well...someone *cough walks_in_the_sun cough* made a nice little post regarding recovery matches...and since i haven't stirred the pot lately, i figured i'd use my own rantspace to reply to it...

---
I haven't specifically gone looking for one in months, but I don't think they (necessarily) count as having a pregame agreement."
---

sorry, but yeah, it is...i'll explain why in a moment...

---
"(Examples deleted...see the original blog for the text -> http://fumbbl.com/FUMBBL.php?page=blog&coach=31175)"
---

i can't disagree that example a is not a pre-match agreement directly, and that example b is...

but example a is a pre-match agreement to an extent...

again, explanation incoming momentarily, hang with us folks...

---
"Saying "recovery" match is just a word that means different things to different people. To me, it just means my team is in rough shape. The only "agreement" is with myself - I will cherrypick a team that has no DPs or super-killy CWs or whatever, preferably with a high FF, big TR/TS discrepancy that offers me handicaps, or is shorthanded or something. Usually I will lose, but (ideally) I will make more money than I lose players. My opponents don't agree to take it easy on me at all.
---

now here's where we have the rub...

the flaw in this "it's not a pre-match agreement!!!" theory is the definition of a pre-match agreement, and what constitutes a "recoverY" match....

a recovery match, while yes, can be something as simple as two coaches agreeing to play easier on each other for a given reason, it also insinuates the same thing...

when i say "hi i'm looking for a recovery match!" it insinuates that i'm looking for someone that isn't going to wreck my team, that's going to play a certain way...

while this isn't a direct "me no foul you, you no foul me!" agreement, it *is* an agreement between two coaches to modify how they're going to play to a some degree....

now if you're just looking to pick certain teams to play against(read: no claw/rsc, no multi-dp, whatever), that's all fine and dandy...but why do you feel it necessary to express that you're looking for a "recovery" match? can't you just put your teams up for a game, and then pick and choose between the offers you receive, or make?

why do you feel it necessary to vocalize your need for a recovery match, when every coach that ever chooses a game, already makes decisions on games that are favorable for their team?

---
"I will cherrypick a team that has no DPs or super-killy CWs or whatever, preferably with a high FF, big TR/TS discrepancy that offers me handicaps, or is shorthanded or something. "
---

this statement doesn't define "recovery matches"...this statement defines coaches as a whole...very few coaches on here play 100% open schedules, where they'll play anyone that comes across, without regard to skill choice, tr/ts, or whatever you choose to define by....

how many coaches on this site use this sort of rationale for picking *all* of their matches, not just recovery games? i would wager that a good amount of them do...granted, not all, but i would say at least the majority do...

now with that thinking in mind, if coach A uses that mentality for all of their games, what makes a regular game different from a recovery game?...

easy....the expectation that the opponent is going to play in a specific manner, or is going to change their method of play, to cater to the weaker "recovering" team....

there's your "pre-match agreement"...while it's not outright, explicitly said that a coach is going to play a certain way...it's expected...

how many times have i played a coach looking for a recovery, only to hear them cry because i played the way i always do, looked for injuries, surfed, etc etc etc?

heck, even emphasy got miffed at me once because i niggle-surfed one of his blitzers when he "was expecting a recovery match"....don't get me wrong, he didn't ask for one, but then again, i bet he probably thought i was easy pickings ;)

the rationale is simple...while you, walks, may not expect a coach to play differently because you're in recovery mode, a lot do...a lot of coaches expect a much lighter, less bash type of game when they're looking to bolster their ranks...that's where the ruling about "no pre-match agreements" comes into play...

---
"That's why I don't think it's an agreement, unless you explicitly say you will or will not do some action or actions."
---

ever heard the phrase "actions speak louder than words"?

someone asks me to kill someone...i say no, but i do it anyways...i'm guilty of murder, and the other person is guilty of conspiracy to commit murder(i think that's the right one...either way they're guilty, maybe it's associate to murder or something...i'm not a cop or a lawyer)...

when it comes time for trial, i highly doubt a judge is going to let me off just because i defend myself with "but i told the guy i wasn't going to do it!"...

---
"The best way to play a "recovery" match is to find a coach who doesn't get all his jollies by fouling, surfing, and killing above all else."
---

/agree

but this goes back to one of my earlier points...

why do you need to publicly express that you're looking for a "recovery" match, when you can follow this tactic without expressing your intentions?

why get into the position of potentially causing an issue by saying "i want a recovery" when you can act towards the same end result without vocalizing it?

so yeah, two differing opinions on the same issue...fun times....

and on one last point...

---
"Some people think offering a match to a weak team and "taking it a little easy" on them is a bad thing."
---

depends on the circumstances...i've gone easy on teams before...get ahead far enough, or inflict a large number of casualties to a team that's in rebuilding phase, there's no real point to completely eradicating the team, other than to stroke your own ego...and as much as i love stroking my ego, it's not as much fun by myself...

---
"Others may think taking a match with a weak team just to kill them or to pad your SPPs or avoid difficult matches is a bad thing."
---

yeah....very bad...it's not necessary to name names, since the coaches who do this regularly are pretty well known(sadly, i've even done it from time to time...yeah i need to work on that)....

---
"I think that retiring a team after 1 or 2 bad matches rather than seeking to fix them (through "recovery" matches if necessary) is a bad thing."
---

again...depends on the circumstances...

if it's a team that's been around, and they're established, then yeah...keep them around, work on them, rebuild them....

but if it's a TR100 team, with no apo, that takes 4 rips in the first match...can them..start over...no big deal....

it's easier to restart a 1 game team, than it is to restart a 100 game team...food for thought

--j

ps...new updates to my personal blog...complete with a new rant on fanbois and halo3...http://deviantlunatic.blogspot.com/