All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > long overdue...User Polls
5/6/2014 4:41 PM
I am going to try and answer as much as I can there was a ton of different thoughts thrown around. Why do we just have tiers to scouting service? Allow the most money be paid towards the most accurate service. From a coaching, standpoint I don't think a scouting service should be the answer to a teams prayers. I have spent times in the coaching ranks, and I used to get those emails for scouting service telling me that player A is D1, I watch film and laugh and say you are nuts. Just not realistic.

I used to recruit many more JC and Transfers, mainly to get scholarship numbers to even out. I haven't done so recently.

I use all scouting trips, that is my service. Llamanunts, I know you were just throwing out numbers, but I would never begin to recruit a PG at 30 speed lol. I wouldn't need a service at that point, but let's say the service would say 30 rating high potential, great. If I had time to develop a PG it would be fine, but when rebuilding, you just don't have that kind of time.

At $3K, it would be much better to have any player rather than a walk-on. I would take my chances with player with better current ratings, at least that player could play, then just find someone better the following year.

Gillespie. I believe what you said to be true. Although, indirectly you made a point for me. The teams with the higher prestige tend pull more from D2 anyway. At that point you don't really need a service anyway, because the players should be better. I can turn any team into a higher prestige team without the service. (I have done it already.) I start pulling more from D2 and be in the same boat.

I do want to address that m2m question. You have to do it for zone. I use zone, but if I could put a tall quick post at the top of a zone that would be great. IRL, I've put PG in the past at the bottom of 1-3-1 zones that could get us out and running on the break.

M2M defense, need more fouls called on players who are poor defenders, with the new rules out there this past year, teams are using more zone to avoid that hand check-release-hand check foul.




5/6/2014 5:34 PM
Most states cost much less than $1,000 to FSS. If you use even 4-5 Scouting Trips, you could've just FSS'd the state, and potentially uncovered some other hidden gems.

As for just not having the time to develop a PG at a rebuild, that is exactly WHEN you have the time to do that! Most true rebuilds take a 3-4 seasons to complete, so why NOT redshirt that high potential, 30 ATH/55 SPD PG and then start him from his redshirt freshman season on? At D-2/D-3, a 60 Ath/85 Spd PG would be VERY good in his junior and senior seasons.

To me, it feels like you're sort of cutting off your nose to spite your face regarding FSS.
5/6/2014 6:16 PM
Posted by ettaexpress on 5/6/2014 11:59:00 AM (view original):
Posted by wildcat98 on 5/6/2014 9:18:00 AM (view original):
Posted by nickguy08 on 5/5/2014 11:37:00 PM (view original):
Posted by llamanunts on 5/4/2014 7:03:00 PM (view original):
I know my method of recruiting is not the popular method, but it has worked. I think Nyack in the Knight world is probably the best example of my method.
If peaking at the #49 RPI and some first round NT exits is a supportive example of your method, you may have some reevaluating to do.
I think the general opinion is that maybe I am not putting much thought into recruiting, because I don't use the service.
I'm sure you're putting a lot of thought into it, but it's really inefficient.  If you want to be a winning coach you're going to have to use all the information you can get your hands on.  FSS is VITAL if you want to have any real success.  Two guys with identical starting numbers will often look wildly different from each other with FSS information.  You're a sacrificing huge huge huge amount by foregoing it.
I did ramble on this post. I should be sleeping.

Make it cost less and I will use it. The service costs too much when users are in a weak conference. The service is affordable a little bit more bigger conferences. That is my biggest issue. A successful school should benefit more from it regardless of the conference. Why share the "team" success with a conference full of sims. IRL D3 level public schools HAVE advantages when they are a conference of private schools that cost $30,000+ year to attend. You think Wichita St has an as small basketball budget as the rest of the conference ? I wouldn't think so. Why should I be at fault in that case too?

I don't disagree with the benefits. I said in an earlier post this past season I had $3,000 to spend on one recruit. As it turns out I spent 3/4 of it on a recruit that was undecided until about the last day. I woke up the recruit ended up signing with someone else. If I were to get into battles with the best "potential" from the FSS service, I wouldn't have any cash to get a decent player.


