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!

Is it OK for two finalists to agree to "chop" the prize mone (4 Viewers)

Should the two finalists in a league be allowed to agree to divide up prize money before the final g

  • The finalists can agree to whatever they choose, including a 50/50 split if that's what they wan

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Some sort of split is OK, as long as the winner is still getting most of the money.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • No chopping -- the money is handed out based on league rules only

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    0
smcindoe

smcindoe

Footballguy
If you're in the finals of a league with a decent prize pool, is it reasonable to strike a deal with the other guy to split up the prize money in advance? For example, agree to split the money 50/50 regardless of results, or to each take 25% and play for the rest?

(For sake of argument, assume the league is either "all or nothing" or has minimal payout for the runner up. Also assume that there's nothing specific in the rules about this.)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anyone who thinks it violates the spirit of the league is just a bitter loser who doesn't want someone else to collect some cash.

 
I don't care what people do with the money, as long as the final is played as a fair game so that we have an official winner in the league. In my mind that's who the champ is and will go down in league history as such.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Chopping it 50/50 = cheesy.

My opponent and I have agreed to have the winner take all ($2100) with 2nd place getting NADA.

That's how I roll.

:ptts:

 
It's perfectly fine. Most people don't care what the $ amount was the next season...and most this don't care if they are not playing this year.

EVERYBODY remembers who the winner is. A fair and honest game is all that matters.

 
Bolitar said:
It's perfectly fine. Most people don't care what the $ amount was the next season...and most this don't care if they are not playing this year. EVERYBODY remembers who the winner is. A fair and honest game is all that matters.
Click to expand...
:lmao:Besides, once you pay the winner he may do whatever he wants with the money. If he wants to give half to the Superbowl loser, that's his choice.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
As long as the league can declare a final champion based upon normal game results, I don't care about the prize money. :thumbdown:

At that point, the prestige of being the champion is enough insurance IMHO that everyone will do their best. I've never seen a split affect the motivation of the people in the championship game.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Swamprat said:
Besides, once you pay the winner he may do whatever he wants with the money. If he wants to give half to the Superbowl loser, that's his choice.
Click to expand...
Agreed.I'm currently trying to strike a deal with my opponent that if I bench LT in the final and still beat him I get his second place money :thumbdown:
 
:pickle: no different than side bets all year long on individual games. It's their $$ let them do what they want with it.
 
CapnJB said:
Swamprat said:
Besides, once you pay the winner he may do whatever he wants with the money. If he wants to give half to the Superbowl loser, that's his choice.
Click to expand...
Agreed.I'm currently trying to strike a deal with my opponent that if I bench LT in the final and still beat him I get his second place money :D
Click to expand...
That I don't like because your bet may affect the game outcome. Both sides should be playing their best teams.
 
I'm currently trying to strike a deal with my opponent that if I bench LT in the final and still beat him I get his second place money :thumbup:
Click to expand...
That I don't like because your bet may affect the game outcome. Both sides should be playing their best teams.
Click to expand...
I agree. A side bet that he can beat the team minus LT's scores would be better.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
the league does a 70/30 split.

this year and last year I was in the bowl against very close friends of mine. We normally do a 60/40...basically a 50/50 w/ some left over to play for.

 
Last year due to 3 people dropping out i ended up in a 9 team league. We had to create a ghost team and it kinda sucked. Anyway, it was a $40 entry and a payout of $280 to first and $80 to second. If i would have taken second, I wouldn't have broken even from the entries of all my leagues. I decided to split with the other team in the championship game ($180 a piece) which meant I made a little bit of money overall last season. I see no problem with it even though I shouldn't have done it because i ended up winning the championship game. This season the payouts in the same league are $300 to first and $150 to second. I will make money this season win or lose so I don't plan on cutting a deal this year. That means I am probably going to lose the championship game this time and make the wrong decision again. Oh well, c'est la vie!

 
Splitting is OK but I have done Winner take all a couple of times in the past. It's a great way to end the Fantasy season "If You Win"

 
I'd have no problem with it, but I would lose respect for both guys, and would take steps towards not playing in a league with them in the future. And that would be too bad, since it's usually a safe assumption that the two guys in the championship game are probably pretty good owners.

