Posted by zorzii on 11/14/2017 8:46:00 PM (view original):
TheWiz cut a EE and IDave got him... It's time that kid is banned.

thecheater17 said he was quitting because the game affected his quality of life. I'm sure that's BS, the quitting part, but I guess we'll see.

Posted by possumfiend on 11/15/2017 8:46:00 AM (view original):
Wow. I'm constantly amazed by how prominently people display their lack of ethics and sportsmanship on these boards. My question to buddha is, assuming WIS doesn't step in and correct the situation by immediately removing the player from his roster, is now that he has obtained a player - one that never should have been available - through a glitch (one which he was well aware existed before this incident) is will he actually play the guy? My guess is he will because he stated earlier that the guy "sure would help". But that clearly isn't the right decision. Now being aware that the player never should have been available It would be completely unethical to continue exploiting the loophole he knew existed by playing the guy.

This is an idiotic post -- what did buddha do that was "unethical"? Even if he knew the guy was an EE (and per a post on page 1 of this thread, it doesn't look like he did before he signed him), what is buddha supposed to do, let someone else recruit and play the guy? It's not his fault the glitch exists, it had been brought to WIS' attention, and WIS (as usual) failed to clean up their own mess. Your quarrel is with WIS' crappy programming and failure to fix glitches that have been brought to their attention, and maybe with the user who cut the guy (although it appears he just wanted to see what would happen).

Per the rules of the game as currently set up, the guy was available to recruit. You're going to have to explain to me why buddha was wrong to do so.

So I'm guessing all these coaches who think I was being unethical would have a problem with any coach who would recruit any player that UCLA cuts if I raged quit and began cutting? From the signing perspective there is NO difference between that and this.

1. Didn't know ahead of time that the cut was going to occur with no contact between coaches.
2. Player appears recruitable to all coaches in the world which discover him.
3. Ends up with the team that wins him as per HD 3.0 system.

So again from the signee's perspective what occurred that *THEY* did which was unethical.

Notice no outrage @ steve for cutting him in the first place and only the signers of said talent (even poor idave who did the exact same thing as I but he may of known even more since this was out in the open and fresh by the time wiz cut his EE).

So you guys are cutting your EE's to prevent them from being drafted, and they reappear as HS seniors eligible to be recruited by everyone. Obviously, I see this as a defect. But how is this so "unethical"?

Can't D1 coaches identify HS talent that will become EE's? Wont this player just will fall back into the pool of many HS players that will eventually leave early?
Don't coaches get some sort of award for having a player drafted? So why would anyone continue to make a habit of this?

At this point Buddha has done nothing unethical (unless he knew the guy was an EE that someone had cut - I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt there). If he plays him, he crosses the line.

Posted by possumfiend on 11/15/2017 10:36:00 AM (view original):
At this point Buddha has done nothing unethical (unless he knew the guy was an EE that someone had cut - I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt there). If he plays him, he crosses the line.

Well consider the line crossed then.

I was going to let him languish on the bench but all this misguided questioning of who's to blame here is given fuel to the fire. I was beginning to feel complacent, the competitive fire dwindling but now I'm going out on a rampage... don't wake a sleepy bear else you get mauled.

Go put in your tickets and if WIS says to remove him off my roster at any point I'll accept that decision but at no point will I feel I did anything close to unethical to what some people think.

Then stop defending yourself by deflecting onto others. That full-on wizard territory.

Notice to Mike-

I find threads like THIS a lot of fun.

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/15/2017 10:51:00 AM (view original):
Then stop defending yourself by deflecting onto others. That full-on wizard territory.

Just ******* me off to no end being compared to what wiz did...

Guess being successful does breed contempt.

Look, you misinterpreted my initial post. I never said you (Buddha) acted unethically. You presumed that. But you obviously feel guilty because you keep trying to deflect blame onto others (I.e., Steve and oldresorter).

You go ahead and do whatever you need/want to do to win, that’s your call. But it does cross a line to play someone you now know NEVER should have been available to you or anyone else.

It’s like getting money from an ATM and the machine mistakenly spits out $100s instead of $20s. You’ve done nothing wrong by taking money out, but the minute you start spending the money as if it’s yours you’ve crossed the line.

I think it's fair for buddha to point out how people are picking and choosing which people are in the wrong here. Buddha is wrong for playing this guy but iDave isn't. Nor was the person who did it previously. thewiz is wrong but cutting the EE but Steve isn't.

As with other scandals around here, I'm fine passing it up to Seble and having him decide the appropriate correction.

But whatever. I'm happy with some entertaining reading regardless.

Posted by possumfiend on 11/15/2017 10:59:00 AM (view original):
Look, you misinterpreted my initial post. I never said you (Buddha) acted unethically. You presumed that. But you obviously feel guilty because you keep trying to deflect blame onto others (I.e., Steve and oldresorter).

You go ahead and do whatever you need/want to do to win, that’s your call. But it does cross a line to play someone you now know NEVER should have been available to you or anyone else.

It’s like getting money from an ATM and the machine mistakenly spits out $100s instead of $20s. You’ve done nothing wrong by taking money out, but the minute you start spending the money as if it’s yours you’ve crossed the line.

Why is buddha playing him wrong/unethical? He validly recruited the player, just like anyone else could have -- the player was available to anyone else in session 2. Why should he be forced to play with 11 players (or fewer) this season just because WIS can't get it together enough to fix a glitch?

BTW, your ATM analogy doesn't work -- if you try to withdraw $200 and the ATM gives you $1000, that extra $800 is not your money/property -- it's the bank's. The player here isn't anyone's "property" -- he's more akin to a $100 bill lying on the ground.

budda spent resources. I wouldn't blame him for playing the guy. Only he knows if he knowingly exploited a loophole.

IDave - whoever that is - would be wrong to do so too if the circumstances are the same. With respect to Steve and thewiz it depends on their intent. Thewiz, from what I’ve read seemed very well aware of all his actions. Steve contends he didn’t know about the glitch - only he knows the truth - and I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt.

I’m happy to leave it to seble as well, but we all know that WIS is notorious for not acting to correct issues in a timely fashion or doing so in a manner that only prevents it from happening in the future. They are loathe to take retroactive action.

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/15/2017 11:12:00 AM (view original):
budda spent resources. I wouldn't blame him for playing the guy. Only he knows if he knowingly exploited a loophole.

But even if he knowingly exploited a loophole (and he appears to deny knowledge that the guy was an EE on page 1 of this thread), I'm still not sure that buddha's wrong. The player is out there to be recruited by anyone -- and someone's going to recruit a 900+ rated transfer. Why should he let a competitor take him just because he knows the original coach cut him on purpose?