As for the # 49 RPI, yeah I see what you are saying. I try my best to schedule tough non-conference games, but I can't control the conference. Not using the service, took Nyack to the first NT EVER, when 5 previous coaches could not. (They probably used the service.) Just good coaching?

Am I at fault for wanting to turn a program around? Often times they are in the weakest conferences. I took a small chunk little of thunder away from the Felician dominance while I was there. I am sure that user used the service too.
I'd recommend ignoring almost everything posted by Ettaexpress regarding HD. He knows almost nothing about how the game works, and isn't particularly interested in changing that state of affairs.

I would also recommend taking the advice of the people who have told you that using the FSS service is your best avenue for recruiting. The information gleaned from knowing potentials is just invaluable.
Seriously? I'm more interested in changing the state of affairs with regard to the game than anyone. Most of you are happy with the same clunker of a non-sim that you've gotten used to because you can take advantage of it.
You have poor reading comprehension. "Changing that state of affairs" refers to your ignorance in regards to the game, not your desire to change the engine. 
5/6/2014 7:11 PM
Posted by wildcat98 on 5/6/2014 12:40:00 PM (view original):
Posted by ettaexpress on 5/6/2014 12:02:00 PM (view original):
Posted by wildcat98 on 5/6/2014 9:14:00 AM (view original):
Etta, you're constantly insulting people. And you have no sense of the irony of what you post.
I don't think you even know what irony means. 
Yeah, so I taught language arts for 8 years. I'm sure I do. And I'm positive you don't. I'm also positive that you're going to continue to **** on useful threads, so I'll leave you to your proverbial defecating.
I'd really expect more from a language arts teacher than your last two posts. Clunky, to say the least. Well you know what they say: those who can do; those who can't, teach.

And you still didn't use irony correctly. I'm really 'constantly' insulting people as you say, you wouldn't see anything ironic either because if it is constant, why would you not expect it?

8 years of language arts teaching and all you've got is invective and false accusations. Hooray for teachers' unions. 
5/6/2014 7:13 PM
Posted by nachopuzzle on 5/6/2014 12:51:00 PM (view original):
So, what does everybody think about the response to changing m2m? I think it would definitely be useful, but at the end of the day there is still enough wiggle room to game the system.
I think it's funny that you said what I had already said previously, yet everyone acted like it was something original when you said it.
5/6/2014 7:18 PM
Posted by nachopuzzle on 5/6/2014 1:34:00 PM (view original):
I agree with TJ, and in a weird way I kinda agree with llama as well (although I do keep going back and forth on it in my mind). In real life, it doesn't always workout to where a man can guard the same guy on every single trip down the court or stay with him once he is on him...so it could be a problem if there wasn't any wiggle room whatsoever for the offensive team.
When doesn't this happen other than on a fast break or secondary? Teams can choose to switch on a screen, but that's not "he couldn't stay with him". If a guy can't stay on a man once he's on him, he's can either back off or get help after he's beaten. That doesn't change the matchup, though.
5/6/2014 7:22 PM
Posted by llamanunts on 5/6/2014 1:23:00 PM (view original):
It's a good idea at first blush, but I think it would make man to man too powerful.  This was probably stated earlier.  If I can set my defensive matchups that closely and you can't counter that with a move of your own, that's a huge advantage to me.

There's something like this at play with the zone defense.  I don't know if you're going to play a 2-3 or a 3-2.  Sure, it indicates your current choice on the gameplanning pages, but you can switch that right before the game.  So I can't be certain.  HOWEVER, I can set up my distribution vs. a 2-3 and vs. a 3-2 separately. 

I have no idea how to give a coach sufficient options to gameplan for all the different man-to-man assignments you might throw at me... and zero options is gonna be too few, I reckon.
Isn't your substitution pattern a countermeasure? 

