Posted by gomiami1972 on 7/9/2018 12:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by kcsundevil on 7/9/2018 11:38:00 AM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 7/8/2018 6:40:00 PM (view original):
From the Fair Play Guidelines...

Cheating

All owners must play by the rules and requirements set forth by each game on our site. If an owner discovers a loophole, a way to cheat, or any other method of giving himself an unfair advantage, WhatIfSports reserves the right to take the necessary steps to correct the issue at any time without prior notification. Refunds or roster changes will not be given to any owner in this situation.

This could be argued as a loophole but it is definitely giving oneself an unfair advantage over all other DIII coaches that season.

But this isn't a loophole, it's a feature of two-stage recruiting.

The game is designed to let any coach who knows they're going to switch jobs get a head start on recruiting their new school. You can argue the wisdom of that, but not the fairness.

Anyone who has a beef here has it with WIS, not mjs.

We are debating the letter vs the spirit of the law. The Fair Play guideline doesn't spell out this specific scenario; no codified law can describe every possible permutation. You don't see it in writing, therefore you believe it is allowed. I see using a DI budget to recruit for a future DIII school as a method of creating an unfair advantage and is outside the intent of what the programmer had in mind.

Maybe when the Supreme Court has a ninth Justice, we can make our cases and let them decide.

Stop me if you've heard this one before

This issue was brought up when the 2 sessions idea was intially shared. They chose not to do anything about it.

I don't think even the spirit of the rules is violated here. The rules might be dumb, but they're the rules WIS is selling, so WIS can't punish people for playing by those rules.

And yes, Benis is right, beta testers knew the two phases thing was destined to be gamed. Most coaches are more subtle about how they deal with it, but I can't fault mjs for being aggressive.

Posted by Benis on 7/9/2018 12:57:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 7/9/2018 12:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by kcsundevil on 7/9/2018 11:38:00 AM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 7/8/2018 6:40:00 PM (view original):
From the Fair Play Guidelines...

Cheating

All owners must play by the rules and requirements set forth by each game on our site. If an owner discovers a loophole, a way to cheat, or any other method of giving himself an unfair advantage, WhatIfSports reserves the right to take the necessary steps to correct the issue at any time without prior notification. Refunds or roster changes will not be given to any owner in this situation.

This could be argued as a loophole but it is definitely giving oneself an unfair advantage over all other DIII coaches that season.

But this isn't a loophole, it's a feature of two-stage recruiting.

The game is designed to let any coach who knows they're going to switch jobs get a head start on recruiting their new school. You can argue the wisdom of that, but not the fairness.

Anyone who has a beef here has it with WIS, not mjs.

We are debating the letter vs the spirit of the law. The Fair Play guideline doesn't spell out this specific scenario; no codified law can describe every possible permutation. You don't see it in writing, therefore you believe it is allowed. I see using a DI budget to recruit for a future DIII school as a method of creating an unfair advantage and is outside the intent of what the programmer had in mind.

Maybe when the Supreme Court has a ninth Justice, we can make our cases and let them decide.

Stop me if you've heard this one before

This issue was brought up when the 2 sessions idea was intially shared. They chose not to do anything about it.

I was in BETA as well and have a different interpretation as to what happened. We'll need to agree to disagree. C'est la vie.

Posted by kcsundevil on 7/9/2018 1:41:00 PM (view original):
I don't think even the spirit of the rules is violated here. The rules might be dumb, but they're the rules WIS is selling, so WIS can't punish people for playing by those rules.

And yes, Benis is right, beta testers knew the two phases thing was destined to be gamed. Most coaches are more subtle about how they deal with it, but I can't fault mjs for being aggressive.

I do think the spirit was violated but I'll respect both yours and Benis' opinions. Let's drop it since there doesn't seem to be much movement in opinions here.

That's on WIS to define the "law", it's not for the coaches to decide on the "spirit of the law", because everyone is going to agree or disagree.

What is "unfair advantage"? Is there is a list somewhere? Define unfair. Is hanging off the Top 10 considering list, while having a scholarship offer on the table an unfair advantage?

Posted by Heyhowareya on 7/9/2018 4:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by thewizard17 on 7/9/2018 3:47:00 PM (view original):
That's on WIS to define the "law", it's not for the coaches to decide on the "spirit of the law", because everyone is going to agree or disagree.

What is "unfair advantage"? Is there is a list somewhere? Define unfair. Is hanging off the Top 10 considering list, while having a scholarship offer on the table an unfair advantage?

You would have something to say. Even after the last couple posters had agreed to drop it.

Another one of your accounts Spud?

Posted by gomiami1972 on 7/9/2018 3:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by kcsundevil on 7/9/2018 1:41:00 PM (view original):
I don't think even the spirit of the rules is violated here. The rules might be dumb, but they're the rules WIS is selling, so WIS can't punish people for playing by those rules.

