New Dynasty

Lets not give up on this thing we can still get it going. When this dynasty is up and running its second to none.

I agree with Russ.

I'm still trying to get it set up, but free time is going to be at a premium the next week or so. I have a major lab final due, final paper due, and 2 finals; once I get done with all that, I'll have free time again and will either get this going or will be pushing you guys to get weeks done. Hopefully I'll at least be able to get the dynasty set up soon so we can at least get preseason stuff done. I guess we don't have any objections to Michblue using ECU and taking Duke's spot in the ACC. If anyone else wants to use a mid-major team like ECU let me know ASAP; once I get this set up, I'm don't want to do it again.

hey guys i think id like to join but if i may suggest that we use 5 or 6 star team it just sseemsmore fun that way im down for whatever though

You can count me in no matter how many people we have but I would rather have 12. If we stay with 3 star or less my bro can go big 12 and I want South Carolina. I think picking whoever we want may be a good idea too just from the standpoint of we know everybody here and we know we are all in it for the long haul and won't quit after one loss or something. That way it wouldn't take so long to build up a team and if you had guys that wanted to build up teams they still could.

My biggest problem with 6 star teams is the game is biased. For example, in one of my offline dynasties I have, Alabama has been in the top 10 and had top 10 recruiting EVERY year even with 2 or 3 losses. Just using Bama as an example, but its pretty much the same thing for all the 6 star teams. I'd be open to us using 5 star and lower, but would prefer to stay with 3 or 4 star teams. If we go with 5 star and lower though...I call dibs on Tennessee.

Elixor1987 wrote:My biggest problem with 6 star teams is the game is biased. For example, in one of my offline dynasties I have, Alabama has been in the top 10 and had top 10 recruiting EVERY year even with 2 or 3 losses. Just using Bama as an example, but its pretty much the same thing for all the 6 star teams. I'd be open to us using 5 star and lower, but would prefer to stay with 3 or 4 star teams. If we go with 5 star and lower though...I call dibs on Tennessee.

I agree it's biased but this year it seems like at least if you get a none traditional powerhouse up to 6 stars they can recruit the same. So for example if you get a team like Kentucky up to 6 stars they can still pull in great recruits while last year it seemed that no matter what a team's prestige was they weren't going to get their fair share of players, so even when schools like Texas dropped to 3 stars they could still pull in top classes and I don't think that's the case anymore. But yes schools like Texas and Bama recruit better than the other teams of the same prestige and they should because in real life they pull in all the kids every year, even Texas who isn't going to a bowl this year is getting great recruits.

So I say we either go with a free-for-all meaning you can pick and team or we just limit it to 3 stars like it is now or we could maybe go 4 stars. I don't really care either way too much but I think if everybody started exactly where they wanted there would be less movement.

I do not care either way myself. i just need to know because if we go 3 star I want to pick ECU in the ACC or maybe the Terps but a free for all I will choose V-Tech

i'm cool either way. just want to play some good games. if you go with 5 or 6 star teams, would the sliders be adjusted to be more difficult than if we would play with 3 star teams?

I would really hate to be a 5-6 star program starting out. All the fun in the dynasties is to build a program to that level. I'd rather take a 1-2 star program over a 5-6 star. Just my 2 cents.

Check voting center...

I personally think we should go back to the idea of all starting with a one star program and put a scoring system in place to be able to move up for a promotion. Example:

1 pt for each win
2 pts for a user vs user win
2 pts for a Rivalry game win
5 pts for wining your conference
5 points for a bowl berth and anothe 5 pts for a bowl win
10 pts for a BCS bowl berth and 10 pts for a BCS bowl win
10 pts for Coach of the Year award from the game
5 pts for producing a Heisman Winner

You need a minimum of 50 points to move up to a 2 star team and 100 to move to a 3 star team. Something like that. The promotion points we can work on but this seems to be the most fun and most challenging dynasty we can. With the adjusted sliders and playing with a one star team, not even CPU games will be a lock to win. Also, that is how in real life you would start out. A small school giving a young coach a shot. We just skip the coordinator years.

