Quote: Originally Posted By oldave on 12/14/2009hmmm, kel, not sure how that first email doesnt break this rule:

# Making agreements with other users to go or not go after specific players with the intent of avoiding recruiting/negotiation battles.

Right, but ole d what kelb is saying is that no agreement was made, that a point was made that "I have x dollars I will spend on him , which is more then you have" and I agree no direct agreement was made, he just said "You can't win".

Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 12/14/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By kelby_03 on 12/14/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 12/14/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By kelby_03 on 12/14/2009

I don't have a problem with the 1st sitemail. They used to happen all the time (and still do from time to time) and I personally always enjoyed them and thought they made the game more interesting. They sure as hell made recruiting more fun. Usually nothing gets settled in these sitemails but they start some fun banter and create rivalries. Suggesting other recruits he should go after instead wasn't a great idea even if his intentions were good.






I agree with you Kelby, but they are against the rules and those rules aren't really ours to make...

i don't think the 1st sitemail was against any rules. Some coaches refuse to talk during recruiting but that's up to them. Unless you're actually dividing up recruits or making plans to attack another coaches recruits together or something actually shady then i don't have a problem with it. If you can send a sitemail to a coach and actually talk him into backing off a recruit (without giving him a recruit in return) then more power to you.

I can agree with you there - but then if tracyr decided to drop off the kid how is that not... something? Both parties saved themselves money via a private sitemail. So they aren't directly saying who else's recruits they are going to target with that money but they are saying who it won't be (each other)

that something would be common sense, being smart, trying to actually land someone. Even if it takes a sitemail to make a person realize it that doesn't make it some evil agreement.

Heck, tracy could of told him he was going to back off just so the other guy would go ahead and spend money elsewhere. I've done that before, lol. There are a billion possibilities and you aren't being actually agreeing to give each other anything. That makes recruiting more fun.

Comming soon "The Suggestion" a major motion picture from Fox studios.

The tag line: "Was it an offer of help or merely a clever ruse."

Directed by Peter Schonau (The Art of Crying)

Featuring an all-star cast including:

Nicholas Cage as yschwartz/tracyr

Tom Hanks as Johnner26

Russell Crowe as coach_billyg/gillispie

Sam Rockwell as oldave

Also staring Mishon, LL Cool J, Steve Zahn, Beatrice Rosen, Beyonce, and a special apperance by Paul Mooney.

Quote: Originally Posted By oldave on 12/14/2009hmmm, kel, not sure how that first email doesnt break this rule:

# Making agreements with other users to go or not go after specific players with the intent of avoiding recruiting/negotiation battles.

I define that as dividing up recruits before recruiting even begins. That used to happen far too often and needed to be stopped.

okay, one last thing, and i know this is beating a dead horse, but i have actually changed my opinion a bit on one thing.

i had not looked at the sitemails since i first read them until just now. after re-reading the first sitemail.... and lets put the issue of whether it was breaking the rules aside for now... but, john, is there any way that you could think that email does not **** off the recipient? maybe its just me, maybe im over-sensitive. But if i had gottten an email like that, i think i would be MORE inclined to battle you for the player.

Its one of those things where the words you are saying are all nice and stuff... but wow, the way it comes across. maybe its just me. but, like i say, if it is legal, it may still not be a good tactic unless one can figure out a way to say it without ******* off the other coach.

I'll be interested to hear the Seble's response.

Quote: Originally Posted By kelby_03 on 12/14/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 12/14/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By kelby_03 on 12/14/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 12/14/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By kelby_03 on 12/14/2009

I don't have a problem with the 1st sitemail. They used to happen all the time (and still do from time to time) and I personally always enjoyed them and thought they made the game more interesting. They sure as hell made recruiting more fun. Usually nothing gets settled in these sitemails but they start some fun banter and create rivalries. Suggesting other recruits he should go after instead wasn't a great idea even if his intentions were good.






