Whobebubba3
All-American
If we are playing on All-American sub 70's is a great idea......
If we are playing on Heisman, terrible......
If we are playing on Heisman, terrible......
Upvote
0
-
Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
- Thread starter IronBuckI
- Start date
Probably one of those things we should try out on our own, and use in dynasty if it still holds its value then.
Upvote
0
whether it's still interesting/viable or the sizzle has worn off... whether created team dynasties work as well, etc.
Upvote
0
IronBuckI
Calmer than you are.
This version of creating teams would involve re-creating a team that we've spent all year building, and just continuing the building process.jwinslow;1460098; said:
I don't think that Piney or myself wants to have a bunch of "fake" teams in either of our dynasties. But, leaving it open for someone to "import" a team that they've built up over the last year is different, imo.
I personally won't be re-creating Kentucky. I think that I want to start over with a fairly low rated team in Piney's Dynasty, and, of course, I'll be Ohio State in the Super Conference Dynasty that I end up creating.
Upvote
0
Jwin - I think what Iron is talking about is carrying the current dynasty's team to the 2010 version.
Iron - The more I think about it, I am leaning towards not doing it. My thinking, it was not part of how we set up the dynasty and you never know if that would have affected what people did (ie choosing teams or recent recruiting) And people that want to change teams will be behind the 8-ball per say.
Also, from what I read about the changes to NCAA10 it might put some teams at a severe disadvantage/advantage. ie if 95+ speed recruits are more rare in 2010, then those teams that don't have alot of speed to start would be hard to recruit guys to overcome that initial advantage of teams that are loaded with 95+ speed guys. Plus if the recruit progression is going to change that much, the guys who pull highly rated recruits in the last year or two of the current dynasty will be full of 90+ guys as they become sophomores and juniors in 2010.
On the flip side, I do think the dynasty I start in 2010 will let everyone know that we do plan on carrying over the teams to 2011 if the Team Builder works. That way people can pick their team accordingly, and also we will have more conference balance as we won't have 3 humans in one conference in my dynasty for 2010.
Iron - The more I think about it, I am leaning towards not doing it. My thinking, it was not part of how we set up the dynasty and you never know if that would have affected what people did (ie choosing teams or recent recruiting) And people that want to change teams will be behind the 8-ball per say.
Also, from what I read about the changes to NCAA10 it might put some teams at a severe disadvantage/advantage. ie if 95+ speed recruits are more rare in 2010, then those teams that don't have alot of speed to start would be hard to recruit guys to overcome that initial advantage of teams that are loaded with 95+ speed guys. Plus if the recruit progression is going to change that much, the guys who pull highly rated recruits in the last year or two of the current dynasty will be full of 90+ guys as they become sophomores and juniors in 2010.
On the flip side, I do think the dynasty I start in 2010 will let everyone know that we do plan on carrying over the teams to 2011 if the Team Builder works. That way people can pick their team accordingly, and also we will have more conference balance as we won't have 3 humans in one conference in my dynasty for 2010.
Upvote
0
But since I am not a dictator... and the commish of the people... I will be posting this question in our dynasty thread to see what everyone thinks.
Upvote
0
Now that I'm on the same page, I agree strongly with this. They often overcompensate when "fixing" gameplay, making strategy & personnel usage a lot different.
For instance, they might continue the slow trickle from Madden to NCAA, and import some of the collision programming. In NCAA 09, there are certain 'fall forward' animations which cannot be affected. In Madden, those same ones can often be slowed or nearly minimized even if your defender arrives after it has begun. That would make the power backs a lot less useful.
Upvote
0
power backs (or any skill position player with under like 92 speed) are pretty much useless in 09 as it is
Upvote
0
A 90-92 speed power back can be pretty dominant in my experience. I agree the true power backs, like an 86 speed guy, are fairly worthless.
Upvote
0
jwinslow;1460151; said:
yea, they have to have excellent acceleration and agility though
Darrelle Scott was only 92 speed I think on my Colorado team and I was able to be dominant with him
but then I got another 92 speed back after he left (with not the acc or agil of scott) and I couldnt do shit with him
I think its ridiculous though, a player can be in the mid to high 90s overall and be completely worthless because he only has 88 speed, while a player in the 70s overall can be dominant because he has 95+ speed
Upvote
0
IronBuckI
Calmer than you are.
That's kind of why I waited a week to let the idea sink in, before hounding people for their ideas...Piney;1460112; said:
The more I thought about it, the less I wanted to do it that way too.
I agree that having that spelled out from the beginning might be a better way to go. If you do decide to do a '10 to '11 transition, then I'll definitely be taking a scrub team in your dynasty and try to make something out of those bums over a multi-year period.
Upvote
0
Iron, are you willing to have a fictitious team in your super conference? Create a team in Ohio/Texas/California/Florida/Wherever and mirror attributes of an elite program. Not saying I want to do that, but if I am not the Bucks I would be open to do that as much as being UT or USC or something like that.
Upvote
0