But really, if I decide to guard one of your guys with a player, what are you realistically going to be able to do to stop it? You can't pick my defense for me. A good sim would essentially make that adjustment in-game and the ball flow to where the shots should naturally go, as any offense would do. And I can hear it now "you want the sim to coach for you". Well, no coach goes into a game saying "I want Johnny to get 35% of the shots, no matter how effective the defense is.
5/6/2014 7:26 PM
Posted by ettaexpress on 5/6/2014 7:18:00 PM (view original):
Posted by nachopuzzle on 5/6/2014 1:34:00 PM (view original):
I agree with TJ, and in a weird way I kinda agree with llama as well (although I do keep going back and forth on it in my mind). In real life, it doesn't always workout to where a man can guard the same guy on every single trip down the court or stay with him once he is on him...so it could be a problem if there wasn't any wiggle room whatsoever for the offensive team.
When doesn't this happen other than on a fast break or secondary? Teams can choose to switch on a screen, but that's not "he couldn't stay with him". If a guy can't stay on a man once he's on him, he's can either back off or get help after he's beaten. That doesn't change the matchup, though.
Okay, so you agree with me, it doesn't always workout to where a man can guard the same guy every single trip down the court, great.
5/6/2014 7:28 PM
Posted by gasparre on 5/6/2014 6:16:00 PM (view original):
Posted by ettaexpress on 5/6/2014 11:59:00 AM (view original):
Posted by wildcat98 on 5/6/2014 9:18:00 AM (view original):
Posted by nickguy08 on 5/5/2014 11:37:00 PM (view original):
Posted by llamanunts on 5/4/2014 7:03:00 PM (view original):
I know my method of recruiting is not the popular method, but it has worked. I think Nyack in the Knight world is probably the best example of my method.
If peaking at the #49 RPI and some first round NT exits is a supportive example of your method, you may have some reevaluating to do.
I think the general opinion is that maybe I am not putting much thought into recruiting, because I don't use the service.
I'm sure you're putting a lot of thought into it, but it's really inefficient.  If you want to be a winning coach you're going to have to use all the information you can get your hands on.  FSS is VITAL if you want to have any real success.  Two guys with identical starting numbers will often look wildly different from each other with FSS information.  You're a sacrificing huge huge huge amount by foregoing it.
I did ramble on this post. I should be sleeping.

Make it cost less and I will use it. The service costs too much when users are in a weak conference. The service is affordable a little bit more bigger conferences. That is my biggest issue. A successful school should benefit more from it regardless of the conference. Why share the "team" success with a conference full of sims. IRL D3 level public schools HAVE advantages when they are a conference of private schools that cost $30,000+ year to attend. You think Wichita St has an as small basketball budget as the rest of the conference ? I wouldn't think so. Why should I be at fault in that case too?

I don't disagree with the benefits. I said in an earlier post this past season I had $3,000 to spend on one recruit. As it turns out I spent 3/4 of it on a recruit that was undecided until about the last day. I woke up the recruit ended up signing with someone else. If I were to get into battles with the best "potential" from the FSS service, I wouldn't have any cash to get a decent player.


As for the # 49 RPI, yeah I see what you are saying. I try my best to schedule tough non-conference games, but I can't control the conference. Not using the service, took Nyack to the first NT EVER, when 5 previous coaches could not. (They probably used the service.) Just good coaching?

Am I at fault for wanting to turn a program around? Often times they are in the weakest conferences. I took a small chunk little of thunder away from the Felician dominance while I was there. I am sure that user used the service too.
I'd recommend ignoring almost everything posted by Ettaexpress regarding HD. He knows almost nothing about how the game works, and isn't particularly interested in changing that state of affairs.

I would also recommend taking the advice of the people who have told you that using the FSS service is your best avenue for recruiting. The information gleaned from knowing potentials is just invaluable.
Seriously? I'm more interested in changing the state of affairs with regard to the game than anyone. Most of you are happy with the same clunker of a non-sim that you've gotten used to because you can take advantage of it.
You have poor reading comprehension. "Changing that state of affairs" refers to your ignorance in regards to the game, not your desire to change the engine. 
Piling on, 15 yard penalty.

Shrug, sorry you all don't want a better game and wish to change *that* state of affairs. Smells like fear, Rabbit. You'd rather keep clunking along in your 83 Nova of a sim because that's what you're used to and what gives you the advantage, even though the sim would do better, sell better, attract new players better with a rebuild. 

