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 "throwing a game" legit if it gets you into playoffs (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter gianmarco
- Start date
Wyld Stallyns
Footballguy
For a lot of people, the line between 'games' & 'sports' gets blurred with fantasy football simply because it involves football.
When playing sports it's never acceptable to tank a game no matter what the circumstances are. When playing a game however, let's say poker for example - it's perfectly fine (although not necessarily advised) to fold a pair of aces if 3 short stacks are all going all-in and you just want the dust to settle and see a few players eliminated from the tournament to advance your standing. Nobody is going to make the ridiculous argument that you "owe" it to the rest of the table to call with your aces - It's your hand to play how you like.
FF is closer to poker than actual football in my book. I think anyone who is against tanking the game in the scenario you put forth is viewing the 'game' as more of a 'sport' ...for obvious reasons.
When playing sports it's never acceptable to tank a game no matter what the circumstances are. When playing a game however, let's say poker for example - it's perfectly fine (although not necessarily advised) to fold a pair of aces if 3 short stacks are all going all-in and you just want the dust to settle and see a few players eliminated from the tournament to advance your standing. Nobody is going to make the ridiculous argument that you "owe" it to the rest of the table to call with your aces - It's your hand to play how you like.
FF is closer to poker than actual football in my book. I think anyone who is against tanking the game in the scenario you put forth is viewing the 'game' as more of a 'sport' ...for obvious reasons.
Knight who says Ni
Footballguy
I agree with this - if the league opposes what Team A is doing then next season they need to change the rules regarding playoff berth.
Last edited by a moderator:
jeter23
Footballguy
QuizGuy66
Footballguy
Well you've shown the clear flaw in these hybrid scoring systems.
So what happens when the Team A also decides to throw the game since he doesn't like the idea of you throwing the game (and also wouldn't mind seeing the high-point team miss the playoffs?). Who gets in when you guys inevitably tie 0-0.
-QG
So what happens when the Team A also decides to throw the game since he doesn't like the idea of you throwing the game (and also wouldn't mind seeing the high-point team miss the playoffs?). Who gets in when you guys inevitably tie 0-0.
-QG
Memphis Mutiny
Footballguy
It's already been discussed that they can't tie. They would be starting lesser caliber players. No way they could both fill a starting line-ups with zeros in a dynasty league unless they pilfered the WW for injured players which isn't going to happen in a dynasty.The guy that made the poker example was spot on. This is a no brainer to me. In this case, you can actually show the league that what you're doing gives your team the best chance to make the playoffs. Making the playoffs is the OPPOSITE of tanking!!!!!Fold the aces and watch potentially two guys get knocked out of the tournament! Nothing wrong with that. Personally, in the poker example, I'd call all 3 of them and see if I could knock 'em all out!!!!!OP, you've got to dig this thread up if it comes down to it in week 13, and let us know what happens.The vote is currently 2 to 1 in favor of throwing the game and securing the playoff spot. I didn't read the entire thread so this point may have already been made. By throwing the game, doesn't the team run the risk of being caught in total points on the year and losing the spot anyway??? You'd have to have a killer lead to assume that no one could catch you in that catagory.Well you've shown the clear flaw in these hybrid scoring systems.So what happens when the Team A also decides to throw the game since he doesn't like the idea of you throwing the game (and also wouldn't mind seeing the high-point team miss the playoffs?). Who gets in when you guys inevitably tie 0-0.-QG
bicycle_seat_sniffer
Smells like chicken
I could see losing a game on purpose as collusion and that is the only thing not tolerated in any league I commish.
gianmarco
Footballguy
Again, that is not possible. It's not possible to submit an empty lineup. The lineups will be submitted by both teams. Sure, Team B can put in a crappy lineup too but, in his instance, he's not gaining anything by doing so. His playoff spot is already locked up. All that does is determine which team he might face (and would be neither one since it's a 5th seed and a 6th seed either way).In terms of tanking a game to change seeding, etc., I've gone back and forth on that issue but in the end, is one where I feel you should continue to just play your best lineup. However, that's still different than:Win: Out of playoffsLose: In playoffsWell you've shown the clear flaw in these hybrid scoring systems.So what happens when the Team A also decides to throw the game since he doesn't like the idea of you throwing the game (and also wouldn't mind seeing the high-point team miss the playoffs?). Who gets in when you guys inevitably tie 0-0.-QG
Amused to Death
Footballguy
Colluding with yourself to ensure you get in the playoffs? You need 2 teams for collusion. As long as your not making a deal with anyone else and your only goal is to increase your team's chance at a championship. I don't view it as collusion at all.ETA: I like the analogy with NFL teams sitting their starters to rest them for the playoffs. Coaches are only thinking about what's best for their team to win a championship. They do not consider it their responsibility to help/hurt other teams on the playoff bubble. Every other team needs to take care of their own business.
