All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > Another 2 Teams 1 World Situation
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
6/30/2013 2:22 PM
I'm a big supporter of allowing people to have multiple teams in one world, but this seems to be one of those situations where jdno should have known that he shouldn't do something like this.  
6/30/2013 2:34 PM
Fair to me...it's a conspiracy because he's going after the guy with Illinois and not Stanford?  Please, maybe he fits better there.

You know how you solve this problem, whinenavy?  Win the recruit...

6/30/2013 2:36 PM
Was Stanford in a battle with either UCLA or Oregon?  If yes then definitely foul.  If not it sounds like sour grapes to me.
6/30/2013 2:57 PM
Posted by colonels19 on 6/30/2013 2:34:00 PM (view original):
Fair to me...it's a conspiracy because he's going after the guy with Illinois and not Stanford?  Please, maybe he fits better there.

You know how you solve this problem, whinenavy?  Win the recruit...

Or report him, as that's been your signature move in the past.
6/30/2013 8:46 PM (edited)
Let me add some more facts to the case that stine forgot to add to the equation:

1. UCLA and ORegon had been in TWO battles over TWO different kids.  Oregon had 5 schollies to fill and an A- prestige.  UCLA had 2 schollies/A+.  Stanford 5 schollies /A.  Illinois had 5 schollies/A+.

2. After the signings cycle last night at 7pm, Stanford and UCLA are still in the 2 battles over the 2 kids.  UCLA, ORegon, and Illinoi are all ~1000 miles away from each of these 2 kids (one in Wyoming, one in Montana).  At Illinois, I had signed just 1 kid at signings and was leading a battle with a SIM for another kid in Minnesota.  This Minnesota kid and an elite guard in Michigan were the only realistic elite targets for my Illinois team, and Notre Dame was tight with the Michigan guard and I didn't want to battle for him and leave me exposed for my Minnesota kid, as I was 500+ miles away from him and I knew a lot of schools still had some deep pockets.  All the surrounding states were very dry for elite talent, which is typically what I chase at Illinois, and actually this was the worst it's been while I've been at Illinois.

3. So signings come at 7pm last night, ORegon signs 3 of their 5 targets and is still in battles for 2 of his remaining targets.  Again, both battles are with UCLA.  At Illinois, I have $65k left to spend.  10pm comes, Oregon and UCLA still battling for the 2 kids.  1am comes, Oregon and UCLA still battling. Meanwhile, I've done nothing at Illinois but I've been watching these 2 battles closely all along.  Why?  Because every other battle I could potentially enter either doesn't involve elite talent I'm interested in or I'm at a severe distance disadvantage.  Both of these kids Oregon and UCLA are battling are ~1000 miles away from them just like they are with me.  So once the cycle ending at 1am following signings has passed, I make my move on one of the kids who's in Wyoming.  I end up winning the kid at the cycle ending at 1pm today.

4. At Stanford, I had 3 kids ready to sign during the signing cycle (all within 30 miles of me) with no real challenge coming for them in my eyes.  I had ~$65k left over at that point but was only going to have 3 guards, so I pursued a guard in Utah to give me 4 guards.  I ended up overpaying for the kid in an extreme way as Memphis put up a good fight. 

5. With Illinois, I didn't jump on the Wyoming kid until well after signings.  If that battle had ended before I got involved, then I'm SOL for him and I'm extremely low on options.  Stine, what you seem to be saying is that even if you came into Illinois and recruited a kid then I can't get involved because that would help my Stanford team.  And here I travel 1000 miles to get a kid and somehow I'm cheating you? 

6. Finish off your battles if you don't want to get challenged after signings...by me or anybody else.  If you had been successful in your late poach attempt from UCLA on that Wyoming kid, then this wouldn't have been an issue.  And since we all know your stance on multiple teams in the same world, and because you didn't finish off that battle sooner, there has to be somebody to blame I guess.

7. If I had chased after the Montana kid (the other one you and UCLA were battling for) with Stanford and the Wyoming kid with Illinois, then I'd agree with you and you'd have a legitimate case.  But in this situation, I don't think you have much argument.  I didn't target the Wyoming kid with Illinois because this was a chance to screw over 2 Pac-10 teams, I did it because I had a lot of cash left, the kid was equidistant to me as he was to you guys, I felt I could win him (b/c you were in 2 battles with UCLA, who had just 2 openings themselves) , and he was elite talent, which is all I target at Illinois. 

