What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Can a commissioner act on somebody tanking games? (1 Viewer)

LC512

Footballguy
There are four teams fighting for the last two playoff spots in my league.

Two teams have already clinched. The first place team wants to tank his game on purpose because he doesn't like the matchup he'd get with the fourth place team (the best team in the league).

The issue that's been raised is that by tanking the game, the first place team could very well cost one of the other four teams a playoff spot. It has direct implications.

This has no bearing on my team, but I am the commissioner. What are your thoughts on a commissioner's role in this? On one hand, tanking clearly goes against fair play and sportsmanship. On the other, it's his team, and he can do what he wants with it.

Thoughts? I'm sure this has been asked before, I just can't find anything on it.

 
There are four teams fighting for the last two playoff spots in my league.Two teams have already clinched. The first place team wants to tank his game on purpose because he doesn't like the matchup he'd get with the fourth place team (the best team in the league).The issue that's been raised is that by tanking the game, the first place team could very well cost one of the other four teams a playoff spot. It has direct implications.This has no bearing on my team, but I am the commissioner. What are your thoughts on a commissioner's role in this? On one hand, tanking clearly goes against fair play and sportsmanship. On the other, it's his team, and he can do what he wants with it.Thoughts? I'm sure this has been asked before, I just can't find anything on it.
Wow. You seem to have a lot of tanking/collusion issues in your leagues, don't you? Or is it just my imagination?
 
There are four teams fighting for the last two playoff spots in my league.Two teams have already clinched. The first place team wants to tank his game on purpose because he doesn't like the matchup he'd get with the fourth place team (the best team in the league).The issue that's been raised is that by tanking the game, the first place team could very well cost one of the other four teams a playoff spot. It has direct implications.This has no bearing on my team, but I am the commissioner. What are your thoughts on a commissioner's role in this? On one hand, tanking clearly goes against fair play and sportsmanship. On the other, it's his team, and he can do what he wants with it.Thoughts? I'm sure this has been asked before, I just can't find anything on it.
Wow. You seem to have a lot of tanking/collusion issues in your leagues, don't you? Or is it just my imagination?
I have a couple of friends that were never taught proper sportsmanship, apparently.
 
You need to write some anti-tanking measures into your league rules.

The only league I'm in that I've ever seen blatant taking was 2 yrs ago. We had nothing written in the rules. The only thing you can really do is try and publicly humiliate the tool tanking, let karma take care of his playoff fate, and make sure to update your rules in the offseason.

 
You need to write some anti-tanking measures into your league rules.The only league I'm in that I've ever seen blatant taking was 2 yrs ago. We had nothing written in the rules. The only thing you can really do is try and publicly humiliate the tool tanking, let karma take care of his playoff fate, and make sure to update your rules in the offseason.
:goodposting: This happened in my league this season. A team started throwing games to improve his draft position next season (keeper league). I didn't have anything in my rules, so I let it go on. It almost knocked me out of the playoffs in the final week.I'll be adding to the rules in the off-season to make sure that it does not happen again in the future, but I let it happen this year.
 
Should I at least force the player to field a roster? Right now, he has a completely empty roster. The team he is playing (#3 team) only has one player in, because he needs a win to clinch, but doesn't want to gain the points to hop into the #1 spot.

Basically everybody is avoiding the #1 spot because if my team wins, I'm at #4, and I have the best team by far (most points, but most scored against :wall: ). Everyone is avoiding my team and it's going to cost their friend(s) a playoff spot. Ridiculous.

 
As others have said, the best thing is to explicitly state that what activities the league considers unethical and will not be allowed, including tanking.

To me this is an issue that having the rule mainly cuts down on the amount of argument you get. It doesn't change what a commish's responsibility is. While there are a lot of people who appear willing to tank, it's also a pretty widely held belief that it is unethical at best or outright cheating at worst.

As commish I would feel the greater responsibility was to uphold the integrity of the league than to allow such activity. When one owner is attempting to gain advantage via a move of questionable ethics, the greater responsibility lies in protecting the owners who maintained their integrity on the matter.

I would have no problem in making it clear that since the rules were not explicit on something that some consider cheating and others don't, I was giving a ruling and that tanking would not be tolerated as being against the spirit of the game and being something that a majority of people considered unethical. I would also outline some penalties that might be invoked if it happened. Some possibilities could be worsened draft spot, loss of draft picks, being penalized points in their next playoff game, etc.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Should I at least force the player to field a roster? Right now, he has a completely empty roster. The team he is playing (#3 team) only has one player in, because he needs a win to clinch, but doesn't want to gain the points to hop into the #1 spot.Basically everybody is avoiding the #1 spot because if my team wins, I'm at #4, and I have the best team by far (most points, but most scored against :wall: ). Everyone is avoiding my team and it's going to cost their friend(s) a playoff spot. Ridiculous.
I couldn't bring myself to tank a game even if it might give me a better matchup or pick next year. It's a selfish move. You can ask everyone to please field their best team because others are counting on them. Then if they flip their nose at you then they really come out looking like jerks.I don't care if there isn't any rule. There can't be rules for every damned thing. If it were me I'd let the people know that I'd put in there last weeks lineup this week if they don't fill a full roster. If they don't like it, screw them they are the one's being jerks. Not you. They are affecting the outcomes of other teams. You are the commish so do some commishing.Now that you see that you have to deal with poor sportsmans now you can add the rule for next year. Who would of thought that you'd have to do this? But apparently you do.
 
