 |
Quote: |
 |
|
|
 |
Originally Posted by Bodizzy |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Boy, do I agree with you that NCAA needs to wage a full-on onslaught towards beefing up recruiting in the series. Your team's current roster, coaching staff (including coordinators and position coaches who actually influence player morale and ability), assistant recruiters, team history and prestige, and the head coach's personality should all intersect at an overall recruiting prowess for a school. You're right, the top-shelf programs should have a leg (or two) up on the smaller schools, and they should have the advantage for various reasons.
Personally, I would love to have a dynamic, RPG-style conversation system implemented to woo and negotiate recruits. A coach with a winning history, a top flight program at his fingertips, and a charming personality would have more dialog options and success rates than coaches who are at smaller schools, lack the personality, etc. But you could pick a small school, create a no-name coach, start winning some football games, and slowly accrue points to either consciously ascribe to your coach and assistants or that are automatically attributed to personnel and coaches based on how those points were accrued. Either way, it's something I would absolutely love.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
I definitely agree with most of these ideas. We need:
- Diamonds in the rough and busts
- More drama on NSD, not as many recruits committing early
- A way to gauge what other teams are doing
- Make the off-season visits matter. Dont have recruits commit so early where my visit in Week 4 never happens