Let me add some more facts to the case that stine forgot to add to the equation:
1. UCLA and ORegon had been in TWO battles over TWO different kids. Oregon had 5 schollies to fill and an A- prestige. UCLA had 2 schollies/A+. Stanford 5 schollies /A. Illinois had 5 schollies/A+.
2. After the signings cycle last night at 7pm, Stanford and UCLA are still in the 2 battles over the 2 kids. UCLA, ORegon, and Illinoi are all ~1000 miles away from each of these 2 kids (one in Wyoming, one in Montana). At Illinois, I had signed just 1 kid at signings and was leading a battle with a SIM for another kid in Minnesota. This Minnesota kid and an elite guard in Michigan were the only realistic elite targets for my Illinois team, and Notre Dame was tight with the Michigan guard and I didn't want to battle for him and leave me exposed for my Minnesota kid, as I was 500+ miles away from him and I knew a lot of schools still had some deep pockets. All the surrounding states were very dry for elite talent, which is typically what I chase at Illinois, and actually this was the worst it's been while I've been at Illinois.
3. So signings come at 7pm last night, ORegon signs 3 of their 5 targets and is still in battles for 2 of his remaining targets. Again, both battles are with UCLA. At Illinois, I have $65k left to spend. 10pm comes, Oregon and UCLA still battling for the 2 kids. 1am comes, Oregon and UCLA still battling. Meanwhile, I've done nothing at Illinois but I've been watching these 2 battles closely all along. Why? Because every other battle I could potentially enter either doesn't involve elite talent I'm interested in or I'm at a severe distance disadvantage. Both of these kids Oregon and UCLA are battling are ~1000 miles away from them just like they are with me. So once the cycle ending at 1am following signings has passed, I make my move on one of the kids who's in Wyoming. I end up winning the kid at the cycle ending at 1pm today.
4. At Stanford, I had 3 kids ready to sign during the signing cycle (all within 30 miles of me) with no real challenge coming for them in my eyes. I had ~$65k left over at that point but was only going to have 3 guards, so I pursued a guard in Utah to give me 4 guards. I ended up overpaying for the kid in an extreme way as Memphis put up a good fight.
5. With Illinois, I didn't jump on the Wyoming kid until well after signings. If that battle had ended before I got involved, then I'm SOL for him and I'm extremely low on options. Stine, what you seem to be saying is that even if you came into Illinois and recruited a kid then I can't get involved because that would help my Stanford team. And here I travel 1000 miles to get a kid and somehow I'm cheating you?
6. Finish off your battles if you don't want to get challenged after signings...by me or anybody else. If you had been successful in your late poach attempt from UCLA on that Wyoming kid, then this wouldn't have been an issue. And since we all know your stance on multiple teams in the same world, and because you didn't finish off that battle sooner, there has to be somebody to blame I guess.
7. If I had chased after the Montana kid (the other one you and UCLA were battling for) with Stanford and the Wyoming kid with Illinois, then I'd agree with you and you'd have a legitimate case. But in this situation, I don't think you have much argument. I didn't target the Wyoming kid with Illinois because this was a chance to screw over 2 Pac-10 teams, I did it because I had a lot of cash left, the kid was equidistant to me as he was to you guys, I felt I could win him (b/c you were in 2 battles with UCLA, who had just 2 openings themselves) , and he was elite talent, which is all I target at Illinois.
Edit: Just to be clear, there was never any overlap or battle b/w Stanford and either UCLA or Oregon, so there was no way I could infer how their budgets were spent based on specific recruiting feedback.
6/30/2013 8:46 PM (edited)