As commish, you need to have a points race $$$ award. Most likely this playoff team would be in the running for cash for finishing, lets say top 3 in points scored. If he was playing for points, he doesn't set a bogus lineup, or else he gives up the points cash which would help the rest of the league catch up.

This points race will avoid good teams tanking for better matchups.

To avoid bad teams from giving up, have a losers bracket playoffs.

 
i considered benching steve smith last night to "improve" my draft seeding. i would have had an incomplete lineup, and decided ultimately to field my team as it was. however, our 6 team playoff field was already set. it was just the seedings that was yet to be determined. as such, i didn't feel any guilt in tanking the game, even though i knew it to be a bit underhanded. then again, i didn't actually do it, so i guess i ####ed out.

i think its somewhat inbounds if it doesn't preclude anyone else from a shot at the playoffs. for example, if it were up to me and i could tank a game to force the obvious two frontrunners in our league (which is the case this year) to play each other before i have to play either one (based on division winners and bye weeks), then that's one less stud team i have to go through to take the crown. i think that's a reasonable strategy. point is though, i'd be starting sammy morris over kevin jones if i were willing to do that. and i think that is totally fine. starting nobody is a copout.

 
i considered benching steve smith last night to "improve" my draft seeding. i would have had an incomplete lineup, and decided ultimately to field my team as it was. however, our 6 team playoff field was already set. it was just the seedings that was yet to be determined. as such, i didn't feel any guilt in tanking the game, even though i knew it to be a bit underhanded. then again, i didn't actually do it, so i guess i ####ed out.i think its somewhat inbounds if it doesn't preclude anyone else from a shot at the playoffs. for example, if it were up to me and i could tank a game to force the obvious two frontrunners in our league (which is the case this year) to play each other before i have to play either one (based on division winners and bye weeks), then that's one less stud team i have to go through to take the crown. i think that's a reasonable strategy. point is though, i'd be starting sammy morris over kevin jones if i were willing to do that. and i think that is totally fine. starting nobody is a copout.
So basically you are screwing with efforts these stud teams took to get where they are through changing the seedings by throwing the game. That's not fair to these teams. :rant:
 
Sheesh. This must be the whiner thread. ;)

Rules are the framework of your league. Make sure your rules are complete and you wont have these problems. Right actions = Right results.

Do the framework construction in the offseason. Once you start your stuck with what you included, and also what you didn't.

You should also check the locked thread at the top that has other good suggestions for rules for leagues (just so they don't outsmart you next year). :P ;)

 
On one hand, tanking clearly goes against fair play and sportsmanship.
I don't agree with this. This particular owner is managing his team in an effort to win the league this year. He's not breaking any rules, since you apparently don't have a rule on this issue. What this owner is doing isn't any different from a playoff-bound Team X resting its starters in week 17, and thus handing a cheap win to Team Y, which then sneaks into the playoffs ahead of Team Z.
 
i considered benching steve smith last night to "improve" my draft seeding. i would have had an incomplete lineup, and decided ultimately to field my team as it was. however, our 6 team playoff field was already set. it was just the seedings that was yet to be determined. as such, i didn't feel any guilt in tanking the game, even though i knew it to be a bit underhanded. then again, i didn't actually do it, so i guess i ####ed out.i think its somewhat inbounds if it doesn't preclude anyone else from a shot at the playoffs. for example, if it were up to me and i could tank a game to force the obvious two frontrunners in our league (which is the case this year) to play each other before i have to play either one (based on division winners and bye weeks), then that's one less stud team i have to go through to take the crown. i think that's a reasonable strategy. point is though, i'd be starting sammy morris over kevin jones if i were willing to do that. and i think that is totally fine. starting nobody is a copout.
So basically you are screwing with efforts these stud teams took to get where they are through changing the seedings by throwing the game. That's not fair to these teams. :rant:
i still see nothing wrong with it. is it "fair" that McNabb got hurt while their teams stayed healthy all year? is it "fair" that one team leveraged all his draft picks next year to acquire a stud lineup at the expense of future competitiveness?point is, what's "fair" doesn't really have a bearing here. i did the "more-correct" thing, but i feel i had the flexibility to play it either way. if there is no rule against it, and a team is trying to posture itself to have the best chance of winning, i think it's totally inbounds.
 
It may be his team, but it's your league.

Tanking is for hacks. Write it into your league rules immediately after the season ends.

 
As Commish, you screwed up bigtime by not having rules in place to prevent tanking games. You need written rules for every posible scenario including collusion and tanking games. I have pages of rules for my league covering everything I've seen over the past 15 years of fantasy football.

You need to step in & fix it, at least set the guy's lineup to what he used last week.