Edit:  Just to be clear, there was never any overlap or battle b/w Stanford and either UCLA or Oregon, so there was no way I could infer how their budgets were spent based on specific recruiting feedback.

6/30/2013 4:24 PM (edited)
Posted by stinenavy on 6/30/2013 2:02:00 PM (view original):
In Rupp, UCLA (oldman_sons) and Oregon (stinenavy) are in a battle over a recruit. Signings started last night. Illinois (jdno) has come in to the battle, but he has a team in the Pac 10, Stanford (jdno2).

With all the hubbub about the multiple teams in one world there was a consensus where if they were allowed there shouldn't be any benefit. Clearly jdno will benefit since he is attempting to take a player away from conference mates of his other username.

Fair? Foul?
jdno is at Illinois and Stanford are more than 1000 miles apart ... what is the problem here.

There is nothing to say he can't recruit where ever he wants ... the stipulation is he is 1000 miles away.

If he wants to recruit a player in the west, that is great.

How is he getting any benefit in a battle between 2 teams on the west coast from Illinois?

NOTE: I don't think the 2 teams in one world is a good rule .. however, if you are going to have it, then as long as he is following that rule (and he is) then he can recruit who ever he wants.
6/30/2013 4:31 PM
Now, if he battled the same player from Illinois and then jumped in from Stanford too ... that might be a problem. It is BS to say he can't recruit a player in the west because he is taking a player from his conference mates ... pure and total BS.

The rule does not say you can't recruit players within a 1000 miles of your other team, it says the teams must be 1000 miles apart.

If I am in Mississippi and recruit a player in Florida, that is hurting a conference mate too ... this is the stillest thing I ever heard.
6/30/2013 4:34 PM
Posted by hughesjr on 6/30/2013 4:24:00 PM (view original):
Posted by stinenavy on 6/30/2013 2:02:00 PM (view original):
In Rupp, UCLA (oldman_sons) and Oregon (stinenavy) are in a battle over a recruit. Signings started last night. Illinois (jdno) has come in to the battle, but he has a team in the Pac 10, Stanford (jdno2).

With all the hubbub about the multiple teams in one world there was a consensus where if they were allowed there shouldn't be any benefit. Clearly jdno will benefit since he is attempting to take a player away from conference mates of his other username.

Fair? Foul?
jdno is at Illinois and Stanford are more than 1000 miles apart ... what is the problem here.

There is nothing to say he can't recruit where ever he wants ... the stipulation is he is 1000 miles away.

If he wants to recruit a player in the west, that is great.

How is he getting any benefit in a battle between 2 teams on the west coast from Illinois?

NOTE: I don't think the 2 teams in one world is a good rule .. however, if you are going to have it, then as long as he is following that rule (and he is) then he can recruit who ever he wants.
This.
6/30/2013 4:34 PM
Posted by hughesjr on 6/30/2013 4:31:00 PM (view original):
Now, if he battled the same player from Illinois and then jumped in from Stanford too ... that might be a problem. It is BS to say he can't recruit a player in the west because he is taking a player from his conference mates ... pure and total BS.

The rule does not say you can't recruit players within a 1000 miles of your other team, it says the teams must be 1000 miles apart.

If I am in Mississippi and recruit a player in Florida, that is hurting a conference mate too ... this is the stillest thing I ever heard.
And this.
6/30/2013 4:40 PM
Seriously, are you going to cry every time you lose a recruit?  Quit acting like a little girl with a skinned knee and win the recruit.  If you can't, then why don't you just report him like you try to do everybody else?  Only problem is, he's within the rules set up by WiS, so good luck with that.  Damn, you have GOT to be the biggest baby on this site, bar none.  Waaaah, I'm going to lose another recruit to a long distance team because I don't know how to recruit, so I guess I'll cry and go tell.    I think it's hilarious that you're gonna lose the recruit to a coach with two teams in that world and because he's within the rules, there isn't jack **** you can do about it.
6/30/2013 4:42 PM
Posted by jdno on 6/30/2013 3:01:00 PM (view original):
Let me add some more facts to the case that stine forgot to add to the equation:

1. UCLA and ORegon had been in TWO battles over TWO different kids.  Oregon had 5 schollies to fill and an A- prestige.  UCLA had 2 schollies/A+.  Stanford 5 schollies /A.  Illinois had 5 schollies/A+.

