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.

Is it acceptable to "fix" your playoff seed? (1 Viewer)

A

atlas4

Footballguy
Pretend you've locked up a playoff seed going into next week, the last week before the playoffs start. If you win next week, you're the #3 seed, but if you lose, you're the #4 seed. If you like your playoff bracket/match-ups better as the lower #4 seed, is it acceptable to purposefully lose the last game in order to drop down to #4?

Strategic or unethical?

(by the way, the numbers of the seeds are arbitrary)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
We actually discussed this as a league, prior to our draft this year. The overwhelming majority of owners felt that, for this ONE specific situation, and only on the last week of the regular season, would, technically speaking, tanking be allowed.

 
#1 I think you still have to set a line-up. It's really poor taste just to bench everyone.

#2. You have to consider how this affects others in terms of playoff seeding. If 8 teams get in, and you're playing someone that's fighting for that 8th seed, you're going to piss alot of people off if he gets in and they did not because you decided you'd rather be the 4th seed. Imagine if you've been battling injuries most of the season, and you just got Romo back. Steven Jackson is right around the corner, and you think you can really make a run at this thing. Then, all of a sudden, the guy that should lose by 35 points wins by 20 because the 3rd seed benched Peterson for Green-Ellis and Warner for Jamarcus Russell. You won your matchup like you needed to, but so did the other guy, and now you're out...you're probably not in that league next year.

 
Jon_Moore said:
#1 I think you still have to set a line-up. It's really poor taste just to bench everyone.#2. You have to consider how this affects others in terms of playoff seeding. If 8 teams get in, and you're playing someone that's fighting for that 8th seed, you're going to piss alot of people off if he gets in and they did not because you decided you'd rather be the 4th seed. Imagine if you've been battling injuries most of the season, and you just got Romo back. Steven Jackson is right around the corner, and you think you can really make a run at this thing. Then, all of a sudden, the guy that should lose by 35 points wins by 20 because the 3rd seed benched Peterson for Green-Ellis and Warner for Jamarcus Russell. You won your matchup like you needed to, but so did the other guy, and now you're out...you're probably not in that league next year.
Click to expand...
All valid points and I totally understand where you're coming from, but if this was discussed and agreed to by the entire league, prior to the season, then you don't really have a right to be upset, no?Again, I totally, get what you're saying, but it would just be unfortunate in said case above, no?
 
fasteddie_21 said:
Jon_Moore said:
#1 I think you still have to set a line-up. It's really poor taste just to bench everyone.#2. You have to consider how this affects others in terms of playoff seeding. If 8 teams get in, and you're playing someone that's fighting for that 8th seed, you're going to piss alot of people off if he gets in and they did not because you decided you'd rather be the 4th seed. Imagine if you've been battling injuries most of the season, and you just got Romo back. Steven Jackson is right around the corner, and you think you can really make a run at this thing. Then, all of a sudden, the guy that should lose by 35 points wins by 20 because the 3rd seed benched Peterson for Green-Ellis and Warner for Jamarcus Russell. You won your matchup like you needed to, but so did the other guy, and now you're out...you're probably not in that league next year.
Click to expand...
All valid points and I totally understand where you're coming from, but if this was discussed and agreed to by the entire league, prior to the season, then you don't really have a right to be upset, no?Again, I totally, get what you're saying, but it would just be unfortunate in said case above, no?
Click to expand...
Well, obviously, if you have a pre-set rule, that pretty much supercedes the rest.
 
That's why I like our system, 6 playoff teams. Split into two conferences, and two divisions in each. Thus 4 division winners, two wildcard spots, top seed in each conference gets a bye. Obviously you play to win, so you get that bye, otherwise your either the wildcard playing a division winner, or vice versa.

 
Mainevent said:
That's why I like our system, 6 playoff teams. Split into two conferences, and two divisions in each. Thus 4 division winners, two wildcard spots, top seed in each conference gets a bye. Obviously you play to win, so you get that bye, otherwise your either the wildcard playing a division winner, or vice versa.
Click to expand...
You still use seeding. 4 division winners, seeded by win-lose. So the teams locking up a bye could still lose to face different people.Same if the wildcards are locked up, 5/6 play different people.
 
No one in out league would dare choice to loose a game to set up a playoff seed. If it back fired they would never hear the end of out smarting themselves. They would have to make sure they would win it all for doing this.

 
I wouldn't, but whether it's "acceptable" depends on your league.

I'm just not confident enough in my (or anyone's) ability to predict how a certain matchup would roll, unless maybe the team I would play has lost a lot of its players in the last week.

 
Some one did this in my league a few years back. Everyone was pissed and it's a crappy thing to do. The next year, we made a rule that the team that finishes first gets to pick their playoff matchup.

 
FUBAR said:
I'm just not confident enough in my (or anyone's) ability to predict how a certain matchup would roll, unless maybe the team I would play has lost a lot of its players in the last week.
Click to expand...
Last year I thought about losing the last regular season game on purpose for a better match-up. I decided against it, lost anyway and wound up facing the team I had wanted anyway. I lost.Don't outsmart yourself, just play it out.
 
