Recruiting Offenders Program..

Discussion in 'Thread Archive' started by T2, Dec 30, 2009.

  1. T2

    T2 Smarter than your average bear!

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2009
    Messages:
    2,973
    Recruiting Offenders Program..

    This thread will keep track of recruiting violations in accordance with The Evolution By-laws.
     
  2. H22APWRD94

    H22APWRD94 RG3 Bandwagon

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Messages:
    3,185
    I just don't want to look like Lane Kiffin or feel like Mike Leach by the time this is over.
     
  3. T2

    T2 Smarter than your average bear!

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2009
    Messages:
    2,973
    For 2010:

    Two Schools were investigated by The Evolution Committee.

    Colorado State: Was Allowed 15 Scholarship Athletes.

    Findings: CSU went over its allowed limit by 1.

    Ruling: CSU will be required to Cut (INSERT TOP RECRUIT NAME)
    CSU will Lose 1 Scholarship for the 2011 Season.


    Nevada: Was Allowed 21 Scholarship Athletes

    Findings: NV went over its alotment by 1.

    Ruling: NV must Cut T (#1) J.Foster
    NV will lose 1 Scholarship for the 2011 season.
     
  4. H22APWRD94

    H22APWRD94 RG3 Bandwagon

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Messages:
    3,185
    Man, I lose my most needed recruit, the guy I signed in like week 7, a 4* tackle. This is going to be a rough year.

    Mike
     
  5. T2

    T2 Smarter than your average bear!

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2009
    Messages:
    2,973
    it could be worse..
     
  6. H22APWRD94

    H22APWRD94 RG3 Bandwagon

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Messages:
    3,185
    Yes, my ass is still foot-free.
     
  7. T2

    T2 Smarter than your average bear!

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2009
    Messages:
    2,973
    well said..
     
  8. T2

    T2 Smarter than your average bear!

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2009
    Messages:
    2,973
    next year its Top 3 and -3 scholarships...
     
  9. H22APWRD94

    H22APWRD94 RG3 Bandwagon

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Messages:
    3,185
    I'm going to give the rumor mill another boost. Don't plan on having to count scholly's at CSU for next season.

    Mike
     
  10. Jvigorous1

    Jvigorous1 Hokie

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2009
    Messages:
    1,900
    May I respectfully suggest that the punishment be lessened alittle for example whatever amount gone over be x2 scholarships lost the next season. So if someone goes over 3 it'll be 6 scholarships to give lost. And if someone is a repeat offender it gets x3 and then a loss of a top recruit.

    1st offenders with only 1 over shouldn't have to lose their top recruit. Such a strict rule will encourage coach's to drastically under-recuit leaving the team with less seniors leaving and a roster constantly short of 70.
     
  11. Emmdotfrisk

    Emmdotfrisk Working half days on my days off.

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Messages:
    11,955
    I have to object here....sorry Jvig. But such a lax rule it would suggest that guys test the waters. The penalty would not be consistent with the risk, especially in an Evo type dynsty. For example say u have 1 scholly left but have 2 5 stars willing to commit on week 5. You could sign both and take the penalty of losing recruits in the future if you thought those two recruits would help boost your team so you could move to a better team the next year.

    Here is an outline of the violation...

    By offering and signing more scholarships available, technically the last guy to sign would have received a "gift" (a scholarship that is not under regulation). Another form of gift could be a car, house, or ect. When a violation of this matter is learned, it is then investigated and the college is put on probation and the recruit is not eligible to participate.

    It is possible to sign your available scholarships. On week 5 I only had 2 scholly's available but 5 guys that i was #1 on their list. I had to choose 2 guys I had the best shot at getting and remove the rest from my board.
     
  12. Jvigorous1

    Jvigorous1 Hokie

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2009
    Messages:
    1,900
    I understand your point of view emm, but in my situation I only had enough recruits to possibly sign by the end of week 6 to give me exactly 20 recruits which was my limit. Unless I summed my commitments incorrectly the cpu's involvement more than likely signed one of these 2* recruits that I wasn't going for during the advance.

    I'll investigate further as to how I went over and see who got signed when. But taking a top commitment for going 1 over is like chopping off someones hand because he scratched his ass.
     
  13. Emmdotfrisk

    Emmdotfrisk Working half days on my days off.

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Messages:
    11,955
    Haha ok me and t2 will ask some of the senior members at tf like drifter and hack to see what their opinion is.
     
