FBCB: Is Prestige rising TOO fast now?
 

I know some changes were made recently, and wanted to see if this is what H.R. intends, and what y'all think it should be like. Here is my history since joining the Southern Conference:


I've won both the conference regular season title and tourney each of the past six seasons, and I'm guessing a get a Prestige boost for each.

I don't think that's too much. 6 straight NCAA trips including an Elite 8 is a pretty good stretch. My career with Georgia State is very comparable to that, and I found Prestige really starts to top off at around 70 with a mid major, unless you can get past the 2nd round of the tourney. I had 3 striaght 28+ win seasons, but Prestige was stuck at 70 because I lost in the 2nd round each time.

How different is Gonzaga's real life pretige from where it was ten years ago? If a Mid-Major preforms well year after year I see no reason why it's prestige should steadily rise...

OK. Sounds good. Herd's comment looks like it may be true for me as well:

Success in the tourney is what is causing the rise. Simply winning your conference every year on that level would put you around 55 prestige. From there, making the tourney each year puts you into the 60's. Any further growth is a result of winning games in the tourney. I tried to model that after the way Gonzaga has grown to their current level. Of course, if people do think it is too much growth then I am open to making some adjustments.

I think if it is topping off at around 70 as the_herd mentioned, and as appears to be happening with me, that it is fine the way it is. I was mainly concerned that I went up 20 points between 2037 and 2043, but I guess it makes sense...especially since it is leveling off now.

Even though I can't play the game, I figure I get to offer a little sumthin-sumthin to the discussion ;)

Here's a question for you, which expands on the Gonzaga real-life analogy.

Let's suppose that the Zags finish losing today's game to Nevada -- what will happen to their real-life "prestige"? They're a #2 seed getting drilled by a #10.
How much damage will this do to their "best of the mid-majors" status? Whatever the damage, I believe a loss like this is more damaging to a Gonzaga than it would be to a Duke, Kentucky, etc -- next year, Duke is still Duke, Kentucky is still Kentucky, etc.

And then the FBCB question -- would a similar loss be more damaging to Savannah State than to (the real-life equivalent of) Duke or Kentucky?

And if it isn't, shouldn't it be? I think what I'm saying is that, at some point, perfecting the game's prestige system would include recognition that all "70's" aren't created equal.

Just .02 from the peanut gallery ...
Jon

I'd say it is reflected to a certain extent. The lesser known team needs those wins in order to keep its prestige up where it is. As you get higher in conference prestige, the tourney success makes up a lower percentage of your actual prestige because the prestige component that comes from the conference will be a larger number. A season in the sweet 16 might get 70 prestige for Savannah State but it might be 85 for Duke because they will have more prestige from their conference finish.