If your league doesn't have integrity, what is the use of having it? You can always join a free Yahoo league if you don't care.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
On one hand, tanking clearly goes against fair play and sportsmanship.
I don't agree with this. This particular owner is managing his team in an effort to win the league this year. He's not breaking any rules, since you apparently don't have a rule on this issue. What this owner is doing isn't any different from a playoff-bound Team X resting its starters in week 17, and thus handing a cheap win to Team Y, which then sneaks into the playoffs ahead of Team Z.
NFL Team X rests its starters so they don't get injured in a game that doesn't matter them, not to try to rig the playoff seedings.Unless you're arguing that real NFL players are more likely to get injured when your fantasy team starts them vs benches them, the reason the actions took place aren't anything at all alike. The difference between them is the fantasy team's motiviation is doing it with the intent to give another team a cheap win. The NFL team is trying to keep their players healthy for games that matter. Nothing at all alike. If NFL teams started throwing games to try to give their opponents, you don't seriously think the league wouldn't stomp on them and fine the hell out of them?
 
As Commish, you screwed up bigtime by not having rules in place to prevent tanking games. You need written rules for every posible scenario including collusion and tanking games. I have pages of rules for my league covering everything I've seen over the past 15 years of fantasy football.You need to step in & fix it, at least set the guy's lineup to what he used last week. If your league doesn't have integrity, what is the use of having it? You can always join a free Yahoo league if you don't care.
Trust me, I know. You're absolutely right. This is our first year doing FF. I've done free Yahoo leagues before but never a league with my friends that actually has some level of competitiveness within it. We messed up by not having clear cut rules on EVERYTHING before the year.Part of the problem is that most of us just figured that everyone would play with integrity and sportsmanship. A couple of the people have really disappointed in that regard. Their bad for being jerks, our bad for not writing rules. Live and learn.
 
i considered benching steve smith last night to "improve" my draft seeding. i would have had an incomplete lineup, and decided ultimately to field my team as it was. however, our 6 team playoff field was already set. it was just the seedings that was yet to be determined. as such, i didn't feel any guilt in tanking the game, even though i knew it to be a bit underhanded. then again, i didn't actually do it, so i guess i ####ed out.i think its somewhat inbounds if it doesn't preclude anyone else from a shot at the playoffs. for example, if it were up to me and i could tank a game to force the obvious two frontrunners in our league (which is the case this year) to play each other before i have to play either one (based on division winners and bye weeks), then that's one less stud team i have to go through to take the crown. i think that's a reasonable strategy. point is though, i'd be starting sammy morris over kevin jones if i were willing to do that. and i think that is totally fine. starting nobody is a copout.
So basically you are screwing with efforts these stud teams took to get where they are through changing the seedings by throwing the game. That's not fair to these teams. :rant:
i still see nothing wrong with it. is it "fair" that McNabb got hurt while their teams stayed healthy all year? is it "fair" that one team leveraged all his draft picks next year to acquire a stud lineup at the expense of future competitiveness?point is, what's "fair" doesn't really have a bearing here. i did the "more-correct" thing, but i feel i had the flexibility to play it either way. if there is no rule against it, and a team is trying to posture itself to have the best chance of winning, i think it's totally inbounds.
Um, people don't make a decision to have injuries. Don't know where you're going with that one.You're posturing yourself to win by doing something dishonorable (IMO) whether or not it's in the rulebook. These other teams tried their best to position themselves ideally and they did that. Now you come in and tank a game ruining what they had worked so hard all year to accomplish. Do you feel good about that? Is that good sportsmanship? Personally I don't care if there is a loophole there to exploit. It's just not right. It's the cheap way out. Work for what you deserve. Don't try and trip someone about to go past the finish line because you can't make it.
 
i considered benching steve smith last night to "improve" my draft seeding. i would have had an incomplete lineup, and decided ultimately to field my team as it was. however, our 6 team playoff field was already set. it was just the seedings that was yet to be determined. as such, i didn't feel any guilt in tanking the game, even though i knew it to be a bit underhanded. then again, i didn't actually do it, so i guess i ####ed out.i think its somewhat inbounds if it doesn't preclude anyone else from a shot at the playoffs. for example, if it were up to me and i could tank a game to force the obvious two frontrunners in our league (which is the case this year) to play each other before i have to play either one (based on division winners and bye weeks), then that's one less stud team i have to go through to take the crown. i think that's a reasonable strategy. point is though, i'd be starting sammy morris over kevin jones if i were willing to do that. and i think that is totally fine. starting nobody is a copout.
So basically you are screwing with efforts these stud teams took to get where they are through changing the seedings by throwing the game. That's not fair to these teams. :rant:
i still see nothing wrong with it. is it "fair" that McNabb got hurt while their teams stayed healthy all year? is it "fair" that one team leveraged all his draft picks next year to acquire a stud lineup at the expense of future competitiveness?point is, what's "fair" doesn't really have a bearing here. i did the "more-correct" thing, but i feel i had the flexibility to play it either way. if there is no rule against it, and a team is trying to posture itself to have the best chance of winning, i think it's totally inbounds.
Um, people don't make a decision to have injuries. Don't know where you're going with that one.You're posturing yourself to win by doing something dishonorable (IMO) whether or not it's in the rulebook. These other teams tried their best to position themselves ideally and they did that. Now you come in and tank a game ruining what they had worked so hard all year to accomplish. Do you feel good about that? Is that good sportsmanship? Personally I don't care if there is a loophole there to exploit. It's just not right. It's the cheap way out. Work for what you deserve. Don't try and trip someone about to go past the finish line because you can't make it.
did you even read my post? i'm AGREEING with you. somewhat. what i said was i think it's "inbounds" since there is no rule against it. in the end i opted to field my regular lineup because i didn't want to play down to the level of all the loophole seekers (of which there are a few in this league).my reasoning in considering it was "fight fire with fire" since there have been people exploiting loopholes in this league since we formed it 6 years ago. i had to deal with it until a rule was in place because there's no penalty if someone can plead ignorance. as such, with no rule to the contrary, i think it's ok.the proper thing is to have an exhaustive rulebook. which is totally gay. friends SHOULD be able to compete with an unspoken degree of sportsmanship. but with thousands of $$ on the line, it rarely occurs.
 
