What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

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

Fantasy Ethics? (1 Viewer)

Beef Ravioli

Footballguy
OK - I am not suggesting I am going to do this, but it has entered my mind.

I am 7-1 in our 12 team league and can afford a couple of losses the rest of the way, seeing as there is only one other team above .500 (he is 5-3). Several teams are 4-4 and will be battling each other for playoff spots.

I am playing a 4-4 team this week and would much rather he make the playoffs than several other teams. (Only because of his roster is not as good as some others - has nothing to do with he is my brother or something like that!)

I am not talking about throwing the game, but would it be good strategy to play some guys that do not have as much upside and possibly help him get a win which in the end may keep some stronger teams out of the playoffs?

I don't think I will do it, it feel wrongs even typing it out.

What say you Sharks?

 
Don't play games just start who you would regularly start. Fooling around with these things usually does not end well.

 
Way too early to be thinking like that.

That 7-1 could potentially be 7-6 if things break badly for you down the stretch.

 
Bush league.........

Don't be afraid of playoff match ups, your record isn't 7-1 for nothing. Obviously you have a good team, bury the competition if you can. No way I would take my foot off anyones throat.

 
I am not talking about throwing the game, but would it be good strategy to play some guys that do not have as much upside and possibly help him get a win which in the end may keep some stronger teams out of the playoffs?
Uh, I happen to think you ARE talking about throwing the game you're just trying to find a way to make it not look obvious.Let's say I have Edge and Steven jackson......and I decide that I will start Edge due to "upside" or because I think he's "due" Would that seem fishy to most people?Play to win........ if you don't and have this much thought into the benefits of losing, it's bush league.This is also why my league also pays out plenty of cash for overall points scored (and a weekly winner) in addition to wins and losses. No one would EVER do this type of thing if you have these kinds of incentives.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Whenever I have a team that is dominating a league, I just stick with my regulars almost every week. Sure you play a few matchups and sub for byes, but if you're dominant, you can usually roll right through every time.

If you start messing with your lineup, starting guys you obviously shouldn't, etc., even if you're not trying to lose, it may give the appearance that you are, and someone might notice and cry foul. It'll be hard to defend starting Warrick Dunn over Clinton Portis, for example.

All of the leagues I'm in have weekly incentives for highest point total, and a bonus for regular season champ as well. These are meant to prevent any kind of point shaving. Do you have anything like that in this league? You'll feel better about beating these bad teams when you collect your weekly bonus and end-of-regular season cash.

 
Absolutely nothing wrong with this, especially since it has the potential to backfire (wouldn't it suck if you ended up missing the playoffs by 1 game??)

 
This is also why my league also pays out plenty of cash for overall points scored (and a weekly winner) in addition to wins and losses. No one would EVER do this type of thing if you have these kinds of incentives.
Beat me to it. Good point, though, and one that really makes a difference in eliminating these kinds of thoughts.
 
Just remember that the teams that don't look as strong to you now could be the stronger teams come playoff time. Injuries, suspensions etc. can change who the strong teams are. Play to win every week and let the playoff chips fall as they will.

 
Bush league.........Don't be afraid of playoff match ups, your record isn't 7-1 for nothing. Obviously you have a good team, bury the competition if you can. No way I would take my foot off anyones throat.
We had a guy in our league with the opportunity to tank and face a much weaker opponent in the playoffs. He chose not to tank the game and the stronger team made the playoffs. And beat him. Play to win (the Championship)
 
The Football Gods will destroy you if you try this. You are in enough trouble with them by even thinking about doing it.

Also, play to win every game.

 
Way too early to be thinking like that.That 7-1 could potentially be 7-6 if things break badly for you down the stretch.
This is good advice - anything can happen. I started off the season 5-0, and thinking that I had this made; unfortunately, I have lost 3 in a row despite putting up the 2nd highest points (top points being the guy I played) in the league each week - seriously. Always play to win ...
 
Always start the players you think give you the best shot at winning each week.

