Posted by bjschumacher on 11/3/2016 9:40:00 PM (view original):
Wow, cool down people.

Tbill, yes I think it is wrong to ask WIS to divulge that information. Let's move along. This conversation is not going to result in any changes, anyway.

Your conclusion might easily be right. I'm not going to sweat an arbitrary decision in an $8/season game. But I am surprised that I'm not drawing very much support for an idea that I think could make the game more fair. Wouldn't you like to compare your Boston College draft in Hayes to LSU or your Fla St. draft in Yost to Texas. I think it would be interesting, at least.

Your request isn't unreasonable. I play numerous simulation type games and RPGs. All of them you can test and figure out how things work.

This is the only game I have played where you can't test. Where you can't prove something one way or the other. Where when a question is asked, it is answered by theories, hyperbole and opinions.....rarely rarely facts.

So your request for more transparency in regards to recruiting fall in line with the requests for more transparency for a lot of things

Maybe that transparency issue could be implemented in the dumbed-down D3 level, which has been limited to training wheels anyway. That way new guys can learn the ropes a little more easily. Other than that, I don't care for it because I don't think the books are open in real life.

Would also be easier to see when 'deals' are made; I would love to know more about the glaring admission of cheating on page 1.

I don't know anything about "deals" with mfnmeyers, but one thing he does do is offer a ton of freshman starts/playing time. If you look at his roster late in the season, most of his freshman have 10 starts (minimum requirement for guaranteed start). My theory is he grabs guys all across the country for cheap using these and then stockpiles the rest of his money for battles. Then people are afraid to battle him, because he wins every time, and less people try, furthering the cycle. For instance, like two cycles ago I had to spend something like 15k on straight CVs(somehow I had a ton of extra cash that season) with fr start and like 50% PT, with a guy who was in my 180 and like 1000 miles away from him, to nab this stud RB. It was so close, he didn't commit till like the last day or two

Pretty great strategy obviously, he gets the best class every year

Posted by pray4pro on 11/4/2016 6:56:00 AM (view original):
I don't know anything about "deals" with mfnmeyers, but one thing he does do is offer a ton of freshman starts/playing time. If you look at his roster late in the season, most of his freshman have 10 starts (minimum requirement for guaranteed start). My theory is he grabs guys all across the country for cheap using these and then stockpiles the rest of his money for battles. Then people are afraid to battle him, because he wins every time, and less people try, furthering the cycle. For instance, like two cycles ago I had to spend something like 15k on straight CVs(somehow I had a ton of extra cash that season) with fr start and like 50% PT, with a guy who was in my 180 and like 1000 miles away from him, to nab this stud RB. It was so close, he didn't commit till like the last day or two

Pretty great strategy obviously, he gets the best class every year

Where do you get the 10 start minimum rule for Freshman promises? I dabble with Sophmore starts once in a while and sometimes I forget to get them into the game. The 2nd game in a row they don't start = WE penalty

The "deal" I was referring to was I had a number of WR that were considering only me. Close to signing day he sitemailed me asking which ones I wanted to sign so he could go in on one of the others as he knew I wasn't going to sign all of them. I told him which ones I wanted and he went after the others. Is that cheating? Not really IMO. But hey, ban me from the game if it gets your panties in a bunch. I have also many times sitemailed back and forth with a coach on his interest in a guy we were both on to see if we could work something out to where if he wanted this guy this time and we were on another guy at the same time later that I would have priority. Don't see that as a problem either.

I'm with Gators on this one. There's nothing wrong with asking someone what their strategy was and using deductive reasoning to make the decision to ever battle them again in the future or change up your strategy and create your own style based around your vision for the team etc. However to ask that the entire make up of the game be changed so as to enforce this, in my opinion would drive some very long and active customers away from the game. Just sitemail folks if you're interested. It's easy to do and doesn't put anyone's "proprietary" information at risk. Honestly I don't want to know exactly what other people did/spent on their recruits. The only time I did I sitemailed the person and they responded. It was an interesting idea but one that I disagree with in terms of changing the game. Not that anything gets changed anyways. Cheers.

We have had many discussion about collusion in the past, and yes you (and the other user) were cheating:

"Collusive transactions
Collusion includes any act that supports bad, deceitful or illegal behavior agreed upon by two or more users or attempted by a single user. Here are a few examples:

• Discussing the pursuit of a recruit with another coach, including who is pursuing him and money that might have been spent."