i considered benching steve smith last night to "improve" my draft seeding. i would have had an incomplete lineup, and decided ultimately to field my team as it was. however, our 6 team playoff field was already set. it was just the seedings that was yet to be determined. as such, i didn't feel any guilt in tanking the game, even though i knew it to be a bit underhanded. then again, i didn't actually do it, so i guess i ####ed out.i think its somewhat inbounds if it doesn't preclude anyone else from a shot at the playoffs. for example, if it were up to me and i could tank a game to force the obvious two frontrunners in our league (which is the case this year) to play each other before i have to play either one (based on division winners and bye weeks), then that's one less stud team i have to go through to take the crown. i think that's a reasonable strategy. point is though, i'd be starting sammy morris over kevin jones if i were willing to do that. and i think that is totally fine. starting nobody is a copout.
So basically you are screwing with efforts these stud teams took to get where they are through changing the seedings by throwing the game. That's not fair to these teams. :rant:
i still see nothing wrong with it. is it "fair" that McNabb got hurt while their teams stayed healthy all year? is it "fair" that one team leveraged all his draft picks next year to acquire a stud lineup at the expense of future competitiveness?point is, what's "fair" doesn't really have a bearing here. i did the "more-correct" thing, but i feel i had the flexibility to play it either way. if there is no rule against it, and a team is trying to posture itself to have the best chance of winning, i think it's totally inbounds.
Um, people don't make a decision to have injuries. Don't know where you're going with that one.You're posturing yourself to win by doing something dishonorable (IMO) whether or not it's in the rulebook. These other teams tried their best to position themselves ideally and they did that. Now you come in and tank a game ruining what they had worked so hard all year to accomplish. Do you feel good about that? Is that good sportsmanship? Personally I don't care if there is a loophole there to exploit. It's just not right. It's the cheap way out. Work for what you deserve. Don't try and trip someone about to go past the finish line because you can't make it.
did you even read my post? i'm AGREEING with you. somewhat. what i said was i think it's "inbounds" since there is no rule against it. in the end i opted to field my regular lineup because i didn't want to play down to the level of all the loophole seekers (of which there are a few in this league).my reasoning in considering it was "fight fire with fire" since there have been people exploiting loopholes in this league since we formed it 6 years ago. i had to deal with it until a rule was in place because there's no penalty if someone can plead ignorance. as such, with no rule to the contrary, i think it's ok.the proper thing is to have an exhaustive rulebook. which is totally gay. friends SHOULD be able to compete with an unspoken degree of sportsmanship. but with thousands of $$ on the line, it rarely occurs.
There is no money involved in this league. Just a guy with low self-esteem who bases his self worth on pointless competitions like fantasy football and Playstation games.
 
i considered benching steve smith last night to "improve" my draft seeding. i would have had an incomplete lineup, and decided ultimately to field my team as it was. however, our 6 team playoff field was already set. it was just the seedings that was yet to be determined. as such, i didn't feel any guilt in tanking the game, even though i knew it to be a bit underhanded. then again, i didn't actually do it, so i guess i ####ed out.i think its somewhat inbounds if it doesn't preclude anyone else from a shot at the playoffs. for example, if it were up to me and i could tank a game to force the obvious two frontrunners in our league (which is the case this year) to play each other before i have to play either one (based on division winners and bye weeks), then that's one less stud team i have to go through to take the crown. i think that's a reasonable strategy. point is though, i'd be starting sammy morris over kevin jones if i were willing to do that. and i think that is totally fine. starting nobody is a copout.
So basically you are screwing with efforts these stud teams took to get where they are through changing the seedings by throwing the game. That's not fair to these teams. :rant:
i still see nothing wrong with it. is it "fair" that McNabb got hurt while their teams stayed healthy all year? is it "fair" that one team leveraged all his draft picks next year to acquire a stud lineup at the expense of future competitiveness?point is, what's "fair" doesn't really have a bearing here. i did the "more-correct" thing, but i feel i had the flexibility to play it either way. if there is no rule against it, and a team is trying to posture itself to have the best chance of winning, i think it's totally inbounds.
Um, people don't make a decision to have injuries. Don't know where you're going with that one.You're posturing yourself to win by doing something dishonorable (IMO) whether or not it's in the rulebook. These other teams tried their best to position themselves ideally and they did that. Now you come in and tank a game ruining what they had worked so hard all year to accomplish. Do you feel good about that? Is that good sportsmanship? Personally I don't care if there is a loophole there to exploit. It's just not right. It's the cheap way out. Work for what you deserve. Don't try and trip someone about to go past the finish line because you can't make it.
did you even read my post? i'm AGREEING with you. somewhat. what i said was i think it's "inbounds" since there is no rule against it. in the end i opted to field my regular lineup because i didn't want to play down to the level of all the loophole seekers (of which there are a few in this league).my reasoning in considering it was "fight fire with fire" since there have been people exploiting loopholes in this league since we formed it 6 years ago. i had to deal with it until a rule was in place because there's no penalty if someone can plead ignorance. as such, with no rule to the contrary, i think it's ok.the proper thing is to have an exhaustive rulebook. which is totally gay. friends SHOULD be able to compete with an unspoken degree of sportsmanship. but with thousands of $$ on the line, it rarely occurs.
Sorry. If you're agreeing with me then I have to admit it. You're right.
 