Now that I've said that, consider an alternative - trading. Do you have a player on your roster that is currently close in value to a player on your opponent's roster? If so, compare each player's remaining schedules. If your guy has a brutal schedule and his guy has a cakewalk, there is trade option for you. I'll use specific players as examples. Let's say you have Marion Barber and your opponent has LaDainian Tomlinson. If you trade away Barber for LT, then you will likely lose in week 9, just as you wanted, to the team you wanted. But let's see how weeks 10 and on work out:

Week 10 - LT vs KC, MB3 on bye - LT wins huge

Week 11 - LT vs PIT, MB3 vs WAS - toss up

Week 12 - LT vs IND, MB3 vs SF - toss up

Week 13 - LT vs ATL, MB3 vs SEA - toss up

Week 14 - LT vs OAK, MB3 vs PIT - LT wins huge (as luck would have it, possibly the 1st game of your FF playoffs)

Week 15 - LT vs KC, MB3 vs NYG - LT wins huge (another FF playoff week)

Week 16 - LT vs TB, MB3 vs BAL - toss up, both very tough games

A bonus would be that MB3 is worth more than LT currently. That means you could do a 2-for-2 deal. Not only would you be getting a RB with a better upcoming schedule, but you could also get an upgrade at another position. Sure, you may not like my MB3/LT comparison because you think MB3 is a ton better. If so, just compare your roster with your opponent's to see how something like this could work out for you. Good luck.

 
Nothing wrong with what you're proposing. If you're fielding a complete roster, that's your obligation by the rules of the game. You didn't sign a contract to field the highest winning % team you possibly could every week. That said, I wouldn't do it for reasons mentioned above but doing it is not bush league.

 
Bush league.........Don't be afraid of playoff match ups, your record isn't 7-1 for nothing. Obviously you have a good team, bury the competition if you can. No way I would take my foot off anyones throat.
We had a guy in our league with the opportunity to tank and face a much weaker opponent in the playoffs. He chose not to tank the game and the stronger team made the playoffs. And beat him. Play to win (the Championship)
Agreed.
 
Play to win.
This should have been the end of the thread. :unsure:
All the people shouting "You play to win" should realize that is exactly what he's doing. Or attempting to do. I'm not against doing this sort of thing if it does indeed match you up with a weaker opponent in the playoffs, but as others have pointed out, this could end up backfiring on you big time. Miss the playoffs by one game, face that "weaker team" who ends up with a fantastic playoff schedule only to smack you around in the first round, etc. For me, planning something like this so far in advance is pretty much irreverent.
 
Don't be a pus**. Play your players. I'd kick you out of my league if I thought you were doing that, and I'd kick you in the nuts if I knew you were doing that.

Be warned...you do that, and I bet Mr. 4-4 comes and kicks your A** in round one of the playoffs.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't know if this has been mentioned but consider too that the others in your league will have very long memories about this

 
OK - I am not suggesting I am going to do this, but it has entered my mind.I am 7-1 in our 12 team league and can afford a couple of losses the rest of the way, seeing as there is only one other team above .500 (he is 5-3). Several teams are 4-4 and will be battling each other for playoff spots. I am playing a 4-4 team this week and would much rather he make the playoffs than several other teams. (Only because of his roster is not as good as some others - has nothing to do with he is my brother or something like that!) I am not talking about throwing the game, but would it be good strategy to play some guys that do not have as much upside and possibly help him get a win which in the end may keep some stronger teams out of the playoffs?I don't think I will do it, it feel wrongs even typing it out.What say you Sharks?
I'm glad that you already know inside that what you're suggesting is unethical.But I don't understand anyone not thinking hurting your lineup this week, with the sole motivation of getting your team to score less so the other team will win, is not throwing a game. Your stated goal for your lineup moves is to try to lose. How is that not throwing a game? There's no difference in the lack of ethics of how you're suggesting throwing your game vs someone who submits a blank lineup. Someone who submits a blank lineup is just being more effective and less surreptitious. But there's no difference in the lack of ethics of having chosen to try to lose to manipulate standings.
 
OK - I am not suggesting I am going to do this, but it has entered my mind.I am 7-1 in our 12 team league and can afford a couple of losses the rest of the way, seeing as there is only one other team above .500 (he is 5-3). Several teams are 4-4 and will be battling each other for playoff spots. I am playing a 4-4 team this week and would much rather he make the playoffs than several other teams. (Only because of his roster is not as good as some others - has nothing to do with he is my brother or something like that!) I am not talking about throwing the game, but would it be good strategy to play some guys that do not have as much upside and possibly help him get a win which in the end may keep some stronger teams out of the playoffs?I don't think I will do it, it feel wrongs even typing it out.What say you Sharks?
Don't count your chickens before they hatch. In one league, I was rolling at 5-0 having scored almost 100 more points than the next closest team. Since then I've tied one game and lost two. I've lost Reggie Bush for however long he's gone and didn't have Steven Jackson last week.Your No. 1 priority is getting yourself to the playoffs. No. 1a is ensuring a bye if it's available. Too many things can happen in the next 5-6 weeks to get cute this early.
 
