Posted by cydrych on 4/29/2012 12:47:00 PM (view original):

Once upon a time, there was a coach at the top of his conference who convinced his conference mates that it was in their best interest to not fight each other (or him) for recruits. He reasoned that if they didn't waste money battling each other, they would have more money to win more battles with other conferences.  This, he went on, would make the teams in the conference stronger and they'd get more teams in the playoffs.  And with more teams in the playoffs, they'd all get more money.  Win-Win for everyone and they lived happily ever after.

He then went on to win the next 12+ conference championships and this unwritten rule became the first thing veterans taught newcomers.

Look, I understand why grindi and zed are annoyed, to an extent. It costs $135+ to scout a recruit's potential. STLs don't grow on trees so they might have to drop 100 scouting trips to find the 1 or 2 STLs nearby. Thats well over 10k they are spending just to find these guys and, at D2 and especially D3, that is not chump change. Then to feel like guys are using their targets as a list of who's who would just compound the frustration. Because the attacks come late, the boys have already spent a grand chunk of money finding these guys and securing their own targets so it makes defending these recruits very tough in the last cycles before signings begin.  I totally get their annoyance here.

But that's where my understanding ends.  Ultimately, they are spending too much money finding STLs and don't have enough money or time to defend them.  It was working for them when people weren't eyeing their lists but now it seems like a flawed strategy to me.  Sure, if they can convince everyone that sniping/poaching/trying to sign their targets is bad form, then maybe this strategy will continue to work for them.  Some people have already signed on to that line of thinking.  But hopefully, most people are not so gullible as we were in the early days.  Look down on the sniping, hate the poachers, do whatever you want.  The only mantra that matters is this: The recruit is not yours until the player signs.

I couldn't agree more, however the only difference I have is that I send out AC scouts not to check potential, but to use it as a cheap way to turn a recruit green. Bottom line is I don't snipe/poach (whatever u call it) and don't expect anybody else to - its called "coaching ethics". There is no need to stoop that low with the amount of recruits versus the number of coaches in any world.

Posted by grindi on 4/29/2012 3:03:00 PM (view original):
Took quote a few insults for me to say that.  Please keep things on subject. That was the message I tried to leave above.  But Llad I stand by the Birth Cerificate crack.  I don't for a minute believe he was born here nor do I think has been good for this country.  He gets my rating below Carter and was a good man but an awful President.  I think this guy got elected by Chicago politics. But now I am off topic. 

Plaese guys stay civil and stay on the topic.  If nobody has anything more to say o topic let the thread die.

I'm pretty sure he got elected because he won 365 electoral college votes and beat McCain by 10 million in the popular vote count. But that might just be the facts talking, not the crazy voices in your head that you generally rely upon for advice.

The only rule would be that the coach has to pick a team that has been a SIM for at least 5 seasons.  It would mean starting out t DIII.  Then after say 6 seasons move up to DII.  If we place a point value on our rankings at the end of the season we could actually have some sort of measure.

Let's make it 7 season (in case there are only 2 coaches we should use an odd number) and head to head in OOC instead of ranking (which can be easily manipulated). 

We set up a dummy account and every coach throws in a 10 pack.  When everyone has paid up, the account is given to a neutral caretaker who changes the password.  When the series is over, the caretaker gives the password to the winner and the winner can transfer all the seasons to his account.  We reup for D2 and repeat the process.

Posted by starfinder77 on 4/30/2012 7:56:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cydrych on 4/29/2012 12:47:00 PM (view original):

Once upon a time, there was a coach at the top of his conference who convinced his conference mates that it was in their best interest to not fight each other (or him) for recruits. He reasoned that if they didn't waste money battling each other, they would have more money to win more battles with other conferences.  This, he went on, would make the teams in the conference stronger and they'd get more teams in the playoffs.  And with more teams in the playoffs, they'd all get more money.  Win-Win for everyone and they lived happily ever after.

He then went on to win the next 12+ conference championships and this unwritten rule became the first thing veterans taught newcomers.

Look, I understand why grindi and zed are annoyed, to an extent. It costs $135+ to scout a recruit's potential. STLs don't grow on trees so they might have to drop 100 scouting trips to find the 1 or 2 STLs nearby. Thats well over 10k they are spending just to find these guys and, at D2 and especially D3, that is not chump change. Then to feel like guys are using their targets as a list of who's who would just compound the frustration. Because the attacks come late, the boys have already spent a grand chunk of money finding these guys and securing their own targets so it makes defending these recruits very tough in the last cycles before signings begin.  I totally get their annoyance here.