Statler & Waldorf said:
Some one did this in my league a few years back. Everyone was pissed and it's a crappy thing to do. The next year, we made a rule that the team that finishes first gets to pick their playoff matchup.
Click to expand...
We extend this to all the top seeds, in order. It works. Plus it's one more decision somebody has to make, which is a fun part of the game.
 
This also happened in my main league 2 years ago. My cousin (and roommate at the time) was actually the one who intentionally tanked to "get a better playoff matchup." Because he scored a lot of points during the year but lost some high-scoring games, he could have finished anywhere from 3rd to 6th based on just the results of the last game, and he liked the matchup as the #6 vs. the #3 seed best. Being the commish, and without any rules against it, all I could do was chastise him for his lack of sportsmanship and deal with the awkwardness of watching the Week 13 matchup play out as one of my close friends in the league fought to gain the same final playoff spot that my cousin shouldn't have been contesting anyway.

In his case, it normally wouldn't have been absolutely clear-cut, but on Sunday he did pull Reggie Bush, who ended up having 3 TD's, for Nick Goings in Monday night's game. He basically told me before the game that he was trying to tank to choose his playoff spot - as a silent protest regarding being the high-point scorer and still being 3 games out of first. At the last minute, due to my pressure on him to not be a total d00shbag, he replaced Goings with DeAngelo Williams, but still lost - would have won with Bush, otherwise.

Luckily, it ended up not mattering a WHOLE lot...the friend who was trying to seal the 6th and final seed ended up not winning anyway, avoiding the issue of my cousin's intentional tanking costing him a spot.

My cousin ended up moving away before the next year, so we avoided the issue of hard feelings at the next draft...though some bitter comments still came up at this last year's draft when reminiscing. We ended up adding a "sportsmanship/honest effort/fair play" clause to the rules the next year to give some clarity to the situation.

Plus, my cousin ended up getting THRASHED in the first round of the playoffs, where he would have won easily in the first round had he finished his projected 3rd. Going back and looking at the potential matchups, had he just let things play out naturally, he would have coasted to a championship. Poetic justice, I suppose.

 
All tanking, regardless of intent, is really poor sportsmanship and should be discouraged with fines. Who wants this kind of owner in your league? Start looking for a replacement.

 
fasteddie_21 said:
We actually discussed this as a league, prior to our draft this year. The overwhelming majority of owners felt that, for this ONE specific situation, and only on the last week of the regular season, would, technically speaking, tanking be allowed.
Click to expand...
Any league that would allow tanking at any time is not a league that I would want to be part of....as others have said one team tanking can help/hurt other teams in the league.......it's just never good to allow something like this and to me is no different than tanking for a better draft position....
 
Well, if you are starting a valid lineup. you can start however you want. These plans often backfire (KARMA). I say play to win, but I see nothing wrong with the scheming.

We have also had teams lose ealry in the season to be first to grab the waiver pickups. As long as the lineup is valid, go for it.

 
fasteddie_21 said:
We actually discussed this as a league, prior to our draft this year. The overwhelming majority of owners felt that, for this ONE specific situation, and only on the last week of the regular season, would, technically speaking, tanking be allowed.
Click to expand...
I don't understand why tanking to "improve" your playoff matchup is any different than tanking to improve your draft position. If one is okay in your league, than the other should be too.
 
not setting a line up is unacceptable to me as a commish... placing players in your line up that are injuried or not playing is also unacceptable to me.

Now, if a playoff bound team has this idea in mind and Benchs a Stud for his back up (who is playing a full game) or something along those lines is fine to me. I actually think its very smart to do... I wouldn't do it of course because w/ my luck I would get burned in the end by the fantasy gawds..

 
this is a bit off topic but still related.

this is what we do in our league.

the 2 seeds that get a bye #1 and #2, play each other during that bye. the winner of the game gets to pick who they play in the 2nd round of the playoffs.

 
KellysHeroes said:
not setting a line up is unacceptable to me as a commish... placing players in your line up that are injuried or not playing is also unacceptable to me.Now, if a playoff bound team has this idea in mind and Benchs a Stud for his back up (who is playing a full game) or something along those lines is fine to me. I actually think its very smart to do... I wouldn't do it of course because w/ my luck I would get burned in the end by the fantasy gawds..
Click to expand...
:rolleyes: that nails it. I don't want to tell others who to start or how to run their team, imagine if an owner wanted to start Harry Douglas over Brandon Marshall last week but your league didn't allow him to, so he lost because he wasn't allowed to manage his team. Injuries and bye weeks or players that aren't on a roster is a different story.
 
