Hardwood - Discussion Forum: Redshirt Limitations?

Forum >> Discussions >> Redshirt Limitations?

Post ID	Date & Time	Game Date

#17609	12/13/2021 6:52:50 am	Dec 17th, 2022
El jefe Joined: 07/06/2018 Posts: 704 Temple Owls I.1	The only thing frustrating for me about RS today is that you HAVE to do it with almost all of your roster if you want to remain competitive and have a shot at promoting to the highest level and/or winning the National Championship. If you look at Legends, only Ursinus and IUPUI have more than 2 upperclassmen who are not redshirted (seems most of UTEP's are JUCO's). I don't have a problem if nothing changes, it's just that if everyone HAS to do it then it's not really a strategy. Versus putting a cap on RS, which introduces so more strategy on who to RS and when (and with the 4/5 star recruiting penalty lifted)

#17610	12/13/2021 7:37:10 am	Dec 17th, 2022
pschwartz Joined: 05/07/2019 Posts: 857 Inactive	The one issue I have is that is based so much on the star rating system. Two players on my team really show this: http://onlinecollegebasketball.org/player/97567 http://onlinecollegebasketball.org/player/106336 Roberson was a 3 star entering college with 102 SI. Glenn was a 4 star entering college with 103 SI (both had same potential). Yet the penalty for redshirting Roberson is nothing and for Glenn it is significant - yet the difference is literally 1 skill point. I RSed Roberson and he will probably reach 175 SI, I didn't RS Glenn because of the penalty and he probably peaks at 160. Just seems to have too much luck involved on how well your players develop in HS. Maybe instead of basing it off of star ratings we base it off of their "overall rank" where the penalty diminishes as the rank decreases. I guess I am kind of hijacking this thread - maybe this should be brought up separately. I don't think redshirting needs to be considered a strategy. All of the teams in I.1 have pretty full rosters of scholarship players, they all have decent size in the post. Those are things you need to do to be successful in HW, just like you need to RS as many 2 and 3 star players as possible to be successful.

#17613	12/13/2021 9:12:32 am	Dec 17th, 2022
cwb Joined: 02/08/2019 Posts: 67 Prairie View A&M Panthers IV.1	I've been thinking about it and reading the thread.. the only point that really resonates with me is el jefe's point about how if you want to compete at the top level, you HAVE to redshirt. I think about March Madness in real life, and the best moments are the Cinderella stories... about how any team could possibly pull off and upset and make a run. And while there are certainly random events that can happen in this game, I've also seen how - as teams have grown over time - there is now a bit of predictability to the tournament every year. The top league teams are so stacked, they squash teams until they get matched up with one another in the playoffs. Similarly, there isn't much movement down for those teams once they make it to the top (unless a team loses its President). Redshirting adds to this problem. These teams are already getting all the 13 and 14 POT recruits. Now, they are able to fully max those recruits via redshirting their entire roster. So I think capping at 2 redshirts a year and 7 over a 4-year timespan is a reasonable compromise. So teams can still think strategically about recruiting and developing, but it can also ever-so-slightly close that gap between the very top teams and those others trying to move up (or make a Tournament run). Essentially, it would still give those teams an advantage because they still have the recruiting advantage. However, it could reasonably close those TPI gaps by 5-10 SI.. which could be all the difference. Just my two cents - as someone who didn't really see a reason to cap redshirts in the past. Updated Monday, December 13 2021 @ 9:14:18 am PST

#17615	12/13/2021 9:55:44 am	Dec 17th, 2022
ouija7 Joined: 07/07/2019 Posts: 47 Inactive	Redshirting is fine from where I sit, why stop it and hinder the chance to get that recruit maxed out in si? Why have them graduating at 160 si when they can be 170+ ? I just don’t see the benefit off cutting a guys progress by a year when most freshmen need that year of redshirting so they have time to build si and hence start playing at around 120si instead of 100 🤷🏻‍♂️

#17618	12/13/2021 12:17:22 pm	Dec 22nd, 2022
cdilks Joined: 03/21/2020 Posts: 18 Inactive	I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that teams can't build into top teams. Just looking at the champions page: 2022 runner-up DUCA was 4 years removed from LL5, 8 years removed from LL6 2021 champ Minnesota State was 2 years removed from LL5, 6 years removed from LL6 2020 runner-up Bentley was 6 years removed from LL5, 7 years removed from LL6 2019 champ Marist was 2 years removed from LL5, 3 years removed from LL6. So lots of teams are working their way up and having success. As for the tournament itself, look at how top overall seeds have fared in recent years. Pretty much every tournament game is a toss-up. Limiting redshirts wouldn't even things between the best teams and lower teams, it would only widen the gap. Redshirting allows lower level teams to take lower SI/high POT recruits and give them time to reach their full potential(Find FurySK's YouTube videos about this). The right high-2/low-3 star can be just as good as a 4/5 if you play your cards right.

