Adding and dropping players to screw your opponent (1 Viewer)

[Ramos]

It's a total Bush-league move.Add a transaction fee to stop this and various other kinds of transaction silliness.

We charge $1 for each acquisition (no freebies)... not sure it would be worth the extra dough for maybe a 10-pt advantage.

That's part of the reason he's gonna do this. He wants transaction fees.

 

[Road Warriors]

If someone did that in a league I commish I would immediately lock their team and find a new owner. No warning, nothing. Anyone that would circumvent the rules like that doesn't belong in my leagues, even if they were just trying to make a point for a rule change.

This doesn't circumvent rules. The rules are fully enforced. The rules, as written, suck... but they're fully enforced. As written, there is nothing that states you can add/drop every available player at any time, and there is no financial consideration, either, so no penalty.

 

[JohnnyU]

Personally I recommend having a "Catch and Release" clause regarding waivers saying that the waiver-hold period kicks in only if the player was on a roster over the course of a game.

So, for example, if you pick up player A, then that week, drop him for player B before the start of next week's games, that player is immediately available for pickup by all owners.

This eliminates the "add and drop just to screw other players" strategy, which is, imho, pretty unethical.

We have First come first serve from Thurs morning at around 12:01(after waivers process) until kickoff of the first game, so owners dropping players has no affect as they are still a FA during this time. Rosters are frozen from the kickoff of the first game until Tues morning at 7:00 a.m. From 7:00 a.m. Tues until midnight Wed owners submit waiver requests, and the waivers are processed at midnight.

 

[Road Warriors]

...

Well my opponent this week needs to pick up a kicker as his has a bye week. Knowing him, he probably won't do it until Friday night at the earliest. If he doesn't act early, as I expect, late Friday afternoon I can add and drop every available kicker, and keep the Baltimore K on my roster for the week as he plays on Monday night. This will ensure my opponent doesn't have a K to go against me.

If I do this I know my opponent will be furious (he was one of the owners on my side wrt changing to a legit waivers process), there will be some drama in the league, and some owners will think it's hillarious. I figure this move might be the impetus to actually vote in decent free agent pickup rules next season.

The only con I can think of is that the commish had my back on dependent subs wrt Hurricane Ike, overruling most of the league. If I do this and the commish waives the 48 hour waiver period on a kicker for my opponent, he will be contradicting himself as to what he told me during the draft and this could create some tension between us.

Can anyone think of a legitimate reason why I shouldn't go through with what I've dubbed "Operation Catch and Release" ? I would like to hear opinions and from people who have experienced something akin to Operation Catch and Release. Right now, I can't think of a reason not to do this. It seems like the logical thing to do.

I wouldn't do it this week. The object of your Operation Catch and Release was on your side. Bad karma to screw someone who backed your play to push through the rule you want by showcasing the bad side of not pushing it through.Second, I wouldn't blindside the commish, either. He's made the ruling, and the league has said this issue doesn't need to be addressed.

What I would do is target the biggest loudmouth who opposed your proposal, and make him the victim. And I'd give the commish a heads up that I was going to do it.

Don't alienate your allies for this rule change. Make those who don't feel it's necessary feel the pain.

 

[goldenchild]

It's a total Bush-league move.Add a transaction fee to stop this and various other kinds of transaction silliness.

We charge $1 for each acquisition (no freebies)... not sure it would be worth the extra dough for maybe a 10-pt advantage.

That's part of the reason he's gonna do this. He wants transaction fees.

Ah, yes... I overlooked that part of the posting.If the OP is planning to do this to prove a point, then I would suggest doing it towards the end of the season (maybe after the playoff picture is set)...Doing it this early will just open another can of worms... this "strategy" will probably be used every week. by everyone.

 

[JohnnyU]

If someone did that in a league I commish I would immediately lock their team and find a new owner. No warning, nothing. Anyone that would circumvent the rules like that doesn't belong in my leagues, even if they were just trying to make a point for a rule change.

This doesn't circumvent rules. The rules are fully enforced. The rules, as written, suck... but they're fully enforced. As written, there is nothing that states you can add/drop every available player at any time, and there is no financial consideration, either, so no penalty.

I believe I already said that "circumvent" probably was a poor word choice, so replace that with "spirit of the rules". In the spirit of the rules it's a BIG no no for such behavior.

 

[rick6668]

We had a similar situation once.

This was in a yahoo league and a few years ago so when you dropped a player, he went on waivers for 48 hours.

Also, with a yahoo league, you can pick up FA anytime.

So this guy decides he doesn't want to drop someone to pick up a kicker for the week his kicker is on a bye.

Sunday games finish and He is losing by one point. His opponent sees that both kickers for Monday Night are available. He drops 2 players and picks them both up guaranteeing himself a win.

Is this fair?

