Help a commish create a new rule (1 Viewer)

[Rounders]

Hey fellas, I need some input from the Shark Pool on this one. A little background....I'm the commish of our 15 year old re-draft league. It's a 10 team league, that is filled with guys who have known each other for almost 20 years. It's a high stakes league (for us) with a $200 entry fee and multiple payouts. $1000 to the winner.

We have a 13 game regular season, and 3 weeks of playoffs. That means 6 teams make the playoffs, 3 from each division. It may seem like a lot, but we try to keep everyone involved for as long as possible. This past year has been rough on a team and he was basically eliminated from the playoffs in week 8, with a 1-7 record.

Once eliminated I noticed that his interest in the game was dwindling and on a couple of occasions I had to remind him to set his lineup for bye week issues or injuries. I would remind him that there are other teams still playing and the outcome of his game mattered to them. He was always responsive and would usually submit a lineup before kickoff. There was one incident where he had the NYG defense in week 10 off, and he failed to pick up another defense to field a full starting lineup. He didn't want to spend the $5 because he knew it was a waste of $$. So he played a man down that week, and luckily won the game. I was not happy about it and told him, he still needs to put his best lineup out there.

Fast forward to week 13, he's playing a team that needs to win to get in the playoffs and it happens again. He leaves Slaton in his lineup after he was declared inactive. He could have replaced him with Mendenhall. He loses the game by 11, Mendenhall scored 16. The result would have been changed had he checked his lineup before game time and made a replacement. The playoff teams were affected.

Now before you can say, throw him out of the league, that’s not an option. Instead I wanted to throw this out to you guys to see what ideas you would have to remedy this from happening in the future. Any of your leagues have a rule in place to prevent this from happening?

 

[None_More_Black]

Hey fellas, I need some input from the Shark Pool on this one. A little background....I'm the commish of our 15 year old re-draft league. It's a 10 team league, that is filled with guys who have known each other for almost 20 years. It's a high stakes league (for us) with a $200 entry fee and multiple payouts. $1000 to the winner.We have a 13 game regular season, and 3 weeks of playoffs. That means 6 teams make the playoffs, 3 from each division. It may seem like a lot, but we try to keep everyone involved for as long as possible. This past year has been rough on a team and he was basically eliminated from the playoffs in week 8, with a 1-7 record. Once eliminated I noticed that his interest in the game was dwindling and on a couple of occasions I had to remind him to set his lineup for bye week issues or injuries. I would remind him that there are other teams still playing and the outcome of his game mattered to them. He was always responsive and would usually submit a lineup before kickoff. There was one incident where he had the NYG defense in week 10 off, and he failed to pick up another defense to field a full starting lineup. He didn't want to spend the $5 because he knew it was a waste of $$. So he played a man down that week, and luckily won the game. I was not happy about it and told him, he still needs to put his best lineup out there.Fast forward to week 13, he's playing a team that needs to win to get in the playoffs and it happens again. He leaves Slaton in his lineup after he was declared inactive. He could have replaced him with Mendenhall. He loses the game by 11, Mendenhall scored 16. The result would have been changed had he checked his lineup before game time and made a replacement. The playoff teams were affected.Now before you can say, throw him out of the league, that’s not an option. Instead I wanted to throw this out to you guys to see what ideas you would have to remedy this from happening in the future. Any of your leagues have a rule in place to prevent this from happening?

In my main league owners are fined $10 if they play a player who is out. No other way to keep things fair in a head to head league.

 

[Mr. Retukes]

He didn't want to spend the $5 because he knew it was a waste of $$. So he played a man down that week, and luckily won the game. I was not happy about it and told him, he still needs to put his best lineup out there.

If the cost of fielding his best lineup is more than the penalty for not fielding his best lineup, then it sounds like your rules are screwy.That said.....I'm not sure if you can penalize someone simply because they didn't check to see if Slaton was active or not. What if the roles were reversed, and the guy fighting for the playoff spot forgot to bench Slaton? Would you apply the same penalty?

 

[Fuzzy McGillicuddy]

Our league is 11 years old and shares some of the similarities you've explained.

Still, every now and then, we get someone who's not paying much attention because they're not playing for much. It doesn't happen often and we take it pretty seriously when someone mails it in. A few years ago, our league decided to fine owners $25 if they start an inactive player (either through injury or bye.) There are exceptions when an injury comes as a complete surprise.

Once we introduced the rule, all the owners pretty much got the message. We haven't had to exercise this option yet.

 

[Rounders]

Our league is 11 years old and shares some of the similarities you've explained. Still, every now and then, we get someone who's not paying much attention because they're not playing for much. It doesn't happen often and we take it pretty seriously when someone mails it in. A few years ago, our league decided to fine owners $25 if they start an inactive player (either through injury or bye.) There are exceptions when an injury comes as a complete surprise. Once we introduced the rule, all the owners pretty much got the message. We haven't had to exercise this option yet.

