Posted by dan2044 on 12/9/2014 2:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bowen_brian on 12/9/2014 2:10:00 PM (view original):
I will give you an example where I would have issues. Coach A and B are in the same area with about the same prestige. Coach A recruits normally and paying for FSS. Coach B simply waits and targets coach A's players without ever using FSS. This gives him a monetary advantage over coach A. I know this is an extreme hypothetical ( a less advance version would be 'if he's good enough for Coach A he's good enough for me') but I would have a problem with it,

Everyone would agree that the coach in this situation is a jerk, and that's the nicest thing to say about him.  And we would all have no respect for someone who does that.  But the bottom line is, it's not against the rules, and there is no reason why it should be.  
Same would be true if a coach had a grudge against another coach and coach A decides his goal is to spend all his money trying to mess over coach B, even though it will mess him over as well.  Coach A is an idiot, but even that is not against any rules.

It seems to be pretty clearly against this rule: 

Specifically targeting another coach is prohibited. This includes, but is not limited to, focusing on recruits a particular coach is pursuing in order to steal them or force the coach to overspend.

 

That targeting another coach rule seems to be more of an anti-griefing rule than a rule that goes against the strategy bowen_brian posted.

For example it would apply to a A+ d1 prestige coach intentionally going after a D- prestige's recruits just to make him spend but not offering a scholarship.

I don't think it would apply if two coaches were in legit battles trying to sign a player.

the "forcing a coach to overspend" rule is too general. i know that if i am battling for a recruit, i will look for a weak link to target in the other coach's recruit list, forcing him to spend money on the other recruit that he would not otherwise have to so that he has less money to spend on the recruit i actually want.

I assume that the forcing a coach to overspend rule is about doing so outside of regular competition for a recruit.  It would be wrong to come after a guys recruits without being interested in recruiting them - mere vengeance etc.  Now, proving that may be hard, but for example - seasons ago someone "wronged" you, now you are way higher in prestige and you decide to spend modest effort on all his recruits to make it look like he is in lots of battles purely in order to hurt him.  Not fair play.

But, I'm competing with Coach A for player XYZ, he knocks me off XYZ but I hope to come back.  I see that player ABC is only barely considering Coach A.  I wouldn't mind having player ABC so I toss some effort that way.  Coach A spends more to lock ABC up and then I come back to XYZ.  Sincere competition.

If I recall correctly, the "going after a specific coach" rule was in direct response to an incident where a coach was specifically (and only) targeting another coach's recruits for multiple seasons consecutively.

Posted by sullytoo on 12/9/2014 2:50:00 PM (view original):
the "forcing a coach to overspend" rule is too general. i know that if i am battling for a recruit, i will look for a weak link to target in the other coach's recruit list, forcing him to spend money on the other recruit that he would not otherwise have to so that he has less money to spend on the recruit i actually want.

Unless you're an A+ BCS school with a pot full of money, that sounds very self-defeating to me.  You're doing more harm to your own recruiting than good.

As others have said, I agree none of the things you mentioned are "wrong". I'm about to say "but" here, and as always, there are exceptions and circumstance and context.

Generally speaking though,I think "poaching" a late recruit in your own conference is a bad move. As WIS is set up, you actually need your conference to be strong to get more recruiting money. You can't do it all on your own. Otherwise, the other conferences will always have more money. If you want the recruit move on him earlier and let the other coach decide what he's going to do. WIS has this strange dynamic of needing to better than your conference, but also needing them to be good. In a lot of cases, you are just weakening yourself by moving late on a conference mate.

Then I take my original comment back.  If it's against the rules, it's against the rules.  But it does seem like there is very little that is against the rules, and I have no problem with that.

Posted by bowen_brian on 12/9/2014 2:10:00 PM (view original):
I will give you an example where I would have issues. Coach A and B are in the same area with about the same prestige. Coach A recruits normally and paying for FSS. Coach B simply waits and targets coach A's players without ever using FSS. This gives him a monetary advantage over coach A. I know this is an extreme hypothetical ( a less advance version would be 'if he's good enough for Coach A he's good enough for me') but I would have a problem with it,

I'm quite certain that I've noticed examples of this several times in the past (some against me, but not all. Hard to prove though). In fact, many, many seasons ago, it was posted on one of the Coaches Corners of a conference I was in asking if anyone thought it was a viable recruiting strategy. I still remember the coaches name, but I won't post it publicly since he still coaches. Made me start watching him a lot closer and his recruiting patterns sure looked fishy on more than a handful of occasions.