 

[Stinkin Ref]

If someone did that in a league I commish I would immediately lock their team and find a new owner. No warning, nothing. Anyone that would circumvent the rules like that doesn't belong in my leagues, even if they were just trying to make a point for a rule change.

for some reason I just found this kind of funny after reading all of your posts in here...... is what your reaction as the commish would be that much better than what the original owner did....

 

[Stinkin Ref]

It's a total Bush-league move.Add a transaction fee to stop this and various other kinds of transaction silliness.

We charge $1 for each acquisition (no freebies)... not sure it would be worth the extra dough for maybe a 10-pt advantage.

That's part of the reason he's gonna do this. He wants transaction fees.

Ah, yes... I overlooked that part of the posting.If the OP is planning to do this to prove a point, then I would suggest doing it towards the end of the season (maybe after the playoff picture is set)...Doing it this early will just open another can of worms... this "strategy" will probably be used every week. by everyone.

not sure that this is the type of situation that presents itself on a week to week basis....if you are going to do it, you probably have to do it when the opportunity arises......

 

[Road Warriors]

If someone did that in a league I commish I would immediately lock their team and find a new owner. No warning, nothing. Anyone that would circumvent the rules like that doesn't belong in my leagues, even if they were just trying to make a point for a rule change.

This doesn't circumvent rules. The rules are fully enforced. The rules, as written, suck... but they're fully enforced. As written, there is nothing that states you can add/drop every available player at any time, and there is no financial consideration, either, so no penalty.

I believe I already said that "circumvent" probably was a poor word choice, so replace that with "spirit of the rules". In the spirit of the rules it's a BIG no no for such behavior.

Yeah, I saw that after the post. My first inclination was where you are, that this is bush league and shouldn't happen. However, what has me leaning a bit is the fact the OP has lobbied for rules that would stop this sort of action, and was dismissed by much of the league. If this was just a strategy used by the OP to get a "W" I'd be against it. If this is more of a lesson for the owners who don't want to implement transaction fees, after discussion, etc.... I can live with that. I'd inform the Commish of the plan, but I can see using the rules as proposed/lobbied for by certain teams against them, if given the chance.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

We had a similar situation once.This was in a yahoo league and a few years ago so when you dropped a player, he went on waivers for 48 hours.Also, with a yahoo league, you can pick up FA anytime.So this guy decides he doesn't want to drop someone to pick up a kicker for the week his kicker is on a bye.Sunday games finish and He is losing by one point. His opponent sees that both kickers for Monday Night are available. He drops 2 players and picks them both up guaranteeing himself a win.Is this fair?

this is perfectly fine and a great move.....had the owner without the kicker picked up one of the guys and won it would have been applauded....

 

[Coach3K]

There's no rule against sleeping with your best friend's wife in many states.

So obviously it's something you should do, right? I mean...since HE could do the same to you since it's legal, you might as well screw his wife before he screws yours!

Legality makes it perfectly morally acceptable, yes?

This is a completely inappropriate metaphor. Cutthroat Fantasy Football = Banging your friend's wife.

I'm just using an extreme example to show that just because something is TECHNICALLY ok to do, it doesn't mean is SHOULD be done.Think of any number of other, less-shocking scenarios if the other offends your tender sensibilities.

The point is that just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you should - there's a voice in most people called a conscience that reminds them that what they are doing isn't right. There's no question adultery is wrong in this situation, even if it's legal - and everyone with a conscience reading that extreme example just KNOWS without thinking that it's morally, if not legally, wrong. Why isn't that conscience triggered for everyone when thinking about this situation? You're still doing the wrong thing. Punishments and consequences may vary according to the circumstances, but the fact still remains that both are shady things to do.

 

[j3r3m3y]

If someone did that in a league I commish I would immeadiately lock their team and find a new owner. No warning, nothing. Anyone that would circumvent the rules like that doesn't belong in my leagues, even if they were just trying to make a poinit for a rule change.

How can it be "circumventing the rules" when it's not prohibited by the rules?Calling someone a ####head is circumventing the language filter.

Calling someone a blockhead is not.

Ok, then, let's just change the wording to "spirit of the rules". Either way, it taks a ##### to do that.

Not only is it not against the rules, the commish told me "Do it" twice at the draft when I brought up my concerns. So he basically encouraged me to do it.

Being encouraged to do something you know is wrong, does not make it the right thing to do.

"Wrong"? Play to win or don't play. If the rules allow it, go for it. Some of you guys take this stuff too seriously. I have run a league with mostly the same cast of characters for 9 years now. If someone did something like this it would make a pretty strong case for changing the rules but I can't see getting mad at someone for doing something that the rules allowed.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

I wouldn't tell the commish ahead of time.....he will steal your thunder

what I would do is post a message before you make all the moves....then make all the moves....and in that message you say, "but after I do it, I am fine with my moves being deleted/over turned whatever".....that way you prove your point, show AHEAD of time that you are not being an #####, but merely showing them what could happen if the rule is not changed.....

going through the whole process and showing what could happen, and the commish having to go back and reverse the transactions, should get your point across while you also come out looking okay....

if the league actually sees an example of what could happen it might sway some votes your way

 

[j3r3m3y]

If someone did that in a league I commish I would immediately lock their team and find a new owner. No warning, nothing. Anyone that would circumvent the rules like that doesn't belong in my leagues, even if they were just trying to make a point for a rule change.