2. After the signings cycle last night at 7pm, Stanford and UCLA are still in the 2 battles over the 2 kids.  UCLA, ORegon, and Illinoi are all ~1000 miles away from each of these 2 kids.  At Illinois, I had signed just 1 kid at signings and was leading a battle with a SIM for another kid in Minnesota.  This Minnesota kid and an elite guard in Michigan were the only realistic elite targets for my Illinois team, and Notre Dame was tight with the Michigan guard and I didn't want to battle for him and leave me exposed for my Minnesota kid, as I was 500+ miles away from him and I knew a lot of schools still had some deep pockets.  All the surrounding states were very dry for elite talent, which is typically what I chase at Illinois, and actually this was the worst it's been while I've been at Illinois.

3. So signings come at 7pm last night, ORegon signs 3 of their 5 targets and is still in battles for 2 of his remaining targets.  Again, both battles are with UCLA.  At Illinois, I have $65k left to spend.  10pm comes, Oregon and UCLA still battling for the 2 kids.  1am comes, Oregon and UCLA still battling. Meanwhile, I've done nothing at Illinois but I've been watching these 2 battles closely all along.  Why?  Because every other battle I could potentially enter either doesn't involve elite talent I'm interested in or I'm at a severe distance disadvantage.  Both of these kids Oregon and UCLA are battling are ~1000 miles away from them just like they are with me.  So once the cycle ending at 1am following signings has passed, I make my move on one of the kids who's in Wyoming.  I end up winning the kid at the cycle ending at 1pm today.

4. At Stanford, I had 3 kids ready to sign during the signing cycle (all within 30 miles of me) with no real challenge coming for them in my eyes.  I had ~$65k left over at that point but was only going to have 3 guards, so I pursued a guard in Utah to give me 4 guards.  I ended up overpaying for the kid in an extreme way as Memphis put up a good fight. 

5. With Illinois, I didn't jump on the Wyoming kid until well after signings.  If that battle had ended before I got involved, then I'm SOL for him and I'm extremely low on options.  Stine, what you seem to be saying is that even if you came into Illinois and recruited a kid then I can't get involved because that would help my Stanford team.  And here I travel 1000 miles to get a kid and somehow I'm cheating you? 

6. Finish off your battles if you don't want to get challenged after signings...by me or anybody else.  If you had been successful in your late poach attempt from UCLA on that Wyoming kid, then this wouldn't have been an issue.  And since we all know your stance on multiple teams in the same world, and because you didn't finish off that battle sooner, there has to be somebody to blame I guess.

7. If I had chased after the Montana kid (the other one you and UCLA were battling for) with Stanford and the Wyoming kid with Illinois, then I'd agree with you and you'd have a legitimate case.  But in this situation, I don't think you have much argument.  I didn't target the Wyoming kid with Illinois because this was a chance to screw over 2 Pac-10 teams, I did it because I had a lot of cash left, the kid was equidistant to me as he was to you guys, I felt I could win him (b/c you were in 2 battles with UCLA, who had just 2 openings themselves) , and he was elite talent, which is all I target at Illinois. 

Edit:  Just to be clear, there was never any overlap or battle b/w Stanford and either UCLA or Oregon, so there was no way I could infer how their budgets were spent based on specific recruiting feedback.

Convenient how all of this info was somehow left out of the original post.  Kinda changes the scenario quite a bit.  Nothing to see here, move along.......
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
6/30/2013 6:16 PM
the Q+A in this thread may be worth considering in this discussion

http://www.whatifsports.com/forums/Posts.aspx?TopicID=468157&TopicsTimeframe=180&TopicsPage=10
6/30/2013 6:47 PM
This is really getting ridiculous.

Jdno is definitely in a grey area, but have you sitemailed him? Have you chatted with him about it before deciding to sensationalize it as if you were the tabloids? I get that what he did was questionable, but your motives have always been questionable as well. He has come on here and respectfully defended himself and attempted to justify his actions, while you attempt to tarnish his reputation.

This could have easily been avoided if you would have sitemailed him first and discussed it. I don't get why you can't contact users first and try and figure this out, and if you determine they were blatantly trying to cheat, then coming to the forums would be justifiable as well.
of 5
All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > Another 2 Teams 1 World Situation

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.