and here is another
1) i really dont see a problem with it, its just for fun. i guess you could really use it to try to analyze something, but its just one game. i dont know, i see the conflict, and am fine going along with that as a rule - i just tend to think its not important enough to stop people from doing what they would naturally do for fun if you didnt restrict them.
2) my opinion on this is two fold. first, having been in the situation, while its kind of cool to play yourself, it also kind of sucks. i dont know about the rest of you, but id much rather have two teams in the final four and them NOT play each other, than play each other. to me, the possibility (and its happened to me a few times) of playing yourself in the NT is just one of those negatives you have to deal with (there are a lot of them, another point lost in this debate).
anyway, i totally agree you cannot pick the winner. my approach has always been to start with my generic setup, and then if there is super obvious **** you basically would have to do, to do it. i had two teams play once where it was clearly beneficial to one to play my normal +/- and tempo with both. so i decided i would go with the 1 minute game plan for both guys - capturing the really obvious important **** (like playing a +2 instead of a -1, it was something like that). i didnt want to get in the complexities of trying to fully game plan both without knowing both, but at the time if i played only my default, i felt id be favoring one team. i hadnt really thought of a system before getting in the situation, which always makes it more difficult.
fundamentally, it sucks in the first place, so im not too concerned about how people try to be fair about it, as long as they try to be fair. if you want to use your base settings, fine, just do it again next time. if you want to use the 1 minute game plan off the default setup, fine. just be consistent.
3) i dont think i agree with this one. in d1, when i had two teams, i would only scout a state on one team, and only scout national players from scouting areas. when i had d1/d3 teams in the same state, i definitely scouted the same **** all the time, but there is 0 overlap. basically, if my 2 teams overlap in recruits, i dont want to scout the same state, to be safe. but if they dont, who cares? overlap is somewhat subjective, but as long as people try to be reasonable, im not too worried about it. i dont consider a BCS d1 team to overlap with my a+ d2 team, but there could be a recruit here and there when i had for example, south carolina at a b-. i had UK right next door to SIUE (border of illinois and missouri) starting at a b-, and then generally at an a+ after building up. but that was before the new engine, back then, no overlap. today, maybe a tiny bit? i think when you try to get it right, there are often very, very small advantages and disadvantages for you (actually, more commonly the latter, it seems to me), and my philosophy on right and wrong is such that as long as you make a true reasonable effort to minimize it, its not a big deal. were not competing in the olympics here. anyway i would consider d2 teams overlapping, and low d1 and d2 teams overlapping. but thats just my opinion, i dont think in practice, its that big of a deal. i know of a guy (well, most of us do) with two d2 teams really close. im not even worried about him seeing the same guys - its a disadvantage overall - because he now has to split the guys he likes between both schools. that sucks. nobody can match your tastes more closely than yourself. i guess you dont battle yourself, but the average amount you battle another school in the area is pretty small, i think its a much bigger loss to have to decide which d2 team to recruit a guy with, than to avoid having those battles.
4) absolutely.