This doesn't circumvent rules. The rules are fully enforced. The rules, as written, suck... but they're fully enforced. As written, there is nothing that states you can add/drop every available player at any time, and there is no financial consideration, either, so no penalty.

I believe I already said that "circumvent" probably was a poor word choice, so replace that with "spirit of the rules". In the spirit of the rules it's a BIG no no for such behavior.

Yeah, I saw that after the post. My first inclination was where you are, that this is bush league and shouldn't happen.

Hypothetical:You are in a league with 11 other internet people you don't know. Entry was free but the prize at the end is a million. Cash. The league allows this and doing it will a) increase your chance of winning and b) not violate any league rules.Are you going to tell me you don't do it because it is "bush league"?

 

[j3r3m3y]

The point is that just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you should - there's a voice in most people called a conscience that reminds them that what they are doing isn't right.

So if you are going to gamble (which is what fantasy football is) do so with a proper moral compass? Seems like relativism to me.

 

[jaybebo]

It would be a very unsportsmanlike action. Nevertheless, if the rule allows such action to take place and you proceed to complete "Operation Catch and Release", there is nothing the league owners can say about the issue.

 

[eric rymer]

I've decided that if my opponent hasn't picked up a K by tomorrow morning, I'm going to send an email to our commish, detailing Operation: Catch and Release.

If he has a problem with it, then I'll abide by his decision, and he can send out a mass email stating that such tactics are prohibited. If he says I'm free to do whatever I want, then Operation: Catch and Release will commence at 1800 hours on 9/26.

The bottom line is -- What would Bill Belichek do? I think BB would definitely side with me on this one. And he's one of the greatest coaches of all time.

Btw, thanks to whoever suggested contacting the commish.

This is the only part of the post I'd agree with. I'd explain how the glitch in the rules could completely screw the other guy over and be done with it. I can see your frustration, but it's not worth being the leaguewide #####. Can't say I'd want to put my self in the same category with BB.

 

[Road Warriors]

If someone did that in a league I commish I would immediately lock their team and find a new owner. No warning, nothing. Anyone that would circumvent the rules like that doesn't belong in my leagues, even if they were just trying to make a point for a rule change.

This doesn't circumvent rules. The rules are fully enforced. The rules, as written, suck... but they're fully enforced. As written, there is nothing that states you can add/drop every available player at any time, and there is no financial consideration, either, so no penalty.

I believe I already said that "circumvent" probably was a poor word choice, so replace that with "spirit of the rules". In the spirit of the rules it's a BIG no no for such behavior.

Yeah, I saw that after the post. My first inclination was where you are, that this is bush league and shouldn't happen.

Hypothetical:You are in a league with 11 other internet people you don't know. Entry was free but the prize at the end is a million. Cash. The league allows this and doing it will a) increase your chance of winning and b) not violate any league rules.Are you going to tell me you don't do it because it is "bush league"?

Circumstances in your hypothetical might change my mind. I'm looking through the I play with friends/acquaintances window, and I wouldn't "win at any cost" in that circumstance. If I expect to have an ongoing FF league with the same guys, I doubt I would do this. If its hardcore money on the line, and it within the rules, I certainly would do it. Circumstances can change your actions, IMO.

 

[j3r3m3y]

It would be a very unsportsmanlike action. Nevertheless, if the rule allows such action to take place and you proceed to complete "Operation Catch and Release", there is nothing the league owners can say about the issue.

My take on it might be askew because the league I am in consists mostly of members of our old D&D group (yeah we are nerds ). So we look at it as a game first, a sport.... well not at all.Now that we are all grown up and spread across the country pursuing our various careers (IT, teachers, even have a state assistant attorney general in the league) this is the way we roll the dice and beat each other up. In making the rules for the league we think about possible issues like this because we know if they are there, someone will use them to gain advantage.This situation is a little different because something this obvious would be changed as soon as it was brought to the leagues attention but if someone came up with something like this without any discussion we would laugh and applaud. Then hold a vote to change the rules next season, or in rare cases immediately.

 

[davearm]

"Wrong"? Play to win or don't play. If the rules allow it, go for it. Some of you guys take this stuff too seriously. I have run a league with mostly the same cast of characters for 9 years now. If someone did something like this it would make a pretty strong case for changing the rules but I can't see getting mad at someone for doing something that the rules allowed.

Actually it's the folks that would consider "Operation Catch and Release" an acceptable strategy that are taking this stuff too seriously.

 

[j3r3m3y]

Circumstances in your hypothetical might change my mind. I'm looking through the I play with friends/acquaintances window, and I wouldn't "win at any cost" in that circumstance. If I expect to have an ongoing FF league with the same guys, I doubt I would do this. If its hardcore money on the line, and it within the rules, I certainly would do it. Circumstances can change your actions, IMO.

I appreciate your candor. This is why I have an issue with the line of thought in this thread that you just don't do it because it is "wrong". If it is wrong it is always wrong, circumstances don't change that. Then again, I don't believe it is "wrong" in the first place.

 

[Topes]

People used to do this in the free Yahoo leagues all the time.

It's a ####ty thing to do.

I don't play in those leagues anymore.

 

[j3r3m3y]

"Wrong"? Play to win or don't play. If the rules allow it, go for it. Some of you guys take this stuff too seriously. I have run a league with mostly the same cast of characters for 9 years now. If someone did something like this it would make a pretty strong case for changing the rules but I can't see getting mad at someone for doing something that the rules allowed.

Actually it's the folks that would consider "Operation Catch and Release" an acceptable strategy that are taking this stuff too seriously.

Maybe both groups do to a degree and in different ways.

 

[Road Warriors]

It would be a very unsportsmanlike action. Nevertheless, if the rule allows such action to take place and you proceed to complete "Operation Catch and Release", there is nothing the league owners can say about the issue.

Wanna bet? While the owners won't have any logical backing to their complaints, I'm virtually certain that the owner impacted would have something to say.

I like the idea of executing Operation Catch & Release against the most vocal opponent to adding transaction fees or any other rules that eliminate or discourage this action.

 

[Coach3K]

The point is that just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you should - there's a voice in most people called a conscience that reminds them that what they are doing isn't right.

So if you are going to gamble (which is what fantasy football is) do so with a proper moral compass? Seems like relativism to me.

We could get all philosophical if we want, but some things are just inherently moral/immoral and others have to have those tags placed upon them by outside entities.If we all grew up living with ONE other person on a deserted south pacific island with no outside forces, would any of us consider EVVVVVIIIILLL things like "playing cards", "making a bet about which coconut falls next", or "wagering fish on which monkey can jump the furthest between trees" to be "wrong" or immoral? No...we wouldn't think twice about it. We think that those things are morally wrong because we've been raised to believe that *ooh...scary voice* gambling is a sinnnn because Father Mullally told us that in Sunday School!!!Now, taking that other persons cards and burning them...knocking him out with the first coconut that falls, or killing him with a knife fashioned from the bones of the fish you won from him due to your superior monkey-evaluating skills....those are all things we'd probably learn aren't good things to do. Natural consequences would quickly come into play and hone that sense of conscience when you don't have a card partner, you get smashed in the face the next day with HIS coconut, or you lose half your fish-catching workforce.

 

[j3r3m3y]

The point is that just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you should - there's a voice in most people called a conscience that reminds them that what they are doing isn't right.

So if you are going to gamble (which is what fantasy football is) do so with a proper moral compass? Seems like relativism to me.

We could get all philosophical if we want, but some things are just inherently moral/immoral and others have to have those tags placed upon them by outside entities.If we all grew up living with ONE other person on a deserted south pacific island with no outside forces, would any of us consider EVVVVVIIIILLL things like "playing cards", "making a bet about which coconut falls next", or "wagering fish on which monkey can jump the furthest between trees" to be "wrong" or immoral? No...we wouldn't think twice about it. We think that those things are morally wrong because we've been raised to believe that *ooh...scary voice* gambling is a sinnnn because Father Mullally told us that in Sunday School!!!Now, taking that other persons cards and burning them...knocking him out with the first coconut that falls, or killing him with a knife fashioned from the bones of the fish you won from him due to your superior monkey-evaluating skills....those are all things we'd probably learn aren't good things to do. Natural consequences would quickly come into play and hone that sense of conscience when you don't have a card partner, you get smashed in the face the next day with HIS coconut, or you lose half your fish-catching workforce.

Touche`, but the entire concept of "sportsmanship" and what all that entails is just as subjective.I did laugh out loud at the last paragraph though, getting funny looks from the guy in the next cube.edit: oh, and can that one other person be Alyssia Milano? If so I would sign up yesterday and there will be NO card playing dilemma, that I can assure you.

 

[Coach3K]

If someone did that in a league I commish I would immediately lock their team and find a new owner. No warning, nothing. Anyone that would circumvent the rules like that doesn't belong in my leagues, even if they were just trying to make a point for a rule change.

This doesn't circumvent rules. The rules are fully enforced. The rules, as written, suck... but they're fully enforced. As written, there is nothing that states you can add/drop every available player at any time, and there is no financial consideration, either, so no penalty.

I believe I already said that "circumvent" probably was a poor word choice, so replace that with "spirit of the rules". In the spirit of the rules it's a BIG no no for such behavior.

Yeah, I saw that after the post. My first inclination was where you are, that this is bush league and shouldn't happen.

