2nd place worth more $$ than 1st (1 Viewer)

[Terpfan]

The winner of the league gets a set amount of money. Places 2-4 split the transaction fee money. Despite what the commish thought before the season, the payout for second place has now exceeded the set amount for first, and will probably go a up a little more before the season ends.

Is it fair to change the payout structure this late (or early)? This is a similar ethical question as the tanking thread, since owners may tank the last game to win more money. Would you play for the money or the "honor of winning"? Or would you change the payout to avoid this question?

 

[fruity pebbles]

i would change the payout

 

[shadyridr]

Just swap the 1st and 2nd prize money

 

[Wrigley]

The winner of the league gets a set amount of money. Places 2-4 split the transaction fee money. Despite what the commish thought before the season, the payout for second place has now exceeded the set amount for first, and will probably go a up a little more before the season ends.Is it fair to change the payout structure this late (or early)? This is a similar ethical question as the tanking thread, since owners may tank the last game to win more money. Would you play for the money or the "honor of winning"? Or would you change the payout to avoid this question?

Wow, now this is something newYes you should be able to change the payouts at this point.The season is not over, and the playoffs have yet to start.Why on earth should the 2nd place team earn more than the 1st place team........ridicules

 

[strong]

Yes, change the payout but have the league discuss it now before the playoffs start.

I'm sure everyone will be willing to change it since paying the second team more is a kinda Downsie.

 

[Phurfur]

The winner of the league gets a set amount of money. Places 2-4 split the transaction fee money. Despite what the commish thought before the season, the payout for second place has now exceeded the set amount for first, and will probably go a up a little more before the season ends.Is it fair to change the payout structure this late (or early)? This is a similar ethical question as the tanking thread, since owners may tank the last game to win more money. Would you play for the money or the "honor of winning"? Or would you change the payout to avoid this question?

You should put it to a vote, majority rules and the Commish breaks a tie.

 

[trader jake]

Just swap the 1st and 2nd prize money

Just do so before the playoffs in your league begin.

 

[Ron_Mexico]

Just swap the 1st and 2nd prize money

FatJoba is correct.

 

[The_Man]

Just do a percentage -- pool the 1st and 2nd money and then pay out a set percentage to the winners

 

[arlingtonpark27]

I'd swap the payouts too and then change the rules for next year to say whichever is greater out of the set amount or % of transaction fees goes to the winner.

 

[Anonymous Internet User]

why wouldn't 1st place get a portion of the transaction fees so this never happens?

 

[ChromeWeasel]

The winner of the league gets a set amount of money. Places 2-4 split the transaction fee money. Despite what the commish thought before the season, the payout for second place has now exceeded the set amount for first, and will probably go a up a little more before the season ends.Is it fair to change the payout structure this late (or early)? This is a similar ethical question as the tanking thread, since owners may tank the last game to win more money. Would you play for the money or the "honor of winning"? Or would you change the payout to avoid this question?

If its not SUBSTANTIALLY more money I'd just leave it. If 2nd stands to gain a lot more, the commish should announce ASAP that he miscalculated and will swap prizes for #1 and #2, and will address this properly in the offseason. Dont vote on it, just have the commish make the call. The only way I'd vote on it is if you have a pre-established voting system for issues. Those leagues generally suck, so hopefully you arent stuck with a situation like that.