FSU-Miami and State-Carolina are two such examples since those four teams were split into different divisions.

[dawgfan]

Q: What role will academics have?

Arlie Rahn- Academics will only matter in regards to staying eligible both as a recruit and once on the team.

Do I take this to mean that it's possible a kid you're recruiting may not gain entrance to your school due to poor academics in H.S.? That would be cool - you can take the risk of spending resources recruiting a stud player with questionable grades, but you run the risk he won't gain entry to your school - something real teams have happen to them all the time.

This leads to another question - will there be JC recruits? If so, will there be both Sophomore and Junior JC recruits? Will these JC kids consist of the H.S. recruits that were denied admission previously?

Also, I'm assuming that there will be standard Bowl arrangements as an option instead of a playoff (the game is called Bowl Bound, right?) Assuming this is the case, will the pairings be rigid or can the user edit them, and will they match current arrangements with conferences?

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Arles

One workaround could be to put the GT-Georgia game in the table and have Auburn and Georgia be rivals - but that may not be a preferred way either.

That sounds reasonable to me. Why might make that way of doing it a bad thing?

[henry296]

Originally Posted by Arles

This is an interesting question and I do not think it would happen by using that table. Those have to be nonconference opponents.

This is a great example where allowing customization may impact a specific case in "real life". Given the game is setup to allow numerous conference sizes, there's no real way to peg an "Auburn-Georgia" as non-rivals in different divisions that play every season. One workaround could be to put the GT-Georgia game in the table and have Auburn and Georgia be rivals - but that may not be a preferred way either.

Would you then make Auburn and Alabama rivals?

[Huckleberry]

Is each team limited to being in only one rivalry pair or to only having one rival of theirs?

What I mean is this:

Could Oklahoma State have Oklahoma as their rivals, and Texas A&M have Texas as their rivals, so that Texas and Oklahoma both have two rivals?

Or perhaps easier to relate to for some would be the academies. Could Navy list Army as their rival, Army list Air Force, and Air Force list Navy just so that those are all rivalry games?

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by henry296

Would you then make Auburn and Alabama rivals?

Sounds like Auburn and Alabama would still *play* every year, because they're both in the SEC West, but UGA and Auburn would be rivals. (Having grown up in Columbus, GA, that would work just fine, Georgia-Auburn was, without question, THE biggest game of the year. Georgia fans in Columbus hated Auburn *far* worse than Tech, Florida, or Tennessee.) The problem comes when a team has an every-year traditional game against a foe in the other division of the same conference, and also has a "rival" who is not in their conference. This does sound it could be an issue with some places like Georgia (needs to play Tech and Auburn every season) and FSU (needs to play Florida and Miami every year). I'm curious to hear more about why Arlie says that the workaround he mentioned is less than ideal. I wonder if it is, as I mentioned, that Alabama/Auburn and Florida/Florida St. won't be "rivals" under that setup--just teams that play each other every year.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Huckleberry

Is each team limited to being in only one rivalry pair or to only having one rival of theirs?

What I mean is this:

Could Oklahoma State have Oklahoma as their rivals, and Texas A&M have Texas as their rivals, so that Texas and Oklahoma both have two rivals?

Or perhaps easier to relate to for some would be the academies. Could Navy list Army as their rival, Army list Air Force, and Air Force list Navy just so that those are all rivalry games?

Ah...good question.

[VPI97]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

The problem comes when a team has an every-year traditional game against a foe in the other division of the same conference, and also has a "rival" who is not in their conference. This does sound it could be an issue with some places like Georgia (needs to play Tech and Auburn every season) and FSU (needs to play Florida and Miami every year).

Every team in the ACC has a cross-division rival who they play every year...for VT it's Boston College....despite the fact that we're not really 'rivals'.

[HomerJSimpson]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

Sounds like Auburn and Alabama would still *play* every year, because they're both in the SEC West, but UGA and Auburn would be rivals. (Having grown up in Columbus, GA, that would work just fine, Georgia-Auburn was, without question, THE biggest game of the year. Georgia fans in Columbus hated Auburn *far* worse than Tech, Florida, or Tennessee.) The problem comes when a team has an every-year traditional game against a foe in the other division of the same conference, and also has a "rival" who is not in their conference. This does sound it could be an issue with some places like Georgia (needs to play Tech and Auburn every season) and FSU (needs to play Florida and Miami every year). I'm curious to hear more about why Arlie says that the workaround he mentioned is less than ideal. I wonder if it is, as I mentioned, that Alabama/Auburn and Florida/Florida St. won't be "rivals" under that setup--just teams that play each other every year.

Well, he suggests in the chat that players will sometimes play differently in Rivalry games. I think his biggest limitation is, if the games are different, then teams needed the abilty to have more than one rivalry. There are many teams that have 2 or more, and limiting it to one hurts that quality of the game over-all.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

That sounds reasonable to me. Why might make that way of doing it a bad thing?

Because it would list Auburn as your rival on the team page and that may upset others. But let me chew on what you and Wolfpack have said and see if I can't make a better way.

[Arles]

I tell you what, could one of you guys email me the cross-conference rivalries that exist and let me see if I can find a way to work it in ([email protected]).

[Wolfpack]

I assume it would be too difficult to have specific rivals play specific dates in a schedule (like Tennessee-Alabama in October), but how will the program handle what usually are the traditional last-week-of-the-year rivalries like Tech-UGa or any of the games in the Pac-10? Will such games be fixed or will those games move around the schedule depending on what the scheduling algorithm does? Perhaps when rivalries are designated, an option to make those games the last of the year?

EDIT: on a case by case basis, I mean...

[Arles]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Do I take this to mean that it's possible a kid you're recruiting may not gain entrance to your school due to poor academics in H.S.? That would be cool - you can take the risk of spending resources recruiting a stud player with questionable grades, but you run the risk he won't gain entry to your school - something real teams have happen to them all the time.

Yeah, midway through the recruiting period, an entrance exam is taken. If a player doesn't have a certain HS GPA, they must pass the exam. You see the GPA from the first week, so you will know which guys will need the exam to get in.

This leads to another question - will there be JC recruits? If so, will there be both Sophomore and Junior JC recruits? Will these JC kids consist of the H.S. recruits that were denied admission previously?

There will only be juniors, but they will consist partly of HS recruits denied admission two years before. That number probably won't be enough for a full JC class, so you will see more players than just those who failed to quailify.

Also, I'm assuming that there will be standard Bowl arrangements as an option instead of a playoff (the game is called Bowl Bound, right?)

Correct.

Assuming this is the case, will the pairings be rigid or can the user edit them, and will they match current arrangements with conferences?

They will initially be set to current arrangements, but you will be able to edit them in an access DB at any point in your career. You will also be able to have the game first check for a team that qualifies. For instance, the "Florida Bowl" has South Bend as a team that it checks before anyone else. The "Honolulu Bowl" checks to see if Hawaii is eligible before checking conference pairings.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by Wolfpack

I assume it would be too difficult to have specific rivals play specific dates in a schedule (like Tennessee-Alabama in October), but how will the program handle what usually are the traditional last-week-of-the-year rivalries like Tech-UGa or any of the games in the Pac-10? Will such games be fixed or will those games move around the schedule depending on what the scheduling algorithm does? Perhaps when rivalries are designated, an option to make those games the last of the year?

There are two ways rivals can be designated - anytime or the final week - in the team setup.

[HomerJSimpson]

Originally Posted by Arles

There will only be juniors, but they will consist partly of HS recruits denied admission two years before. That number probably won't be enough for a full JC class, so you will see more players than just those who failed to quailify.

That's cool, but will they come out with a slant toward the team that originally recruited them (or quite possibly that they had once commited to)?

[Huckleberry]

Originally Posted by Arles

There are two ways rivals can be designated - anytime or the final week - in the team setup.

You should add "Second Saturday in October" as the third designation.

[Wolfpack]

Originally Posted by Arles

There are two ways rivals can be designated - anytime or the final week - in the team setup.

Cool. Thanks. My monthly budget's rather miserly when it comes to games anymore, but my interest in this one is building quite a bit (no doubt in part since college football is coming soon, but it looks like a very promising game).

[JonInMiddleGA]

This is from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southeastern_Conference
I wonder how many other conferences have similiar listings out there somewhere?