Hypothetical:You are in a league with 11 other internet people you don't know. Entry was free but the prize at the end is a million. Cash. The league allows this and doing it will a) increase your chance of winning and b) not violate any league rules.Are you going to tell me you don't do it because it is "bush league"?

It's an invalid hypothetical because if $1Million were actually on the line, the rules would be so ironed out to account for every possible ######## move, that you'd need a lawyer to review it.It's fantasy football! It's a game. You shouldn't need Hammurabi's Code to play it.

 

[j3r3m3y]

It's an invalid hypothetical because if $1Million were actually on the line, the rules would be so ironed out to account for every possible ######## move, that you'd need a lawyer to review it.It's fantasy football! It's a game. You shouldn't need Hammurabi's Code to play it.

You ever see the rule book for just about any major league sport? Games sometimes need a lot of rules.And your assertion does not invalidate my hypothetical. It is my hypothetical and I say this situation can exist. I think you are avoiding the question because you know you would do it.

 

[Coach3K]

LOL - either way, both sides ARE probably taking this too seriously.

Fact of the matter is, we all live by different standards.

I tend to play with guys who consider moves like this to be against the "unspoken rules" that we play by...not because we don't want to hire lawyers to review a huge league document to protect our $25 investments. It's just because we all have similar views about the "bro code" and its violations without having to draw them up on faded parchment. We just have fun and do the right thing while doing it.

Others may be more cutthroat. If your league allows that, fine. I'm sure you'll be able to get yourself out of bed tomorrow and carry on your life just fine without any feelings of guilt.

I'm not sure, then, what purpose this post serves. I mean...it's not like our input was going to cause you to develop a sense of fair play. Your moral beliefs are already well-developed. If you're of the opinion that anything NOT in the rules is fair game, then you already have your answer and would already have planned to do this. If you tend to have more of a conscience and "do what's right" even if rules allow you to do otherwise, then you probably wouldn't have even thought to do otherwise.

*shrug* I guess you could be somewhere in between, wavering...wondering if there's another angle that you hadn't considered yet that might tip the scales. Dunno...good luck with whatever you do though!

 

[j3r3m3y]

LOL - either way, both sides ARE probably taking this too seriously.Fact of the matter is, we all live by different standards.I tend to play with guys who consider moves like this to be against the "unspoken rules" that we play by...not because we don't want to hire lawyers to review a huge league document to protect our $25 investments. It's just because we all have similar views about the "bro code" and its violations without having to draw them up on faded parchment. We just have fun and do the right thing while doing it.Others may be more cutthroat. If your league allows that, fine. I'm sure you'll be able to get yourself out of bed tomorrow and carry on your life just fine without any feelings of guilt. I'm not sure, then, what purpose this post serves. I mean...it's not like our input was going to cause you to develop a sense of fair play. Your moral beliefs are already well-developed. If you're of the opinion that anything NOT in the rules is fair game, then you already have your answer and would already have planned to do this. If you tend to have more of a conscience and "do what's right" even if rules allow you to do otherwise, then you probably wouldn't have even thought to do otherwise.*shrug* I guess you could be somewhere in between, wavering...wondering if there's another angle that you hadn't considered yet that might tip the scales. Dunno...good luck with whatever you do though!

As I said before, it could have to do with the fact that we are all old school gamers and "rules lawyering" is more than just a minor interest to us. It might also have something to do with the fact that we have three actual (as in passed the bar, practicing in court) lawyers in the league (I am not one). Mostly I think you are right, we have a different view of the "bro" code, but at least in our circle it is similar so it works. I still take exception to the idea that we don't have a "do what's right" attitude we just define "right" differently.Cheers!

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Background: I'm in a 16 team league with a bunch of friends that's ultra competitive. Tons of trash talking, making fun of others, etc. Well this league has an abnormal waivers process. If you drop a player, they are put on waivers for 48 hours and can be claimed. This is fairly standard. All other players, however, are available to be picked up at any time -- they're not even locked during the games. It's a first come, first serve, free for all for free agents.A couple owners in the league are already closing in on 20 transactions, as you might expect. I've been trying to change this for years, to no avail. This year I got together with a couple guys to try and vote in a rule charging for player adds, with the caveat that you get your first 15 moves free. It didn't pass. I then informed the league how this rule could be easily abused. For example, say an owner only has one defense/st rostered and it's their by week. Let's also say that this owner is a procrastinator and won't look to pick up another D/ST until Saturday. Well his opponent could add and drop every available D/ST on Friday night, so they would all be placed on the waiver wire and claims wouldn't go through until Sunday night after the games are played. The guy needing a D/ST would be screwed. No one cared about this abuse scenario, and the commish told me I could do it if I wanted. Everyone thought it was funny.

I was going to come in here and post that this is a bush league move that should get you kicked out of your league, but if you and the other owners discussed this issue and decided it was fair game, then it's their fault that there's no rule in place to prevent this. Go for it.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

In the spirit of the rules it's a BIG no no for such behavior.