 
If they are going to split why play the game .

Ridiculous they both are to chicken to play the game so they make it easy ( No pressure ) they split .

Stupidity .

 
I have no problem with them splitting the money but there can be only one REAL champion of the league. I would never personally agree to that. I don't think you can dictate how people choose to spend their money.

 
Traders2001 said:
Stupidity .
Click to expand...
If one guy thinks he has a 75% chance of winning, splitting is probably stupid. If he thinks he has a 25% chance of winning, splitting is probably smart. If he thinks he has a 50% chance of winning, wanting to split just depends on whether he likes or dislikes risk.If both owners think they have a 50% chance of winning, splitting might make sense to both of them.If both owners think that Team A has a 75% chance of winning, dividing the prize such that Team A gets (1st place) * (0.75) + (2nd place) + (0.25) with Team B getting the rest might make sense to both of them.It's their money. Team A and Team B, collectively, have earned the 1st place + 2nd place money and can divide it however they please. JMHO.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So say like the winner gets $1,200 and the Super Bowl loser gets $400? That's $1,600 total. What is to stop the winner from giving the loser an extra $400 on the side? What I am hearing is that as long as you owners do not have to know about the winner giving the other guy some cash you are cool with it? More of a 'if I don't see it, it never happened thing"?

I am in my league's Super Bowl and I am not considering chopping the pot with the other guy. Namely I am not considering it because I think I have a much better team than he. I am sure if I offered him a chop he would leap at the chance. Unfortunately for him I am greedy and would take home 75% of the pot.

 
This does nothing to harm the integrity of the league, although it is not exactly the man's thing to do.

That said, it's fine if the teams decide to do so.

 
Borat said:
I'd have no problem with it, but I would lose respect for both guys, and would take steps towards not playing in a league with them in the future. And that would be too bad, since it's usually a safe assumption that the two guys in the championship game are probably pretty good owners.
Click to expand...
Can you expand on why you'd feel this way? Would this apply to any split, or 50/50 only?
 
I was on the fence, and I voted no, but I think you guys have convinced me. As long as the game is played fairly I don't really have a problem with it. If you have a traveling trophy, I guess the thing is to put it up in the living room so they have to see it every time they come over. The money is secondary. That being said, it also would be nice to take all the money, buy a really big TV, and then make them watch it every time they come over. You know: "You should pay attention to the top 1/10th of the screen....that part's yours." :lmao:

 
we also have a trophy in our league which is what is we play for. a cpl years ago i offered the split of the cash to my opponent and he accepted. we figured the champion would still get the trophy. well, it went over like a popcorn fart in church when the others heard about it. i really couldnt understand why it mattered to the rest.

i agree with the guy earlier. just a bunch of whiny outsiders wanting to still be playing.

 
Traders2001 said:
If they are going to split why play the game .Ridiculous they both are to chicken to play the game so they make it easy ( No pressure ) they split .Stupidity .
Click to expand...
Exactly. It's just cowardly.Now, if you're in a big money league, and you really don't think you have a good shot at winning, and it's more about the money than fun, or if you're in a bind in your personal life and just need the guaranteed money, then maybe I could see why you'd agree to such an arrangement.But if it's a league that's primarily for fun (even if there is a little cash involved) and you agree to something like this, you're just a scumbag, in my opinion.
 
I think it's fine, and I think both sides will definitely try to win the game anyway.

Think about it this way: Both sides agree that whoever wins will give half to the other team, since they agreed to split in advance. Now, which guy would you rather be? The one with the cold, hard cash in his hand, ready to dole half out to the other owner? Or the losing owner who is waiting for that phone call about his half of the money?

If they hardly know each other, better to be the winner just in case. If they're great friends, they'll want to beat each other just for the bragging rights over a buddy. So I don't think it affects the integrity of the game at all. It simply acknowledges that they both had great years and the "winner" is just the one who gets luckier on one weekend in December. They could have the two lowest socres for the week, but one will still be the "champion." That's a lot of money (potentially) to be riding on Lady Luck.

No, I'm not defending it because I've done it before. It just makes a lot of sense to me.

