What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Has Anyone Done an Empire League? (1 Viewer)

steelers1080

Footballguy
If you haven't heard of one before, essentially it's a dynasty league. Half of the money from each year goes into a side pot that keeps growing until someone wins the league 2 years in a row. That winner gets the money from the side pot in addition to any regular winnings, and then the league is over. Everyone drafts new teams the next season and the dream of building an empire starts anew.

If you've played in this type of league, how did you like it and how did it work out? Was there too much collusion to stop a repeat?

 
If you haven't heard of one before, essentially it's a dynasty league. Half of the money from each year goes into a side pot that keeps growing until someone wins the league 2 years in a row. That winner gets the money from the side pot in addition to any regular winnings, and then the league is over. Everyone drafts new teams the next season and the dream of building an empire starts anew.

If you've played in this type of league, how did you like it and how did it work out? Was there too much collusion to stop a repeat?
I have heard of it - but to me that set up tells me it's nothing like a real dynasty. Why would a team bother to build when the league can end just like that. It also seems like being a "win now" team is the only way to go in that type of league.

 
I just listened to the latest Audible where they talked about it.

The idea sounds fun but I think you have to have just the right owners and set some firm ground rules for if a defending champion teams looks strong, I can see owners colluding against that team to make sure they don't win the next year.

 
Avery said:
I just listened to the latest Audible where they talked about it.

The idea sounds fun but I think you have to have just the right owners and set some firm ground rules for if a defending champion teams looks strong, I can see owners colluding against that team to make sure they don't win the next year.
Or the complete opposite, helping the defending champ win again so they can reset their team which they don't like. 

 
Or the complete opposite, helping the defending champ win again so they can reset their team which they don't like. 


That was my first thought.  You’d better trust everyone involved, because in dynasty it’s not unusual to see trades towards the playoffs of vet studs for young potential and draft picks.  It would be easy for two teams to load one strong team to split that double pot while giving the illusion that the weaker team is building for the future, making collusion almost undetectable.

.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You could make it a no trading league, leaving only the wire for "light" collusion, but that is my favorite part of fantasy football.

 
My understanding of the original empire league concept was that the reigning champion team going for the repeat win was not allowed to trade at all during that second season, just to prevent a colluded victory.

Doesn’t address the more complex, and therefore less likely prospect of colluding to dethrone that team.  Hard to see the win for individual participants there though, since they would still be two successful years from the big payout.

 
My understanding of the original empire league concept was that the reigning champion team going for the repeat win was not allowed to trade at all during that second season, just to prevent a colluded victory.

Doesn’t address the more complex, and therefore less likely prospect of colluding to dethrone that team.  Hard to see the win for individual participants there though, since they would still be two successful years from the big payout.
But the payout would still be there and growing per year.  

I hate to think the worst of people, but as the big payout grows the odds of people doing shady things to get it increases.

I think something like you can't own a player you traded away through the next season and early trading deadlines would limit the collusion options, but when there is a lot of money on the line people get creative which goes back to my original premise that you would need to have the "right" set of team owners to make it work.

Still love the idea, conceptually.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
My understanding of the original empire league concept was that the reigning champion team going for the repeat win was not allowed to trade at all during that second season, just to prevent a colluded victory.

Doesn’t address the more complex, and therefore less likely prospect of colluding to dethrone that team.  Hard to see the win for individual participants there though, since they would still be two successful years from the big payout.
That's an interesting twist. I like it.

 
We do an empire league.  If an owner wins back to back years or three times in 10 years they drag the whole pot.  If no one does either after 10 years the league ends and everyone gets an equal share of the pot back.  

 
Dr. Octopus said:
I have heard of it - but to me that set up tells me it's nothing like a real dynasty. Why would a team bother to build when the league can end just like that. It also seems like being a "win now" team is the only way to go in that type of league.


i'd think the majority of teams would focus on winning now with veterans and some other teams could really clean up with a lot of high ceiling young guys and cross their fingers that nobody wins for a few years.

 
not exactly the same concept, but our dynasty/player contracts/salary cap league of 22 years has $50 added each year to a side-pot for the winner of the 'un-defeated season bonus prize'.

pays out to the first owner to run the table (15 wins in a row).  nobody has collected yet.  

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top