I thought about the fining part, I like that it's a steep price (considering add/drops are $5 in my league). Would you mind copying your rule, so I can review the wording. I would really like to bring something to the league that is concrete and not abstract.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

You could enact an anti-tanking rule that would allow the commish to replace a bye or injured player with the next best player (according to your league's scoring system) if the team is mathematically eliminated and playing a game with playoff implications.

Basically it would only apply the last few weeks of the season, only cover bye weeks or players who are inactive and only impact games that "matter." In the case you mentioned, you would know to keep an eye on that game, go in and replace Slaton when necessary.

I don't normally like intrusive rules, but that limited commish power would help retain the integrity of your season.

 

[John Zaleski]

Our league is 11 years old and shares some of the similarities you've explained. Still, every now and then, we get someone who's not paying much attention because they're not playing for much. It doesn't happen often and we take it pretty seriously when someone mails it in. A few years ago, our league decided to fine owners $25 if they start an inactive player (either through injury or bye.) There are exceptions when an injury comes as a complete surprise. Once we introduced the rule, all the owners pretty much got the message. We haven't had to exercise this option yet.

I thought about the fining part, I like that it's a steep price (considering add/drops are $5 in my league). Would you mind copying your rule, so I can review the wording. I would really like to bring something to the league that is concrete and not abstract.

Get rid of fees for transactions... Take the average total pot size over the last 5 years and make that average one entry fee for all owners each year.Add a team of the week prize. I run 50+ leagues per year. We had a 1-10 team beat a 11-0 team last week and win the TOW.

 

[Steelfan7]

Our league is 11 years old and shares some of the similarities you've explained. Still, every now and then, we get someone who's not paying much attention because they're not playing for much. It doesn't happen often and we take it pretty seriously when someone mails it in. A few years ago, our league decided to fine owners $25 if they start an inactive player (either through injury or bye.) There are exceptions when an injury comes as a complete surprise. Once we introduced the rule, all the owners pretty much got the message. We haven't had to exercise this option yet.

I thought about the fining part, I like that it's a steep price (considering add/drops are $5 in my league). Would you mind copying your rule, so I can review the wording. I would really like to bring something to the league that is concrete and not abstract.

Get rid of fees for transactions... Take the average total pot size over the last 5 years and make that average one entry fee for all owners each year.Add a team of the week prize. I run 50+ leagues per year. We had a 1-10 team beat a 11-0 team last week and win the TOW.

We do this as well.

 

[moleculo]

we have a weekly $10 prize to the high scoring team. So, even if your team is eliminated and no matter how bad you are, you always have a chance of getting lucky and pulling the high score. It's funny - sometimes bad teams can put up big scores late in the season.

I think the carrot works better than the stick.

 

[MIMN]

Our league is 11 years old and shares some of the similarities you've explained. Still, every now and then, we get someone who's not paying much attention because they're not playing for much. It doesn't happen often and we take it pretty seriously when someone mails it in. A few years ago, our league decided to fine owners $25 if they start an inactive player (either through injury or bye.) There are exceptions when an injury comes as a complete surprise. Once we introduced the rule, all the owners pretty much got the message. We haven't had to exercise this option yet.

I thought about the fining part, I like that it's a steep price (considering add/drops are $5 in my league). Would you mind copying your rule, so I can review the wording. I would really like to bring something to the league that is concrete and not abstract.

First, I hate leagues that have too many rules. If there are too many rules it begs people to look for loopholes. Unless you are the greatest lawyer ever expect for loopholes to exist. Consider the ramifications before enacting a rule:Would still fine a team if they are unavailable to check their lineup? Slaton was not declared out until game-time.What about someone playing someone on a Sunday/Monday night? What about if someone would had Warner in their lineup and he was declared out just before game-time last night? Still a fine? Really? Despite the fact that a player that people don't expect to start had a great game!? How about Steven Jackson? So they can't play Jackson either?What if someone falls putting up Christmas lights when their player is declared out? What if they are in church (God forbid)? What if they are in a car accident Saturday and in the hospital? Still a fine? If you have the rule you must enforce it or there is no integrity in the league.Too many rules leave no room for the spirit of the game nor room for a commissioner to react to unexpected situations. I'd suggest having an anti-tanking rule that is enacted by a league vote. Then have a fine of some sort. A better rule that some have is to allow for 1 alternate to be assigned in case a questionable player if ruled out. Wouldn't that resolve your issue using (as a another poster said) a carrot instead of a stick?Regardless, this should happen in the off-season and I bet that you won't see a ton of owners clamoring for this rule. If they are, good luck writing one that doesn't fine someone for an unexpected inactive player. Slaton was only questionable, not doubtful, on the NFL injury report.Did I mention I hate too many rules? :end-of-rant:

 

[renesauz]

You could enact an anti-tanking rule that would allow the commish to replace a bye or injured player with the next best player (according to your league's scoring system) if the team is mathematically eliminated and playing a game with playoff implications. Basically it would only apply the last few weeks of the season, only cover bye weeks or players who are inactive and only impact games that "matter." In the case you mentioned, you would know to keep an eye on that game, go in and replace Slaton when necessary. I don't normally like intrusive rules, but that limited commish power would help retain the integrity of your season.