 
Borat said:
Now, if you're in a big money league, and you really don't think you have a good shot at winning, and it's more about the money than fun, or if you're in a bind in your personal life and just need the guaranteed money, then maybe I could see why you'd agree to such an arrangement.But if it's a league that's primarily for fun (even if there is a little cash involved) and you agree to something like this, you're just a scumbag, in my opinion.
Click to expand...
I have assumed the question was asked in the context that it would make a difference if you won or lost. If it was a $400 league, with winner getting $350 and loser getting $50 I probably wouldn't bother splitting but still think the participants should be able to if they want to.Now if it is a $6000 league, winner take all, I am splitting that pot (which I currently AM doing with one other person in a $20 entry survivor pool)
 
or if you're in a bind in your personal life and just need the guaranteed money, then maybe I could see why you'd agree to such an arrangement
Click to expand...
I have won my league three out of seven years.I split one time as the other owner was having money problems. (I offered)We agreed the winner would get an extra 100 and the remaining split 50/50.We went to a sports bar, had lunch, watched the game, and I creamed him.That owner has since become a very good friend.We play more for the trophy and bragging rights.I have no problem with owners spliting, but think 60/40 is a better split.
 
Neil Beaufort Zod said:
I think it's fine, and I think both sides will definitely try to win the game anyway.Think about it this way: Both sides agree that whoever wins will give half to the other team, since they agreed to split in advance. Now, which guy would you rather be? The one with the cold, hard cash in his hand, ready to dole half out to the other owner? Or the losing owner who is waiting for that phone call about his half of the money?If they hardly know each other, better to be the winner just in case. If they're great friends, they'll want to beat each other just for the bragging rights over a buddy. So I don't think it affects the integrity of the game at all. It simply acknowledges that they both had great years and the "winner" is just the one who gets luckier on one weekend in December. They could have the two lowest socres for the week, but one will still be the "champion." That's a lot of money (potentially) to be riding on Lady Luck.No, I'm not defending it because I've done it before. It just makes a lot of sense to me.
Click to expand...
I think the key here is LADY LUCK. I've heard people whining all weekend about the luck factor in the playoffs.I have personally only done this once. I was in an extremely rough financial situation at the time and the money really made a difference. I really wasn't in the mood to let the luck factor determine my financial situation. We did agree beforehand, however, to set aside part of the money to go to the only to the winner.It didn't change how I felt about the championship game at all. I think most of us who play are incredibly competitive and the win is as important as the money. I really don't understand why some people seem to think that it means something "shady" is going on if teams decide to split.No one in our league cared if the top 2 split, but the person who would have taken the bulk of the pot always takes a lot of #### from the other owners.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's kinda #####... but likewise... what if you league goes

60% to 1st place

30% to 2nd place

and they agree to go winner take all... much more fun n' ballsy, but in the "spirit of the rule" is that cool?

Let em do whatever they want so long as it's not crooked.

 
Borat said:
I'd have no problem with it, but I would lose respect for both guys, and would take steps towards not playing in a league with them in the future. And that would be too bad, since it's usually a safe assumption that the two guys in the championship game are probably pretty good owners.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't lose respect for them but I would definately razz on them for not having the guts (substitute word of your choice) to go for it.
 
I've done it before...makes no difference to me. It's all about the bracelet as far as I am concerned. Money is nice and I've won my share, but unless it is big coin (like in the thousands), I'd much rather get the dollar issue set aside and focus on the game itself.

Bragging rights for a year...priceless! :confused:

 
redman said:
CapnJB said:
Swamprat said:
Besides, once you pay the winner he may do whatever he wants with the money. If he wants to give half to the Superbowl loser, that's his choice.
Click to expand...
Agreed.I'm currently trying to strike a deal with my opponent that if I bench LT in the final and still beat him I get his second place money :confused:
Click to expand...
That I don't like because your bet may affect the game outcome. Both sides should be playing their best teams.
Click to expand...
Of course it could affect the game outcome... that'd be the only reason he'd make the bet. I win, I take the entire pot. I lose, I still keep my second place money. :lmao: He already has $175 guaranteed from being a division winner so it's not like he'd be walking away empty handed.I had a silly draft and even if I had benched LT and started Priest Holmes every week this year I still would have had the #1 seed. The offer was just to make the final game a little more interesting before heading into the doldrums of no FF for months.... In a league that averages 50 points a game, I'm a 24 point favorite going in. Not that you care, but that was the reason that led me to make that offer. :stalker:
 