And yes, Benis is right, beta testers knew the two phases thing was destined to be gamed. Most coaches are more subtle about how they deal with it, but I can't fault mjs for being aggressive.

I do think the spirit was violated but I'll respect both yours and Benis' opinions. Let's drop it since there doesn't seem to be much movement in opinions here.

For the record - I do agree with you gomiami. I think it is an unfair advantage.

But I also agree with kc about WIS needing to set up some clear rules. We did talk about the ability to do this throughout the development and nothing was really done.

I'll also add that I don't really expect anything to come from this from CS. I sent in a ticket about the new coach recruiting glitch and I was told that fixing it is not very high on the priority list. So there ya go. I do think at least they could call it out on the fairplay guidelines and say explicitly what isn't allowed.

Apologies if this was already mentioned, but to me this falls under the same umbrella where in 2.0 you could scout a bunch of states with your carryover budget, copy/paste the recruits into Excel, change teams and not need to FSS again. This was fairly common practice in the old system but given the way the game was set up there really wasn’t a way to prevent it.

Posted by Benis on 7/9/2018 7:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 7/9/2018 3:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by kcsundevil on 7/9/2018 1:41:00 PM (view original):
I don't think even the spirit of the rules is violated here. The rules might be dumb, but they're the rules WIS is selling, so WIS can't punish people for playing by those rules.

And yes, Benis is right, beta testers knew the two phases thing was destined to be gamed. Most coaches are more subtle about how they deal with it, but I can't fault mjs for being aggressive.

I do think the spirit was violated but I'll respect both yours and Benis' opinions. Let's drop it since there doesn't seem to be much movement in opinions here.

For the record - I do agree with you gomiami. I think it is an unfair advantage.

But I also agree with kc about WIS needing to set up some clear rules. We did talk about the ability to do this throughout the development and nothing was really done.

I'll also add that I don't really expect anything to come from this from CS. I sent in a ticket about the new coach recruiting glitch and I was told that fixing it is not very high on the priority list. So there ya go. I do think at least they could call it out on the fairplay guidelines and say explicitly what isn't allowed.

Cool. I think everyone has a valid point here. We all agree WIS is their own biggest problem.

Hey guys, catching up on this situation. This is certainly a gray area when applying fair play rules. In the end, the only advantage for the DIII team was having already scouted the player, but that advantage exists any time a coach changes jobs. I understand that the perception of a DI team pursuing a recruit might scare off other DIII teams.

It's tricky to apply a hard and fast rule to this type of scenario, because there are valid cases where a coach changes jobs and then recruits players he had recruited at the previous school. That's true of the game and in real life.

Posted by seble on 7/10/2018 12:11:00 PM (view original):
Hey guys, catching up on this situation. This is certainly a gray area when applying fair play rules. In the end, the only advantage for the DIII team was having already scouted the player, but that advantage exists any time a coach changes jobs. I understand that the perception of a DI team pursuing a recruit might scare off other DIII teams.

It's tricky to apply a hard and fast rule to this type of scenario, because there are valid cases where a coach changes jobs and then recruits players he had recruited at the previous school. That's true of the game and in real life.

Hey... seble in our argument thread. I love it

seble note makes sense -

I would just say that it would be help if the DI actions were taken in good faith - recruiing guys who were of interest to the DI team. If not, those efforts at DI were not fair play - recruiting someone with no interest in signing.

If done in good faith and then coach moves, I'm convinced thats just the way it goes.

Posted by thewizard17 on 7/9/2018 3:47:00 PM (view original):
That's on WIS to define the "law", it's not for the coaches to decide on the "spirit of the law", because everyone is going to agree or disagree.

What is "unfair advantage"? Is there is a list somewhere? Define unfair. Is hanging off the Top 10 considering list, while having a scholarship offer on the table an unfair advantage?

Lol thecheater17 swoops in to defend cheaters everywhere.

Posted by seble on 7/10/2018 12:11:00 PM (view original):
Hey guys, catching up on this situation. This is certainly a gray area when applying fair play rules. In the end, the only advantage for the DIII team was having already scouted the player, but that advantage exists any time a coach changes jobs. I understand that the perception of a DI team pursuing a recruit might scare off other DIII teams.

It's tricky to apply a hard and fast rule to this type of scenario, because there are valid cases where a coach changes jobs and then recruits players he had recruited at the previous school. That's true of the game and in real life.

LOL...you "understand" the perception of a D1 team pursuing a recruit might scare off other D3 teams" but then claim the only advantage for the D3 team was having already scouted the player. I'm not sure you understand what the word "understand" means.

Had the beta been used for something more than serving as a rubber stamping of whatever changes you wanted to make, maybe the area wouldn't be so gray or so broad. You had fair warning in beta that things like this were possible. You chose not to address it then in the rush to get the product out. "Faster" was a higher priority for you than "better," so any "tricky" position you find yourself in is the product of your own inattention to details in both product and policy wording.