College Football Rivalries in the SEC

Football has a rich tradition in the SEC, and its many rivalries among its members have long histories. Some of the rivalries involving SEC teams include (with travelling trophies or special names in parentheses):
Rivalry 	  Name 	Trophy 	
Alabama-Tennessee 	The Third Saturday in October 	
Arkansas-LSU 	The Battle for the Golden Boot 	The Golden Boot
Auburn-Alabama 	The Iron Bowl 	ODK-James E. Foy V Sportsmanship Trophy 	
Auburn-Georgia 	The Deep South's Oldest Rivalry 	
Florida-Tennessee 	The Third Saturday in September 	
Florida-Florida State 		
Florida-Miami 		The War Canoe
Florida-Georgia 	The World's Largest Outdoor Cocktail Party 1 		
Georgia-Georgia Tech 	Clean, Old Fashioned Hate 	
Kentucky-Indiana 		2
Kentucky-Louisville 		The Governor's Cup
LSU-Tulane 	The Battle for the Rag 	The Rag
Mississippi State-Ole Miss 	The Egg Bowl 	The Golden Egg Trophy
Ole Miss-LSU 		
South Carolina-Clemson 		
Tennessee-Kentucky 		3
Tennessee-Vanderbilt 		

    * 1 Played in Jacksonville. Now officially referred to as the "Florida-Georgia Game" due to sensitivity about consumption of alcohol by college students.
    * 2 For decades the trophy of this game was a red, white, and blue bourbon barrel, but this practice was discontinued in 1999 following a DUI accident that killed two Kentucky football players.
    * 3 For 74 years the trophy of this game was an orange, white, and blue beer keg, but this practice was discontinued in 1999 following the aforementioned DUI accident.


Each school has a permanent rival from the other division which it plays each year in football (though this may or may not reflect a traditional rivalry). Each East Division school's permanent rival from the West Division:

    * Florida--LSU
    * Georgia--Auburn
    * Kentucky--Mississippi State
    * South Carolina--Arkansas
    * Tennessee--Alabama
    * Vanderbilt--Ole Miss

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Arles

Yeah, midway through the recruiting period, an entrance exam is taken. If a player doesn't have a certain HS GPA, they must pass the exam. You see the GPA from the first week, so you will know which guys will need the exam to get in.

Cool. Will there be anything besides the GPA by which we can get some clue as to how likely they'd be to get the exam score, or is it just "buyer beware" on guys with GPA's lower than the requirement? If a guy has a certain minimum GPA, he doesn't need to take the exam and is automatically qualified?

I like this approach to academics - while I respect Jim's decision to not mirror reality and make academics more important to success in TCY, it made it harder to get immersed in the game. This better mirrors reality.

Another factor that might be interesting to program is making intelligence a factor in how well the player performs (maybe play recognition or film study or some such way of describing it) - that way you still have some incentive to recruit smart players without having the Stanford/Rice/etc. phenomenon in TCY of high academic prestige schools also becoming gridiron powerhouses.

Which brings up another point - will all schools have the same academic requirements for entry, or will there be some variety (maybe this is something that can be edited?) This would allow for users to add a degree of difficulty when choosing a school like Stanford.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by HomerJSimpson

That's cool, but will they come out with a slant toward the team that originally recruited them (or quite possibly that they had once commited to)?

I doubt it. There may be the same regional factors but that would only be coincidence if it happened. There are so many things that can change in two seasons (his ability increasing the school quality, playing time at certain schools, coaching style, ...) that it's probably better to have him take a fresh look at the schools after him before making that choice.

[HomerJSimpson]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

This is from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southeastern_Conference
I wonder how many other conferences have similiar listings out there somewhere?

I imagine most of them do. NCAA football from EA covers just about every one from the biggest to the smallest.

[HomerJSimpson]

Originally Posted by Arles

I doubt it. There may be the same regional factors but that would only be coincidence if it happened. There are so many things that can change in two seasons (his ability increasing the school quality, playing time at certain schools, coaching style, ...) that it's probably better to have him take a fresh look at the schools after him before making that choice.

Well, it may be easier to code, but realistically many players that don't qualify go back to the original school the commited to, whether after a year of prep school or a couple of years of juco, if the orginal team is still interested.

