Calling fellow commish's (1 Viewer)

[pinda]

So our annual cut down to 9 players was today. It has been known that today was the day for a while, let's say for argument's sake it's been known for 2 weeks. Owner has been slowly cutting down from 17 players down to 11. Today he misses the deadline and if any team misses the deadline, I as commish have to cut players for him. I waited for a half hour and then proceeded to cut 2 of his players.His roster before was:Matt Hasselbeck, Eli Manning, Priest Holmes, Jerious Norwood, Lendale White, Ron Dayne, Bernard Berrian, Amani Toomer, Arnaz Battle, Reggie Williams, Dallas ClarkThis owner also has the #3 overall pick. Here is the situation. He missed the deadline and I dropped for him Priest Holmes and Ron Dayne. He complained that I should have dropped Toomer instead of Dayne. I figured that Toomer was a starter so I should keep him on. For me the decision was between Reggie Williams and Ron Dayne and considering he just traded for Reggie Williams that he'd want to keep him. I have also let him know that I would be willing to trade a starting RB for #3 overall pick.This is what he wrote to me back when I told him that I can't overturn it, only our league committee can after he explained it in an email.

.......I realize that you, amongst others, are coveting my #3 spot, particularly if Calvin Johnson falls to me. I have received a number of inquiries with everyone, even without Dayne protected, offering RBs. It was something I was considering doing but by protecting only Norwood and White, when Dayne is a logical third option, I may be squeezed into a position where I would be forced to trade Johnson for a RB to try to be competitive.....I trust that you and the Board can exercise discretion and make this change. If you are unable to do so, I will have to make the best of the situation. Perhaps the Team ABC would like to add Calvin Johnson in a deal for Willie Parker.

I found it completely classless that this guy is insinuating that I based my decision to drop Ron Dayne on the fact that I could pin him into trading the #3 for a RB. How can somebody compare Ron Dayne to one of my 3 RBs (Westbrook, Ronnie Brown, Deuce). Then to go even further and suggest that if I don't overturn it he will trade that same #3 that I covet to my competition I feel is completely unethical.How would you handle this as a commish? I think the best way is to inform the committee of the situation and remove myself from the whole thing and let them deal with it. As for prior situations, I have given no reason whatsoever for this person to ever doubt my character or integrity when it comes to being the commish.If I'm wrong in that I'm assuming too much, then I am more than willing to hear it and I hope you guys point that out. I was just completely flabbergasted by this owner.

 

[tulane]

First if I had a roster like his, I would kill myself. Especially in a 9-player keeper league.

So 30 minutes after the deadline, you cut these guys, and then he immediately chimed in? How long did it take for him to contact you?

I guess you should have the committee rule on this (and I would assume you'd end up swapping players since it seems to be insignificant).

Going forward, I'd suggest that the committee make the determination of who id cut for a delinquent owner.

 

[King_Kelly]

Do you have any established standard used when cutting players? Have you had to do this in the past?

David Dodds sez that Dayne and Toomer are projected to finish within one point of each other, so I'm not sure this is as cut and dry as you think.

 

[pinda]

10 AM was the deadline, i waited til 10:30 to give them a 1/2 hour buffer, and he emailed at 1:10pm. 3 hours after the deadline.

 

[King_Kelly]

Oh, and I think that going to the rules committee may be the best way to go in order to preserve any question regarding your integrity.

 

[pinda]

Do you have any established standard used when cutting players? Have you had to do this in the past? David Dodds sez that Dayne and Toomer are projected to finish within one point of each other, so I'm not sure this is as cut and dry as you think.

It's left to my discretion. We are drafting in person on Tuesday night at which time I'm tabling a rule to go into effect immediately and that is for any people that don't meet the deadline, a $20 per 24-hour fine be installed so that I don't have to make the decisions.I just can't believe somebody would question my character and integrity over Ron Dayne, just downright silly.

 

[Raptors]

I'll likely be facing the same situation tomorrow night in one of my leagues. I'd stick to my guns. He knew the rules. Tough luck for him.

 

[gianmarco]

You handled it properly. Let the committee decide, but if he wants to gripe about it, he should have made the deadline. Love how he turns and blames it on you when it was his mistake to begin with.

 

[King of the Wolfies]

same 2 players I would have picked. Sleep well tonight knowing that you did the best you could.

 

[pinda]

You handled it properly. Let the committee decide, but if he wants to gripe about it, he should have made the deadline. Love how he turns and blames it on you when it was his mistake to begin with.