I love how people try to criticize my reading or writing or communication like that's not every bit what the entrance exams for grad school tested. Dumb.
5/6/2014 7:30 PM
Posted by nachopuzzle on 5/6/2014 7:26:00 PM (view original):
Posted by ettaexpress on 5/6/2014 7:18:00 PM (view original):
Posted by nachopuzzle on 5/6/2014 1:34:00 PM (view original):
I agree with TJ, and in a weird way I kinda agree with llama as well (although I do keep going back and forth on it in my mind). In real life, it doesn't always workout to where a man can guard the same guy on every single trip down the court or stay with him once he is on him...so it could be a problem if there wasn't any wiggle room whatsoever for the offensive team.
When doesn't this happen other than on a fast break or secondary? Teams can choose to switch on a screen, but that's not "he couldn't stay with him". If a guy can't stay on a man once he's on him, he's can either back off or get help after he's beaten. That doesn't change the matchup, though.
Okay, so you agree with me, it doesn't always workout to where a man can guard the same guy every single trip down the court, great.
This is a gross misrepresentation and you know it. It's pretty frickin obvious that if you're 3 on 2 that you're not matched up. But I guess you'd have to actually have some knowledge about basketball for that to be implicit and for it to evident that wouldn't be in a discussion on man to man defense.

That's fine, stay in denial and work to keep the game in the dark ages. You're only killing yourselves. 
5/6/2014 7:46 PM
Posted by ettaexpress on 5/6/2014 7:28:00 PM (view original):
Posted by gasparre on 5/6/2014 6:16:00 PM (view original):
Posted by ettaexpress on 5/6/2014 11:59:00 AM (view original):
Posted by wildcat98 on 5/6/2014 9:18:00 AM (view original):
Posted by nickguy08 on 5/5/2014 11:37:00 PM (view original):
Posted by llamanunts on 5/4/2014 7:03:00 PM (view original):
I know my method of recruiting is not the popular method, but it has worked. I think Nyack in the Knight world is probably the best example of my method.
If peaking at the #49 RPI and some first round NT exits is a supportive example of your method, you may have some reevaluating to do.
I think the general opinion is that maybe I am not putting much thought into recruiting, because I don't use the service.
I'm sure you're putting a lot of thought into it, but it's really inefficient.  If you want to be a winning coach you're going to have to use all the information you can get your hands on.  FSS is VITAL if you want to have any real success.  Two guys with identical starting numbers will often look wildly different from each other with FSS information.  You're a sacrificing huge huge huge amount by foregoing it.
I did ramble on this post. I should be sleeping.

Make it cost less and I will use it. The service costs too much when users are in a weak conference. The service is affordable a little bit more bigger conferences. That is my biggest issue. A successful school should benefit more from it regardless of the conference. Why share the "team" success with a conference full of sims. IRL D3 level public schools HAVE advantages when they are a conference of private schools that cost $30,000+ year to attend. You think Wichita St has an as small basketball budget as the rest of the conference ? I wouldn't think so. Why should I be at fault in that case too?

I don't disagree with the benefits. I said in an earlier post this past season I had $3,000 to spend on one recruit. As it turns out I spent 3/4 of it on a recruit that was undecided until about the last day. I woke up the recruit ended up signing with someone else. If I were to get into battles with the best "potential" from the FSS service, I wouldn't have any cash to get a decent player.


As for the # 49 RPI, yeah I see what you are saying. I try my best to schedule tough non-conference games, but I can't control the conference. Not using the service, took Nyack to the first NT EVER, when 5 previous coaches could not. (They probably used the service.) Just good coaching?

Am I at fault for wanting to turn a program around? Often times they are in the weakest conferences. I took a small chunk little of thunder away from the Felician dominance while I was there. I am sure that user used the service too.
I'd recommend ignoring almost everything posted by Ettaexpress regarding HD. He knows almost nothing about how the game works, and isn't particularly interested in changing that state of affairs.

I would also recommend taking the advice of the people who have told you that using the FSS service is your best avenue for recruiting. The information gleaned from knowing potentials is just invaluable.
Seriously? I'm more interested in changing the state of affairs with regard to the game than anyone. Most of you are happy with the same clunker of a non-sim that you've gotten used to because you can take advantage of it.
You have poor reading comprehension. "Changing that state of affairs" refers to your ignorance in regards to the game, not your desire to change the engine. 
Piling on, 15 yard penalty.

