DropKick
Footballguy
[SIZE=10pt]The dictionary definition of collusion is "a secret agreement, especially for fraudulent or treacherous purposes; conspiracy". I see no reason to challenge Merriam-Webster by redefining a word for the purposes of fantasy football. But, collusive acts can be judged by their key elements; conspiracy and fraud.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]The classic example of collusion comes from the business world and is an agreement between companies to fix prices rather than compete in the free market. This has the elements of collusion most relevant to the fantasy community - cooperation between multiple parties and deceit.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Business also gave us the term "Going Concern". This is an accounting principle that states, essentially, that a company intends and is capable of staying in business for the foreseeable future. Why bring up an accounting term in a fantasy football discussion? A company that is no longer a going concern may behave differently from other companies, including selling off assets or ceasing operations. In comparison, a fantasy team is more likely to remain a "going concern" in dynasty formats. But, redraft leagues tend to promote apathy - teams can develop a lack of interest once their season appears to be over. Problems occur when a team is run as if it has no future.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]The most blatant example of collusion in fantasy football is stacking a team via lopsided trade(s). With money (or even just bragging rights) at stake, this can happen in any format but is more likely in redraft and especially in the anonymity of on-line leagues. Collusion can also be more subtle. Consider the boomerang trade. Two teams agree to temporarily swap players to work around an injury or bye week. This enables them to extend their rosters by protecting an extra player or to retain waiver priority. Teams acting together to circumvent the rules or gain unfair advantage is the essence of collusion.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Bad trades aren't necessarily collusion. People evaluate players and even the strengths and weaknesses of their own teams differently. Strategies also vary; some owners are infatuated with shiny new toys and others are committed to proven veterans; some care most about the current season and others are already planning for the future. Recognize that everyone doesn't think like you do.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Some common questions in this forum:[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Is this trade collusive? This all too frequent question would be easier to answer if put into context. What is their roster composition? Is one team out of contention? Is the format redraft or dynasty? Are there keeper or salary cap implications? Are the trade parties close friends or relatives? Are the teams in "win now" or rebuilding mode?[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]How can you "prove" collusion? Fortunately, you don't have to... this is fantasy football not a court of law or a witch hunt. The answers to the questions above will help in determining the likelihood that a given trade is collusive. The bottom line? It isn't collusion if the owners are making the trade in, what they believe is, the best immediate or long term interest of their respective teams.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]What if the parties are not secretive but "out in the open" about their intentions? When people conspire to do something wrong, the act, by its nature, tends to be secretive. Secrecy is a secondary characteristic. It isn't an essential element of collusion.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Suggestions to minimize problems in your league...[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Have an early trade deadline. Have a very early trade deadline if you play redraft.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Have quality owners. People new to fantasy football and veteran owners can be a bad mix. When you must have new owners, try to give them good advice rather than treat them as a potential chump.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Require the commissioner to approve trades. We know the veto system is problematic. A good commissioner will approve most (if not all) trades, but retain the power to veto a trade that is suspect. Incidentally, this veto power can extend beyond collusion. The full spectrum of questionable behavior is hard to legislate. I've seen an out of contention team release very good players to build a fantasy team featuring players from his favorite NFL team. As the act of a single team, this wasn't "collusion", but it did pose a threat to the competitive integrity of the season.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]As an alternative to the commissioner or as a means of approving trades involving the commissioner, have an approval committee (3 owners?) with the mission of only denying suspect trades. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Consider the ramifications of your keeper or salary cap rules. I’ve always preferred simple keeper rules: “keep your N best players and draft”. However, various restrictions on keepers, salary cap or even contractual limits can create situations when strategies around these rules produce trades that, on the surface, seem imbalanced.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Play with people you know and trust. If you must play with strangers, limit your financial and emotional investment.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]And, most importantly, don't play the collusion card unless you truly believe the teams are cheating.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]The classic example of collusion comes from the business world and is an agreement between companies to fix prices rather than compete in the free market. This has the elements of collusion most relevant to the fantasy community - cooperation between multiple parties and deceit.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Business also gave us the term "Going Concern". This is an accounting principle that states, essentially, that a company intends and is capable of staying in business for the foreseeable future. Why bring up an accounting term in a fantasy football discussion? A company that is no longer a going concern may behave differently from other companies, including selling off assets or ceasing operations. In comparison, a fantasy team is more likely to remain a "going concern" in dynasty formats. But, redraft leagues tend to promote apathy - teams can develop a lack of interest once their season appears to be over. Problems occur when a team is run as if it has no future.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]The most blatant example of collusion in fantasy football is stacking a team via lopsided trade(s). With money (or even just bragging rights) at stake, this can happen in any format but is more likely in redraft and especially in the anonymity of on-line leagues. Collusion can also be more subtle. Consider the boomerang trade. Two teams agree to temporarily swap players to work around an injury or bye week. This enables them to extend their rosters by protecting an extra player or to retain waiver priority. Teams acting together to circumvent the rules or gain unfair advantage is the essence of collusion.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Bad trades aren't necessarily collusion. People evaluate players and even the strengths and weaknesses of their own teams differently. Strategies also vary; some owners are infatuated with shiny new toys and others are committed to proven veterans; some care most about the current season and others are already planning for the future. Recognize that everyone doesn't think like you do.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Some common questions in this forum:[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Is this trade collusive? This all too frequent question would be easier to answer if put into context. What is their roster composition? Is one team out of contention? Is the format redraft or dynasty? Are there keeper or salary cap implications? Are the trade parties close friends or relatives? Are the teams in "win now" or rebuilding mode?[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]How can you "prove" collusion? Fortunately, you don't have to... this is fantasy football not a court of law or a witch hunt. The answers to the questions above will help in determining the likelihood that a given trade is collusive. The bottom line? It isn't collusion if the owners are making the trade in, what they believe is, the best immediate or long term interest of their respective teams.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]What if the parties are not secretive but "out in the open" about their intentions? When people conspire to do something wrong, the act, by its nature, tends to be secretive. Secrecy is a secondary characteristic. It isn't an essential element of collusion.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Suggestions to minimize problems in your league...[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Have an early trade deadline. Have a very early trade deadline if you play redraft.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Have quality owners. People new to fantasy football and veteran owners can be a bad mix. When you must have new owners, try to give them good advice rather than treat them as a potential chump.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Require the commissioner to approve trades. We know the veto system is problematic. A good commissioner will approve most (if not all) trades, but retain the power to veto a trade that is suspect. Incidentally, this veto power can extend beyond collusion. The full spectrum of questionable behavior is hard to legislate. I've seen an out of contention team release very good players to build a fantasy team featuring players from his favorite NFL team. As the act of a single team, this wasn't "collusion", but it did pose a threat to the competitive integrity of the season.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]As an alternative to the commissioner or as a means of approving trades involving the commissioner, have an approval committee (3 owners?) with the mission of only denying suspect trades. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Consider the ramifications of your keeper or salary cap rules. I’ve always preferred simple keeper rules: “keep your N best players and draft”. However, various restrictions on keepers, salary cap or even contractual limits can create situations when strategies around these rules produce trades that, on the surface, seem imbalanced.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Play with people you know and trust. If you must play with strangers, limit your financial and emotional investment.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]And, most importantly, don't play the collusion card unless you truly believe the teams are cheating.[/SIZE]
Last edited by a moderator:
