6/6/2014 1:54 PM
Posted by iamthetwo__2 on 6/6/2014 1:06:00 PM (view original):
I always thought they were "poke a dot", especially when they were stratigically placed.  
   You are Sooo Bad...........
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
6/6/2014 3:38 PM
D3 schools don't give football players scholarships either.  I do know a player that recently switched allegiances from one school's football program that recruited heavily to another school's that didn't recruit him hardly at all.  I would rate him as a four-star D3 player.  He just changed his mind and wanted to go to a different school.  Wouldn't that be fun if a green dot all of sudden when green to another school with that school doing anything?
6/6/2014 4:18 PM (edited)
Posted by dublinuf on 6/6/2014 3:16:00 PM (view original):
Posted by hogdaddy on 6/6/2014 1:41:00 PM (view original):
Posted by dachmann on 6/5/2014 5:04:00 AM (view original):
What other way is there to avoid a 3 day bidding war, that - as a low vision team - you are going to lose for sure?

It is not something I do for fun, but I do it when the situation calls for it. In general I don't want to go after many recruits who already are green for someone else, because that is not a winning play. I need to have a good reason to do that. But if during the initial cycles I fall flat on a lot of recruits at a position of need, or have to move down too far in order not to have a battle with a human,  then I will battle and this is one of my preferred tactics. I also try to keep a bit of money in my pocket to counter act if someone tries this the other way. I don't see a reason that there is something wrong with stealth. And to come in shortly before the signing deadline is a very effective way to avoid heavy battle costs. Either you win fast, or you lose fast, but you will not end up in a three day bidding war, where you will not know if you will end up winning or not. To me that is the worst thing to happen, as it binds a lot of my money, but will leave me with the necessity to keep money back for a plan b should I lose the bidding war. If you have a player you really don't want that to happen to... invest more in him than necessary just to turn him green. That makes almost certain that a swooper will understimate the cost of what it takes to turn the guy green, and you will have a chance to counter. I don't target particular coaches, but I do target particular players and situations. As I said it is a risky play, because it usually comes at a time when money is not abundant,  and this is more of a desperation play. But desperation has happened to me twice in the 4 seasons I played this game.


I don't see much of a problem with it. Had it happen to me too, before I started employing it myself. Got 3 players this way, lost two.
I actually did not even know this was supposed to be wrong until this thread. Would not have crossed my mind. I mean I don't consider a recruit mine, until he's signed, and signing deadline tends to be the time in recruiting that has me the most anxious and excited. I mean we are competing and there is no way we can all have the best recruits. And of course it does more than hurt the swoopee. It really does benefit the swooper (if done correctly and not with the primary goal to hurt the swoopee), and as I said, it avoids long and more expensive bidding wars, that will hurt both parties even more.

It's called recruiting not a draft simply for the reasons you point out.  It's entirely part of the game.  And YES it does happen in real life.  Very often a D-1 team swoops in and picks a recruit from a directional school without ever showing interest before.

Arkansas swooped in on a kid named Korliss Marshall from Arkansas State and he is now one of the best players on the team.
Which applies to when D1A teams do it to IAA teams but not anything to do with DII and DIII recruiting.

You guys keep going back to in real life, but in real life, you don't set fire to 4/5th of whatever money you don't use in recruiting.

No one is saying that it isn't allowed or that they own the recruits. It's still a strategy that involves trying to get a recruit you can't afford by using an arbitrary deadline to do it. It's still akin to hitting someone from behind so you don't have to fight them. Effective way to win a fight. Allowed in a street fight like recruiting.

In real life, if you don't use your whole budget for a project, you may well have to return some of that money, and your future budgets are unlikely to be as generous.

Most deadlines in real life are arbitrary. You set them because at some point something has to be done.

Your comparing a late recruiting steal to getting punched from behind is silly.
6/6/2014 10:17 PM
Posted by dublinuf on 6/6/2014 3:16:00 PM (view original):
Posted by hogdaddy on 6/6/2014 1:41:00 PM (view original):
Posted by dachmann on 6/5/2014 5:04:00 AM (view original):
What other way is there to avoid a 3 day bidding war, that - as a low vision team - you are going to lose for sure?