Shrug, sorry you all don't want a better game and wish to change *that* state of affairs. Smells like fear, Rabbit. You'd rather keep clunking along in your 83 Nova of a sim because that's what you're used to and what gives you the advantage, even though the sim would do better, sell better, attract new players better with a rebuild. 

I love how people try to criticize my reading or writing or communication like that's not every bit what the entrance exams for grad school tested. Dumb.
I love how you act like getting into grad school means you have accomplished more than anyone on these boards. Plenty of us have been to grad school as well. You read that wrong and addressed it incorrectly. It's simple fact-- that is what happened.

Also, at no point did I say I don't want improvements to the game. The whole point was that changing the state of the game engine wasn't even the topic of these posts. At no point did wildcat or myself address changing or not changing the engine, but you are thrusting that in there as if that is what we said. However, anyone can see that neither of us addressed that. You just read it wrong. 
5/6/2014 7:55 PM
Posted by ettaexpress on 5/6/2014 7:13:00 PM (view original):
Posted by nachopuzzle on 5/6/2014 12:51:00 PM (view original):
So, what does everybody think about the response to changing m2m? I think it would definitely be useful, but at the end of the day there is still enough wiggle room to game the system.
I think it's funny that you said what I had already said previously, yet everyone acted like it was something original when you said it.
Maybe if you didn't act like such a ***** all the time, people would pay more attention to what you write.
5/6/2014 8:00 PM
Posted by gasparre on 5/6/2014 7:46:00 PM (view original):
Posted by ettaexpress on 5/6/2014 7:28:00 PM (view original):
Posted by gasparre on 5/6/2014 6:16:00 PM (view original):
Posted by ettaexpress on 5/6/2014 11:59:00 AM (view original):
Posted by wildcat98 on 5/6/2014 9:18:00 AM (view original):
Posted by nickguy08 on 5/5/2014 11:37:00 PM (view original):
Posted by llamanunts on 5/4/2014 7:03:00 PM (view original):
I know my method of recruiting is not the popular method, but it has worked. I think Nyack in the Knight world is probably the best example of my method.
If peaking at the #49 RPI and some first round NT exits is a supportive example of your method, you may have some reevaluating to do.
I think the general opinion is that maybe I am not putting much thought into recruiting, because I don't use the service.
I'm sure you're putting a lot of thought into it, but it's really inefficient.  If you want to be a winning coach you're going to have to use all the information you can get your hands on.  FSS is VITAL if you want to have any real success.  Two guys with identical starting numbers will often look wildly different from each other with FSS information.  You're a sacrificing huge huge huge amount by foregoing it.
I did ramble on this post. I should be sleeping.

Make it cost less and I will use it. The service costs too much when users are in a weak conference. The service is affordable a little bit more bigger conferences. That is my biggest issue. A successful school should benefit more from it regardless of the conference. Why share the "team" success with a conference full of sims. IRL D3 level public schools HAVE advantages when they are a conference of private schools that cost $30,000+ year to attend. You think Wichita St has an as small basketball budget as the rest of the conference ? I wouldn't think so. Why should I be at fault in that case too?

I don't disagree with the benefits. I said in an earlier post this past season I had $3,000 to spend on one recruit. As it turns out I spent 3/4 of it on a recruit that was undecided until about the last day. I woke up the recruit ended up signing with someone else. If I were to get into battles with the best "potential" from the FSS service, I wouldn't have any cash to get a decent player.


As for the # 49 RPI, yeah I see what you are saying. I try my best to schedule tough non-conference games, but I can't control the conference. Not using the service, took Nyack to the first NT EVER, when 5 previous coaches could not. (They probably used the service.) Just good coaching?

Am I at fault for wanting to turn a program around? Often times they are in the weakest conferences. I took a small chunk little of thunder away from the Felician dominance while I was there. I am sure that user used the service too.
I'd recommend ignoring almost everything posted by Ettaexpress regarding HD. He knows almost nothing about how the game works, and isn't particularly interested in changing that state of affairs.