#17619	12/13/2021 12:52:14 pm	Dec 22nd, 2022
pschwartz Joined: 05/07/2019 Posts: 857 Inactive	Well - is the problem too much redshirting or is the problem a logjam at the top that prevents other teams from breaking through? Similarly, there isn't much movement down for those teams once they make it to the top (unless a team loses its President). Is this a problem? 5 years ago only 1 legit team from I.1 is currently LL3 or below and that is Simpson (sorry for signaling you out, I don't make the rules) - the rest are either in LL2 or LL1 or their owner quit which led to their downfall. HW is a zero-sum game and if the main way teams move down from higher leagues is their owner quitting, I am not sure that is great. But on the other hand, I think people are overstating the recruiting advantage in LL1 - I promoted last year and had a 25% bump to my prestige and my recruiting interest barely budged.

#17620	12/13/2021 1:49:56 pm	Dec 22nd, 2022
cwb Joined: 02/08/2019 Posts: 67 Prairie View A&M Panthers IV.1	All good points. I didn't say that it doesn't happen with teams moving up, but as pschwartz points out better than I did... Would those teams have moved up if other teams hadn't lost their Presidents? I stated what I did by just looking at the Champions and saying "Huh... so many of those Presidents have been in place for awhile!" I mean, look at the juggernauts like Dominican, Richmond, Tennessee. It's even more obvious when you look at the Conference One Champions. Aside from Bentley, most of those are teams that have been embedded in the top two leagues for YEARS. And once you make it to the top league and you are able to redshirt your entire roster year after year, you're pretty much ensured to never fall below League 2 (as pschwartz pointed out). Either way, I don't have a strong feeling on the matter. I'm just pointing out a potential problem that we could agree on, as naph had posed. pschwartz, regarding your comment on overstating the recruitment... I agree. I think the bonus between the top Leagues is negligible, but the big bonus comes between Divisions. That said, those teams who stick around the top (League 1 and League 2) are regularly protected, even if they have a bad year and demote. But if you're a team hovering around League 3 and League 4, it can be a big knock if you have a bad year and drop to Division 2.