Last edited by a moderator:
Gary Davenport
Footballguy
I've said it before, I'll say it again. If you have to ask whether or not something is ethical then odds are you already know the answer.
Carolina Hustler
Footballguy
Rules need to be adjusted in this league.. It's already hard enough to monitor tanking... We already have incentive enough for team owners who would consider throwing a game, no need adding more...
gianmarco
Footballguy
Yes, throwing the game COULD run the risk of being caught in total points. We're not there yet but with only 2 weeks leading up to it, it's VERY possible both considering matchups for the teams involved as well as the state of current lineups that this situation will arise. Btw, this move isn't to increase your chances to make the playoffs. It could literally be a "if you win, you're out of the playoffs" vs. "if you lose, you're in the playoffs". Period. It's a very rare circumstance but this is a team that has been fighting for a playoff spot and worked hard and in the end, a one week win from his own team would be his demise. Very rare circumstance indeed but not one I think where a team is wrong by doing what it takes to get their team in.It's already been discussed that they can't tie. They would be starting lesser caliber players. No way they could both fill a starting line-ups with zeros in a dynasty league unless they pilfered the WW for injured players which isn't going to happen in a dynasty.The guy that made the poker example was spot on. This is a no brainer to me. In this case, you can actually show the league that what you're doing gives your team the best chance to make the playoffs. Making the playoffs is the OPPOSITE of tanking!!!!!Fold the aces and watch potentially two guys get knocked out of the tournament! Nothing wrong with that. Personally, in the poker example, I'd call all 3 of them and see if I could knock 'em all out!!!!!OP, you've got to dig this thread up if it comes down to it in week 13, and let us know what happens.The vote is currently 2 to 1 in favor of throwing the game and securing the playoff spot. I didn't read the entire thread so this point may have already been made. By throwing the game, doesn't the team run the risk of being caught in total points on the year and losing the spot anyway??? You'd have to have a killer lead to assume that no one could catch you in that catagory.Well you've shown the clear flaw in these hybrid scoring systems.So what happens when the Team A also decides to throw the game since he doesn't like the idea of you throwing the game (and also wouldn't mind seeing the high-point team miss the playoffs?). Who gets in when you guys inevitably tie 0-0.-QG
th3f00l
Footballguy
Wouldn't it suck if his players all put up horrible numbers (getting benched because of a clinched play off birth, injury, etc.), losing to you, and the players that you don't play could've gotten you the amount of points to win the tie breaker. If you are tied in points then you win the head to head if you have the same record right? Things can happen between now and then, but if it comes to that situation play to win the play off spot and not the game that ends your season. FF is not exactly a game of sportsmanship and fair competition. If you trade someone three players that all have the same bye week, and it happens to be the week they play against you.... it's strategy. Three running backs get injured in the same week and you grab the top waiver prospects for trade bait... unethical, but strategy. If your chances of a play off birth depend on losing, put in brady quinn.
bicycle_seat_sniffer
Smells like chicken
By him giving a team another win, it will affect someone else's seeding and/or chances to get in the playoffs. dont like it all
Amused to Death
Footballguy
But that's not collusion. You might think its shady, but its not collusion. And like my ETA says, NFL teams do it all the time. As long as you're not breaking an explicit league rule I don't have a problem with it. Now if the rules say you must start your top players its different. But I also wouldn't like that rule as I wouldn't want someone else determining who my best players are if I'm paying my league fee to try to win a championship.
Lehigh98
Footballguy
I think you need to look up the definition of "Collusion".
bicycle_seat_sniffer
Smells like chicken
as commish do you really know if both teams are in on it or not? tanking shouldnt be tolerated.