I would also recommend taking the advice of the people who have told you that using the FSS service is your best avenue for recruiting. The information gleaned from knowing potentials is just invaluable.
Seriously? I'm more interested in changing the state of affairs with regard to the game than anyone. Most of you are happy with the same clunker of a non-sim that you've gotten used to because you can take advantage of it.
You have poor reading comprehension. "Changing that state of affairs" refers to your ignorance in regards to the game, not your desire to change the engine. 
Piling on, 15 yard penalty.

Shrug, sorry you all don't want a better game and wish to change *that* state of affairs. Smells like fear, Rabbit. You'd rather keep clunking along in your 83 Nova of a sim because that's what you're used to and what gives you the advantage, even though the sim would do better, sell better, attract new players better with a rebuild. 

I love how people try to criticize my reading or writing or communication like that's not every bit what the entrance exams for grad school tested. Dumb.
I love how you act like getting into grad school means you have accomplished more than anyone on these boards. Plenty of us have been to grad school as well. You read that wrong and addressed it incorrectly. It's simple fact-- that is what happened.

Also, at no point did I say I don't want improvements to the game. The whole point was that changing the state of the game engine wasn't even the topic of these posts. At no point did wildcat or myself address changing or not changing the engine, but you are thrusting that in there as if that is what we said. However, anyone can see that neither of us addressed that. You just read it wrong. 
I didn't read anything wrong. I love how everything on this board is my friggin fault.

I addressed changing the engine because that's what I felt like addressing, because it needs changing, desperately. And even as some here seem desperate to hang onto the past, many here seem to realize it needs changing. 

I haven't acted at all like I've accomplished more than anyone else. I have however made the point that you have to demonstrate some significant ability to read, write, communicate, comprehend in order to do well on grad school entrance exams, and I did. So why don't we just can the horsecrap on that? 

I read nothing wrong. You see, the sim is not really very complicated. It's actually ridiculously uncomplicated, and that's part of its problem. At the same time though, the sim somehow manages to be clunky and opaque. Some say this is intentional; if so, it's probably the worst concept I've ever seen for a product. I suspect it would be to cover up the sim's obvious weaknesses in relation to real life. Finally, while being all of these things, it's also clunky, which is impressive. Trying to turn around a program is akin to turning around an aircraft carrier because of the deeply flawed IQ mess, primarily. 

What I don't understand about the sim, what I don't comprehend, is how in the world any of you actually defend the current system. It would be easier to list the things right with it than what's wrong. The things right is a shorter list. And yet most of you are proposing cosmetic changes or you don't want to make changes that need to be made because you don't want to actually have to realistically control and coach your team. You'll argue against a change just because there's a 1% exception that proves the rule. 

But it's obvious that seble isn't going to listen to me and is going to give you whiners what you want, which is some superficial changes to make you happy while not upsetting the little world you've created for yourselves too much. Too bad it's not anything like reality.
5/6/2014 8:01 PM
Posted by wildcat98 on 5/6/2014 7:55:00 PM (view original):
Posted by ettaexpress on 5/6/2014 7:13:00 PM (view original):
Posted by nachopuzzle on 5/6/2014 12:51:00 PM (view original):
So, what does everybody think about the response to changing m2m? I think it would definitely be useful, but at the end of the day there is still enough wiggle room to game the system.
I think it's funny that you said what I had already said previously, yet everyone acted like it was something original when you said it.
Maybe if you didn't act like such a ***** all the time, people would pay more attention to what you write.
And yet you're the one that goes around cursing at me and chasing me like you're some kind of lost puppy.

Do you think you're contributing with horsecrap like this? Do you think this is a valuable post? This is garbage, and apparently it's all you're capable of contributing.
5/6/2014 8:06 PM
Posted by wildcat98 on 5/6/2014 7:55:00 PM (view original):
Posted by ettaexpress on 5/6/2014 7:13:00 PM (view original):
Posted by nachopuzzle on 5/6/2014 12:51:00 PM (view original):
So, what does everybody think about the response to changing m2m? I think it would definitely be useful, but at the end of the day there is still enough wiggle room to game the system.
I think it's funny that you said what I had already said previously, yet everyone acted like it was something original when you said it.
Maybe if you didn't act like such a ***** all the time, people would pay more attention to what you write.
haha, thank god I took the time to scroll down and read, I was about to post a reply very similar to this.
of 18
All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > long overdue...User Polls

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.