Every league needs a generic rule in place allowing the commish to act in the best interests of the league as a whole.Any such rule would justify the commish changing the lineup BEFORE the games. It should have been reasonable to have made the Mendenhall substitution for him.Regardless of when the sub is made, the replacement needs to be based on recomendations of a third party source published BEFORE the games...not just high bench player. In your league, the $5 per transaction rule needs to be amended to allow pickups of players by eliminated teams for the purpose of a complete lineup for free. No way should an elimininated team be expected to pay more money to field a lineup. This is another thing that should have been waiveable by the commish based on an integrity clause.This is an odd thing that pops up every year it seems. The problem is that too many leagues have rules which are either poorly written, or have rules which handcuff the commish and prevent him from effectively taking care of problems. You have to trust your commish, or you have to have rules extremely well planned and very specific.

 

[MIMN]

In your league, the $5 per transaction rule needs to be amended to allow pickups of players by eliminated teams for the purpose of a complete lineup for free. No way should an elimininated team be expected to pay more money to field a lineup. This is another thing that should have been waiveable by the commish based on an integrity clause.

GREAT SUGGESTION! I am proposing that to one of my leagues.

 

[Phurfur]

You people make this hobby a lot harder than it should be.

 

[jwb]

In this case, you should let it stand - Slaton was not a clear "out" until very late. Those are the breaks. As of wed/thur, having Slaton in was fine. And even fri/sat, it was a "he might not play".

Commenting on other stuff, yea, I feel every league needs a "best interest of the league" umbrella that gives commish final say on any gray area.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

He didn't want to spend the $5 because he knew it was a waste of $$. So he played a man down that week, and luckily won the game. I was not happy about it and told him, he still needs to put his best lineup out there.

If the cost of fielding his best lineup is more than the penalty for not fielding his best lineup, then it sounds like your rules are screwy.That said.....I'm not sure if you can penalize someone simply because they didn't check to see if Slaton was active or not. What if the roles were reversed, and the guy fighting for the playoff spot forgot to bench Slaton? Would you apply the same penalty?

We have $5 transaction fees as well, but a rule that states once a player is officially eliminated from playoff contention his transaction fee is waved to replace a player that is injured or on a bye. Why make some one pay the $ if they really have nothing to play for?

 

[Rounders]

In this case, you should let it stand - Slaton was not a clear "out" until very late. Those are the breaks. As of wed/thur, having Slaton in was fine. And even fri/sat, it was a "he might not play". Commenting on other stuff, yea, I feel every league needs a "best interest of the league" umbrella that gives commish final say on any gray area.

I think (I'm not sure) that you are not understanding the point. I'm not trying to change the rule this year or change the outcome of the game....I'm trying to gather suggestions so that it does not happen again.So far I've got:1) Fines2) Waive transaction costs for eliminated teams3) Commish override rule

 

[jwb]

In this case, you should let it stand - Slaton was not a clear "out" until very late. Those are the breaks. As of wed/thur, having Slaton in was fine. And even fri/sat, it was a "he might not play".

Commenting on other stuff, yea, I feel every league needs a "best interest of the league" umbrella that gives commish final say on any gray area.

I think (I'm not sure) that you are not understanding the point. I'm not trying to change the rule this year or change the outcome of the game....I'm trying to gather suggestions so that it does not happen again.So far I've got:

1) Fines

2) Waive transaction costs for eliminated teams

3) Commish override rule

But what I'm trying to say is there is nothing to prevent from happening again - in this case, anyway. Nothing "wrong" happened that needs a rule. He set his lineup and started a guy who was declared out on Sun. That happens sometimes. I would think it is a "commish should step in" problem only if the player was on IR or clearly out for a week, etc. I feel the commish override rule is something you should have anyway, but if next year, the exact same thing happens and you change slaton to mendy, prepare for screaming from the owner that missed the playoffs. IMHO, a commish override rule is to prevent tanking, not to babysit rosters/lineups.

 

[Phurfur]

In this case, you should let it stand - Slaton was not a clear "out" until very late. Those are the breaks. As of wed/thur, having Slaton in was fine. And even fri/sat, it was a "he might not play".

