Curious if anyone has come across a similar answer from Customer Support.

I'm at an elite and was head to head with a BCS school for a significant player. Under 180 for him, over 180 under 360 for me. I had put a very significant amount into the player, he signed the morning of day two, which indicates to me I was pretty dominated in the battle. We did lock up in three battles, I did not expect to win all.

Coach at BCS school does happen to be an employee of WIS.

I think what I found odd about the situation is that the players all signed with the BCS school on exactly the same cycle.

The response from customer service regarding my effort vs his was that is was even however he put more effort in early on versus me. I'm having a hard time believing this as I spent > 82% of my allocation for the player in question on Day 1.

I can believe that effort may have a time component as some things vs sims work early on versus in later cycles. However, I never heard this in terms of head to head versus humans and the fact that I did not dump a large amount late but was steadily in it from the outset.

Thoughts?

How did you know it was a WIS employee?

I have some questions regarding my recruiting for Michigan in Yost. I was head to head vs Cincinnati on three recruits. I am aware that this user is an employee of WIS. I did happen to lose all three battles to the user, not unexpected. However, I did find it hard to believe that all three players signed on the exact same cycle. One player I put a significant amount of effort into. My understanding is that the players will sign according to the difference in effort between the two teams battling for a players services. I do not believe Cincinnati could have possibly put that much more effort into the player in question (Eugene Delgado) would've signed so quickly with his team versus mine. <recruiting effort redacted> and I wasn't close? I'm very suspicious.
3/8/2017 3:03 PM	Customer Support
Hi Kevin, Who were the other two recruits? Yes, the Cincinnati coach (guggendr) is site staff, but we can assure you that there was absolutely no tampering of the game, or the recruits on their part. That would be pretty evident if it were, and we hold all of our employees to a high standard when it comes to following Fair Play Guidelines and other internal company policies. As far as Delgado, it looks like Cincinnati had put in more effort very early in the recruiting process. Depending on the recruit, the earlier you recruit, there is a chance for more effort you earn towards the recruit. We cannot give exact figures, but the money spent was pretty even, it's just that Cincinnati put more into Delgado earlier on in the process. Hope this helps. Thank you!
3/8/2017 3:15 PM	lyonzfan37
The other two recruits do not matter. However, they were LB Michael Hoffman and DB William Sullivan I spent all of those funds, with the exception of yy campus visits on the first day. I find it difficult to believe it was much more significant of a difference the yy that were spend on signing day versus the xx that were spent on the very first day. If it is close as you say, the player never would sign the morning of the second day.

I agree Lyonz. Seems very odd. Could be a unique coincidence, but it's really odd that all 3 went his way.

there are a few cycles during recruiting that seem more significant than others (ie players are more likely to sign on this cycle than others). morning of day 2 (9:05am) seems to be one of them

i don't know that this is true and i'm not defending the answer you received, but if this is right it would help explain the coincidence of them signing on same cycle

probably someone smarter than me could easily pull data on which cycles has most players sign

For me, most players still in contention (after signings begin at noon on day four) sign at 6am EST on day five. Some will go longer, but most sign at 6am.

A list should exist that WIS keeps up with stating all coaches in all products that work for the company. I don't trust anyone anymore

Posted by tampafla on 3/9/2017 4:57:00 AM (view original):
A list should exist that WIS keeps up with stating all coaches in all products that work for the company. I don't trust anyone anymore

Yes, with their role in the company listed - i.e. are they an accountant, a web master, customer support rep, developer, etc.

Was unaware that effort early was weighed heavier than effort later in the recruiting cycle. Always thought that 10 CVs would beat 8 CVs if everything else (reputation, loyalty, etc) were equal.

I have never heard that....that is new vs the old days...

When I started, season 50 or so in Stagg, I was told that the earlier you spent the money the better value for each $ you would get.

But the value was never known.

Same with the diff in Elites> BCS>NonBCS.

Same with the value of a Coaches Reputation, and Loyalty and their effect on recruiting.

Same with the diff in a CampusVisit and a HomeVisit (HeadCoach) or a HomeVisit (AssistantCoach).

What I was told is you get an initial boost for having the player on your watch list the season before recruiting begins. The amount is so small that you will not notice but it is there. Then during recruiting, every cycle the value of a CV and HV would drop slightly. Once again, the amount is so small that you will not notice but it is there.

Either way the situation in the OP smells fishy to me. It sounds like Eugene Delgado should have at most been yellow for you both, not green for the WIS Staff. And the fact that you put so much effort into the player and he some how he magically knew exactly how much to spend on all three players is suspect.

IMO, employees of Wis should not be allowed to have teams simply because of the Way It Looks. This controversy would not exist if this was the case.