On one hand, tanking clearly goes against fair play and sportsmanship.
I don't agree with this. This particular owner is managing his team in an effort to win the league this year. He's not breaking any rules, since you apparently don't have a rule on this issue. What this owner is doing isn't any different from a playoff-bound Team X resting its starters in week 17, and thus handing a cheap win to Team Y, which then sneaks into the playoffs ahead of Team Z.
NFL Team X rests its starters so they don't get injured in a game that doesn't matter them, not to try to rig the playoff seedings.Unless you're arguing that real NFL players are more likely to get injured when your fantasy team starts them vs benches them, the reason the actions took place aren't anything at all alike.

The difference between them is the fantasy team's motiviation is doing it with the intent to give another team a cheap win. The NFL team is trying to keep their players healthy for games that matter. Nothing at all alike. If NFL teams started throwing games to try to give their opponents, you don't seriously think the league wouldn't stomp on them and fine the hell out of them?
The fantasy's teams motivation is to win its league. That's why the owner is tanking his last regular season game. Likewise, an NFL team that tanks its last regular-season game is tanking one game in an effort to improve its odds of winning the league. It's the same thing. If you have a rule on this, great. But don't pretend like it's just self-evidently unethical or unsportsmanlike when it isn't.

 
On one hand, tanking clearly goes against fair play and sportsmanship.
I don't agree with this. This particular owner is managing his team in an effort to win the league this year. He's not breaking any rules, since you apparently don't have a rule on this issue. What this owner is doing isn't any different from a playoff-bound Team X resting its starters in week 17, and thus handing a cheap win to Team Y, which then sneaks into the playoffs ahead of Team Z.
NFL Team X rests its starters so they don't get injured in a game that doesn't matter them, not to try to rig the playoff seedings.Unless you're arguing that real NFL players are more likely to get injured when your fantasy team starts them vs benches them, the reason the actions took place aren't anything at all alike.

The difference between them is the fantasy team's motiviation is doing it with the intent to give another team a cheap win. The NFL team is trying to keep their players healthy for games that matter. Nothing at all alike. If NFL teams started throwing games to try to give their opponents, you don't seriously think the league wouldn't stomp on them and fine the hell out of them?
The fantasy's teams motivation is to win its league. That's why the owner is tanking his last regular season game. Likewise, an NFL team that tanks its last regular-season game is tanking one game in an effort to improve its odds of winning the league. It's the same thing. If you have a rule on this, great. But don't pretend like it's just self-evidently unethical or unsportsmanlike when it isn't.
It is self-evidently unthetical and unsportsmanlike. (Edit: Someone can do any number of unethical things with the motivation of winning their league. That doesn't make them any less unethical. )NFL teams do not tank games to intentionally lose. They rest starters to avoid injury. Losing the game is not a goal and I don't know of a coach that wouldn't do his best to win the game without risking injury.

Tell me this, if an NFL GM came out and said, "Well, we figured we already had clinched a wildcard and couldn't win our division, and if we lost this week we liked the division winner that we'd face more than if we won, so we threw it." How do you think the NFL front office would react? How do you think they should react?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Tell me this, if an NFL GM came out and said, "Well, we figured we already had clinched a wildcard and couldn't win our division, and if we lost this week we liked the division winner that we'd face more than if we won, so we threw it." How do you think the NFL front office would react? How do you think they should react?
My answer would depend entirely on whether the NFL has some sort of rule in place about this event.
 
Tell me this, if an NFL GM came out and said, "Well, we figured we already had clinched a wildcard and couldn't win our division, and if we lost this week we liked the division winner that we'd face more than if we won, so we threw it." How do you think the NFL front office would react? How do you think they should react?
My answer would depend entirely on whether the NFL has some sort of rule in place about this event.
Fair enough. Do you think the NFL should have a rule about this kind of event? Should this be allowed in the NFL, or not?
 
Its your job to act in this situation no matter what rules are or arent written. This is a game of competition. The competative spirit of fair competition is being broken. This is like a team who has given up giving his players away. Competative balance is disrupted. There are different ways to handle it but definately act.

 
I run a dynasty league. My league has a rule against tanking. I had an owner try to tank last week to guarantee himself the #1 pick in 2007. He was playing a guy who was fighting 2 other owners for 2 playoff spots. I emailed him and ask him to fix his line up or I will. He fixed it.