It is not something I do for fun, but I do it when the situation calls for it. In general I don't want to go after many recruits who already are green for someone else, because that is not a winning play. I need to have a good reason to do that. But if during the initial cycles I fall flat on a lot of recruits at a position of need, or have to move down too far in order not to have a battle with a human,  then I will battle and this is one of my preferred tactics. I also try to keep a bit of money in my pocket to counter act if someone tries this the other way. I don't see a reason that there is something wrong with stealth. And to come in shortly before the signing deadline is a very effective way to avoid heavy battle costs. Either you win fast, or you lose fast, but you will not end up in a three day bidding war, where you will not know if you will end up winning or not. To me that is the worst thing to happen, as it binds a lot of my money, but will leave me with the necessity to keep money back for a plan b should I lose the bidding war. If you have a player you really don't want that to happen to... invest more in him than necessary just to turn him green. That makes almost certain that a swooper will understimate the cost of what it takes to turn the guy green, and you will have a chance to counter. I don't target particular coaches, but I do target particular players and situations. As I said it is a risky play, because it usually comes at a time when money is not abundant,  and this is more of a desperation play. But desperation has happened to me twice in the 4 seasons I played this game.


I don't see much of a problem with it. Had it happen to me too, before I started employing it myself. Got 3 players this way, lost two.
I actually did not even know this was supposed to be wrong until this thread. Would not have crossed my mind. I mean I don't consider a recruit mine, until he's signed, and signing deadline tends to be the time in recruiting that has me the most anxious and excited. I mean we are competing and there is no way we can all have the best recruits. And of course it does more than hurt the swoopee. It really does benefit the swooper (if done correctly and not with the primary goal to hurt the swoopee), and as I said, it avoids long and more expensive bidding wars, that will hurt both parties even more.

It's called recruiting not a draft simply for the reasons you point out.  It's entirely part of the game.  And YES it does happen in real life.  Very often a D-1 team swoops in and picks a recruit from a directional school without ever showing interest before.

Arkansas swooped in on a kid named Korliss Marshall from Arkansas State and he is now one of the best players on the team.
Which applies to when D1A teams do it to IAA teams but not anything to do with DII and DIII recruiting.

You guys keep going back to in real life, but in real life, you don't set fire to 4/5th of whatever money you don't use in recruiting.

No one is saying that it isn't allowed or that they own the recruits. It's still a strategy that involves trying to get a recruit you can't afford by using an arbitrary deadline to do it. It's still akin to hitting someone from behind so you don't have to fight them. Effective way to win a fight. Allowed in a street fight like recruiting.

You've obviously never worked for a corporation. In the real world, you don't get to save the part of your budget you don't use. You don't even get to save 20%. Your corporation rolls the savings into the P&L statement at the end of the year, the stockholders gets a nice bonus, and you start over next year with an entirely new budget.
6/6/2014 10:23 PM
Yes, that is how big time college football works. If they don't spend it all, they lose it.
6/7/2014 12:08 PM
I've been trying to explain the "use it or lose it" concept to my wife for years.
6/7/2014 12:08 PM
Posted by dublinuf on 6/6/2014 10:23:00 PM (view original):
Yes, that is how big time college football works. If they don't spend it all, they lose it.
Actually, yes, it is.
6/7/2014 12:20 PM
Posted by scrodz on 6/7/2014 12:08:00 PM (view original):
Posted by dublinuf on 6/6/2014 10:23:00 PM (view original):
Yes, that is how big time college football works. If they don't spend it all, they lose it.
Actually, yes, it is.
It so isn't. You can be wrong all you want.

I won't speak for every school, but at the University of Florida recruiting is constant and nothing like GD.

It's not targeted money on each recruit, either. And they are already working on the next class before Signing Day and they turn right around into the next year after. Phone calls also don't cost money, and you can only have one campus visit per recruit.

The UAA (University Athletic Association) provides money for Florida, not the University system or the state of Florida. This is why Jimbo Fisher is the highest paid employee of the state of Florida. He makes less than Billy Donovan, but Donovan is not paid by the state of Florida.

Florida also doesn't have to spend only what Georgia spends per recruit perse, which brings another problem to your they actually lose it argument. In the system you are describing. the teams would get the same amount to spend every year regardless of scholarship.

This game is it's own system.

Which doesn't change the overarching point, whether you believe it is unethical, just really douchy or completely fine, it is still a long term bad strategy.



6/7/2014 7:32 PM
It's only wrong to those that think it's wrong.
        Aren't you as the head coach supposed to improve your team any way you can as long as you stay within the rules ?
        I rarely use it but I have done it. Had it happen to me more than I've done to others.
                What if you played poker with your  friends. You would never hurt them under ordinary circumstances. But you are out to take their money in a poker game in any way you can as long as you don't cheat them.
                     To think this is unethical is plain ridiculous.
               