I agree with you Kelby, but they are against the rules and those rules aren't really ours to make...

i don't think the 1st sitemail was against any rules. Some coaches refuse to talk during recruiting but that's up to them. Unless you're actually dividing up recruits or making plans to attack another coaches recruits together or something actually shady then i don't have a problem with it. If you can send a sitemail to a coach and actually talk him into backing off a recruit (without giving him a recruit in return) then more power to you.

I can agree with you there - but then if tracyr decided to drop off the kid how is that not... something? Both parties saved themselves money via a private sitemail. So they aren't directly saying who else's recruits they are going to target with that money but they are saying who it won't be (each other).

that something would be common sense, being smart, trying to actually land someone. Even if it takes a sitemail to make a person realize it that doesn't make it some evil agreement.

Heck, tracy could of told him he was going to back off just so the other guy would go ahead and spend money elsewhere. I've done that before, lol. There are a billion possibilities and you aren't being actually agreeing to give each other anything. That makes recruiting more fun.

Yeah I agree with you there and have had numerous sitemails of these myself, I usually don't respond privetly to them but absoultely agree that they can add to recruiting.

I guess this is where seble gets to make his judgement on what he considers collusion?

Quote: Originally Posted By oldave on 12/14/2009okay, one last thing, and i know this is beating a dead horse, but i have actually changed my opinion a bit on one thing.

i had not looked at the sitemails since i first read them until just now. after re-reading the first sitemail.... and lets put the issue of whether it was breaking the rules aside for now... but, john, is there any way that you could think that email does not **** off the recipient? maybe its just me, maybe im over-sensitive. But if i had gottten an email like that, i think i would be MORE inclined to battle you for the player.

Its one of those things where the words you are saying are all nice and stuff... but wow, the way it comes across. maybe its just me. but, like i say, if it is legal, it may still not be a good tactic unless one can figure out a way to say it without ******* off the other coach.

I'll be interested to hear the Seble's response

I agree. Everytime I have gotten a "Player x is my top target" email I never lose the player... lol

I think johnjohn should be stripped of his recruits. He also seems like he could use a little meditation in his life. Drop by the Staples Center some time and I'll give you some free tips while you polish my championship rings.

ugh, i dunno, Sam Rockwell? i was thinking more along the lines of Denzel Washington.

Quote: Originally Posted By Weena on 12/14/2009
Comming soon "The Suggestion" a major motion picture from Fox studios.

The tag line: "Was it an offer of help or merely a clever ruse."

Directed by Peter Schonau (The Art of Crying)

Featuring an all-star cast including:

Nicholas Cage as yschwartz/tracyr

Tom Hanks as Johnner26

Russell Crowe as coach_billyg/gillispie

Sam Rockwell as oldave

Also staring Mishon, LL Cool J, Steve Zahn, Beatrice Rosen, Beyonce, and a special apperance by Paul Mooney.

I'd go see it

but, i guess it could be worse.

On another note...this forum post may have set a record for the amount of time it's taken to hit 5 pages. Doesn't anyone work anymore?

what?.....oh sorry sir.....right away sir......

Sorry guys got to go!

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

Quote: Originally Posted By johnner26 on 12/14/2009
You know I happen to have been on the short end of the stick in recruiting and I thought I was helping the guy out. Clearly Schwartz has problems with how that went down. There was no collusion--just some feedback from what I would do if I were him. I don't control any of the teams I made comments on and if I had to do it all over again (and if Schwartz wasn't such a DB)--I would.

Honestly if anyone has a problem with what I did--they can man up and we can talk about it. Or they can throw it up on the board like Oregon did and wait for a lynch mob to come and help out.

Regardless, check the rules--I didn't do anything that I wouldn't be comfortable doing again. When I start to actually collude with other coaches then feel free to pull out your pichforks.

In the end--Oregon loses big time, screws up his season and then tries to throw me under the bus for attempting to help him out...whatever. Lesson learned. Enjoy your season Schwartz!

FAIR PLAY VIOLATOR.

seriously, he should be sanctioned by wis.

whaaa? I just noticed:
Cage, Hanks, Crowe... and I get Rockwell???!