 
I run a dynasty league. My league has a rule against tanking. I had an owner try to tank last week to guarantee himself the #1 pick in 2007. He was playing a guy who was fighting 2 other owners for 2 playoff spots. I emailed him and ask him to fix his line up or I will. He fixed it.
Than you overstepped your bounds IMO if he entered a 'legal' lineup. As long as you enter a legal lineup you should be able to start whom ever you wish. What give you the right to decide whether a guy starts Tomlinson or Sam Gado?
 
There is no money involved in this league. Just a guy with low self-esteem who bases his self worth on pointless competitions like fantasy football and Playstation games.
This makes a difference for me. Since there is no money involved I'd say take action in the offseason. That might include kicking that guy out of the league or just changing the rules. Since there are no rules against tanking and no $ on the line you're in a tough spot. If you want the league to continue on next year then clearly define what will happen, now or in the offseason.EDIT: Oh, dynasty league. Fix it now. Poll the owners and get a 3/4 majority to take action this year. If not enough people care then let it go.I have 2 leagues that I will probably leave after this year because of this. Both are free. Funny, putting $ on the line seems to bring out more owners that are concerned about these issues.Good luck
 
Last edited by a moderator:
As a self-professed tanker who did it once to keep a real ##### out of the playoffs. My chief comeback to the commish was, "Who are you to police my lineup in week 14 when you didn't care all year prior to now?"

In my situation, I started guys who I felt were my worst players. I wouldn't even stoop so low as to leave a roster empty.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
There are four teams fighting for the last two playoff spots in my league.

Two teams have already clinched. The first place team wants to tank his game on purpose because he doesn't like the matchup he'd get with the fourth place team (the best team in the league).

The issue that's been raised is that by tanking the game, the first place team could very well cost one of the other four teams a playoff spot. It has direct implications.

This has no bearing on my team, but I am the commissioner. What are your thoughts on a commissioner's role in this? On one hand, tanking clearly goes against fair play and sportsmanship. On the other, it's his team, and he can do what he wants with it.

Thoughts? I'm sure this has been asked before, I just can't find anything on it.
If you want to get an idea of what percentage of people think it's ok to tank vs those who don't, there's a poll here. Right now it's running 3-1 against tanking. I think those who are fine with it need to accept that they are a minority by a long shot and they shouldn't expect others to accept it happening, stated rule or not.
 
I run a dynasty league. My league has a rule against tanking. I had an owner try to tank last week to guarantee himself the #1 pick in 2007. He was playing a guy who was fighting 2 other owners for 2 playoff spots. I emailed him and ask him to fix his line up or I will. He fixed it.
:goodposting: Nice job, Commish.
 
I run a dynasty league. My league has a rule against tanking. I had an owner try to tank last week to guarantee himself the #1 pick in 2007. He was playing a guy who was fighting 2 other owners for 2 playoff spots. I emailed him and ask him to fix his line up or I will. He fixed it.
Than you overstepped your bounds IMO if he entered a 'legal' lineup. As long as you enter a legal lineup you should be able to start whom ever you wish. What give you the right to decide whether a guy starts Tomlinson or Sam Gado?
Starting Sam Gado over LaDanian Tomlinson is about as clear of an example of tanking as there is. Thank you.What gives this Commish the right to make him change his lineup? The rule his league has against tanking, that's what.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It would be nice to see a collection of options for Commissioners in the other thread "Rules every league should consider having" as to how to best avoid even getting into a situation where teams consider tanking.

What sort of penalties are appropriate?

 
In one of my Zealot Leagues we had an owner not play a QB or RBs the last 2 weeks, and he had Vick and LJ sitting by on his roster. It had direct implications on the rookie draft next season. Start 1 QB and 3 RBs.

He could have started Vick or Trent Green at the QB position and LJ, Travis Henry and JJ at the RB position.

Commisioner did nothing after the first week and let it happen again in week 13. There has not even been a post of any kind about the situation. I complained earlier in the season about an owner leaving players on byes in the lineup and got my hand spanked so I did not say anything about this.

I find it amazing that this was allowed to occur and am shocked that not a single pwner said anything about it.

I have never seen anything like this occur in any league I have ever played in.

 
Our league will not invite the team back. They will never play in the league again. It happened a few years back. They team who purposefully would lose games (3 in all) came to a off season meeting and we asked him to leave. Right now we have a solid core of guys for the most part.

In my 15 year old league, that has never happened, the ridicule would just be too much.

 
Should I at least force the player to field a roster? Right now, he has a completely empty roster. The team he is playing (#3 team) only has one player in, because he needs a win to clinch, but doesn't want to gain the points to hop into the #1 spot.

Basically everybody is avoiding the #1 spot because if my team wins, I'm at #4, and I have the best team by far (most points, but most scored against :wall: ). Everyone is avoiding my team and it's going to cost their friend(s) a playoff spot. Ridiculous.
I couldn't bring myself to tank a game even if it might give me a better matchup or pick next year. It's a selfish move. You can ask everyone to please field their best team because others are counting on them. Then if they flip their nose at you then they really come out looking like jerks.I don't care if there isn't any rule. There can't be rules for every damned thing. If it were me I'd let the people know that I'd put in there last weeks lineup this week if they don't fill a full roster. If they don't like it, screw them they are the one's being jerks. Not you. They are affecting the outcomes of other teams. You are the commish so do some commishing.

