One way to make filtering work would be step away from the letter grades. At levels 2 and 3 of scouting use numbers but make them rounded. maybe filtering only starts at levels 2. At level 2 use numbers but rounded to the nearest 10. Then at level 3 rounded to nearest 5. Then at level 4 you get the numbers. Filters then filter based on whatever data you have available.

IF one began the process of adding texture and uncertainty to scouting with a view that filters were a must, one would have avoided the use of non-filterable letters and found a way to use numbers with texture and uncertainty.

Ditch the letters, use rounded or otherwise uncertain numbers and enable filters.

as camps approach, I'm preparing for lots of manual labor in the new scouting regime......filters might permit one to enjoy the scouting recruiting process - if fun is a goal of the product

I did some scouting this morning, and I appreciate the mass scouting option. It still takes a few tedious minutes to check each player on the target page that I want to scout "up a level." Can you add an option to "select all" or "select blue category" or some other way to make a group check list?

Would still like the option for asst to exclude or target Jucos. Can you add a button like you did for division?

Camps: Would suggest a couple of things:
Allow teams to gain information on the national camps without the hard deadline to signup. You miss the deadline? No problem. The information is still to be had isn't it, similar to asst coach trip.

Add more national or "regional" camps--again don't put an actual time stamp as to when it would occur, just get us the info (similar to the asst scouting trips. More camps would lessen the distance issue that a few have brought up.

Might I suggest 6 A level camps, 10 B camps and 14 C/D camps--keep regional locations but maybe change cities from year to year--perhaps have cities rotate to host? Regional camps for DII and DIII, but have many to choose from but not the hard deadline to sign up.

Perhaps allow schools to host more than one camp?

If given the choice I prefer the current pbp format not the beta. Current is in columns--. Maybe put the just scores in columns?
tabs didn't work
eg
Team Desc Away Team Home Team
OSU Smith Scores 2
Duke Jones Scores 2
OSU Foul on Jones #1....
OSU Smith hits a FT 3
OSU Smith hits a FT 4


The OSU scores would be under the first column for score. The Duke scores under the second score column?.

etc....

The Public Camps need work. Currently they bring in mostly guys you would never dream of recruiting. And the coach has no control over this. It seems to me that the best use of camps, public and private, are to cast a wide net, like FSS can do. After that assistant scouting can hone in on a target. In this case, the camps would be of a lot more utility and make more sense if they were quite a bit earlier in the scouting period.

Posted by Rails on 7/7/2016 5:33:00 PM (view original):
Camps: Would suggest a couple of things:
Allow teams to gain information on the national camps without the hard deadline to signup. You miss the deadline? No problem. The information is still to be had isn't it, similar to asst coach trip.

Add more national or "regional" camps--again don't put an actual time stamp as to when it would occur, just get us the info (similar to the asst scouting trips. More camps would lessen the distance issue that a few have brought up.

Might I suggest 6 A level camps, 10 B camps and 14 C/D camps--keep regional locations but maybe change cities from year to year--perhaps have cities rotate to host? Regional camps for DII and DIII, but have many to choose from but not the hard deadline to sign up.

Perhaps allow schools to host more than one camp?

Like this idea too

In the current game, when the mid-term grade report comes out, the names on the e-mail correspond with the order of names on the individual practice plan page. In the beta, I noticed that my midterm grade report no longer lists my players in the same order they appear in the practice plan.

My suggestion is that they go back to matching. It's minor, but it's still annoying to look at names rather than just count down 'x' number of lines and shift minutes.

Another minor suggestion -- remove the team ranking that appears in the play-by-play window for games. In the beta, the ranking appears at the top of the screen with the team name. For those of us who like to read the line-by-line for the drama, it takes the mystery out of the process when we already know how the rankings changed as a result of the game.

Revert to the current game format where the current ranking appears in the box score, but cannot be seen when opening the play-by-play. Alternatively, list the ratings as they were when the game was played rather than as they changed as a result of the game's outcome.

I'm scouting a player who, on his ratings page, has his primary defense listed as M2M. But on preferences, his preferred defense is fullcourt press. Why would he prefer a defense that isn't what he's played?

In the individual section of the "Practice Plan" page, when you select a player to edit and it lists the affected attributes under each practice item, the list order of attributes under conditioning is A, ST, SPD, BLK, DU....

I know it's a very minor edit, but please consider switching ST and SPD in the list order. Everywhere else in HD (team profile ratings, player profile ratings, recruiting search [under "Physical"], etc) have the order as A, SPD, ST. (I'd say you could have BLK and DU as the 4th and 5th attributes listed.)

I don't know about everyone else, but I've gotten mixed up several times after quick glances and then had to correct my practice changes when I realized/remembered that the order is different in the individual practice page than everywhere in HD.

Two suggestion:

1) The game thread (play by play) set up is a little harder to follow in beta. I would just going back to the current layout (with each team on their respective sides of home/away) but you can keep the color formatting on it. It just flows a lot better IMO rather than the beta layout which just gets hard to follow.

2) Add a defensive assignment option in game planning. There are many instances where I would like to mix and match on defensive assignments but for example I don't want to have my SF running the point in order to have him match up defensively on the opposing team's PG.

Just thought I would suggest these two things even though this beta is more geared towards revamping the recruiting side of things.

just a cosmetic change:

on the recruiting page it currently lists your entire roster with all 12 players. So right now mine says "Ohio St. Roster" with all 12 players listed below.

I feel like since we are recruiting it should only show our returning guys. Gives a better feel for what you need. So maybe it could say "Ohio St. Projected Roster". I have 3 SRs and 1 Walk-on so I would have only my other 8 players listed below it.

This is essentially how it is displayed in the current game when you are recruiting.

On the emails about players passing so that they are eligible, in the current game, there was a link to that player's profile. In this Beta that does not exist. That would be really helpful. I keep notes about eligibility in my notes, plus, if it is a player I have marked as red, it does not matter to me, but I would like to know if one of my targets becomes eligible. Now I have to scroll through the list of recruits and find them. Plus, I can't sort the list alphabetically, so this makes it very time consuming.