Let's say I have Edge and Steven jackson......and I decide that I will start Edge due to "upside" or because I think he's "due" Would that seem fishy to most people?
[aside]While I agree with your post--that might not be the best example this week--between questions regarding Jackson's status and Edge's favorable matchup![/aside]For the record: I happen to have both on my squad. :thumbup:
 
OK - I am not suggesting I am going to do this, but it has entered my mind.

I am 7-1 in our 12 team league and can afford a couple of losses the rest of the way, seeing as there is only one other team above .500 (he is 5-3). Several teams are 4-4 and will be battling each other for playoff spots.

I am playing a 4-4 team this week and would much rather he make the playoffs than several other teams. (Only because of his roster is not as good as some others - has nothing to do with he is my brother or something like that!)

I am not talking about throwing the game, but would it be good strategy to play some guys that do not have as much upside and possibly help him get a win which in the end may keep some stronger teams out of the playoffs?

I don't think I will do it, it feel wrongs even typing it out.

What say you Sharks?
Answered your own question I think.
 
Put in a legit starting lineup with players who start (not backup QB's or people who have a game but won't see the field) and you're doing your job.

 
I am not talking about throwing the game, but would it be good strategy to play some guys that do not have as much upside and possibly help him get a win which in the end may keep some stronger teams out of the playoffs?
Fixed.Not making a judgment on that. Just calling it what it is.

 
Outside of the ethics, which a couple of people have already jumped on, I think it is poor strategy. I mean you already think this guy's line-up sucks, so if he wins this week, it sounds like he may not win enough to get into the playoffs or he may realize his team is not good enough and then make a couple of trades to improve his standing.

 
Play to win.
This should have been the end of the thread. :thumbup:
All the people shouting "You play to win" should realize that is exactly what he's doing. Or attempting to do. I'm not against doing this sort of thing if it does indeed match you up with a weaker opponent in the playoffs, but as others have pointed out, this could end up backfiring on you big time. Miss the playoffs by one game, face that "weaker team" who ends up with a fantastic playoff schedule only to smack you around in the first round, etc. For me, planning something like this so far in advance is pretty much irreverent.
No. He is playing to lose.
 
Play to win.
This should have been the end of the thread. :thumbup:
All the people shouting "You play to win" should realize that is exactly what he's doing. Or attempting to do. I'm not against doing this sort of thing if it does indeed match you up with a weaker opponent in the playoffs, but as others have pointed out, this could end up backfiring on you big time. Miss the playoffs by one game, face that "weaker team" who ends up with a fantastic playoff schedule only to smack you around in the first round, etc. For me, planning something like this so far in advance is pretty much irreverent.
No. He is playing to lose.
He meant the league. Not the week.
 
Play to win.
This should have been the end of the thread. :thumbup:
All the people shouting "You play to win" should realize that is exactly what he's doing. Or attempting to do. I'm not against doing this sort of thing if it does indeed match you up with a weaker opponent in the playoffs, but as others have pointed out, this could end up backfiring on you big time. Miss the playoffs by one game, face that "weaker team" who ends up with a fantastic playoff schedule only to smack you around in the first round, etc. For me, planning something like this so far in advance is pretty much irreverent.
No. He is playing to lose.
He meant the league. Not the week.
I know what he meant.Play to win every week.
 
Play to win.
This should have been the end of the thread. :thumbup:
All the people shouting "You play to win" should realize that is exactly what he's doing. Or attempting to do. I'm not against doing this sort of thing if it does indeed match you up with a weaker opponent in the playoffs, but as others have pointed out, this could end up backfiring on you big time. Miss the playoffs by one game, face that "weaker team" who ends up with a fantastic playoff schedule only to smack you around in the first round, etc. For me, planning something like this so far in advance is pretty much irreverent.
No. He is playing to lose.
He meant the league. Not the week.
I know what he meant.Play to win every week.
Okay. I just thought you were slow.
 
Maybe in week 13, but not this week. I need to guarantee my own spot in the play-offs before I worry about who I have to play. No such thing as resting your starters in fantasy football.

 
this is bush league any week.

not surprising, but still disconcerting, that so many ppl advocate this at any point.

 
It also depends on what kind of league it is. For example, if it's a huge money redraft league with strangers, I am gonna do anything and everything within the rules to win the most money I can. If it's the last week of the regular season and I am assured of a playoff spot and knew that I could tank in order to play a weaker team in the playoffs, I'm gonna do it (if there are no rules stopping me). Like I said, my hypothetical league is all strangers, so why do I care if they think it's bush league? The fun comes when you try to collect your winnings...

