...another suggested solution

What do you have against having EEs declaring before the 1st recruiting cycle ?
(If you can respond then maybe we can work around fixes to address the concern)

I have an idea that may address a concern.
Steps :
1) EE's declare the day before recruiting session #1 starts based on %s from draft big board (this simulates the player's intention to enter the draft at season's end and hire an agent)
2) Teams get additional scouting/recruiting/AP compensation immediately
3) Everyone else through the end of the season runs as is
4) Draft occurs as normal based on a combination of final draft board + post season results.
5) Players that declare but are NOT drafted are assumed to have left school to play professionally in another country
(ie - you lose the EE whether he was drafted or not).

Only downside, that I see, is you may lose a prestige bump from an EE that doesn't get drafted. I would think this is a very small # of kids.
On the plus side, 1) now we don't have to do ANYTHING special for teams with EEs. Those teams scout and recruit just like EVERYONE else. 2) We don't have to change anything else with the current recruiting process.

Having them declare early would be risky without thorough testing. There are changes made to the player data once they declare, so I would have to fully investigate the ramifications of those changes.

That sounds like a good solution. Perhaps there could even be a smaller prestige bump for a player that leaves to play professionally in another country.

Something you could consider if you don't do any other changes to address EEs, is to at least raise the bar for early exit declaration so that teams which are stock full under the old 2.0 recruiting aren't completely decimated when 3.0 rolls out (by this I mean for you to reduce the ratio of EEs to seniors).

Right now its typically a 50/50 split but if you were to reduce it to say 25/75 where fewer non-seniors declare, then teams are less likely to experience multiple EEs while we are still have what you consider a high proportion of elite recruits on our rosters. This would help at least in the transition to the new 3.0 model where you believe the elite recruits will end up more spread out and teams will be less likely to have multiple EEs in a single season.

what about just setting a limit? Max of 2 EE's for a team per season...you still may not get anyone that good in the 2nd period (and I would prefer to just have EE's declare before Period 1) but at least losing 2 EE's probably wouldn't decimate a team like 3-5 would.

Posted by skinzfan36 on 8/12/2016 3:11:00 PM (view original):
what about just setting a limit? Max of 2 EE's for a team per season...you still may not get anyone that good in the 2nd period (and I would prefer to just have EE's declare before Period 1) but at least losing 2 EE's probably wouldn't decimate a team like 3-5 would.

Good solution too.

Posted by skinzfan36 on 8/12/2016 3:11:00 PM (view original):
what about just setting a limit? Max of 2 EE's for a team per season...you still may not get anyone that good in the 2nd period (and I would prefer to just have EE's declare before Period 1) but at least losing 2 EE's probably wouldn't decimate a team like 3-5 would.

While the setting the max to two isn't bad, it would have to be announced and then if seble decided it wasn't necessary later on, he'd have to announce that too (and coaches would be confused whether the restriction is there or not).

If he just raised the bar for a few season, all coaches would see is fewer EEs declaring in the first few transition seasons and he could then put it back to the way it was without having to announce anything.

This is all under the assumption seble decides to *NOT* address the EE situation immediately and we end up suffering for a few seasons until he decides he has enough data to justify making a change.

My hope is EEs declare in season 1 and credit is given at that time. That's my favorite solution.

Posted by chapelhillne on 8/12/2016 6:54:00 PM (view original):
My hope is EEs declare in season 1 and credit is given at that time. That's my favorite solution.

Considering I suggested it over 2 months ago, I like it too but seble at the time indicated he didn't like the idea due to the ignoring of the growth post period #1 and post-season results.

Posted by buddhagamer on 8/12/2016 7:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by chapelhillne on 8/12/2016 6:54:00 PM (view original):
My hope is EEs declare in season 1 and credit is given at that time. That's my favorite solution.

Considering I suggested it over 2 months ago, I like it too but seble at the time indicated he didn't like the idea due to the ignoring of the growth post period #1 and post-season results.

I agree totally. Early declaration of ees is the best solution to this problem. It is not ideal as seble has correctly explained, but the alternative would compromise the competitive balance in Div 1, punishing strong teams for success in the extreme. A team which loses 3 or 4 ees will not be able to compete the next season. That cannot be allowed to occur. (Although a part of me wants to see Duke and NC take a beating for a change.)

I think we just run with it as it is.

If you want to mitigate the chances of losing too many players early or being unable to fill holes then your recruiting strategy may need to change. Or I could suggest the same idea I did earlier.

Have High School players declared their interest in being EEs at the start of the recruiting season. This would give players the ability to decide how many of those EEs to take on. Maybe the EEs stay one season or maybe all four. Who knows? You know the risk though. If you wanted to stay competitive every year maybe you only take one or two of those and fill the rest of the positions with other high quality players. If you want to make one big run you load up on them for a title run knowing that the following season you can fall into the abyss. Either way no one should feel sorry for you because you chose to take the risk and no more whining if you chose to take that risk and it doesn't work out or you don't like the flip side. You won't hear any whining from me when it happens to me.

Having players who are already on your roster declaring their leaving before the season starts makes no sense to me.

Posted by ftbeaglesfan on 8/13/2016 1:13:00 PM (view original):
Having players who are already on your roster declaring their leaving before the season starts makes no sense to me.

The suggestion was to have them declare before *RECRUITING* starts (which is like half way thru the season).

Because it makes way more sense that A+ Seton Hall having to recruit low 500 players to come play for them because nobody else wants to.

This upcoming season I have only 1 opening and 5 players on the draft board (1 likely gone, 4 on the fence) so I guess we'll see how I'm going to be able to open up 5 or 6 back up options with 40 AP and pray that once I do get the additional resources that I can get effort in before they sign with teams which have already maxed out HVs and hundreds of AP before I could (I don't hold out hope since OR couldn't do it at TAMU and his A prestige).

I wonder if seble would run a test where he made it so top D2 and D3 schools experienced the exact same thing where their top players would transfer away just so people can experience the exact same frustration.

Posted by seble on 8/12/2016 10:30:00 AM (view original):
Having them declare early would be risky without thorough testing. There are changes made to the player data once they declare, so I would have to fully investigate the ramifications of those changes.

That's why Fox pays you the big bucks.

Posted by seble on 8/12/2016 10:30:00 AM (view original):
Having them declare early would be risky without thorough testing. There are changes made to the player data once they declare, so I would have to fully investigate the ramifications of those changes.

If it can't be done then ees have to be eliminated. Leaving this issue unresolved would not be acceptable.