But that's where my understanding ends.  Ultimately, they are spending too much money finding STLs and don't have enough money or time to defend them.  It was working for them when people weren't eyeing their lists but now it seems like a flawed strategy to me.  Sure, if they can convince everyone that sniping/poaching/trying to sign their targets is bad form, then maybe this strategy will continue to work for them.  Some people have already signed on to that line of thinking.  But hopefully, most people are not so gullible as we were in the early days.  Look down on the sniping, hate the poachers, do whatever you want.  The only mantra that matters is this: The recruit is not yours until the player signs.

I couldn't agree more, however the only difference I have is that I send out AC scouts not to check potential, but to use it as a cheap way to turn a recruit green. Bottom line is I don't snipe/poach (whatever u call it) and don't expect anybody else to - its called "coaching ethics". There is no need to stoop that low with the amount of recruits versus the number of coaches in any world.

Glad you agree.  But I am not sure what you agree with.  If all you do is recruit using AC scouts, I'm pretty sure you are leaving your guys as vulnerable as Zed does.  And its that vulnerability that is getting him in trouble.  Maybe it hasn't affected your recruit classes yet, but someday it will and you're going to be very mad.  Further, if you never snipe/poach you are doing 3 things:  you are limiting yourself to the "first come, first serve" mentality, you are predictable, and you are not being particularly competitive.  And if you never expect anybody else to, then I recommend you banish any thoughts of working your way to D1A or D1AA.  Seriously, there is no way you will avoid those situations at the upper levels.

There are guys who have been conned into believing that there are unwritten rules, your "coaching ethics", in how one is to go about the business of recruiting.  But outside of the fair play guidelines set by WIS, which discourages intentional sabotage and bans collusion, there are no enforceable ethics in recruiting.  I won't say the game can't be fun for those who play within these "ethical boundaries," but I will say the game works just as well as in a cut-throat, competitive environment as well.  Its naive to expect everyone to play by flag football rules when everyone else is wearing helmets and shoulderpads.

This is a great topic to bring into the open! I've seen "whiners"  talk about this point and others who comically talk about it , but this may be one of the first times Ive see this topic brought up where there seems to be a mutual respect for each others point.

Just to add my 2 cents, I didn't know how to really recruit until I moved to a mid major.   Recruiting at this level is probably the most difficult because all the rules of "coaching ethics" and inner conference poaching were thrown out the door the second I took over my team.    At each level you adjust and adapt,  the good schools and coaches have plans A and B for recruiting Ive noticed.  
Like most points yall have mentioned,  you have to lean on your AC Scouting reports to target a few and most Mid majors dont even recruit until the 2 or 3rd cycle because we know who those scoopers, poachers and biatch's are !   In other words you have to know your competition better than they know you, I will scout on those frequent scoopers before I recruit to see who and what needs they need and account for that in my decision on how many players I will scout for one player and the distance I have to go.
I could be wrong , but I figure once I have an elite team the built in advantage will probably shift my strategy a bit , but I think regardless you have to know your competition.

Posted by cydrych on 4/30/2012 12:57:00 PM (view original):

Posted by starfinder77 on 4/30/2012 7:56:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cydrych on 4/29/2012 12:47:00 PM (view original):

Once upon a time, there was a coach at the top of his conference who convinced his conference mates that it was in their best interest to not fight each other (or him) for recruits. He reasoned that if they didn't waste money battling each other, they would have more money to win more battles with other conferences.  This, he went on, would make the teams in the conference stronger and they'd get more teams in the playoffs.  And with more teams in the playoffs, they'd all get more money.  Win-Win for everyone and they lived happily ever after.

He then went on to win the next 12+ conference championships and this unwritten rule became the first thing veterans taught newcomers.

Look, I understand why grindi and zed are annoyed, to an extent. It costs $135+ to scout a recruit's potential. STLs don't grow on trees so they might have to drop 100 scouting trips to find the 1 or 2 STLs nearby. Thats well over 10k they are spending just to find these guys and, at D2 and especially D3, that is not chump change. Then to feel like guys are using their targets as a list of who's who would just compound the frustration. Because the attacks come late, the boys have already spent a grand chunk of money finding these guys and securing their own targets so it makes defending these recruits very tough in the last cycles before signings begin.  I totally get their annoyance here.

But that's where my understanding ends.  Ultimately, they are spending too much money finding STLs and don't have enough money or time to defend them.  It was working for them when people weren't eyeing their lists but now it seems like a flawed strategy to me.  Sure, if they can convince everyone that sniping/poaching/trying to sign their targets is bad form, then maybe this strategy will continue to work for them.  Some people have already signed on to that line of thinking.  But hopefully, most people are not so gullible as we were in the early days.  Look down on the sniping, hate the poachers, do whatever you want.  The only mantra that matters is this: The recruit is not yours until the player signs.