How can you possibly argue that this is against the spirit of the rules when every owner in the league knows about this possibility and the commish explicitly said it was okay? It sounds like this particular league happens to be filled with owners who are completely cool with this sort of thing. It wouldn't fly in any leagues that I'm in, and I wouldn't want to be in OP's league, but it sounds like this is squarely within the spirit of the rules in his particular league.

 

[Coach3K]

It's an invalid hypothetical because if $1Million were actually on the line, the rules would be so ironed out to account for every possible ######## move, that you'd need a lawyer to review it.It's fantasy football! It's a game. You shouldn't need Hammurabi's Code to play it.

You ever see the rule book for just about any major league sport? Games sometimes need a lot of rules.And your assertion does not invalidate my hypothetical. It is my hypothetical and I say this situation can exist. I think you are avoiding the question because you know you would do it.

OK - it doesn't invalidate it completely. You own it...fine...do what you want with the fantasy hypothetical, even though no actual scenario like it would ever come to be because ONE MILLION DOLLARS is riding on it and every member of the league would ensure all cheating angles are addressed beforehand. Hopefully, Alyssa Milano IS worked in there somewhere, because that IS nice to fantasize about. It IS invalidated as it relates to this specific situation, though. He is with a group of friends. The amount on the line would not trigger a run to his lawyer to draw up a set of rules because the cost likely outweighs the benefit.And to answer - IF in some strange galaxy where people had no brains and played for the equivalent of $1Million on fantasy football and didn't have an airtight document outlawing all the things many of us consider "foul play" - then I'd definitely use every advantage I could, even if it DID violate sportsmanship, because everyone else would obviously be at a mental advantage from not insisting on a comprehensive rule document. Of course, I'd use part of my winnings to donate to some charity to make myself feel a little better. See...it still would be inherently WRONG - I don't deny that and don't claim to be a Saint...but the benefit to be gained would outweigh it enough that I'd also be able to live with myself. Doing the same thing to a group of my college buddies who I've known for 15 years over a $25 entry fee league where the primary motivation is entertainment?...now that wouldn't even cross my mind.Edit: And to answer two obvious questions...no I wouldn't sleep with my best friend's wife or stand on a corner shouting racial epithets for $1Million...winning that money in a league of internet strangers wouldn't negatively impact my life the way both of those activities would. Some things are wrong AND don't have a violation price-point! (and my #$@#%@# fingers can't stop hitting T's when I try to spell "weigh"!)

 

[Chicago Hooligan]

I've done something very similar in a league I used to play in. My opponent dropped his kicker, and I assume was going to just grab the best one available. I did the add/drop to lock them all on waiver and beat him in the 1st round of the playoffs by 3 points. Some arguing ensued but the commish let it happen. I ended up winning the league.

I was told the league was full the following year.

In retrospect, I wish I had not done what I did. I had been in that league for 3 years, and had alot of fun during that time. I didn't know anyone IRL, but I did consider myself friends with the other guys in the leagues. Now they all think I'm an ###hole, and rightfully so.

Long story short, if you do it, it'll be bad for the league's longevity (or your tenure in it).

I thought this was the best post in here. No one did anything "wrong" but everyone ended up unhappy about it. Thanks.

 

[j3r3m3y]

See...it still would be inherently WRONG -

There are very few things that across all cultures are considered "wrong". I don't think this is a case that this term applies to, that is my point. I am not saying it is acceptable in all cases either. But what about the one we are actually discussing? Where it has been brought up and not only did the league say "it's no big deal?" but the commish even encouraged him to do it. How can this be "wrong"?

 

[JohnnyU]

If someone did that in a league I commish I would immediately lock their team and find a new owner. No warning, nothing. Anyone that would circumvent the rules like that doesn't belong in my leagues, even if they were just trying to make a point for a rule change.

for some reason I just found this kind of funny after reading all of your posts in here...... is what your reaction as the commish would be that much better than what the original owner did....

I don't know why you said that. It was uncalled for. You can ask anyone about my reputation as a commish. I feel that I do a very good job as commish.

 

[j3r3m3y]

If someone did that in a league I commish I would immediately lock their team and find a new owner. No warning, nothing. Anyone that would circumvent the rules like that doesn't belong in my leagues, even if they were just trying to make a point for a rule change.

for some reason I just found this kind of funny after reading all of your posts in here...... is what your reaction as the commish would be that much better than what the original owner did....

I don't know why you said that. It was uncalled for. You can ask anyone about my reputation as a commish. I feel that I do a very good job as commish.

No, he is right. Your knee jerk reaction to someone doing something completely allowed by the rules is just as bad. It is pretty clear that I, as a commish, would have no problem with this, but if I did I would roll back the changes and have a talk with the people involved.And we all think we do a very good job as commish... just ask any one of us and we will tell you. But we aren't all right.