  14. H22APWRD94

    H22APWRD94 RG3 Bandwagon

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Messages:
    3,185
    I can deal with the loss of the recruit. Will it suck, yes, but I screwed up. In an OD I am in outside of TF, we have a similar rule. 18 is the limit, year in and year out. Overages results in lost scholly's and lost commits. For each recruit over, you lose 2 commits. And you lose equal number available the following year. Now the recruits that are removed over there are done on a random number generator. Works a little more fairly, but, like I said, I will deal with it. BTW, my two best recruits signed in season with me. All my post season guys were fillers.

    Mike
     
  15. Jvigorous1

    Jvigorous1 Hokie

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2009
    Messages:
    1,900
    Hey emm thanks for hearing me out man. I went back and compared to the week 5 committed and who got committed the last week of offseason recruiting (I posted in scouting reports).

    Total of 8 got recruited. Out of that 8 I only went for 7 just as fillers. (which would of got me to my limit)

    G (144) G.Cannon :2stars: (This guy I don't recognize)
    T (102) K.Webb :2stars:
    CB (176) M.Brooks :2stars:
    G (138) J.Patterson :2stars:
    CB (13) S.Rutledge :4stars:
    CB (133) L.Brown :3stars:
    LT (47) M. Washington :3stars:
    QB (48) K.Williams :2stars:
     
  16. Emmdotfrisk

    Emmdotfrisk Working half days on my days off.

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Messages:
    11,955
    I posted in the commish lounge and it looks like we are being a bit strict. You should check it out. We know u and H22 are great TF members and u are a fellow commish, we just cant show favoritism u know. But anyways I will talk to T2/evo committee about what we should do. So dont send your guy packing just yet!
     
  17. Jvigorous1

    Jvigorous1 Hokie

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2009
    Messages:
    1,900
    I think it's quite evident that I wasn't trying to do as you said emm "For example say u have 1 scholly left but have 2 5 stars willing to commit on week 5. You could sign both and take the penalty of losing recruits in the future if you thought those two recruits would help boost your team so you could move to a better team the next year."
     
  18. Jvigorous1

    Jvigorous1 Hokie

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2009
    Messages:
    1,900
    Thanks man, I completely understand about the favortism. If it was any other guy who was just looking to fill and he had evidence of doing just that then I would have the same complaint for them as well. Look at my scouting report (last updated 12:06 AM today) which I updated before the advance to coaching changes.

    I just PM'd hack to allow me access to the League Commissioner Lounge.
     
  19. Emmdotfrisk

    Emmdotfrisk Working half days on my days off.

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Messages:
    11,955
    I would PM Drifter. He is on right now. I think Hack is enjoying a long holiday vacation.
     
  20. Jvigorous1

    Jvigorous1 Hokie

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2009
    Messages:
    1,900
    I didn't have CPU assistance on and used up all recruiting time on the 7 recruits. Out of the 7 recruits only 4 had me as 1st, the 3 others had me at 7th-8th interest at best. The rest of the board has all recruits with N/A interest in my school. I figured this would be be sufficient to be close to fill my roster and be under the recruiting limit.
     
  21. Emmdotfrisk

    Emmdotfrisk Working half days on my days off.

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Messages:
    11,955
    hmmm so the someone just signed even though you didn't offer them a scholarship and u weren't their #1 school?
     
  22. Jvigorous1

    Jvigorous1 Hokie

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2009
    Messages:
    1,900
    Exactly, Honestly I was really trying to be careful and thought I was going to be under my limit by 3-4 recruits.

    The extra 4 recruits that signed were unexpected because of N/A interest, especially the 2* Guard that I don't even think I had on my recruiting board. But ultimately I should've been more careful in making sure I didn't have anyone that could sneak in my school by way of CPU. I just don't think the loss of a top recruit is justified for an accident.
     
  23. Emmdotfrisk

    Emmdotfrisk Working half days on my days off.

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Messages:
    11,955
    damn that stuff never happens at CMU, I wish it would! haha
     
  24. Jvigorous1

    Jvigorous1 Hokie

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2009
    Messages:
    1,900
    LOL, Nevada is an up and coming school, finished ranked #12, won a BCS bowl game last season, and currently a 4* prestige which will probably goto 5* the start of the next season. (I believe prestige changes the following season) so a 2* recruit would probably be elated to sneak in and join this program.
     
  25. bcduggan

    bcduggan Walk On

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2009
    Messages:
    2,771
    I haven't read all post in this thread. Do you have your recruiting assistance turned on? If yes, you should turn it off.
     

Share This Page