Hi all-- I actually thought about this a couple times when I was the team that was going to lose the CT game-- I don't see where it ever says it is illegal to throw a game, but I think making that agreement with another user is what makes that illegal.  If the "other team" is sim controlled, even more ambiguity there but I do see situations where it might make sense to throw a game for seeding purposes or playing time for younger players, especially if you know your team doesn't have a chance to win it all.  I think we would all agree this happens in rl from time to time.
  Dahs-- I think your quotation actually supports my thoughts but I can tell there is an unwritten rule against throwing games at all-  would be interested to hear WIS stance on this. 

I'm pretty sure that quotation says explicitly that throwing a game to help another team make the postseason is specifically disallowed.  I don't see the ambiguity there at all.  It doesn't say you have to collude prior to throwing the game - it says that under the WIS Fair Play Guidelines definition of collusion, throwing a game to help another team make the tournament IS collusion and is not allowed.  Also, I don't think it happens in real life.  VERY occasionally you might see a team with no real postseason hopes or a guaranteed high seed play some younger guys to get them extra court time in a game it doesn't need, but you would NEVER see that in a conference tournament, and you'd never see a team throw a game to help another team in-conference make the tournament.  I can't remember a single occasion of seeing anything that even remotely approached that.  I also fail to see how throwing a game "for seeding purposes" would ever make sense.  Both IRL and in the game any loss hurts your seed, and the bracket is never known in advance.  It's not like in the NBA playoffs where maybe you lose a game and drop from the 5 seed to the 6th because you know the 3 seed is a team you feel is a better matchup for yours than the 4 seed.  You don't know who will be playing in what region, and outside of the 1s there is a lot of seed mobility up to the last games of the season (CT finals).  There is never any reason to lose a game to "help" with seeding, higher seed will always give you the best probability of facing the weakest team.

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

Posted by dahsdebater on 6/5/2012 7:53:00 PM (view original):
I'm pretty sure that quotation says explicitly that throwing a game to help another team make the postseason is specifically disallowed.  I don't see the ambiguity there at all.  It doesn't say you have to collude prior to throwing the game - it says that under the WIS Fair Play Guidelines definition of collusion, throwing a game to help another team make the tournament IS collusion and is not allowed.  Also, I don't think it happens in real life.  VERY occasionally you might see a team with no real postseason hopes or a guaranteed high seed play some younger guys to get them extra court time in a game it doesn't need, but you would NEVER see that in a conference tournament, and you'd never see a team throw a game to help another team in-conference make the tournament.  I can't remember a single occasion of seeing anything that even remotely approached that.  I also fail to see how throwing a game "for seeding purposes" would ever make sense.  Both IRL and in the game any loss hurts your seed, and the bracket is never known in advance.  It's not like in the NBA playoffs where maybe you lose a game and drop from the 5 seed to the 6th because you know the 3 seed is a team you feel is a better matchup for yours than the 4 seed.  You don't know who will be playing in what region, and outside of the 1s there is a lot of seed mobility up to the last games of the season (CT finals).  There is never any reason to lose a game to "help" with seeding, higher seed will always give you the best probability of facing the weakest team.

as we saw this past season Kentucky lost to Vandy in the SEC tournament.  Sure vandy was going to the tournament anyway, but they absolutely helped their seed and kentucky knew it wouldn't hurt them at all.  as we all know, they were the overall #1 seed and smoked everyone on their way to winning the title.  i doubt they "threw" the game, but i'm sure if they played like it was the NT, the result would have been different

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

Was it on Marvin Hile? What did you do wrong.

marvin hile?

I do think it happens in college basketball extremely rarely but I was thinking of the nba.  I think the rule states something about "with another player" so wouldn't an independent decision be not covered?  That was more my point and that sounds closer to the original question than collusion.  I want to be clear that I don't see myself doing that but it would be great to get clarification because extremely rarely, it might provide an advantage worth taking if legal.   

It says exactly what I posted.  That is the full text.  "Intentionally throwing a game to ensure another team improves its chances for a post-season bid," listed under examples of collusion.  Even if you do it by yourself it is implicit collusion.

