jayball wrote:ZMagic30 wrote:Maybe that's because we actually can't talk about it. Heath makes it very clear what can and can't leave the board in order to keep healthy relationships with sources. If we went and leaked everything that he told us, the info would stop coming pretty quickly. That's why we suggest getting a membership over there - we seriously can't talk about some of the stuff on this board
Nothing against Banter subscribers but I call BS.
The payside is not some vault of privacy. The sources for the information published there are basically making information public as soon as they tell Heath or whoever. I think they know that well. Any tom dick and harry can learn something on Rivals and tell all of his friends. Its not 100% private secret information after it is posted there. The restriction on divulging information online basically serves to ensure Heath and (any Rivals site owner) get paid for they work they are doing. Why would anyone pay the subscription if all the information was free? If the coaches don' t want anyone to know about a prospect they won't divulge it or will ask Heath to sit on the information.
I agree it is annoying to have people constantly saying get a subscription. I'm sure they are doing nice work there but it doesn't me people here are prohibited from talking about recruiting. Joey provides updates from time to time and others post nuggets they find around the interwebs. If you have "secret" Rivals info fine, keep it to yourself and move on, but don't play the "I know something you don't know game" and imply that no one else is allowed to talk about recruiting unless you are a Rivals member.
As Chicagojays stated the transfer rule question is clearly not private or proprietary information.
Flashbacks to matt Perrault here, geez.
Seriously? Has there been some huge rash of constant comments to go buy a subscription or something? I feel like I read most posts on here and I don't recall seeing hardly any posts telling people they should go buy a subscription or anyone saying anything like "I know some stuff, but if you want to know it you need to go buy a subscription to the Rivals site." Perhaps it was just hyperbole, or perhaps people have actually forgotten the way Matt operated when that his site -- but the current operators are not remotely similar to that at all. At all. If somebody operates a pay site, shares information, and asks that people not share that information widely, that seems entirely fair and reasonable, to me. I'm confused about what I'm missing here.
As for this particular comment, again I may be way out in left field, but I took the comment as simply an indication that if you go subscribe over there you'll find a lot of information that isn't here. I didn't take as any kind of "teasing" or harassing anyone to buy anything. And those arguing about how the transfer rules aren't "private" -- then what's the big deal? Go look it up if you don't feel like someone else is giving you enough of an answer. It seemed pretty clear to me that the comment about the Rivals site was not about the transfer rules at all, and was about the questions about him visiting, etc.
Maybe it's just because it is summer and people are bored, but this seems like a whole lot of blowing things out of proportion.