 

[JohnnyU]

If someone did that in a league I commish I would immediately lock their team and find a new owner. No warning, nothing. Anyone that would circumvent the rules like that doesn't belong in my leagues, even if they were just trying to make a point for a rule change.

for some reason I just found this kind of funny after reading all of your posts in here...... is what your reaction as the commish would be that much better than what the original owner did....

I don't know why you said that. It was uncalled for. You can ask anyone about my reputation as a commish. I feel that I do a very good job as commish.

No, he is right. Your knee jerk reaction to someone doing something completely allowed by the rules is just as bad. It is pretty clear that I, as a commish, would have no problem with this, but if I did I would roll back the changes and have a talk with the people involved.And we all think we do a very good job as commish... just ask any one of us and we will tell you. But we aren't all right.

Being a jerk just because there's a loophole in the rules should not be tolerated. I guarantee you there's not one owner in Fantasy Legends I, II, or III that would object to ousting such an owner, and I'm not known to be an unfair commish. However, I do move swiftly to correct a bad situation. Maybe I wouldn't have ousted the owner the first time, but if I'd had previous problems with him, or if he was an extremely inactive owner, or if something else happened that was just as bad, I wouldn't have a problem getting rid of him.

 

[j3r3m3y]

Being a jerk just because there's a loophole in the rules should not be tolerated. I guarantee you there's not one owner in Fantasy Legends I, II, or III that would object to ousting such an owner,

So what? I know this is supposed to impress me, but it doesn't. And it is an appeal to authority, not a valid point.

 

[Coach3K]

See...it still would be inherently WRONG -

There are very few things that across all cultures are considered "wrong". I don't think this is a case that this term applies to, that is my point. I am not saying it is acceptable in all cases either. But what about the one we are actually discussing? Where it has been brought up and not only did the league say "it's no big deal?" but the commish even encouraged him to do it. How can this be "wrong"?

I'll agree with you on the limited scope of things that are universally considered immoral or wrong. I'm sure murder, theft, and assault don't often come up in the realm of fantasy football. Please, no one prove me wrong!But in the scope of THIS culture...fantasy football players...generally guys who follow sports...etc., (even going so far as to limit it to the sub-culture of FRIENDS who play fantasy football, as that is the specific group related by the OP), I would like to think that there'd be an expanded list of "universal wrong" actions.

There's the rub..."I would like to think" - sadly, it's obviously not the case. Clearly from this thread, there are opinions on both sides. Luckily, I play with friends who share my beliefs on the matter. I'd like to think that people I may find in an online league would have the same values I do. Of course, it's a crapshoot in that situation.

But I digress....the discussion has morphed a bit from the original point, and I even answered my own question above (which was directed to the OP, not to you Jeremy) - the OP was looking not for whether he should do it or not because of moral issues...but whether there was a good reason why he shouldn't do it to specifically prove his point on the lack of rules addressing waiver players.

In the context of that league, the short answer is probably "No...there's not a good reason to not do it", especially if all parties understand that he was trying to make a point for a reason ...and I think he got a good discussion on both sides. All the other talk about right and wrong is really irrelevant and I guess I should have read more clearly through the original post to get to that issue vs. automatically jumping on my soapbox.

I did get to fantasize about Alyssa though...mmm...thanks for that!

 

[JohnnyU]

Being a jerk just because there's a loophole in the rules should not be tolerated. I guarantee you there's not one owner in Fantasy Legends I, II, or III that would object to ousting such an owner,

So what? I know this is supposed to impress me, but it doesn't. And it is an appeal to authority, not a valid point.

I'm not trying to impress you, only to say that this kind of behavior isn't tolerated. Anyone that really thinks this isn't bad for their league is either lying or stupid.

 

[j3r3m3y]

Being a jerk just because there's a loophole in the rules should not be tolerated. I guarantee you there's not one owner in Fantasy Legends I, II, or III that would object to ousting such an owner,

So what? I know this is supposed to impress me, but it doesn't. And it is an appeal to authority, not a valid point.

I'm not trying to impress you, only to say that this kind of behavior isn't tolerated. Anyone that really thinks this isn't bad for their league is either lying or stupid.

So you move from appeals to authority to personal attacks? I never said it wasn't bad for the league but the problem is the rules, not the owner who uses the rules to his advantage. In an above scenario it was shown that even though someone pulled this off, they later regretted it. But in the case of the OP he is being told not only is it allowed but to go ahead and do it.

Did you even read the first post?

 

[Dexter Manley]

FTR, this is the only league I'm in that I would consider doing this. And the main reason I'm leaning towards doing is because of the illogical resistance other owners have put up to making legitimate player add rules.

Also, I'm not the guy everyone thinks is an ahole. That guy is in my division and is always looking to screw other people over. Unfortunately, he doesn't wait unitl the weekend to pick up players for bye weeks, so I'll never have a chance to unleash Operation: Catch and Release on him.