Posted by sublightd on 12/9/2014 3:25:00 PM (view original):
As others have said, I agree none of the things you mentioned are "wrong". I'm about to say "but" here, and as always, there are exceptions and circumstance and context.

Generally speaking though,I think "poaching" a late recruit in your own conference is a bad move. As WIS is set up, you actually need your conference to be strong to get more recruiting money. You can't do it all on your own. Otherwise, the other conferences will always have more money. If you want the recruit move on him earlier and let the other coach decide what he's going to do. WIS has this strange dynamic of needing to better than your conference, but also needing them to be good. In a lot of cases, you are just weakening yourself by moving late on a conference mate.

This. This is "generally" why I try to avoid battling fellow conference coaches. Now if the player is a program changer then all bets are off, but usually there is a player that's at least comparable somewhere else. Usually.

Posted by ethan66 on 12/9/2014 3:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by sullytoo on 12/9/2014 2:50:00 PM (view original):
the "forcing a coach to overspend" rule is too general. i know that if i am battling for a recruit, i will look for a weak link to target in the other coach's recruit list, forcing him to spend money on the other recruit that he would not otherwise have to so that he has less money to spend on the recruit i actually want.

Unless you're an A+ BCS school with a pot full of money, that sounds very self-defeating to me.  You're doing more harm to your own recruiting than good.

Not neccessarily. In certain circumstances it can be a very viable strategy. I've used it myself here and there, but there are certainly risks involved. I wouldn't recommend it all the time, but it can definitely help win the occasional battle, even in D2.

Sorry, but those saying a coach targeting another coach's recruitsfor personal reasons is against the rules is a bit like having your cake ande eating it too. The same circumstances apply whether you are just going after a random coach's recruits or targeting a coach's recruits. I've never done either and had one or both done to me. I agree, at the time i was ticked, but neither circumstance crippled my team for seasons to come. I realize that at d3 there are luxuries involving similar players that other divisions don't have, but just my two cents.

You recruit for one reason and one reason only. To field the best possible team. Who you recruit, when you recruit, against whom you recruit: entirely up to you. Frankly, I think some coaches don't want to invest the effort into the strategies of recruiting. It would be a piece of cake if you just picked 4 guys at 6:01 and they were yours. It would also be BORING! How you handle battles, how you read situations, when you pull the trigger, when you throw in the towel and look for alternatives, that's what makes recruiting fun.

Posted by bowen_brian on 12/9/2014 2:10:00 PM (view original):
I will give you an example where I would have issues. Coach A and B are in the same area with about the same prestige. Coach A recruits normally and paying for FSS. Coach B simply waits and targets coach A's players without ever using FSS. This gives him a monetary advantage over coach A. I know this is an extreme hypothetical ( a less advance version would be 'if he's good enough for Coach A he's good enough for me') but I would have a problem with it,

This has happened to me before. Coach B was a conference mate and friend of mine who admitted to doing it. He also waited until the cycle before signings to make his move. It really got on my nerves, but I admit it's not against the rules. I considered throwing a $110 special at some guys with crappy potential the next year to mess with him (rescinding my offers before signing), but didn't actually go through with it.

Posted by rsvphr on 12/9/2014 6:49:00 PM (view original):
You recruit for one reason and one reason only. To field the best possible team. Who you recruit, when you recruit, against whom you recruit: entirely up to you. Frankly, I think some coaches don't want to invest the effort into the strategies of recruiting. It would be a piece of cake if you just picked 4 guys at 6:01 and they were yours. It would also be BORING! How you handle battles, how you read situations, when you pull the trigger, when you throw in the towel and look for alternatives, that's what makes recruiting fun.

1 million percent agree. That's why I check every cycle to see if someone is on one of my guys now and I have to fight back. It is so easy to look at a players in recruiting and convince yourself " I HAVE TO HAVE THAT GUY!" Which puts you on alert to protect them. It is also interesting when you get to pull players down. But overall, You have to earn your players.

I haven't always thought that the only thing that matters is that I get "that guy" but I do now. Although I have never and would never recruit against a conference mate. Just a personal preference.