#17621	12/13/2021 1:56:22 pm	Dec 22nd, 2022
Slickandjake Joined: 03/21/2021 Posts: 193 Inactive	If the problem is stated as too much redshirting, what constitutes it as too much? I see a lot of comments stating it is much more than real life. If that is the real problem, is that really a problem? The game differs in many ways to real life. I think most people don't care about this. Is the problem it helps the most prestigious teams? I actually think it creates more parity, the teams that redshirt 2 and 3 stars can then almost reach the same SI as a redshirted 4 or 5 star, POT being equal. If one says, yeah but POT isn't equal in all cases, well is that again really a problem? Do we want all players to be the same POT? I don't think many would say yes to that. Is the problem it hurts the top end teams too much, allowing the lower level teams to catch up from redshirting. Well the top end teams do have a recruiting edge (so I have heard), but definitely a recruiting edge exists between Div 1 versus 2 and 3 for 4 and 5 star talent. So they still hold a slight edge in recruiting overall. There have been complaints from top end teams and low end teams that things are "unfair", meaning lower end teams seem to be able to advance quite easily (from top end teams) OR top end teams get all the best talent and low end teams can't compete (from low end teams). When there are complaints from both ends of the level spectrum, AND there are a lot of new teams able to reach the pinnacle, then the parity is quite exceptional if you are a neutral observer taking things in. If the problem is stated as a logjam at the top preventing teams from breaking through, I can't see how that is either. I'll make two examples of this, the first using pschwartz's look at 5 years ago, but I will look at all of the last 5 years. Here were the teams that have been in Legends the last 5 years, where they currently are, and whether it is the same manager: Rochester LL2, same manager Miss LL2, same manager UCLA LL1, same manager Ursinus LL1, same manager Butler, LL4, manager quit Evansville LL2, same manager L&C LL1, same manager K state LL2, manager quit Washburn, LL5, manager quit UMKC LL3, manager quit Florida St LL2, same manager Chowan LL2, same manager Huntington LL1, same manager Simpson LL3, same manager MIT LL3, manager quit when demoting to LL3 IUPUI LL1, same manager Tarleton LL2, same manager LUPA LL2, same manager Louisville LL2, same manager West Virg LL4, same manager Lehigh LL3, same manager Wake Forest LL3, same manager Oregon State LL4 same manager Loyola Chic LL4 same manager Iona LL2 same manager Cal St. Mont Bay LL3 same manager Bentley LL2 same manager Tufts LL2 same manager So of the teams that have been in Legends the last 5 years, 5 are currently there, 12 are in LL2, 6 in LL3, 4 in LL4, and 1 in LL5. Of the managers that quit while in LL1, it accounts for 4 of those teams, one each in LL2, LL3, LL4, and LL5. This looks like plenty of room in Division 1 for other teams, and I didn't even look how far some of the teams slid before getting back to LL2 or whatever level they are at. But lets take a different look. Here are the teams currently in Legends, how many seasons the team has been in Legends, and any current streak the team is on (and I am listing these according to how they currently sit in the conference standings): CSDH - first season ever UCLA - 9 seasons overall, 6 straight (other three were 2001-2003) Richmond - second season overall (2 of last 3 seasons) Toledo - second season overall, and 2 straight seasons L&C - 4th overall season, and second season in a row N. Greenville - third overall season, three straight Ursinus - fifth overall, first since 2020 Florida Gulf Coast - second overall, second straight season DUCA - second overall, second straight Iowa - third overall, three straight seasons Tennessee - 12 overall seasons, 12 of last 13 Daemen - First ever season IUPUI - second overall, first since 2018 NYU - third overall, three straight seasons UTEP - third overall, first appearance since 2010 this season Huntington - 7 overall seasons, third straight this year So, two teams making their Legends debut this season, three new teams last season, and three teams made their debut two seasons ago. 8 brand new teams the last 3 years (out of 18 promotions), and three making an appearance for the first time since 2020 or earlier. UCLA and Tennessee are the only two that have sustained long stints, and between the two they have one regular season Legends title and no NT titles. I have a hard time arguing parity doesn't exist. In addition, 20 different teams have won a Div 1 NT (in 22 seasons) and 14 different teams have won Legends regular season. I haven't seen anyone make a solid case that the amount of redshirting is really hurting the game, competitiveness, or anything else. So again, why change the redshirting rules? Who is getting favored too much by the rules? Who is getting hurt too much by the rules? And yet the evidence for great parity exists. Updated Monday, December 13 2021 @ 2:21:06 pm PST

#17622	12/13/2021 2:32:22 pm	Dec 22nd, 2022
Wine13 Joined: 07/03/2018 Posts: 20 Inactive	Nice write-up Slickandjake. Just a note here. Take a look at Cal State Dominquez Hills. Steady climb through the conferences to right now one of the best teams in HW. Not 1 single 4 or 5 star EVER on Holocrons roster and ONLY 1 pot 13!!! He has made his way to the top using 12pot 3 star players and redshirting. Seems like a good strategy. I don't think RS should be changed. The trick to the game is finding the right players for the game tactics you want to use regardless of Pot and stars.

#17623	12/13/2021 2:39:00 pm	Dec 22nd, 2022
cwb Joined: 02/08/2019 Posts: 67 Prairie View A&M Panthers IV.1	I mean, with 6 teams being demoted out of League 1 every year, there's bound to be some new team making appearances. Considering there have been 18 new spots over the last three seasons, and only 8 "new" teams remain (and half of those teams likely demoting out after this season)... I think the point you're trying to make is a little flimsy. Additionally, of the 6 teams that look to promote to League 1 for next year, half of those teams have already been in League 1 in the last 5 years. So yes, new teams do come into League 1. That's bound to happen just because 6 teams demote every year. But which teams remain? And which teams from League 1 will demote for 1-2 seasons and then be back because their entirely redshirted roster has secured them? Meanwhile, teams like Daemen will climb up just to enjoy one season to League 1 and then demote back out (until their entirely redshirted roster can develop enough for them to sustain at the top). If anything, limited redshirts just adds some extra strategy to the game rather than becoming a must-do after-thought.