(from here: https://www.whatifsports.com/account/FairPlayGuidelines)

As for bunched panties, they aren't, but I do like to point out where people appear to be completely unaware of the rules that have been in place for 12 years. I guess this might explain some 'non-transparent' recruiting success as well.

Posted by waregl72 on 11/4/2016 8:03:00 AM (view original):
The "deal" I was referring to was I had a number of WR that were considering only me. Close to signing day he sitemailed me asking which ones I wanted to sign so he could go in on one of the others as he knew I wasn't going to sign all of them. I told him which ones I wanted and he went after the others. Is that cheating? Not really IMO. But hey, ban me from the game if it gets your panties in a bunch. I have also many times sitemailed back and forth with a coach on his interest in a guy we were both on to see if we could work something out to where if he wanted this guy this time and we were on another guy at the same time later that I would have priority. Don't see that as a problem either.

Definitely collusion and borderline cheating - End

I have also many times sitemailed back and forth with a coach on his interest in a guy we were both on to see if we could work something out to where if he wanted this guy this time and we were on another guy at the same time later that I would have priority. Don't see that as a problem either.

That is the posterchild for collusion. If you were unaware, you should stop that practice in my opinion.

Posted by nitros on 11/4/2016 9:03:00 AM (view original):

I have also many times sitemailed back and forth with a coach on his interest in a guy we were both on to see if we could work something out to where if he wanted this guy this time and we were on another guy at the same time later that I would have priority. Don't see that as a problem either.

That is the posterchild for collusion. If you were unaware, you should stop that practice in my opinion.

I was unaware. And no worries. I didn't do it that often and I won't do it again. Thanks for the info.

I was unaware. And no worries. I didn't do it that often and I won't do it again. Thanks for the info.

Top notch. Good luck with your teams.

A couple of things here...(someone may have already provided answers but I didn't have time to read through the entire thread).

First, just because Coach A spent $27,000 on a recruit and Coach B spent $12,000 on a recruit...does not mean that Coach A should sign said player. This is for several reasons but I'll just address the three main reasons. 1. Depending on distance, that amount could have a significantly different value. 2. It's not how much money you invest in a player, it's how you invest it. There are a number of different tools, all cost different amounts and all have different effects on recruits. 3. Recent success can give one coach an advantage of another coach. I know the difference in amounts are significant but understand that it isn't just how much you spend on a player.

Secondly. I don't believe that two coaches piecing a deal together is definitively collusion. It's more of a gray area, unless it involves two coaches specifically targeting one coach or one conference. However, if it's two coaches in the same conference, that just don't want to battle over an average offensive lineman...I don't see any issue with one coach sitemailing the other a, "how much do you really need him?" message. If two coaches are discussing the scouting report of player, if the amount spent is disclosed before the recruit signs, or if one coach jumps on a recruit with the intent of not signing him so that his buddy can sign him, that's different. Those are clear violations of the fair play guidelines.

Posted by cjsweat on 11/4/2016 10:33:00 AM (view original):
A couple of things here...(someone may have already provided answers but I didn't have time to read through the entire thread).

First, just because Coach A spent $27,000 on a recruit and Coach B spent $12,000 on a recruit...does not mean that Coach A should sign said player. This is for several reasons but I'll just address the three main reasons. 1. Depending on distance, that amount could have a significantly different value. 2. It's not how much money you invest in a player, it's how you invest it. There are a number of different tools, all cost different amounts and all have different effects on recruits. 3. Recent success can give one coach an advantage of another coach. I know the difference in amounts are significant but understand that it isn't just how much you spend on a player.

Secondly. I don't believe that two coaches piecing a deal together is definitively collusion. It's more of a gray area, unless it involves two coaches specifically targeting one coach or one conference. However, if it's two coaches in the same conference, that just don't want to battle over an average offensive lineman...I don't see any issue with one coach sitemailing the other a, "how much do you really need him?" message. If two coaches are discussing the scouting report of player, if the amount spent is disclosed before the recruit signs, or if one coach jumps on a recruit with the intent of not signing him so that his buddy can sign him, that's different. Those are clear violations of the fair play guidelines.

Absolutely concur.

" Discussing the pursuit of a recruit with another coach, including who is pursuing him and money that might have been spent."

I think that addresses *any* communication that deals with 'pursuing' a recruit, which - during the recruiting stage - is just about 100% of communication.
I don't know how you could perceive your examples as anything other than breaking those (broad) guidelines.