I couldn't agree more, however the only difference I have is that I send out AC scouts not to check potential, but to use it as a cheap way to turn a recruit green. Bottom line is I don't snipe/poach (whatever u call it) and don't expect anybody else to - its called "coaching ethics". There is no need to stoop that low with the amount of recruits versus the number of coaches in any world.

Glad you agree.  But I am not sure what you agree with.  If all you do is recruit using AC scouts, I'm pretty sure you are leaving your guys as vulnerable as Zed does.  And its that vulnerability that is getting him in trouble.  Maybe it hasn't affected your recruit classes yet, but someday it will and you're going to be very mad.  Further, if you never snipe/poach you are doing 3 things:  you are limiting yourself to the "first come, first serve" mentality, you are predictable, and you are not being particularly competitive.  And if you never expect anybody else to, then I recommend you banish any thoughts of working your way to D1A or D1AA.  Seriously, there is no way you will avoid those situations at the upper levels.

There are guys who have been conned into believing that there are unwritten rules, your "coaching ethics", in how one is to go about the business of recruiting.  But outside of the fair play guidelines set by WIS, which discourages intentional sabotage and bans collusion, there are no enforceable ethics in recruiting.  I won't say the game can't be fun for those who play within these "ethical boundaries," but I will say the game works just as well as in a cut-throat, competitive environment as well.  Its naive to expect everyone to play by flag football rules when everyone else is wearing helmets and shoulderpads.

What I meant is that there are umpteen recruits that are virtually identical, so why **** another coach off when you can find one yourself that is undecided. Second I use AC scouts at the beginning, like everybody else does and it alone usually turns a few guys green, then I move on to more actions. If every world was filled up then I can understand the need for sniping/poaching. If a coach prepares for recruiting he/she will have plenty of recruits to choose from.

Got it.  Just remember that there are only "umpteen" recruits at D3.  As you start moving up the divisions, players become less and less fungible and, as a result, recruiting habits tend to change accordingly.  =)  Those that don't adapt tend to get butt-hurt.

I miss snake and jeff_kahleb - there was a time one or both would have hijacked this thread.  

Posted by vhoward415 on 4/30/2012 2:44:00 PM (view original):
I miss snake and jeff_kahleb - there was a time one or both would have hijacked this thread.  

and made it interesting.

jeff_kahleb left because he realized the bullying doesn't pay.

Posted by cydrych on 4/30/2012 1:55:00 PM (view original):
Got it.  Just remember that there are only "umpteen" recruits at D3.  As you start moving up the divisions, players become less and less fungible and, as a result, recruiting habits tend to change accordingly.  =)  Those that don't adapt tend to get butt-hurt.

I haven't coached higher than D2, so I have no idea what 1aa is like. Should try it someday

My favorite thing I have seen are the Div 1 coaches that "reach down" and grab every Div 1AA recruit in 300 miles early and then just wait to sign that last recruit until the bitter end, freezing out the 1AA coaches.

Posted by slid64er on 4/30/2012 11:04:00 AM (view original):
The only rule would be that the coach has to pick a team that has been a SIM for at least 5 seasons.  It would mean starting out t DIII.  Then after say 6 seasons move up to DII.  If we place a point value on our rankings at the end of the season we could actually have some sort of measure.

Let's make it 7 season (in case there are only 2 coaches we should use an odd number) and head to head in OOC instead of ranking (which can be easily manipulated). 

We set up a dummy account and every coach throws in a 10 pack.  When everyone has paid up, the account is given to a neutral caretaker who changes the password.  When the series is over, the caretaker gives the password to the winner and the winner can transfer all the seasons to his account.  We reup for D2 and repeat the process.

 

Love it, Reid. Are you planning on participating?

Hey Starfinder just a heads up. I have been in DIII Heisman for about 25
seasons and 12 seasons ago took a team in Wilky and began working up now my second DIAA season. In my opinion DII was by far the easiest to recruit and so far DIAA the hardest by far. Definitely less good players to choose from and different strategies than DlII where there are abundant similar players.

Those that think the types of players that win titles are everywhere will continue to be "poached" and continue never getting over the hump.  This same topic has been brought up since I started playing many years ago.  Does it **** me off, yes, BUT not because I was "sniped" but because I did not recruit better and have the funds to defend that player.  If you ever run across me in recruiting and I take a recruit you cash spammed to turn green then do me a favor and save the 2 brain cells you would waste to send a site mail.

And yes, snake and jeff would have brought some life to this whine fest.....