Now, if it's a league with friends and smaller amounts of money, I wouldn't tank. I am not going to risk alienating my FF buddies for a few bucks. But let's just say it's a friends league and the winner takes the entire pot of $1,000,000. Screw that, I can buy new friends!

 
Dirty Weasel said:
It also depends on what kind of league it is. For example, if it's a huge money redraft league with strangers, I am gonna do anything and everything within the rules to win the most money I can. If it's the last week of the regular season and I am assured of a playoff spot and knew that I could tank in order to play a weaker team in the playoffs, I'm gonna do it (if there are no rules stopping me). Like I said, my hypothetical league is all strangers, so why do I care if they think it's bush league? The fun comes when you try to collect your winnings...Now, if it's a league with friends and smaller amounts of money, I wouldn't tank. I am not going to risk alienating my FF buddies for a few bucks. But let's just say it's a friends league and the winner takes the entire pot of $1,000,000. Screw that, I can buy new friends!
Ever hear the saying that Character is what you do when no one else is looking?
 
This is a dangerous strategy. If there's one thing that remains true each and every year, it's that sometimes, you lose to teams you really shouldn't lose to. It just happens. I'd rather put my best lineup out there every single week, and deal with what happens, rather than lose a game in the playoffs to a team that I put there by playing this matchup game.

 
I can't stand when people get whiney and judgemental around here. There is nothing wrong with this move.

Let's say you are in a league that requires 8 starters and has a 10 player roster. You are 7-1 and have almost no chance of not making the playoffs. This week your defense, TE and kicker are on bye but you don't want to lose any of your roster players to cover those byes. You have the choice of a dropping a legit player(s) or playing 3 players on bye and almost certainly lose the week.

Do you drop the players to cover your byes? Of course not. You take an intentional loss because it gives your team a better chance of winning it all.

Now I know you will all answer "But that's different, this guys is not making his team any worse by starting the good players." The end result is still the same. You make the choice that gives your team a chance to win it all unless the rules specifically prohibit it. Period.

Besides, there is no guarentee that Patrick Cobb (insert worse player's name here) doesn't out perform Ronnie Brown (insert better player's name here) that week.

 
Thank you for all the kind words of encouragement to do the right thing! It was more of a passing thought, I was never really serious about it - really!!

Some of you should really consider anger management though. I could feel the rage in some of your comments.

Just wanted to see what some of you thought, you can quit now!

 
What would really be neat if you did this would be....

If the guy actually does end up making the playoffs and knocks you out!!!!

 
Dirty Weasel said:
It also depends on what kind of league it is. For example, if it's a huge money redraft league with strangers, I am gonna do anything and everything within the rules to win the most money I can. If it's the last week of the regular season and I am assured of a playoff spot and knew that I could tank in order to play a weaker team in the playoffs, I'm gonna do it (if there are no rules stopping me). Like I said, my hypothetical league is all strangers, so why do I care if they think it's bush league? The fun comes when you try to collect your winnings...Now, if it's a league with friends and smaller amounts of money, I wouldn't tank. I am not going to risk alienating my FF buddies for a few bucks. But let's just say it's a friends league and the winner takes the entire pot of $1,000,000. Screw that, I can buy new friends!
Ever hear the saying that Character is what you do when no one else is looking?
I'll sign up for an ethics/character/morality/whatever class with my $1,000,000 winnings.
 
I can't stand when people get whiney and judgemental around here. There is nothing wrong with this move. Let's say you are in a league that requires 8 starters and has a 10 player roster. You are 7-1 and have almost no chance of not making the playoffs. This week your defense, TE and kicker are on bye but you don't want to lose any of your roster players to cover those byes. You have the choice of a dropping a legit player(s) or playing 3 players on bye and almost certainly lose the week.Do you drop the players to cover your byes? Of course not. You take an intentional loss because it gives your team a better chance of winning it all.Now I know you will all answer "But that's different, this guys is not making his team any worse by starting the good players." The end result is still the same. You make the choice that gives your team a chance to win it all unless the rules specifically prohibit it. Period.Besides, there is no guarentee that Patrick Cobb (insert worse player's name here) doesn't out perform Ronnie Brown (insert better player's name here) that week.
:rolleyes: I still say it's awful strategy and I'd never personally do it - but responses in this thread have included the fact that you'd be a Pu**y, you'd lack any moral character and be deserving of getting kicked in nu** and ousted from the league. There's many games where intentially losing a battle to win the war is acceptable. But that doesn't seem to be the case with FF.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top