Posted by emy1013 on 6/6/2012 2:34:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gillispie1 on 6/6/2012 1:05:00 PM (view original):

Posted by emy1013 on 6/6/2012 3:26:00 AM (view original):
It's funny actually.  I got a sitemail a few weeks ago from a coach who has posted in this thread (not you Gill).  He referred to me as a douche in his opening line.  Now I see him in this thread actually supporting the idea of intentionally throwing a game (nope, not you either Colonels).  Even has the nerve, the gall, the audacity to try to play lawyer and find a loophole in the TOS so he can justify cheating by throwing a game.  And I'm a douche?  Damn, the irony........

emy, what is funny is that when you start to talk about a coach in this thread, who sitemailed you recently, calling you a douche in his opening line - you have to clarify which two of the forty or so coaches who posted, you ARENT referring too ;) i mean seriously emy, how many coaches out there sitemail you specifically to call you a douche?  (not actually serious, just comes across funny, at least to me)

Gill, you might have missed the part about the coach supporting the idea of throwing a CT game.  I threw the two names out there to let everyone else know that neither you or Colonels was that guy (and I know you are adamantly opposed to throwing a game on purpose).  I also put the two of you out there to let everyone else know that it wasn't either of you who would stoop so low.  Plus, I didn't want you to think that it was you that I was referring to in my post, especially since it took me about an hour to read that novel of a sitemail you sent me a few days ago.  No worries.  :^) 

Last, (and I'm putting this down here by itself for a reason), I know that sometimes you skim through the posts/threads very quickly and might miss a line or two along the way.

i wasn't disagreeing with anything you said. i read what you said about someone supporting the idea of throwing a CT game and completely agree with you.

i just thought your post was humorous, i didn't mean that post to be against you in any way, shape, or form. i know what you MEANT. but it reads a little different, at least thats how i read it the first time. im sure you weren't saying multiple coaches a week sitemail you to say you are a douche, but it came across that way to me :)

Posted by flashlantern on 6/6/2012 3:02:00 PM (view original):

Reading these posts, one thought kept coming to mind that was touched upon by Girt. I took over a team two seasons ago now that I had to rebuild. I have another id SuperSloth33, which has a team in Iba (Wisconsin, Eau Claire) that when I took it over also two seasons ago now, was in serious disrepair. I even posted on these boards, asking if I would win a game that season. I ended up going 2-26 I believe, so saved the goose egg.

Anyway, to get back to my point, it was suggested to me several times by several people, either in sitemails, or posted as responses to other forum topics I came across, that since I was taking my lumps anyway, it would be best to build up the freshman by starting them over more established upperclassmen... I believe some of you can see where I'm going with this. How can playing inferior players to build them up for future seasons, thus severely hampering your team's chances to win, not count as collusion?????????

By many of your own definitions, that falls under collusion.

Sorry, that's just really dumb.  There's a huge difference between throwing a tournament game which affects about a hundred other teams and playing your freshmen, still hoping to grab a few wins, and many more in the future.

A hundred teams?  Try maybe 4...the first 4 out would be the only ones missing out if a PI team made the NT...it only bumps those on the bubble...seeding is pretty random as is.

Posted by flashlantern on 6/6/2012 3:02:00 PM (view original):

Reading these posts, one thought kept coming to mind that was touched upon by Girt. I took over a team two seasons ago now that I had to rebuild. I have another id SuperSloth33, which has a team in Iba (Wisconsin, Eau Claire) that when I took it over also two seasons ago now, was in serious disrepair. I even posted on these boards, asking if I would win a game that season. I ended up going 2-26 I believe, so saved the goose egg.

Anyway, to get back to my point, it was suggested to me several times by several people, either in sitemails, or posted as responses to other forum topics I came across, that since I was taking my lumps anyway, it would be best to build up the freshman by starting them over more established upperclassmen... I believe some of you can see where I'm going with this. How can playing inferior players to build them up for future seasons, thus severely hampering your team's chances to win, not count as collusion?????????

By many of your own definitions, that falls under collusion.

i don't think this is true, although i recognize where you are coming from.

it is your right as a coach to do what is best for your team, in and of itself. it is not your right to sabotage your team or your game for the benefit of others, even if it indirectly helps you. i think that is what everyone in this thread is saying (in the don't throw the game camp, at least).

nobody is trying to imply you can't start a freshman to get him more playing time, even though it technically hurts your team that game. you are supposed to maximize your teams success, and it is your choice if you do that in the short term, or in the long term. otherwise, switching offenses would be cheating. switching defenses would be cheating. being a less than perfect coach who makes less than perfect lineup decisions would be cheating. but, nobody is trying to suggest ANY of those things are cheating.

all we are saying is, you are required to, in good faith, try to make your team successful. intentionally destroying your team or throwing games is not making the most of your team, in good faith. taking a lump now, to be better later, is.