Now that you see that you have to deal with poor sportsmans now you can add the rule for next year. Who would of thought that you'd have to do this? But apparently you do.
:goodposting: I was eliminated from the playoffs early four weeks ago, but still fielded a complete team - I didn't optimize my matchups or make any roster moves (at a buck a throw, why bother?) but I also didn't intentionally tank. Went 3-1 the last 4 weeks and lost the first overall pick because of it. :hot:

We have a bylaw that states that "teams shall make every effort to field a complete team and shall not intentionally bench healthy players for those who are known to be injured or out for purposes of intentionally tanking, losing a week, or otherwise provide unfair advantage to an opponent." I call it the "don't be a ####" rule.

 
He should at least have a valid lineup with players that are not injured. After that, it's unethical and I'd go the public humilitation route...I'm sure other owners would put some pressure on him.

In the offseason, write some rules. If he doesn't adjust his lineup this week, I'd probably not have him back next year regardless. I want my leagues to be competitive and have integrity.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Does the NFL have a specific rule against tanking? (honestly, I am not sure)

(Or do they just assume that teams won't act in an unsportsmanlike, classless, manner?)

Personally, I agree that it should be written into fantasy constitutions everywhere, but I also think it should be pretty damned understood that you shouldn't THROW FRIGGIN GAMES.

Win or lose with dignity. Even in fantasy football.

<stepsoffsoapbox>

 
I run a dynasty league. My league has a rule against tanking. I had an owner try to tank last week to guarantee himself the #1 pick in 2007. He was playing a guy who was fighting 2 other owners for 2 playoff spots. I emailed him and ask him to fix his line up or I will. He fixed it.
Than you overstepped your bounds IMO if he entered a 'legal' lineup. As long as you enter a legal lineup you should be able to start whom ever you wish. What give you the right to decide whether a guy starts Tomlinson or Sam Gado?
here are my leagues rules on tanking. pretty damn clear.
Losing intentionally (tanking a game)•Losing intentionally to better your draft pick for the next season is prohibited. •Losing intentionally to help out or to hurt another owner’s chance of making the playoffs is prohibited. •The purpose of this league is to have fun. Failing to field your best team undermines the integrity of the league. Every owner must try to field his or her best team each week. Failing to get a lineup changed in time does happen sometimes, but intentionally losing a game for any reason, including to aid another team, or trying to improve draft position the following year, goes against the league rules and is not permitted. •Any teams caught tanking games will forfeit their following game (regular season or playoff)•The commissioner has the right to adjust an owners line up if tanking is suspectedWhy Tanking Is Wrong•Tanking is wrong because it undermines the integrity of the games and the league. But let's examine some other ramifications that tanking could have on your league.•The effects it has on other teams - tanking games can seriously affect the standings and playoff race of other teams•Defeating the purpose of the draft order - as with the NFL, the purpose of a FFL draft should be to help the worst teams get better through the draft. However, if the team that is tanking is a middle tier team, he is going to screw the worst team out of bettering his already really bad team.here is his line up most of the year

QB-Vick

RB- Portis- maroney once he got hurt

RB- T. Jones

WR- Galloway

WR- Djax

WR- Musin

here is his line up he tried to set for week 13 :bs:

QB- brunell- bench for Campbell

RB- A train- back to bench

RB- alstott

WR- burleson

WR- stovall

WR- horn

no owner has the right to break league rules, bottom line

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Does the NFL have a specific rule against tanking? (honestly, I am not sure)
I'm not sure if there is, but I'm confident there would be significant retribution if a team were to do it. The NFL would levy fines, take ownership rights away, etc. But the media, fans, and other coaches/players would tear the team's management apart and drive them away.
 
I run a dynasty league. My league has a rule against tanking. I had an owner try to tank last week to guarantee himself the #1 pick in 2007. He was playing a guy who was fighting 2 other owners for 2 playoff spots. I emailed him and ask him to fix his line up or I will. He fixed it.
Than you overstepped your bounds IMO if he entered a 'legal' lineup. As long as you enter a legal lineup you should be able to start whom ever you wish. What give you the right to decide whether a guy starts Tomlinson or Sam Gado?
here are my leagues rules on tanking. pretty damn clear.
Losing intentionally (tanking a game)•Losing intentionally to better your draft pick for the next season is prohibited. •Losing intentionally to help out or to hurt another owner’s chance of making the playoffs is prohibited. •The purpose of this league is to have fun. Failing to field your best team undermines the integrity of the league. Every owner must try to field his or her best team each week. Failing to get a lineup changed in time does happen sometimes, but intentionally losing a game for any reason, including to aid another team, or trying to improve draft position the following year, goes against the league rules and is not permitted. •Any teams caught tanking games will forfeit their following game (regular season or playoff)•The commissioner has the right to adjust an owners line up if tanking is suspectedWhy Tanking Is Wrong•Tanking is wrong because it undermines the integrity of the games and the league. But let's examine some other ramifications that tanking could have on your league.•The effects it has on other teams - tanking games can seriously affect the standings and playoff race of other teams•Defeating the purpose of the draft order - as with the NFL, the purpose of a FFL draft should be to help the worst teams get better through the draft. However, if the team that is tanking is a middle tier team, he is going to screw the worst team out of bettering his already really bad team.here is his line up most of the year