Lehigh98
Footballguy
Ok, but its not "collusion" and if that's "the only thing not tolerated in any league I commish" then it should be ok in your leagues. That is, unless you want to extend rules that don't apply to things you just don't happen to like. And if you start doing that, what kind of commish does that make you?
Lehigh98
Footballguy
So now you're making rulings on things that could have maybe possibly happened?Glad I'm not in any of your leagues.
corpcow
Footballguy
"You keep using that word, but I do not think it means what you think it means."
The agreement is a necessary part of this. If Team A alone decides to field a poor team to get into the playoffs, that's not collusion. If Team A convinces Team C to tank to get into the playoffs, that is collusion.It might appear on the surface that this would be "tanking", a term that most rulebooks specify but don't explicitly define - though I do think there is a significant (if subtle) difference between losing games on purpose to get a better draft pick and losing because the goal is to make the playoffs.
Last edited by a moderator:
No tanking. Tanking is like porn, we know it when we see it. Don't be a (word for male genitalia) about it.
footballnerd
Footballguy
It's not your fault the rules allow this tactic. Playoffs baby! by any means necessar.....uh...within the rules. Let them fix the loop hole next year.
Last edited by a moderator:
bcr8f
Footballguy
We define it by kicking people out that do it.
bicycle_seat_sniffer
Smells like chicken
Yeah im losing sleep over you
corpcow
Footballguy
What exactly would be the agreement between the two teams? Team A can choose to act with or without Team B's input, permission, agreement. How can Team B "be in on it"?
tomarken
Footballguy
And yet Team A has fewer wins than Team C. Now you propose that Team A can and should "earn" the final playoff spot over Team C by losing yet another game? Any fugazi league that allows, even encourages, a situation like this has problems, and being the ##### that exploits the situation makes it worse. He owes it to the league to play it straight up and then have the rules fixed in the offseason.Lehigh98 said:
Agreed, it's bizzaro world.
Lehigh98
Footballguy
Good rule.
Lehigh98
Footballguy
Another gem.
th3f00l
Footballguy
Yeah but that other team is your own. You shouldn't be forced to put yourself out of the playoffs, because it will upset the person who has the play off spot that could be your own. Sounds like this outscored and outperformed team may not have that much of a chance to win against the higher scoring team that has a better record. You set your own line up. You play to win. As long as injured players aren't being started, and you are playing for playoff contention, it's not tanking. If you put in a line up that gives a team other than your own a playoff birth that is collusion. If the other team intentionally loses to get a different team into the playoffs, that seems like collusion. This is just questionable strateg.
Amused to Death
Footballguy
Just curious, why would anyone purposely try to eliminate themselves from the playoffs?
fsufan
Footballguy
for 3 dynasty leagues I runEthics 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. · The commissioner has the right to adjust an owners line up if tanking is suspected Why 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. Punishment for tanking· owner will be removed from the league Collusion· Collusion is not permitted. Each owner will try to win through the efforts of his or her team only. Collusion is demonstrated by any transaction or series of transactions that works to the exclusive benefit of one team and the detriment of the other, or any series of transactions that amount to two or more teams pooling their rosters. · Any transaction a team participates in should be of benefit to the team’s game time efforts. A transaction done solely to aid another team who plays a rival does not count as showing a benefit, and is a clear-cut example of collusion.· Borrowing player(s) (two owners make a trade and then those players are trade back to the originally owners at another time) is a form of collusion and is prohibited.
Pipes
Footballguy
Another gem.
What's wrong with this rule? As others have stated the scenario mentioned is extremely rare however tanking games to get a better draft pick or playoff matchup is a definite no no and grounds for getting kicked out of any league I'm in.
Lehigh98
Footballguy
Also alot of commishes on power trips and people taking a game way too seriously. If you can't come up with a good definition to and prevention of this "dumping" some of you want to avoid then incent people to not do it. That's how I set up my leagues and why we don't need a silly "no dumping" rule like the great ones above.
footballnerd
Footballguy
Exactly, the rule only encourages tanking. Give High Points a percentage of the cash prize as reward and be done with this rule.
bonesman
Footballguy
Because they "owe it" to the league to suck?
