Corn, I get your point, but pot...kettle...black. We can agree to disagree but please don't take the ethical stance in terms of recruiting, it doesn't suit you.

Posted by Iguana1 on 8/1/2012 2:49:00 PM (view original):
if this conference wasn't the king of collusion during recruiting, Maryland would have been open to having any additonal recruits of his snatched as well.  Although I think he only had the one recruit on his consider list.

How many inter-conference recruiting battles has the ACC had in the past 10 seasons?  1?  2? 

Yeah, he had only one guy considering him (two schollies). But quite honestly, do you think if he had another guy, a conference mate should've gone after him? Do you think if it were a Big 12 or Pac 10 team in that situation, that a conference mate would've gone after him? Of course not. Zero chance.

There are plenty of battles initially -- this season alone, Wake and I went after the same guard, VT and MD both went after the same guy, Miami and FSU both went after the same guy, NC State and Wake were both on the same center. I may be missing one or two. But people are smart enough to realize they're better off taking the massive amounts of money and prestige and picking on someone else rather than actively choosing to battle one of the other other teams in the world with as much money + prestige. That's just common sense. Plus, the massive war chests allow people to branch out geographically. I'm not terribly likely to run into a conference battle signing guys from Maine and Louisiana.

If you've been paying attention the last few seasons (and I know you have), it's actually the Big 12 that's had almost no recruiting battles (yeah, I said it), save for one or two late attacks vs. jslotman. And since we're both former conference mates of his, we both know he totally deserves it.

kari and i fight all the time!

Posted by Iguana1 on 8/1/2012 2:49:00 PM (view original):
if this conference wasn't the king of collusion during recruiting, Maryland would have been open to having any additonal recruits of his snatched as well.  Although I think he only had the one recruit on his consider list.

How many inter-conference recruiting battles has the ACC had in the past 10 seasons?  1?  2? 

I've lost large battles to Maryland and Boston College in the last 10 seasons. I think I spent something like 170K combined in those 2 battles. I didn't really ***** about it so not many noticed how big they were.

Posted by kelby_03 on 8/1/2012 6:35:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Iguana1 on 8/1/2012 2:49:00 PM (view original):
if this conference wasn't the king of collusion during recruiting, Maryland would have been open to having any additonal recruits of his snatched as well.  Although I think he only had the one recruit on his consider list.

How many inter-conference recruiting battles has the ACC had in the past 10 seasons?  1?  2? 

I've lost large battles to Maryland and Boston College in the last 10 seasons. I think I spent something like 170K combined in those 2 battles. I didn't really ***** about it so not many noticed how big they were.

There's your problem.  If it's just light chatter after like "Congrats, what'd you end up spending on him?" then it doesn't resonate with people that there was even a battle.  B!tch and moan next time and you'll get the credit you deserve for being in an in-conference battle.

Posted by kelby_03 on 8/1/2012 6:35:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Iguana1 on 8/1/2012 2:49:00 PM (view original):
if this conference wasn't the king of collusion during recruiting, Maryland would have been open to having any additonal recruits of his snatched as well.  Although I think he only had the one recruit on his consider list.

How many inter-conference recruiting battles has the ACC had in the past 10 seasons?  1?  2? 

I've lost large battles to Maryland and Boston College in the last 10 seasons. I think I spent something like 170K combined in those 2 battles. I didn't really ***** about it so not many noticed how big they were.

Miami and Duke had a huge battle just last season over a Serbian G. I've also spent ove $95k to take a G away from VA Tech.

If you are claiming you don't do it, I for one will take you at your word. But it is extremely unusual, given the small number of ACC-quality recruits there are, and given how close geographically the schools in the conference are, how frequently only one of you shows up on a given player. Admittedly, I haven't run any statistical analysis on this. But I have definitely noticed two things:

1. On the first cycle or two of recruiting, it is rare to see two ACC schools on the same recruit.
2. On the 8 PM and/or the 11 PM cycles the day before signings, ACC schools tend to go after high-level recruits considering other schools in the region. Again, there aren't a lot of those players, and again, it is rare to see two ACC schools go after the same one. It's much more common to see what happened with Michigan State this time around: He had four top-level recruits considering him, and a different ACC school went after each of the four during those two cycles.

You all say there is nothing untoward going on, and without any evidence to the contrary I will take your word. But you'd have to admit, as a group you have been very lucky, particularly in the late stages of recruiting cycles in Allen. 
 

I have noticed an ACC trend of teaming up on the same school, which could obviously just be part of good strategy rather than abject collusion.  Michigan State and Syracuse this recruiting cycle are good examples of this. 

You're absolutely right, jslot, it's great strategy. The luck piece of it is how often they seem to jump on different guys in the same cycle.

But of course, if you're jumping in on a later cycle, it's a good strategic move. Those of us directly in the combat zone have to be a lot more careful than normal to not overreach.

The biggest problem (for non-ACC Allen DI schools) is that while the ACC can jump on just about any recruit they want and win, the reverse is very rarely true because of the massive prestige and cash advantages inherent in the ACC.  For the most part, it's impossible to try to pry a secondary recruit away from an ACC school who's otherwise involved in a battle. 

I'm trying to think of a legit reason why WIS would not disclose what the punishment is, but all I can come up with is that all they did was give a warning, and they didn't want people fuming at them about how they should have done more.

Posted by stinenavy on 8/2/2012 3:16:00 PM (view original):
I'm trying to think of a legit reason why WIS would not disclose what the punishment is, but all I can come up with is that all they did was give a warning, and they didn't want people fuming at them about how they should have done more.

+1

Posted by stinenavy on 8/2/2012 3:16:00 PM (view original):
I'm trying to think of a legit reason why WIS would not disclose what the punishment is, but all I can come up with is that all they did was give a warning, and they didn't want people fuming at them about how they should have done more.

+1

Posted by jbasnight on 8/2/2012 10:20:00 AM (view original):
If you are claiming you don't do it, I for one will take you at your word. But it is extremely unusual, given the small number of ACC-quality recruits there are, and given how close geographically the schools in the conference are, how frequently only one of you shows up on a given player. Admittedly, I haven't run any statistical analysis on this. But I have definitely noticed two things:

1. On the first cycle or two of recruiting, it is rare to see two ACC schools on the same recruit.
2. On the 8 PM and/or the 11 PM cycles the day before signings, ACC schools tend to go after high-level recruits considering other schools in the region. Again, there aren't a lot of those players, and again, it is rare to see two ACC schools go after the same one. It's much more common to see what happened with Michigan State this time around: He had four top-level recruits considering him, and a different ACC school went after each of the four during those two cycles.

You all say there is nothing untoward going on, and without any evidence to the contrary I will take your word. But you'd have to admit, as a group you have been very lucky, particularly in the late stages of recruiting cycles in Allen. 
 

Having been on the outside looking in and a lower rung insider.  My observation is that recruiting is more or less similar in all conferences.  The main difference is the number of bullies with A+ prestige and the cash from the tournaments. All coaches are experienced and don't waste lots of cash fighting for players of lesser skill.  You will see fights for the most talented players; on occassion they go to the wire.  There is little reason to fight for player when another player of similar skill is available.

You fight battles you think you can win and walk away from those you believe you will lose. The difference is the coaches in this conference make that decision quickly as not to waste their recruiting cash.  

I cannot say what the A+++ coaches are doing though as I am still waiting to get invited to their meeting in Boca.

The questions, I think to ask are, does A+ prestige carry too much power or is there a general belief that there are too many schools with A+ prestige? 

I think my view is the latter.  (too many A+ schools).  Allen has 15-20 right now, 9 in the ACC alone.