Two of the leagues I'm in take care of this by paying out for your playoff position. 1/2, 3/4, 5/6 all get different amounts of money just for making it to the playoffs. It's not a lot of money compared to the final purse but it seems to keep people from trying to get a specific spot.

 
a scenario that happened to me:

in a league where only 4 teams make the playoffs i had clinched the #1 seed and was playing a guy who had overachieved to be sitting at the current #4 seed - the #5 seed was an underachieving team due to injury but was getting healthy fast

if i lose on purpose i play the same guy the next week in round one and the second best team in the league would be shut out of the playoffs

i couldn't do it, didn't seem right so i started my best lineup and won

the good team made the playoffs and beat me week one playoffs and won the title

projecting the scores out i'd have won both my playoff games had i tanked last regular season game

$400 difference between what i coulda won

and i'd still do the same thing again, tanking is never right

 
interesting rule we added

in a 4team playoff seed #1 chooses his first round opponent and the other two play

in a 6team playoff, #1 and #2 get byes, and seed #3 chooses his opponent for the first round - in the second round see rule for 4team playoff above

 
To me this comes down to what kind of league you're in. If this is a casual, fun league with friends, IMHO one kind of looks like a tool pulling these kind of shenanigans.

If it's a highly competitive league that encourages this kind of gamesmanship and doesn't have a rule on the books, then have at it.

Of course, if it was the latter situation I'm not sure you'd need to come here to get opinions, so I suspect that this is the usual case of if you have to ask...

 
I think more FF systems need to implement weights on the seedings in the playoffs to make it advantageous to have higher seeds. My system, for example, has a 4-team playoff (12 team league) where the 4th seed gets a fixed deduction in score so it is highly advantageous to have the first seed. In a 4-team playoff, 2nd and 3rd obviously are indifferent.

Many systems do this strategy in the form of early round byes (ie, 6 team playoffs), but beyond that, you frequently find yourself in situations where you are indifferent in seeds 3-6 meaning that you are basically looking for the best matchup to your team. I'm a big fan of giving score modifiers to each seed to prevent people from wanting to tank games. For example, a 5% score modifier is typically far better to have than a marginally better matchup.

To answer this post directly, I think anything but fielding your best team each week, unless discussed before the season started, is very similar to collusion. While there isn't much a comish can do in hindsight to fix the results, it may be seen as poor sportsmanship by the rest of your league.

 
Somewhat different situation in my league but could also be a common similar situation.

I am 8-4 and have locked up my division and my playoff seating is pretty much set in stone as well too. This is the last week of the regular season. It is a dynasty league. I am playing a team that is tied with several other teams with a 5-7 record. I own the first round picks of two other teams that also hold 5-7 records. I obviously could possibly move up a slot with each of those two first round picks if I tanked and lost to the 5-7 team I am playing.

I am not going to play anything less than my best lineup and I am trying to win. As others have said do not anger the fantasy gods. Truth be known I just would not feel right doing anything less than playing what I feel is my best lineup even if I might gain a little something by losing.

 
Evilhomer3k said:
Two of the leagues I'm in take care of this by paying out for your playoff position. 1/2, 3/4, 5/6 all get different amounts of money just for making it to the playoffs. It's not a lot of money compared to the final purse but it seems to keep people from trying to get a specific spot.
Click to expand...
:thumbup: I'm a big supporter of allocating a substantial portion of the pot to regular season division winners.
 
Hmm, so what if you aren't tanking for a playoff matchup, but instead for a draft slot in the following year? Assume that no ones playoff matchups change by you losing, only the draft spots of you and the team you are facing.

 
The Man with the Plan said:
That's the cowards way out. To be the man you've got to beat the man so why delay the inevitable?
Click to expand...
I never understood this WWE-style philosophy. You've never seen a scenario where a team would beat you in week 15 but lose to you in week 16? Matchups are part of the game. It's why 12-2 teams can lose in the first round of the playoffs. Your job is to win the title by whatever path gets you there. Some paths are better than others. That's just the way the playoffs work. Leagues need to reward the top seed with some control over their opponent so there isn't any temptation to affect who it will be. Giving the top seed the ability to pick their opponent is the right way to go imo.
 
Since I'm getting harped on a little here, let me clarify a couple of things.

I'm commish in the league in which the league voted this rule as being 'ok'. I did not make the rule. The league did. Had we thought of some of these other ideas (higher seeds get to choose their matchups and/or the idea of maybe a 5% scoring penalty on lower seeds etc), I'm sure that would have been voted in. But given that none of us thought of those things, the league voted as it did.

Now, to be fair, I wasn't thorough in my explanation...teams can't start injured players, guys not on rosters etc. It's just how Kelley's Heroes stated in that a guy might bench a STUD for a non-STUD etc. I won't allow BLATANT (read: injured) tanking, perse.

Sorry for the lack of explaination.

That said, some really great ideas in here that I will DEFINITELY be bringing up to our owners for next season!

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

U
Cleveland Browns road to the number 1 seed!
Replies
8
Views
924
Gatorman
Gatorman
Joe Bryant
Week 17 Motivation...
Replies
43
Views
2K
BassNBrew
BassNBrew
Ministry of Pain
It felt good on Draft Night but now you have to actually start'em...Who Should I Start Thread "OFFICIALLY UNOFFICIAL"
3 4 5
Replies
206
Views
3K
Hot Sauce Guy
Hot Sauce Guy

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top