What do you all think?

michblue5411 wrote:I personally think we should go back to the idea of all starting with a one star program and put a scoring system in place to be able to move up for a promotion. Example:

1 pt for each win
2 pts for a user vs user win
2 pts for a Rivalry game win
5 pts for wining your conference
5 points for a bowl berth and anothe 5 pts for a bowl win
10 pts for a BCS bowl berth and 10 pts for a BCS bowl win
10 pts for Coach of the Year award from the game
5 pts for producing a Heisman Winner

You need a minimum of 50 points to move up to a 2 star team and 100 to move to a 3 star team. Something like that. The promotion points we can work on but this seems to be the most fun and most challenging dynasty we can. With the adjusted sliders and playing with a one star team, not even CPU games will be a lock to win. Also, that is how in real life you would start out. A small school giving a young coach a shot. We just skip the coordinator years.

What do you all think?

I like this idea but the only problem is you are looking at 3 yrs before you move up to a 3 star school. We are now in December and with the rate we advanced last year it took us about a month for each advance so you are looking at getting 5 seasons in so you really never have a chance to build your team or progress like you would want. We could start with 3 star schools and have the same point system in case anybody ever wanted to move up to a bigger type school or you could just stay at your current school.

I can be fine with that. Or we can lower the point total needed so you can possibly move up after yr 1 and then by yr 4 or 5 reach a top level school. Either way I am fine with the Progression style dynasty

im done with whatever i just want to get this thang rollin

Ok I think we should just do three stars and a format in which you can move up to bigger schools if you would like to.

Also I have a suggestion, since we have seven users we have one more user than we have conferences. So to avoid having two user teams in one conference what I suggest is that we take a team and move them to independent so that way we could have a team be independent and have one user per each conference. So as the set up is now we have one user in each of the following conferences, BIg 10, Big East, SEC, Pac 10, and ACC so that leaves the Big 12 open for my bro or me. So my bro could take a Big 12 team and then I really want to be South Carolina so I could swamp them for say USF then swamp again with Notre Dame. So this would make ND in the Big East and USF in the SEC East and South Carolina independent. This way we would have 1 user in each conference and there isn't an unfair advantage for anybody. But if everybody isn't cool with this then somebody has to have two in one conference anyways and I would still want to choose South Carolina. Let me know what you guys think about that.

Lets do it! I'm ready to slap RJAfan around.

Ok so then here is how we would go.

Big Ten: Michigan State - Elixor1987
ACC: Maryland - michblue5411
Big East: Syracuse - RJAfan6
SEC: Arkansas - alief
PAC-10: Stanford - Russeak82
Big 12: My bro is gonna look but says he like the Big 12
Independent: South Carolina- King_CEPS

If everybody is down with this I could send out the invites in right away and we could get rolling.

the only thing i have against that is that every body will most likely cruise to a conference championship with hardly any difficulty and every one will progress to 4-5 star schools at the same rate.

Why not reverse it. One team in the other five conferences and 2 independent teams.

actually i like this lets go!

michblue5411 wrote:Why not reverse it. One team in the other five conferences and 2 independent teams.

Then we would have one BCS conference open, but I'm not totally opposed to that. I am guessing you would like to be ECU switched for say Army?

Man have i been away lol and russ you will not slap me around at all, im so nice with my orange its sickening. Were using luv's rosters right? Its gonn abe physical finding time to play this (which i havent played in awhile for some reason), cod, and both college hoops games. King and texasfight glad to have you back, just wasnt the same. This is getting me pumped lol

No. We would stay in the conferences they are in. I would be ecu and be in conf usa. Then we need a sunbelt, mac, wac,mount west and 2 ind

Oh I see, but I thought we were going with the BCS conferences?

RJAfan6 wrote:Man have i been away lol and russ you will not slap me around at all, im so nice with my orange its sickening. Were using luv's rosters right? Its gonn abe physical finding time to play this (which i havent played in awhile for some reason), cod, and both college hoops games. King and texasfight glad to have you back, just wasnt the same. This is getting me pumped lol

I'm pumped to, I can't wait to get this going and it seems like everybody is ready to get going as well. So I think I am going to go ahead and start it up and send out invites and if anybody has objections or something we can always delete it but I wanna get going.

And yes we are using luv's latest rosters