As the author of the Free FSS, I'll explain my rationale (and it has nothing to do with the cheating that goes on). First, the game was played for many seasons without FSS and potential. In my opinion, when FSS was introduced, the costs associated with it didn't connect to other recruiting initiatives like CV, Evals and HVs. For those liking the idea of FSS costing something, had FSS costs been introduced based on miles and not states, I'm quite certain you'd feel no different. The point is, there is a disconnect between FSS costs and other costs.
Second, at DI, FSS has turned recruiting into more local recruiting. That means those teams with more sims and lower prestige schools around them benefit even more than they did before. It also means that remote teams whose peer group are other Big 6 schools, are even more handicapped than before. In DII and DIII with dropdowns, it may not be as localized for high prestige teams, but those teams can easily FSS one distant state for one particular dropdown recruit after signings start for a discounted price.
Third, and this point plays in the delicate realm of what occurs in real life and what is best for HD and that just because something occurs in real life doesn't mean it's best for HD. To that point, I think that HD outcomes should be similar to real life, not necessarily the means to that end. IRL, there is no way that every coach knows objectively how good players are to begin with (initial ratings). IRL, however, it is most certainly common knowledge thru scout.com or rivals or the many other scouting services that players have pros and cons and where they currently stand. And the costs for these services are virtually inconsequential. There are limits on HVs and CVs and the costs for each of those items is based 100% on distance. In HD it is these costs that are most significant. Since there are limits IRL, costs for HVs and CVs are again, not real critical. So what is the best way to get to the desirable end? That is the question. IRL, since there are limits, early recruiting efforts, prestige and a kid's preference are the main decision points. Do I dare say that gifts help too. It works...well, like real life since it is real life. With Early Entries mixed in, there is pretty good balance in college basketball. I've toyed with suggesting similar limits with having the same initiatives drive recruiting and I think it could work well. IRL there is more of a shotgun approach with teams considering 20 kids perhaps. And again it's public knowledge who has offered a scholly, etc. Again, I think it could work very well to mirror real life, especially if things like preference, prestige and early effort are rewarded.
Fourth, and this may be the most important. Many of you are suggesting that it's an actual strategic decision to use FSS. What's strategic about it? The states to FSS? Whether or not to use it? 99.9% think FSS is critical so the decision isn't about whether to use it. It's how to use it. And we already know that it's primarily a local and/or regional function. So again, what is the decision? See point one on the disconnect of FSS costs. If you were to ask me, strategy shouldn't be as much about whether to use FSS or not. It would be to decide whether to recruit a 560 kid with average potential or a 520 kid with high potential so-to speak. Prior to FSS the strategy was not about how to filter recruits (although there was an uproar when filters were introduced and many thought that the strategy of clicking a bunch of buttons was being taken away from them). The strategy was whether to take a 600 kid with high REB and LP or a 600 kid with high Speed, and LP, etc. Now with the addition of LP for guards there are still plenty of strategic decisions that we coaches can make--even more than before. So again, it's not about whether to use strategy of purchasing FSS. It's who you should target. As it is, since FSS is used by nearly all and most stay within a certain range to use it, it sounds like the strategy isn't really about spending money on FSS at all. It sounds like the strategy is finding the right school that can make FSS more advantageous and I don't think--in fact I know that that is not the intent of HD.
Fifth, the info on FSS is basically weak. Am I to understand that I need to spend money to FSS a kid who loves my school and who has attended all games since he was in 4th grade and whose dad is on the faculty? Really? I wouldn't know that we were his favorite without FSS?
Last and this deals with the cheating aspect. Eliminated would be the temptation of using FSS in a way that was unintended. And we know that will go on and on.
I don't think that freeing FSS will make the game more simple, if anything would make it more complex I'd think. Coaches would have more data to look thru and would need to strategically prioritize targets from a bigger pool. I also think that most want to compete, not just here for a fun challenge. I think we all want an equal and legit shot at success and to be given apples to apples opportunities. That is different than RL. I think IRL there are plenty of coaches who coach because they love it and as a reward they are able to put food on the table. IRL at the high DI, there are huge pressures. In HD there is no stress for anyone.