[HomerJSimpson]

BTW, you never did answer whether you'll be able to hire coaches at the begining of the game or not.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by HomerJSimpson

I imagine most of them do. NCAA football from EA covers just about every one from the biggest to the smallest.

Then let me rephrase what I wondered: I wonder whether somebody could find a list(s) that was very near complete & covered every conference, so that it would be easy for Arlie to see all of them instead of having some of them at his fingertips but not others.

[Arles]

Thanks for the info Jon and Wolfpack (for the email). Let me see what I can do with this.

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Cool. Will there be anything besides the GPA by which we can get some clue as to how likely they'd be to get the exam score, or is it just "buyer beware" on guys with GPA's lower than the requirement? If a guy has a certain minimum GPA, he doesn't need to take the exam and is automatically qualified?

It's more buyer beware. But if he's way below the threshold, he's probably more of a risk then someone right on the cutoff (but not always). As to your second question, people will be automatically qualified if they have a certain GPA. It's GPA or Exam.

Another factor that might be interesting to program is making intelligence a factor in how well the player performs (maybe play recognition or film study or some such way of describing it)

Intelligence is a minor factor for a position like QB.

Which brings up another point - will all schools have the same academic requirements for entry, or will there be some variety (maybe this is something that can be edited?) This would allow for users to add a degree of difficulty when choosing a school like Stanford.

For now, it's all the same. I'm trying not to make everything too complex this version and this may be where I draw the line. Still, I'll see what the feedback is and would be open to working something like this in for later versions down the road.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by HomerJSimpson

Well, it may be easier to code, but realistically many players that don't qualify go back to the original school the commited to, whether after a year of prep school or a couple of years of juco, if the orginal team is still interested.

I think Arlie has this one right - the number of players in his game that will end up making the same choice because the preferences still match up well will probably correspond pretty well with the actual number of JC kids that pick the same school they originally signed with. I follow recruiting pretty closely around the Pac-10 and especially Washington, and while some academic casualties end up picking the same school out of JC, many don't for the reasons Arlie listed (the player improved at JC and higher prestige schools are now looking at him, playing time concerns may have changed, etc).

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Arles

Thanks for the info Jon and Wolfpack (for the email). Let me see what I can do with this.

I figured the SEC would be covered pretty quickly around here
I was hoping that posting that would maybe inspire other conferences followers into passing along more stuff to you in emails (i.e., that's why I didn't email you direct but posted instead)



re: different academic standards:

For now, it's all the same. I'm trying not to make everything too complex this version and this may be where I draw the line. Still, I'll see what the feedback is and would be open to working something like this in for later versions down the road.

I really do like the idea of having this be at least user adjustable, probably adjustable is the best notion rather than having it hard-coded to different levels (giving the user the option of balanced/unbalanced academic playing fields). From Stanford to Duke to the service academies, it really would be something that would add a layer of realism to the game IMO.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Arles

Intelligence is a minor factor for a position like QB.

Something to think about for future versions then - I think it would be cool to make intelligence a factor for all positions. Not necessarily a real big one, but maybe enough to favor one player over another if most other factors are similar.

Originally Posted by Arles

For now, it's all the same. I'm trying not to make everything too complex this version and this may be where I draw the line. Still, I'll see what the feedback is and would be open to working something like this in for later versions down the road.

I'm assuming then that you're coding the current game in such a way that this is not among the fields in the database for each school, but is rather a hard-coded number referenced by all schools? In other words, this isn't something that could be varied per school with a utility?

[HomerJSimpson]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

I think Arlie has this one right - the number of players in his game that will end up making the same choice because the preferences still match up well will probably correspond pretty well with the actual number of JC kids that pick the same school they originally signed with. I follow recruiting pretty closely around the Pac-10 and especially Washington, and while some academic casualties end up picking the same school out of JC, many don't for the reasons Arlie listed (the player improved at JC and higher prestige schools are now looking at him, playing time concerns may have changed, etc).

I'm just making a suggestion, and it is definitely not a big deal. Agree, disagree, whatever.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I figured the SEC would be covered pretty quickly around here
I was hoping that posting that would maybe inspire other conferences followers into passing along more stuff to you in emails (i.e., that's why I didn't email you direct but posted instead).

Arles is a Pac-10 guy so he already knows this, but this isn't (yet) an issue in the Pac-10 since all teams now play each other every year.