That's what gets me the most is that it's not my fault to begin with then he throws a shot out like that based on Ron Dayne, I'm sorry but Ron ####### Dayne.

 

[King_Kelly]

Do you have any established standard used when cutting players? Have you had to do this in the past? David Dodds sez that Dayne and Toomer are projected to finish within one point of each other, so I'm not sure this is as cut and dry as you think.

It's left to my discretion. We are drafting in person on Tuesday night at which time I'm tabling a rule to go into effect immediately and that is for any people that don't meet the deadline, a $20 per 24-hour fine be installed so that I don't have to make the decisions.I just can't believe somebody would question my character and integrity over Ron Dayne, just downright silly.

I appreciate that. As a commish that always has the best interest of the league at heart, it's a tough thing to be accused of something less. What I'm saying is that it isn't all that clear that Dayne should be cut instead of Toomer. Which leaves you in a vulnerable position without a standard. Which is why I think you should leave it up to someone else to decide, and also set a standard (total points projected based on whatever free source you can find) for future years.

 

[pinequick]

Here's your message to the league: "Fellas, he missed the deadline. I made a call. You all made the deadline. That's about all I got."

In short, he can kiss your ###. If he makes the deadline, he doesn't have this problem. End of story. Tuff nuts, buddy.

 

[tulane]

This owner needs to find a new league. I really can't stand whiners that cry about unfair scenarios when they didn't follow the rules. Making a stand over Ron Dayne vs Toomer is a joke. Seriously. If he wants to create league animosity over this, tell him to pack his bags, as worse scenarios await.

Where is THE OWNER'S integrity? Put yourself in the owner's shoes... you missed your deadline and the commish cut Dayne/Toomer.... OK, maybe you wanted the other guy. Big whoop. Get over it and don't create a stink. I really hate owners like this.

 

[Brewzers]

Here's your message to the league: "Fellas, he missed the deadline. I made a call. You all made the deadline. That's about all I got."In short, he can kiss your ###. If he makes the deadline, he doesn't have this problem. End of story. Tuff nuts, buddy.

Exactly. Also, ask him if he has a copy of the rules, regardless of what he says, tell him you are going to send him another copy of the rules.

 

[Rocco]

We are not a holdover league, but years ago i instituted a rule that said if you forget to turn in a lineup, i pull your lowest starting lineup and put it in.

I would adopt a rule in you league that if you miss the deadline, you auto cut the X# of most powerful players in their stead. You will never have the problem again.

And get rid of the owner. not worth the time.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

It's funny. This guy can respond quickly to complain about who you dropped, he can respond e-mails about his #3 pick and he can consider trade offers...but he can't seem to make the deadline to cut his own guys? Selective attention span?

You did nothing wrong and he has no right to complain. I would have dropped Toomer instead of Dayne, but he didn't drop ANYBODY. His fault.

 

[cpstorm]

In one of my dynasty leagues, if you dont get the players in you are fined a 3rd round rookie pick. As for you dropping his players, as long as he knew the rules and they have been in place for a while, then he needs to shut his pie hole and live with his mistake. He left it too long. Something probably came up (life happens) but its his fault for letting it go so late.

 

[earlybreak]

Deadline 10:00 and you waited to 10:30. The only thing I would of done is give him a phone call at 10:15 and then make the move at 10:30. Rules are rules and as you said he has been making cuts fron 17 players down to where he had 2 more to make. Stick to your guns and if he gives you a hard time find a new owner.

 

[cobalt_27]

Here's your message to the league: "Fellas, he missed the deadline. I made a call. You all made the deadline. That's about all I got."In short, he can kiss your ###. If he makes the deadline, he doesn't have this problem. End of story. Tuff nuts, buddy.

So long as it was stated in the rules that, at your discretion, players would be forcibly dropped, you're completely in the clear. I'd put it before the committee if he continues to raise a stink, but this seems pretty clear cut that you didn't do anything untoward here.

 

[gem IV]

Here's your message to the league: "Fellas, he missed the deadline. I made a call. You all made the deadline. That's about all I got."In short, he can kiss your ###. If he makes the deadline, he doesn't have this problem. End of story. Tuff nuts, buddy.

Couldn't agree more!Going forward it helps to have issues like these addressed & written into the rules as objectively as possible. Instead of saying the Commish will cut the roster down to the required number (subjective on whom to cut)...it could spell out that the Commish will cut the roster down to the required number based on last years scoring (lowest scoring players dropped first regardless of position).

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

Here's your message to the league: "Fellas, he missed the deadline. I made a call. You all made the deadline. That's about all I got."In short, he can kiss your ###. If he makes the deadline, he doesn't have this problem. End of story. Tuff nuts, buddy.

