Posted by ll316 on 8/26/2013 7:50:00 AM (view original):

Posted by colonels19 on 8/25/2013 12:22:00 PM (view original):
Moreover, the guy talking **** has an A- prestige and the guy in my conf has a C-...insecure much?  You want to talk about a *****, a guy 2 full letter grades above a first year coach at a school, trying to get him to stop recruiting "his guy"...

Why do you take these things so personally?  Taking a pretty big leap from a post in a CC to mean the coach is "insecure".  Now that I think about it, you do an awful lot of peacocking...insecure much, colonels?

Did you ever figure that guys like you might be my favorite HD mini-game?

This isn't a big deal if the message was sent in a site mail, but it's wrong posting it so everyone in the conference to see.

I actually disagree, I think it's a bigger deal if it's done over sitemail, simply because it really seems like collusion in that case. 

Yeah, but no one knows about it unless either guy squeals.

Yeah, I'd say that any sitemailing of other coaches about anything to do with recruiting, while recruiting is still active (unless both coaches involved have already filled their scholarships) is just not worth the risk at this point.

Like someone before said, there should be no talk until the guy in question has been signed and/or recruiting is over.

Again, colonels you are just stating you're opinion, and not giving any reason as to why that should be the case. 

Because these ominous Dr. Claw warnings are unnecessary...you guys always ***** about the lack of participation in HD, and this would drive newer players away when veteran players tell them that they won't win/get X, Y, or Z.  Why not let the process/signings speak for themselves and hold your congratulations/**** yous for afterwards?  Talk is cheap, and I posted this because I could have sworn there were threads in the past where people were up in arms about this kind of thing.

LOFL!  You really are dumb aren't you...you think that I would start a thread in attempt to get people on my side....LOFL!  Go back and look at all the other threads I've created, I'm basically fighting my own battle just as I am here.  If you doubt the genuine quality of this thread, go look at what I posted on the Mid-America conference board BEFORE I started this thread.

Posted by ike1024 on 8/25/2013 11:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by girt25 on 8/25/2013 10:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by fd343ny on 8/25/2013 5:43:00 PM (view original):
now and then one sees postings in the coaches corner where someone will - right before recruiting - post something like "i'm going all in on that PF who lives right near campus" - allowed or now allowed?  A statement of recruiting plans runs into many of the same issues discussed above.

And yet, despite my comments above, that strikes me as not being OK.

gillispie is right -- tough to find your way around the gray area here ...

Why?

I don't see anything wrong with someone giving away information on their own team. What's the problem if I post, "I have $78,354 in recruiting money" on my coaches corner?

Yes, it's information others didn't have before. But I'm only posting about myself and posting it publicly. I understand that the purpose of doing it is to scare people into avoiding battles, but either one of two things is going to happen: (1) I'm saving someone else a bunch of money; or (2) someone else knows they can beat me. Or maybe I'm not telling the truth. But I still don't understand the problem.

I don't think there's anything wrong with posting how much you have at the start of recruiting. I've done that.

But that wasn't his post -- it was specifically which player you're going after, and to me that's different and crosses into another area.

Posted by dacj501 on 8/26/2013 11:38:00 AM (view original):
this is, at the same time, both interesting and tedious. Somehow. There can never (in HD, as constructed) be a policy that allows for all the variables gillispie elucidates to be covered. Therefore, kmason cannot ever really get what he's looking for. I agree that pointing out battles on the CC is foul play for the reason tianyi gives. I think I am coming to a conclusion that anything that doesn't specifically draw attention to an ongoing battle (or prior while recruiting is still happening and coaches are vulnerable) is probably ok, but that is largely a product of my own tendency to post things at the end of recruiting like, "got my guys, all pretty cheaply and will carry over a ton into next season", which is really me trying to slyly tell my conference mates not to bother ******* with me next time around coz I'm stacked. Is that ok? It is obviously an attempt to influence the recruiting actions of others...

As with most things HD related, I think a case by case evaluation is probably the best solution. FWIW I love when I get a comment like that and then win the battle. Conversely, there is this thread here, where I was on the other side... (and the follow up thread where I try to learn from my mistake)

dac, I think yours is a perfect example of something I think is totally fine and a nice bit of gamesmanship that I'd like to see more of.

 "I posted this because I could have sworn there were threads in the past where people were up in arms about this kind of thing." 

Is this not what you posted? Wouldn't anybody with any level of reading comprehension take this to mean that you posted it because you thought people would agree with you? 

But I see, most people disagree with you, and you can't come up with a singular sound reason as to why your point is correct, so you resort to name calling. Typical of insecure people. 

I'm sure you'd make an attempt to completely ignore the text I copied from your post, so I thought I'd point it out once again, just to make sure that you do address it. I would love an explanation as to why that doesn't mean exactly what it reads. 

I'm not surprised that so many people disagree with me here despite me "remembering" a prior thread where people were up in arms about similar content....that's protocol...to an extent, there are a fair amount of people on here that will say what I'm not saying, just so they wouldn't be agreeing with me...like you.  I asked if I was right, the majority seems to say no...big deal...but if you think this is "on the level", I'd tell you that you're kidding yourself.  You don't even give a **** about the argument anymore, your sole intent now is to one up me (I guess it's been that from the get go really), so we'll play this game as long as you want to.

Posted by colonels19 on 8/26/2013 10:40:00 PM (view original):
I'm not surprised that so many people disagree with me here despite me "remembering" a prior thread where people were up in arms about similar content....that's protocol...to an extent, there are a fair amount of people on here that will say what I'm not saying, just so they wouldn't be agreeing with me...like you.  I asked if I was right, the majority seems to say no...big deal...but if you think this is "on the level", I'd tell you that you're kidding yourself.  You don't even give a **** about the argument anymore, your sole intent now is to one up me (I guess it's been that from the get go really), so we'll play this game as long as you want to.

colonels, don't flatter yourself -- no one here cares enough one way or the other about what you have to say. (And that's not even a dig on you, really -- I'd say the same about basically anyone.) But the notion that people would be expressing opinions that are the opposite of how they really feel because it's so incredibly important to them to vocally disagree with you ... well, again, don't flatter yourself. That's preposterous and borderline delusional.