5) absolutely. it doesnt matter if you legitimately want to battle the same school on both schools. ive had that happen, just a price of having multiple teams. i actually try not to battle core rivals with another school either. i recently battled a pac10 school pretty far from USC in the pac10 (it was washington state), with south carolina, for an international - and didnt even think about it at the time. in retrospect, i was a bit concerned about it, hoping it couldnt be seen as using 1 team to affect a rival. i mean, in the eyes of that coach. i know sebles not going to say anything. my concern is always this - its a for fun game, and having 2 teams in the same world is basically fine until you ruin the fun of someone else. if that coach really felt slighted, i would feel pretty badly. but with it being an international and us not being direct rivals, i think its fine. i would be concerned about battling UCLA for a recruit with south carolina, assuming i was able to keep them... id probably do it, just because i know the coach is a reasonable guy and would realize there are just so few a+ prestige quality internationals, it was a likely coincidence and nothing more. but in general, i have concerns about doing it. i definitely would not battle a d2 rival with my d1 school or anything, i think having a huge upper hand makes it much more questionable. battling and a+ d1 school for an international when i am an a+ d1 school, thats one thing (although the more i think about it, i worry id know too much if i was watching them with the other school. if i knew they were weak from the other school nearby, i definitely wouldnt. if it was like last season where i paid no attention and had no damn clue what they were doing, that would be different - but i worry about what the other coach would think. in general, with the real coach of UCLA, i would probably not be as worried. but in general, its definitely something to stop and think about. im actually curious what people think about this one. i remember oldresorter convincing me once to drop my 2nd d1 team because i could use information from 1 team to benefit the other even if i didnt mean to - but further - even if i didnt, would that make the nearby coach uncomfortable? as long as they have a legitimate reason to be upset, thats enough to make it not OK, to me. its all about keeping the game fun. but then later on i paid so little attention to my teams, and only recruited in 360 miles, i figured it wasnt a big deal - but its still something im pretty torn about). anyway... dont want to go on about this one forever, but i really am curious what others think, was actually going to start a thread to get opinions after it happened, but i just never got around to it.
6) i dont know. this is one of the toughest one. national recruits are a lot easier. i prefer not to have two d1 schools at the same level, when i had UK and CSUN, i thought it was 100% ok, even when OR convinced me there was a problem. i kept them until they made the elite 8 with a decent shot of winning it all, and got up to a B+ or something. i thought the potential for overlap because significant and didnt want to make anyone in the area uncomfortable. i remember him using as an example, when emy had UCLA as a top team and was a major competitor with me for top spots in d1 tark each year, we had by far the 2 best teams one season when i won my 2nd at coloardo and played his outstanding UCLA squad in the final 4. anyway, OR was like, how does emy know you arent just building a team in california to knock him down a peg? now, being emy, im sure he would think that ;) just kidding, im pretty sure he wouldnt. but if i wasnt familiar with the coach, and ended up battling them a bunch, i would definitely worry they might think that and be made to feel uncomfortable.
anyway even when i had texas a&m and UK in the new engine and both were top teams in tark, briefly, i never had this happen, which is when i usually figure out my stance. a&m had so much going on in state, battling jj @ texas every single season (well, we were all in against each other probably 6 out of 8 seasons), i had no opportunity to find internationals :) i think its a small enough set of recruits, with usually about 3 guys being both someone you'd consider taking and someone you have a chance of getting. so, i never was too worried about it, but i have no good answer. i suppose an ideal solution would be to look at local recruits first with both teams, not glancing at internationals, and then based on team needs, open scholarships, etc, and local recruits, decide who gets to go after internationals. that is, if the teams are on the same level. even a b+ to a+ d1, there is almost no overlap.
7) i think so. someone raised this issue when i played stanford in the NT with south carolina after playing them twice in the pac10. today, i dont game plan in the regular season, maybe 3% of games get a 2 minute game plan, so it was a non issue there. back in the day when i game planned super hard on my 2 main teams, i definitely would not have wanted them at the same level for that reason. but i think you REALLY have to game plan. if you spend 2m game planning for an opponent and then play them on another team in the NT... do you really remember that much? do you really remember anything substantial enough to be useful? especially for game planning with a totally different team? i dont think its a big deal myself, but am curious what others think. in general, im OK with it, ESPECIALLY if your two teams are not on the same level that season (for example, if one is #5 and one is #25, thats far apart enough its useless. but if you have 2 of the top 5 teams, then it might be a concern. even if you have 2 #50 teams, i dont think it matters. but if it possibly materially affect who wins a championship, because both teams are championship contenders, and end up playing another championship contender on both, that could be an issue, i guess. still seems hard to really take advantage of the first situation, there is so much randomness in a game simulation).
8) i agree with this, in all cases.
9) i agree with this too, although if you are just messing around, its ok, i guess. if you are doing something like posting incorrect info and using alts to give it support, that is clearly not OK.
10) other items... i think you pretty much summed it up. obviously, the really explicit **** like, using one school to punish someone who poached you on another last season, thats not OK. but hopefully that goes without saying.