Commenting on other stuff, yea, I feel every league needs a "best interest of the league" umbrella that gives commish final say on any gray area.

except that no one should be starting Slaton over Mendenhall.

 

[Hoss_Cartwright]

You people make this hobby a lot harder than it should be.

Ok then, what's your solution to this problem?

 

[Big Blue Wrecking Crew]

In your league, the $5 per transaction rule needs to be amended to allow pickups of players by eliminated teams for the purpose of a complete lineup for free. No way should an elimininated team be expected to pay more money to field a lineup. This is another thing that should have been waiveable by the commish based on an integrity clause.

GREAT SUGGESTION! I am proposing that to one of my leagues.

Curious if those in leagues with this rule have "Toilet Bowls" for teams not making the playoffs? We do, with a minimal cash prize, so I could see teams complaining that those teams are getting free moves but could still win cash via the Toilet Bowl.It's always something...

 

[moleculo]

In this case, you should let it stand - Slaton was not a clear "out" until very late. Those are the breaks. As of wed/thur, having Slaton in was fine. And even fri/sat, it was a "he might not play". Commenting on other stuff, yea, I feel every league needs a "best interest of the league" umbrella that gives commish final say on any gray area.

I think (I'm not sure) that you are not understanding the point. I'm not trying to change the rule this year or change the outcome of the game....I'm trying to gather suggestions so that it does not happen again.So far I've got:1) Fines2) Waive transaction costs for eliminated teams3) Commish override rule

4) some sort of incentive to keep competing (weekly high score score bonus, pay per win, etc).Actually, the pay per win is something that I've proposed over the years - everyone pony up a little extra scratch in entry fees, and then award $5/win.If you have 12 teams and a 14 week schedule, an extra $35/man will cover it. You can sell it by saying that if you win half of your games, you will break even on the deal...really not that big of a deal, and IMO it's enough to keep people interested all year.

 

[shadyridr]

transaction fees

You seriously want this guy to spend $5 to submit a full lineup when he has no chance of making the playoffs? Thats not fair

 

[Swamprat]

In this case, you should let it stand - Slaton was not a clear "out" until very late. Those are the breaks. As of wed/thur, having Slaton in was fine. And even fri/sat, it was a "he might not play". Commenting on other stuff, yea, I feel every league needs a "best interest of the league" umbrella that gives commish final say on any gray area.

I think (I'm not sure) that you are not understanding the point. I'm not trying to change the rule this year or change the outcome of the game....I'm trying to gather suggestions so that it does not happen again.So far I've got:1) Fines2) Waive transaction costs for eliminated teams3) Commish override rule

4) some sort of incentive to keep competing (weekly high score score bonus, pay per win, etc).Actually, the pay per win is something that I've proposed over the years - everyone pony up a little extra scratch in entry fees, and then award $5/win.If you have 12 teams and a 14 week schedule, an extra $35/man will cover it. You can sell it by saying that if you win half of your games, you will break even on the deal...really not that big of a deal, and IMO it's enough to keep people interested all year.

1) Fines: Fine a team for starting a player on a bye week. As explained in previous posts, there are too many possible exceptions to enforcing a fine for a player who out with injury. It would not be fair to fine a team for starting a player who was a dreaded "game time decision".2) Waive transaction fees...period. Add the $25 or so cost to the entry fee.3) Commish override rule: Ewwwwww...Yuck....The commissioner should never make changes to another team's lineup without the expressed written consent of the team in question. Ok, so the rule would be the expressed written consent but I still don't like this.4) Pay the high scoring team a little bonus. A chance to win a couple bucks always helps. Combine this with #2 and you'll see teams try to play spoiler.

 

[Rounders]

Good ideas fellas....now I fear what you may say when I tell you we already pay the following:

1) $5 per regular season win

2) $5 to the highest scoring team of the week

3) $25 to the toilet bowl champion (a playoff of teams that do not make the playoffs)

So theoretically we have a lot of these things in place, and it does not seem to affect the situation. I can't wait for the "throw him out of the league" comments to start. I feel with a close group of friends, that's difficult to do.

 

[moleculo]

have you tried peer pressure?

 

[Rounders]

have you tried peer pressure?

I think a good old fashioned tar and feathering should do the trick, no?

 

[ratbast]

have you tried peer pressure?

I totally agree. If you aren't going to kick him out then perhaps You, the team who lost because of Slaton and everyone else should rag on him so hard he cries.For the whole year and forever! Name all gaffes after him. If his name is Johnson and every time someone does something like this you say "He's pulling a Johnson!" this type of inactivity will dwindle fast!Make fun of him publicly, early and often!In my keeper league thats on year 16, peer pressure has basically replaced the need for a Commish.