For future use not this year as I have my money clearly going for the recruit I am battling for.

Is it wrong to message a team your battling a guy for if your clearly going to win out in the end? Where do people stand on this topic?

I am not complaining I am about certain I am going to get the guy I am battling for as the prestige is even but I have a huge advantage in distance, 220 miles to over 2000 miles.

Reason I ask is that at the current moment he would have had to have over 30,000 (won't say how high don't want to give away the number of HV I have done) just counter my home visits alone not to mention letters and scouting trips. I on the other hand have spent just a 1/3 of that and still have money in the bank. Is it just being nice to give them the heads up and save you both money? Or would it backfire and make them sink all their money in jeopardizing the rest of their recruiting class?

By the way this is D2 so $30,000+ at the D2 level for a C rated team is quite a bit to sink into one recruit. Although I assume its quite less and I am about to sign him in the next cycle or so.

i say, if you can do something similar in real life and not get hit with a rules violation, go for it

there are many huge threads. My opinion is that if you alter someone else's recruiting efforts by contacting them during recruiting, you've done something wrong. If you will eventually win the fight, perhaps the money you spend would cause you to lose a different fight that someone launched against you late - a legal tactic...or, maybe the guy takes the money he was going to use fighting you and comes and fights me. I wouldn't appreciate that...

http://wisjournal.com/forums/threads.asp?ForumID=30&TopicID=402495&PagePosition=13

It is considered collusion by WIS which is against the Fair Play Guidelines.

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

Ya it does make sense in a way. Only time I can see extra leeway if they have it as against the rules is in D3 when someone who is brand new is recruiting the first season or two, but it does make sense.

I remember when the thread broke that zhawks posted. I must say that, that thread showed someone posting for a guy to recruit other guys and listed them, where as I was just talking about who not to recruit although I understand both are wrong.

I understand the small differences there, but that is what his message started out as "Hey you can't win..."

I have had it happen many times, coaches start to battle me with 0% chance to win. I always find it odd when this happens, I am not going to back down and they have no chance to win, yet they will drop good sums of money on said recruit.

But in sending a message saying "Hey dude you can't win" - you do benefit yourself as well as the other coach.

better to avoid it - can be viewed as collusion - and some folks get really annoyed

Quote: Originally posted by jetwildcat on 1/19/2010i say, if you can do something similar in real life and not get hit with a rules violation, go for it

So we can share FSS information with our conference mates? Nice!

If you did it on the conference boards (where everybody can see) - saying something to the effect of "I don't like your chances buddy - just fyi) - it can be seen as gamesmanship, and is ok.

Obvious there is a major issue here. Everyone has their own interpretation of what "fair play" is. Unless it's clearly stated in the rules, everything is open for debate. So technically, there is no right or wrong answer.

Quote: Originally Posted By thewizard2 on 1/19/2010
Obvious there is a major issue here. Everyone has their own interpretation of what "fair play" is. Unless it's clearly stated in the rules, everything is open for debate. So technically, there is no right or wrong answer.

Wrong, it has been stated by WIS that this (ie what this thread is asking) is against the rules.

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

Here is the point I'm trying to make. If the old Admin was still in charge his rules of "fair play" would take precedence. The issue is seble's fair play rules may be different than what the old Admin's idea of fair play is.

Since there is no clear defined list anywhere on the site of what fair play is, everything is open for interpretation.

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