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

The Fair Play Guidelines aren't there to protect you from yourself, they exist to protect everyone else from you.  You're paying to play, but you're ignoring that everyone else is paying to play as well.  By going 0-162 you're giving an unfair advantage to the other teams in your division in terms of grabbing the wildcard spot and earning higher playoff seeds.  Now if somebody in another division misses the wildcard by 1 or 2 games in spite of having ostensibly a better team than the 2nd best team in your division you've screwed that owner out of the opportunity to take his team to the playoffs, where he deserved to be on the merits of his own team.  This kind of thing is always a risk - some teams are always pretty bad - but intentionally building a team to lose throws off the competitive balance of the league and unfairly punishes owners for not being put in a division with you.  In a division-winners only playoff format it would be somewhat different, but you'd still be virtually guaranteeing the winner of your division the best shot at the #1 seed, and most good owners tend to build teams that win more consistently at home than on the road except perhaps in the more restrictive themes.  Similarly, in this game if you throw the conference championship game to get an extra conference team in you're taking a playoff berth away from some other at-large team, which more often than not is going to be a human-coached team.  Now you're screwing that first team out's owner out of an opportunity to play in the tournament - not to mention at least a couple of bucks in reward money.  That is absolutely not right.  You're paying to play, but not paying to take some of the fun out of the game for the other people who are also paying.  All of those people combined are paying a lot more than you.

Posted by dahsdebater on 6/5/2012 6:52:00 PM (view original):

Collusion includes any act that supports bad, deceitful or illegal behavior agreed upon by two or more users. Here are a few examples:

...

Intentionally throwing a game to ensure another team improves its chances for a post-season bid.

That seems pretty explicit to me...

If he's the only user, then there's wiggle room..if he's throwing a game to a sim ai it's not collusion according to that...sim ai isnt a user...had he never said anything he could have gotten away with this easily...some of u need to get off ur high horse

Again i gave u an "ingameable" solution, if u want this to happen 0% of the time with no possibility of collusion...eliminate the CTs...give the auto bid to the RS conf champ and problem solved...plus with this, u get the 64 most desrving teams in the nt EVERY SINGLE YEAR

Posted by colonels19 on 6/6/2012 12:18:00 AM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 6/5/2012 6:52:00 PM (view original):

Collusion includes any act that supports bad, deceitful or illegal behavior agreed upon by two or more users. Here are a few examples:

...

Intentionally throwing a game to ensure another team improves its chances for a post-season bid.

That seems pretty explicit to me...

If he's the only user, then there's wiggle room..if he's throwing a game to a sim ai it's not collusion according to that...sim ai isnt a user...had he never said anything he could have gotten away with this easily...some of u need to get off ur high horse

Seriously, are you this stupid?  Get your head out of your *** and read my post.  You're impressing YOUR interpretation of the word collusion (IE an explicit agreement, which incidentally would probably be part of my definition as well).  But this is very simple.  Let me interpret for you.  "Collusion is not allowed.  Here is an example of collusion: throwing a game."  I know the top part says "agreed upon by two or more users," but this is an unambiguous example of what would be considered collusive behavior.  I'm thinking they just tossed it in to avoid having to create another section that basically said "you can't throw any games."

Posted by colonels19 on 6/6/2012 12:24:00 AM (view original):
Again i gave u an "ingameable" solution, if u want this to happen 0% of the time with no possibility of collusion...eliminate the CTs...give the auto bid to the RS conf champ and problem solved...plus with this, u get the 64 most desrving teams in the nt EVERY SINGLE YEAR

I generally agree with this.  CTs are fun, but do let some undeserving teams in.  Does do the best job of mirroring real life, though.

Dahs, while I tend to agree with you that is *should* perhaps say what you think it says, the simple plain language of the TOS for Collusive Transactions requires the actions of two or more users.

If you're going to treat them as gospel, you should bind yourself to what they actually say and require, not what they probably *should* say if WhatIf took the time to draft them carefully.

Posted by zbrent716 on 6/6/2012 2:20:00 AM (view original):
Dahs, while I tend to agree with you that is *should* perhaps say what you think it says, the simple plain language of the TOS for Collusive Transactions requires the actions of two or more users.

If you're going to treat them as gospel, you should bind yourself to what they actually say and require, not what they probably *should* say if WhatIf took the time to draft them carefully.

you can't just make it black and white like that. the reality is WIS did not spend a few hundred thousand dollars and pay top lawyers to draft a serious legal contract. they are trying to outline the rules of the game as best they can on a very limited budget for the project. you have to keep that in mind while reading the rules, if you hope to do them justice.

i agree with dahs. its pretty obvious what the spirit of the law is here, so to speak. throwing a game to help another team is cheating, period. we should also take into account the reality of the situation, which is that seble has come out repeatedly to stand up for the "spirit of the law" of the fair play guidelines.