Ugh, Army

[Peacefrog]

Quote: Originally Posted by zocrates

GT has been solid, but not as good as the service academies since at least GT is in the ACC and plays decent teams during the season. They've had some dominant seasons but also had some moderate ones in there too, unlike the service academies, so it doesn't bother me as much. But yeah, it looks like their playbook could also be affecting their success as well. 2013: 9-4 2014: 13-1 2015: 12-2 2016: 8-5 2017: 10-4 2018: 11-3 2019: 9-4 2020: 8-5 2021: 9-4 2022: 11-3 2023: 6-7 2024: 13-1 2025: 8-5: 2026: 12-2 2027: 13-1 2028: 5-7 2029: 12-2 2030: 7-6 2031: 5-7 I'll also note that I think GT has had a few different coaches over the years, so they may not have even used the flexbone playbook for a while. But Navy and Air Force still have the same coaches, which would explain why they are still having sustained success. And Army is still having success because their head coach is a former assistant from Navy that is using the Navy playbook. That pretty much explains it. I'm just going to switch their playbooks to Spread and see if that fixes it.

That's a very solid record. More losing seasons than the academies, but many more 10+ win campaigns than I'd expect.

My other theory (which I mentioned in a similar thread) is that the military schools seem very good at recruiting "Athletes." And since there don't seem to be many "Athletes" rated below 3-star, these teams get stacked rather quickly. Consider as well there's always a few Athletes that can excel at QB and HB and CB and SS and FS, and you're looking to have a loaded team in no time.

I guess the only way to keep track of how many "Athletes" vs position players they get each season is to sim a dynasty for a couple seasons as one of those teams. If I get around to doing this, I'll post results (major "if," however).

[prettylittlesmiles]

Quote: Originally Posted by zocrates

I would do this if this looked like it was an isolated thing that only happened in this dynasty, but it looks like there is something built into these programs that is making them stand out, no matter what the team looks like at any point. They will always grow to be powerhouses. If I change their ratings, another head will just grow back.

How fast will it grow back though? 5 seasons 10? If it takes that long I am okay with it. How long do dynasties go now a days? 50 years? Say you go up to 50 years. They will need to recruit heavy. "Cut the head off" 4 years losing records, year 5 they have a winning record. It lasts for another 4 years. Cut the head off again at year 10. By year 15 they would have 4 bad years 5 good another 5 bad 1 good. 9 bad years to 6 decent years. I think that is pretty fAir no?

[Dan@ISU]

One of the first things I do since Custom Conferences came in to play is gut the Independents.

Army and Navy are both in the East division of C-USA in my dynasty and while Navy is currently in the Top 5 they have taken a very steady path to get there in Year 5. Plus it gives some merit with them being in an actual conference and having to play a conference championship game.

Additionally I have removed all BCS tie-ins except Rose (B1G vs PAC) and Sugar (SEC vs Big XII). That allows the top teams in, but focuses on rankings more and usually allows a 2 loss SEC school in before a high ranked 2 loss non-AQ school/Independent.

[mjavon]

I just think the sim algorithm overly favors traditional option teams like Army, Navy, Georgia Tech, etc. It has for several years. I just go into edit coach for all of these teams and change their coaches' offensive schemes to something else. BOOM - Fixed.

[E_L_O]

I think it's both the option and the independent scheduling. I've played over a dozen dynasties out to 2020 and beyond (I sim all my games) and Army/Navy are consistently top 10 while I haven't yet seen Air Force (option-not independent) or BYU (independent-not-option) have anything more than the odd fluke year.

After a couple of years, when their pre-programmed schedules play out, they start playing mostly cupcakes (including two FCS teams), probably because it's easier on the algorithm than BCS teams with more restrictive scheduling. This causes their prestige to rise, which then allows them to recruit monster ATHs way outside military height/weight standards, plus redshirts.

Barring a patch, I think the best result for realism is to just ditch the three service academies and replace them with teambuilt UNCC/GSU/AppSt, because when the hammer drops and players get paid in a few years, you'll probably see the service academies drop down to FCS anyway.

[jello1717]

Quote: Originally Posted by E_L_O

I think it's both the option and the independent scheduling. I've played over a dozen dynasties out to 2020 and beyond (I sim all my games) and Army/Navy are consistently top 10 while I haven't yet seen Air Force (option-not independent) or BYU (independent-not-option) have anything more than the odd fluke year. After a couple of years, when their pre-programmed schedules play out, they start playing mostly cupcakes (including two FCS teams), probably because it's easier on the algorithm than BCS teams with more restrictive scheduling. This causes their prestige to rise, which then allows them to recruit monster ATHs way outside military height/weight standards, plus redshirts. Barring a patch, I think the best result for realism is to just ditch the three service academies and replace them with teambuilt UNCC/GSU/AppSt, because when the hammer drops and players get paid in a few years, you'll probably see the service academies drop down to FCS anyway.

Why is Navy an independent for so long? You should have them joining the American conference in 2015.