I'm really hoping that the commish will change his mind and say that what I want to do is unacceptable, and that this will lay the groundwork for new rules next season. If he gives me the ok, however, I pretty much have no choice but to commence Operation: Catch and Release.

 

[JohnnyU]

Being a jerk just because there's a loophole in the rules should not be tolerated. I guarantee you there's not one owner in Fantasy Legends I, II, or III that would object to ousting such an owner,

So what? I know this is supposed to impress me, but it doesn't. And it is an appeal to authority, not a valid point.

I'm not trying to impress you, only to say that this kind of behavior isn't tolerated. Anyone that really thinks this isn't bad for their league is either lying or stupid.

So you move from appeals to authority to personal attacks? I never said it wasn't bad for the league but the problem is the rules, not the owner who uses the rules to his advantage. In an above scenario it was shown that even though someone pulled this off, they later regretted it. But in the case of the OP he is being told not only is it allowed but to go ahead and do it.

Did you even read the first post?

I wasn't being personal with anyone specifically. I guess were different, because the way I see it is, even if a player does something like this within the rules, it is against the "spirit of the rules", and is not the kind of behavior I like to see in my leagues. Two wrongs don't make a right. Yes, try to get the rules changed, but picking up all the kickers and releasing them is asinine no matter how you slice it.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

Being a jerk just because there's a loophole in the rules should not be tolerated. I guarantee you there's not one owner in Fantasy Legends I, II, or III that would object to ousting such an owner,

So what? I know this is supposed to impress me, but it doesn't. And it is an appeal to authority, not a valid point.

I'm not trying to impress you, only to say that this kind of behavior isn't tolerated. Anyone that really thinks this isn't bad for their league is either lying or stupid.

one might think an example of behavior that might not be tolerated by a league would be that of a commish of a league who immediately locks a team, kicks out the owner, no warning given, no questions asked, no explanation given, finds another owner, etc.....without consulting anybody else and does so because he is the commish and uses his power to do so because he thinks he can speak for everybody in the league on every situation.....and that owner technically didn't break a ruleas a commish it is important to make sound judgements, not knee jerk reactions.....there are many other ways to handle this situation other then the one you described that would have probably been accepted by the members of the league....

 

[JohnnyU]

Being a jerk just because there's a loophole in the rules should not be tolerated. I guarantee you there's not one owner in Fantasy Legends I, II, or III that would object to ousting such an owner,

So what? I know this is supposed to impress me, but it doesn't. And it is an appeal to authority, not a valid point.

I'm not trying to impress you, only to say that this kind of behavior isn't tolerated. Anyone that really thinks this isn't bad for their league is either lying or stupid.

one might think an example of behavior that might not be tolerated by a league would be that of a commish of a league who immediately locks a team, kicks out the owner, no warning given, no questions asked, no explanation given, finds another owner, etc.....without consulting anybody else and does so because he is the commish and uses his power to do so because he thinks he can speak for everybody in the league on every situation.....and that owner technically didn't break a ruleas a commish it is important to make sound judgements, not knee jerk reactions.....there are many other ways to handle this situation other then the one you described that would have probably been accepted by the members of the league....

I agree with you. What I said was probably something I wouldn't have done that way. Obviously I would have sent an email asking for his removal in a vote. Only in the cases of certain infractions would I not ask for a vote, such as non-payment, and a there are a few others in our rules.

 

[JohnnyU]

FTR, this is the only league I'm in that I would consider doing this. And the main reason I'm leaning towards doing is because of the illogical resistance other owners have put up to making legitimate player add rules.

Why even play in this league if you can't get the rules changed through discussion, rather than stoop to the level of adding/dropping all the kickers?

 

[j3r3m3y]

FTR, this is the only league I'm in that I would consider doing this. And the main reason I'm leaning towards doing is because of the illogical resistance other owners have put up to making legitimate player add rules.

Why even play in this league if you can't get the rules changed through discussion, rather than stoop to the level of adding/dropping all the kickers?

Sometimes people need to learn the hard way why something needs to be changed. Just because they are slow in seeing the light in this particular case it doesn't mean rules can never be changed through discussion.

 

[Road Warriors]

FTR, this is the only league I'm in that I would consider doing this. And the main reason I'm leaning towards doing is because of the illogical resistance other owners have put up to making legitimate player add rules.

Why even play in this league if you can't get the rules changed through discussion, rather than stoop to the level of adding/dropping all the kickers?

Sometimes actions speak louder than words. You can't always convince FFL owners of the need to add/change rules. Until they are presented with something that makes it blatantly obvious a change needs to happen, most owners will resist change.I don't think that the manner in which the OP is handling this is against the spirit of the rules, based on the league-wide conversation that took place earlier. The loophole was called out, a change was requested to close it, and the other owners apparently wanted to keep the loophole open. Sometimes you have to give the people what they ask for.