Borat said:
I'd have no problem with it, but I would lose respect for both guys, and would take steps towards not playing in a league with them in the future. And that would be too bad, since it's usually a safe assumption that the two guys in the championship game are probably pretty good owners.
Click to expand...
Why? This does not affect you whatsoever. Who cares what they do? They made it to the championship game. They can do whatever they want. 95% of the people care on WHO WINS, not how much money they won. I don't understand why some of you are saying this. It doesn't make any sense. It's there money, they can do whatever they want with it and it does not concern anyone else in the league.
 
I have no problem with people doing this. However, be prepared to be called a bunch of spineless pansies if you do though.

I have NEVER split the pot in any of the championships I have been in. (I should of last year, was in 4 superbowls and lost all 4. :thumbup: )

 
My main league is a winner-take-all, and I think it's kind of dumb to have so much riding on the outcome of a single fantasy matchup. It would really suck to lose by 1 point because your QB pulls a McNair and gets knocked out of his game on the first drive without recording any stats. There's a lot of luck involved in FF and I want to hedge the risk. So, I offered my Championship opponent a split deal, I offered 75-25 instead of 100-0. Sucks to play the whole year, get unlucky at the wrong time, and have nothing to show for it. I mean, I went 11-3 (beating LT owner twice) to get to the Bowl, he's 9-4-1, and we're pretty evenly matched in terms of roster and projections for this week... just seems silly that the runner up gets nada while the other guy plays the next 10 seasons for free with everyone else's money.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Had this sitch last year in my main money league. I think that however the players want to split the money doesn't matter.

Only one of them is the league's champ, right?

 
Your Mom said:
Borat said:
I'd have no problem with it, but I would lose respect for both guys, and would take steps towards not playing in a league with them in the future. And that would be too bad, since it's usually a safe assumption that the two guys in the championship game are probably pretty good owners.
Click to expand...
Why? This does not affect you whatsoever. Who cares what they do? They made it to the championship game. They can do whatever they want. 95% of the people care on WHO WINS, not how much money they won. I don't understand why some of you are saying this. It doesn't make any sense. It's there money, they can do whatever they want with it and it does not concern anyone else in the league.
Click to expand...
Complete agreement. If the players want to hedge their potential winnings with a guaranteed split, why should anyone else care? The situation usually arises while the games are progressing and it looks like it will be a close game.
 
videoguy505 said:
My main league is a winner-take-all, and I think it's kind of dumb to have so much riding on the outcome of a single fantasy matchup. It would really suck to lose by 1 point because your QB pulls a McNair and gets knocked out of his game on the first drive without recording any stats. There's a lot of luck involved in FF and I want to hedge the risk. So, I offered my Championship opponent a split deal, I offered 75-25 instead of 100-0. Sucks to play the whole year, get unlucky at the wrong time, and have nothing to show for it. I mean, I went 11-3 (beating LT owner twice) to get to the Bowl, he's 9-4-1, and we're pretty evenly matched in terms of roster and projections for this week... just seems silly that the runner up gets nada while the other guy plays the next 10 seasons for free with everyone else's money.
Click to expand...
This is pretty much exactly how I feel. Good summary.To be honest, I'm a little surprised the "Some sort of split is OK, as long as the winner is still getting most of the money" option is trailing behind so much. I think it would bug me if there was a 50/50 split, even though I can't quite put my finger on why.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Ignoratio Elenchi
  • Poll Poll
10 plays to gain 10 rushing yards for $10M?
2 3
Replies
129
Views
5K
hamsterdam
hamsterdam
N
Dynasty: Season Long Prize Every Team Can Compete For
Replies
8
Views
715
Flying Elvis
Flying Elvis
EBF
Top 26 Rookies 2021
2 3
Replies
108
Views
13K
jdoggydogg
jdoggydogg

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top