LittlePhatty
Footballguy
When MJD took a knee at the 1 yard line last week, was that lack of character? Or was he "playing to win the game"?In most FF leagues, "playing to win" means the Championship at the end of the season.
The Jets needed to get the ball back in order to have a shot at winning.
The Jags had control over that and denied it.
In order for Team C to make the playoffs, Team A needs to beat Team B in Week 13.
Team A has control over that (without collusion) and in this very rare case, losing one week will give them a shot at "winning the game" - the FF Championship.
I don't agree with the seeding rule (highest points total takes last seed) BECAUSE it can create a situation like this.
But in such a rare case, Team A should play to win the Championship, and the only way to do that is to lie down in Week 13.
Mister CIA
Footballguy
WWMJDD
This.
GregR_2
Footballguy
This one comes up most years, and it such a unique rules and ethics issue. Leagues are right to have an expectation that teams will compete and try their best to do well and be competitive. Trying to win each of your games and trying to make the playoffs are both part of that expectation.
But then the rules may unfortunately put those two at odds with each other. And though this is a very unfortunate situation, I also don't think it makes a "last playoff spot goes to highest total points" rule a bad rule. I think there's some very good reasons for going with such a rule, and I can buy an argument they outweigh negatives like this.
So looking at this from outside of this exact situation on how other leagues can deal with the issue before it comes up, I think it would be very appropriate for the league to mention it in their rules. Something that acknowledges that a team may be put in a situation where they are eliminated from the playoffs unless they lose... and that in just that case it won't be considered unethical if the team makes less than its best attempt to win the game. And also mentioning how it will be viewed as different than tanking to alter the seedings or playoff matchups or improve draft position the following year.
As for gianmarco, I wouldn't have an objection if I was in his league and he went without his studs. If I was the commissioner I would discuss the situation with the league and try to take some of the heat off of him for whatever he decided, pointing out what I have above about the rules unfortunately putting him in a contradictory position and encouraging them to go easy about it because it could be them in that situation next year. If a league had a no tanking rule whose wording specifically ruled out this action then as commish I'd require people to abide by it. But I would probably try to change the rule for the following year to account for the situation.
All that said, I'd still have a lot of respect for someone who said, "Screw it, I'm going to try to win my game even if it means I don't make it". So I don't think there is any right or wrong answer, other than that I think a league should probably respect whatever the owner decides in the bad situation he was put in.
But then the rules may unfortunately put those two at odds with each other. And though this is a very unfortunate situation, I also don't think it makes a "last playoff spot goes to highest total points" rule a bad rule. I think there's some very good reasons for going with such a rule, and I can buy an argument they outweigh negatives like this.
So looking at this from outside of this exact situation on how other leagues can deal with the issue before it comes up, I think it would be very appropriate for the league to mention it in their rules. Something that acknowledges that a team may be put in a situation where they are eliminated from the playoffs unless they lose... and that in just that case it won't be considered unethical if the team makes less than its best attempt to win the game. And also mentioning how it will be viewed as different than tanking to alter the seedings or playoff matchups or improve draft position the following year.
As for gianmarco, I wouldn't have an objection if I was in his league and he went without his studs. If I was the commissioner I would discuss the situation with the league and try to take some of the heat off of him for whatever he decided, pointing out what I have above about the rules unfortunately putting him in a contradictory position and encouraging them to go easy about it because it could be them in that situation next year. If a league had a no tanking rule whose wording specifically ruled out this action then as commish I'd require people to abide by it. But I would probably try to change the rule for the following year to account for the situation.
All that said, I'd still have a lot of respect for someone who said, "Screw it, I'm going to try to win my game even if it means I don't make it". So I don't think there is any right or wrong answer, other than that I think a league should probably respect whatever the owner decides in the bad situation he was put in.
Last edited by a moderator:
bollocks28
Footballguy
That system is just dumb. Fix the system. Everyone should be seeded based on the same criteria. 
Kirby
Footballguy
I like to draft a lot of guys with the same bye week... is that tanking?Another gem.If you dont get it, you dont get it. Don't tank.
Lehigh98
Footballguy
What's wrong with this rule?... Maybe the fact that its not a rule, just a vague threat.Another gem.
Lehigh98
Footballguy
Could you please post the complete league rules? I'd like to see the rest of them.Another gem.
Similar threads