QB-Vick

RB- Portis- maroney once he got hurt

RB- T. Jones

WR- Galloway

WR- Djax

WR- Musin

here is his line up he tried to set for week 13 :bs:

QB- brunell- bench for Campbell

RB- A train- back to bench

RB- alstott

WR- burleson

WR- stovall

WR- horn

no owner has the right to break league rules, bottom line
I still think that changing a lineup oversteps your bounds. What if someone starts Braylon Edwards vs Minnesota over Torry Holt Chicago (just using an example)? Holt was likely a second or third round pick while Edwards was a late rounder if he was drafted at all.Note that I HATE tanking and I would never do it. EVER. I'm just saying that you can't run another person's team and your rules are dangerously close to allowing it.

 
I run a dynasty league. My league has a rule against tanking. I had an owner try to tank last week to guarantee himself the #1 pick in 2007. He was playing a guy who was fighting 2 other owners for 2 playoff spots. I emailed him and ask him to fix his line up or I will. He fixed it.
Than you overstepped your bounds IMO if he entered a 'legal' lineup. As long as you enter a legal lineup you should be able to start whom ever you wish. What give you the right to decide whether a guy starts Tomlinson or Sam Gado?
here are my leagues rules on tanking. pretty damn clear.
Losing intentionally (tanking a game)•Losing intentionally to better your draft pick for the next season is prohibited. •Losing intentionally to help out or to hurt another owner’s chance of making the playoffs is prohibited. •The purpose of this league is to have fun. Failing to field your best team undermines the integrity of the league. Every owner must try to field his or her best team each week. Failing to get a lineup changed in time does happen sometimes, but intentionally losing a game for any reason, including to aid another team, or trying to improve draft position the following year, goes against the league rules and is not permitted. •Any teams caught tanking games will forfeit their following game (regular season or playoff)•The commissioner has the right to adjust an owners line up if tanking is suspectedWhy Tanking Is Wrong•Tanking is wrong because it undermines the integrity of the games and the league. But let's examine some other ramifications that tanking could have on your league.•The effects it has on other teams - tanking games can seriously affect the standings and playoff race of other teams•Defeating the purpose of the draft order - as with the NFL, the purpose of a FFL draft should be to help the worst teams get better through the draft. However, if the team that is tanking is a middle tier team, he is going to screw the worst team out of bettering his already really bad team.here is his line up most of the year

QB-Vick

RB- Portis- maroney once he got hurt

RB- T. Jones

WR- Galloway

WR- Djax

WR- Musin

here is his line up he tried to set for week 13 :bs:

QB- brunell- bench for Campbell

RB- A train- back to bench

RB- alstott

WR- burleson

WR- stovall

WR- horn

no owner has the right to break league rules, bottom line
I still think that changing a lineup oversteps your bounds. What if someone starts Braylon Edwards vs Minnesota over Torry Holt Chicago (just using an example)? Holt was likely a second or third round pick while Edwards was a late rounder if he was drafted at all.Note that I HATE tanking and I would never do it. EVER. I'm just saying that you can't run another person's team and your rules are dangerously close to allowing it.
I agree I could not argue against him starting Horn over Musin or Gallaway but look at the rest of the line up. Here was clearly trying to tank. Luck for me this guy has been playing in this league and another I commish for 8 years and he knew he was wrong and corrected his line up. And it still worked out where he got the #1 overall rookie pick in 07
 
There are four teams fighting for the last two playoff spots in my league.Two teams have already clinched. The first place team wants to tank his game on purpose because he doesn't like the matchup he'd get with the fourth place team (the best team in the league).The issue that's been raised is that by tanking the game, the first place team could very well cost one of the other four teams a playoff spot. It has direct implications.This has no bearing on my team, but I am the commissioner. What are your thoughts on a commissioner's role in this? On one hand, tanking clearly goes against fair play and sportsmanship. On the other, it's his team, and he can do what he wants with it.Thoughts? I'm sure this has been asked before, I just can't find anything on it.
1 rule would eliminate this problem: bestball scoring. In bestball, you do not set line ups but rather get credit for your best starters each game. No one can tank. There are many other assets to this format as well but this one of the better reasons for doing this. Also, there are no arguments or disputes to settle between forends because no one can tank.
 
Does the NFL have a specific rule against tanking? (honestly, I am not sure)

(Or do they just assume that teams won't act in an unsportsmanlike, classless, manner?)

Personally, I agree that it should be written into fantasy constitutions everywhere, but I also think it should be pretty damned understood that you shouldn't THROW FRIGGIN GAMES.

Win or lose with dignity. Even in fantasy football.

<stepsoffsoapbox>
If the NFL has a written rule about it, it isn't in the rulebook that covers games. But then that isn't their only set of rules as that book has nothing about the draft, etc, so don't know.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top