to me, one of the most interesting examples of, is this cheating? is this - you have a team, you want to get them over the prestige hump. you are really worried about early entries. can you throw the first game of the NT, with the sole intention of maximizing your prestige? its not clear what is best for your team, but it is a reasonable and defensible position that it is best for your team to lose early in the NT. now, you might say, its best for your team to throw the CT title game to get more bonus money (although i strongly disagree). but through your actions, someone gets screwed, and that seems to be central to the decision that throwing the game is wrong. in the NT case, someone comes out ahead. now of course, anytime someone wins, others lose, indirectly. throw the game to a team, who now has better prestige, and they might win a battle over someone else.

i guess i personally have held back on throwing NT games early, even though i wanted to lose. however, i've had teams who could maybe have made a sweet 16, and just not given them my all. a lot of it is because at that time, i just didn't care about any of my teams who couldn't win a title, and never gave them my all (which is my right, i believe). however, with my d1 teams, it was partially because i knew if i had a lesser season, i had a better chance of keeping my players, and i already had all the pieces assembled to win a title the next season. so why do i care if i lose a partial prestige grade, with maybe 0, maybe 1-2 scholarships next season, when it means i am the front runner to win the NT the next season?

now, is that cheating? i mean obviously there are shades of grey. you can't tell someone its cheating if they just aren't into a team and that just happens to help them, it seems. but what if they would rather try, and don't, so their team has a mediocre season, so they can be more successful in the long run? 

My point, llamanunts, is that when everyone is saying collusion is "Black and White", there is some gray area... My point has merit, even if you can't see it. Losing games hurts everyone on your schedule who are trying to build their SOS and RPI and hurts your conference's prestige. It may not be as direct as the example stated to begin this all, but it's still there.

A. It is cheating and should not be tolerated

B
Original question was is it cheap? yeah.
My guess is the OP doesn't make the CT final to have to worry about it, two of those sims are as good as he is.

Posted by mizzou77 on 6/6/2012 4:30:00 PM (view original):
B
Original question was is it cheap? yeah.
My guess is the OP doesn't make the CT final to have to worry about it, two of those sims are as good as he is.

The sims almost beat me your right. Im afraid people will think I cheated now if I dont win my conference tourny but my team has had some good wins as well so dont hate on my team mizzou:).

Posted by yanks250125 on 6/6/2012 12:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by hughesjr on 6/6/2012 5:30:00 AM (view original):

Posted by yanks250125 on 6/5/2012 7:58:00 PM (view original):
i guess i'll get busted for restoring the eligibility of my redshirt guy because i knew i wasn't going to stay at that school in the following season?  Those fair play guidelines are stupid.  This is "WHAT IF" sports, not an organization that gets penalized for "cheating".  Remember we pay to play, not the other way around.  I several times went 0-162 in MLB sim leagues to see what would happen "if" a team tried to get perfect gamed every time.  I think its a travesty to a site like this to put limitations on teams that pay to play.  If i want to throw the CT game, I should be allowed to

Other people also pay to play ... they deserve that you not be a cheater.

what part of any of that is cheating?

All of it

First off EMY-  I have the sitemails so if you want everyone to see them, I'll post them on another thread-- something tells me you'll back off from this though and won't want those to be posted. 

My point would be that some people need to look up the word collusion before commenting.  Some of the comments are laughable and you'll see what I mean when you look up the word.

As I mentioned, it would be good to get clarity from WIS on the point because two players are not colluding if a single coach makes a decision that will benefit his team.  You (and I for that matter) may not like it, but calling that collusion is a bit ridiculous.  Like I said, if you don't think so, look up the word and then get back to me.  

I agree with whoever said this is a very minor issue but none of the quotes posted referencing the rules talk about what I am describing and if a coach independently decides to throw a game that cannot be collusion.  And yes, I am serious about that.

Anyways, I'll wait to hear back from EMY and then once he approves, go ahead and open up a new thread to give some insight and a great laugh. 

Posted by udm_mike on 6/6/2012 7:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by yanks250125 on 6/6/2012 12:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by hughesjr on 6/6/2012 5:30:00 AM (view original):

Posted by yanks250125 on 6/5/2012 7:58:00 PM (view original):
i guess i'll get busted for restoring the eligibility of my redshirt guy because i knew i wasn't going to stay at that school in the following season?  Those fair play guidelines are stupid.  This is "WHAT IF" sports, not an organization that gets penalized for "cheating".  Remember we pay to play, not the other way around.  I several times went 0-162 in MLB sim leagues to see what would happen "if" a team tried to get perfect gamed every time.  I think its a travesty to a site like this to put limitations on teams that pay to play.  If i want to throw the CT game, I should be allowed to

Other people also pay to play ... they deserve that you not be a cheater.

what part of any of that is cheating?

All of it

cheating by making my team worse?

Seeing the mass justification for being unethical here is. . . quite saddening.

Posted by arssanguinus on 6/6/2012 8:37:00 PM (view original):
Seeing the mass justification for being unethical here is. . . quite saddening.

Yes, yes it is.  Hope this isn't an accurate picture of our society as a whole.  If so, we're doomed.

we are doomed.........folks if you play not to win then why play?   I understand building a losing team by playing fresh and soph....jrs and srs would lose anyways....grin and bare and hope for best later...tha is different than the ORIGINAL thread of PURPOSELY  throwing games (Conf Champ game).

Sure you pay...so do others