6/7/2014 8:28 PM
It's not unethical. However if you use those tactics be prepared for the repercussions.
6/7/2014 8:38 PM
I got a recruit poached from me today in Stagg (on an alt ID). And, you know what I did? I moved on from that recruit. Decided not to recruit a QB as I had two (a Sr. and Jr.) and figured I could just get an Fr. next season. I lost track and got poached. Big deal. It's one of those things where you just need to move on and deal with it.
6/8/2014 6:59 PM
Posted by awags on 6/7/2014 8:28:00 PM (view original):
It's not unethical. However if you use those tactics be prepared for the repercussions.
+1

I have personally never done it, mainly because I don't want it done to me.
I have had coaches try and do it to me and they are successful less than 5% of the time. I always plan for it to be done to me --- that way I can smack down the punk coach when they try to do it to me.

I'm about 200 seasons in and I have never have taken on a SIM recruit and typically have top 10 classes. Recruiting is my favorite part of the game and I put a lot of thought into my strategy, which will vary by school.
6/8/2014 8:10 PM
Posted by dublinuf on 6/7/2014 12:20:00 PM (view original):
Posted by scrodz on 6/7/2014 12:08:00 PM (view original):
Posted by dublinuf on 6/6/2014 10:23:00 PM (view original):
Yes, that is how big time college football works. If they don't spend it all, they lose it.
Actually, yes, it is.
It so isn't. You can be wrong all you want.

I won't speak for every school, but at the University of Florida recruiting is constant and nothing like GD.

It's not targeted money on each recruit, either. And they are already working on the next class before Signing Day and they turn right around into the next year after. Phone calls also don't cost money, and you can only have one campus visit per recruit.

The UAA (University Athletic Association) provides money for Florida, not the University system or the state of Florida. This is why Jimbo Fisher is the highest paid employee of the state of Florida. He makes less than Billy Donovan, but Donovan is not paid by the state of Florida.

Florida also doesn't have to spend only what Georgia spends per recruit perse, which brings another problem to your they actually lose it argument. In the system you are describing. the teams would get the same amount to spend every year regardless of scholarship.

This game is it's own system.

Which doesn't change the overarching point, whether you believe it is unethical, just really douchy or completely fine, it is still a long term bad strategy.



You could not be more wrong. You could try, but you would not be successful.

As a public institution, the University of Florida publishes their annual budget: http://www.gatorzone.com/overview/files/operating_budgets/uaa_ob_es_2011-2012.pdf

You'll note that under Revenue (Exhibits A-C1) there is no entry for "Unspent Budget from the Previous Year".

6/8/2014 9:05 PM
Posted by scrodz on 6/8/2014 8:10:00 PM (view original):
Posted by dublinuf on 6/7/2014 12:20:00 PM (view original):
Posted by scrodz on 6/7/2014 12:08:00 PM (view original):
Posted by dublinuf on 6/6/2014 10:23:00 PM (view original):
Yes, that is how big time college football works. If they don't spend it all, they lose it.
Actually, yes, it is.
It so isn't. You can be wrong all you want.

I won't speak for every school, but at the University of Florida recruiting is constant and nothing like GD.

It's not targeted money on each recruit, either. And they are already working on the next class before Signing Day and they turn right around into the next year after. Phone calls also don't cost money, and you can only have one campus visit per recruit.

The UAA (University Athletic Association) provides money for Florida, not the University system or the state of Florida. This is why Jimbo Fisher is the highest paid employee of the state of Florida. He makes less than Billy Donovan, but Donovan is not paid by the state of Florida.

Florida also doesn't have to spend only what Georgia spends per recruit perse, which brings another problem to your they actually lose it argument. In the system you are describing. the teams would get the same amount to spend every year regardless of scholarship.

This game is it's own system.

Which doesn't change the overarching point, whether you believe it is unethical, just really douchy or completely fine, it is still a long term bad strategy.



You could not be more wrong. You could try, but you would not be successful.

As a public institution, the University of Florida publishes their annual budget: http://www.gatorzone.com/overview/files/operating_budgets/uaa_ob_es_2011-2012.pdf

You'll note that under Revenue (Exhibits A-C1) there is no entry for "Unspent Budget from the Previous Year".

And yet, I can read. As noted above, the University of Florida does not pay for football recruiting. The UAA, which is completely independent of the University of Florida, does. That said, the budget is from the UAA. The line you are looking for is:

Football Support
4,347,321 4,345,487 4,504,875

 

The first number is the budget, the second number is what they spent (saved 2k), the third number is what they were requesting the next year. Seems to have gone up by 150k. So, it is a complex scenario, but it seems the money is increasing.



of 5

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.