So long as it was stated in the rules that, at your discretion, players would be forcibly dropped, you're completely in the clear. I'd put it before the committee if he continues to raise a stink, but this seems pretty clear cut that you didn't do anything untoward here.

I disagree about the committee. It shouldn't be there as a "last chance" for people who are in clear violation of the rules. It should be there to hash out grey areas only. If the committee somehow sides with the owner, the commissioner now has no power to do anything because even when he's absolutely right, he could be overruled on a technical Hail Mary. Commissioners often use a committee just to establish that they're totally, completely above-board. There shouldn't be an assumption of guilt with a commissh decision, especially with one like this. I'd say make the call, no committee and deal with it. The owner pretty much said he'd accept it even if he didn't like it. Leave it at that imo.

 

[cobalt_27]

Here's your message to the league: "Fellas, he missed the deadline. I made a call. You all made the deadline. That's about all I got."

In short, he can kiss your ###. If he makes the deadline, he doesn't have this problem. End of story. Tuff nuts, buddy.

So long as it was stated in the rules that, at your discretion, players would be forcibly dropped, you're completely in the clear. I'd put it before the committee if he continues to raise a stink, but this seems pretty clear cut that you didn't do anything untoward here.

I disagree about the committee. It shouldn't be there as a "last chance" for people who are in clear violation of the rules. It should be there to hash out grey areas only. If the committee somehow sides with the owner, the commissioner now has no power to do anything because even when he's absolutely right, he could be overruled on a technical Hail Mary. Commissioners often use a committee just to establish that they're totally, completely above-board. There shouldn't be an assumption of guilt with a commissh decision, especially with one like this. I'd say make the call, no committee and deal with it. The owner pretty much said he'd accept it even if he didn't like it. Leave it at that imo.

I think you're right on all points here. I pretty-much am assuming that, if there is a question about the commish's integrity in selecting Dayne over Toomer (i.e., which player to cut), that does present enough of a gray area to put it before the committee. As a commish, myself, I sometimes take this opportunities to shove it back in the owner's face. I think it's embarrassing to the owner to raise such a hissy-fit about this sort of thing and then get drubbed by the objective committee in a unanimous vote against him. Allowing some of these things to go before a committee can sometimes have the desired effect of saying, "stop being a baby and know your rules."

 

[pwtrash]

When the post started, I would have assumed that the commish was going to drop the best two players. I would make that explicit going forward, as another post mentioned.

You absolutely have to be a stickler about the rules. If you back off and change the drop now, that's essentially rendering the deadline meaningless. If this deadline becomes meaningless, why not other deadlines? When you don't extend a waiver deadline for someone or a lineup deadline, they can complain - accurately - that you're showing favoritism toward this owner by virtue of the fact that you let him effectively ignore a league deadline. And then you're basically left to explain that he got his way because he threatened your integrity (which teaches the other owners to...)

I would submit this before the rules committee, but not as an open-ended question - "what do you think". I would present to the rules committee the fact that if this guy gets a break on the deadline, where will it stop? Do they want to do away with league deadlines from now on? If the rule is that the commish chooses, then the commish chooses. Otherwise, the rules committee may focus on the question of Dayne vs. Toomer, which is the absolute wrong question. I think going to the rules committee is essential now that he is impugning your integrity, but make sure they are voting on rules, not on predicted FP. The real issues are:

1) Are deadlines real?

2) When the rule says "the commish does x", does it really mean that?

Dayne vs. Toomer is fluff, unless there is something in the rules about you guaranteeing that the owner perceive that they have maximum value after you make their cuts in the event of a missed deadline. I'm assuming there is not.

So those are the issues. It wouldn't matter if you had dropped LT, unless there was some precedent or rule that you would try to help teams when you had to take over owner function due to negligence. (I respect your decision and would have taken the same approach, but that's really not the issue at stake here. The only difference is that I would have forced him to stick with Dayne, because I'm mean that way. Seriously, this is over Ron Dayne? Has he ever watched him play? If it weren't for the precedent issue, I would let him make this, just because it would hurt his team - what there is of it.)

I'm a rules shark, but only because I get very concerned about precedent. A single exception becomes the new rule. Usually owners asking for an exception are cool enough to understand this once it's pointed out to them (like most 5 year olds are, as well - if I let you have the candy, then everyone will want the candy).

I suspect the vote will be laughably unanimous.

Good luck! It's sounds like you are really working hard to make this a fair league for everyone. Congratulations, and don't let this get you down.