Yes. Very Very much so. This guy should be applauded for keeping guys in check and looking out for the integrity of the league. You would rather be in a league where players start Bye week players than a guy who is trying to make sure the league is fair? Damn, dude.Been playing fantasy for 25+ years and never had a situation where a league member goes through all the lineups every Sunday morning and replies to all on the league text chain pointing out guys who have holes in their starting lineups. We busted his balls about being it at first, but it didn’t stop.
For context - this isn’t a “big money” league, but it’s $100 a head 12 teamer, so it’s not a free Yahoo league either.
How would you handle this? Not invite the guy back next year? Or am I overreacting?
I'm thinking I like the cut of your jib. Whatever that means...Most fantasy leaguers I have known would view start/sit advice from a leaguemate with skepticism. There is ample information out there, so unless they are simply not paying attention, they would give little thought to that kind of "advice", and, in fact, they would find it annoying and unwelcomed. However, I have also known several leaguemates (often good leaguemates) who stop settling their lineups once they are eliminated from playoff contention, and that has implications beyond just their record. It affects draft position (dynasty), but more importantly, it affects the competitive balance of the league as teams jockey for playoff positions. As Commissioner, I don't necessarily worry about "less than optimal" lineups, but when a team fails to replace an injured or bye-week player, I give them a gentle nudge, which is almost always sufficient. There are times when a league member might keep a bye-week kicker or defense in their lineup, and it is not always that they simply forgot to hit the waiver wire. Sometimes, it is more desirable to take a zero at kicker than drop a developmental player (or a premium kicker) for a one-week plug-in. I view this as roster management decisions, and we do not penalize a team for such a decision; however, when it is obvious an owner has simply checked out for the season, I contact that owner with a gentle nudge, and if that does not solicit a response, I reach out to make sure they are still interested in remaining in the League. If I still get no response, I remove them, and we have rules in place for managing orphan teams, if a replacement owner cannot be immediately installed.
I did this once in 2009. Eagles defense playing on a Monday night, last regular season game (for fantasy), and the brackets were almost set. I was able to manipulate my bracket placement since the difference was only a couple of points (the win-loss records were already locked up). I evaluated the brackets, and chose one over the other... and sat the Eagles defense.I'm not one to keep a player in my lineup if he's on a bye. However, I have fielded teams where I opted to not fill a spot with a player.
Might be jumping the gun on who has bye players in their line-up. I have a habit of setting my line-up on Tuesday and adjusting if necessary. I have other owners who religiously set their line-up around noon on Sunday. I think they don't want to show their hand (which is vastly over-rated).I know you are being funny with your last comment, but do you really want to win against a team that is starting bye players? A league that allows stuff like this to go on is likely lopsided anyways. If I were in that league, I would send trade requests non-stop to teams that start bye players.
You're feeling generous today I see.In a case like this, I vote execution. Or, perhaps, torture followed by execution.
Habs, that sounds like a NEXT year solution for a THIS year problem. Got to take care of business for the current season that folks have invested a lot of time, effort, and money (?) in.The best way to resolve holes in line-ups is to create vacancies for new GMs.
No. Stop being obtuse.How about notifying guys that they should make waiver wire moves instead of continuing to roster guys who are hurt or not productive? Is that part of the commissioners duties as well? Because the failure of some of these guys to actively play the wire absolutely impacts the integrity of the league as well, as players they don’t pick up fall to other owners.
Right?
Fair but in my experience you can't prod and cajole people into caring sufficiently if they don't. I used to be a very busy commish and now I am not and the solution was removing people who are not engaged and replacing them with people who are.Habs, that sounds like a NEXT year solution for a THIS year problem. Got to take care of business for the current season that folks have invested a lot of time, effort, and money (?) in.
Are you being serious here?How about notifying guys that they should make waiver wire moves instead of continuing to roster guys who are hurt or not productive? Is that part of the commissioners duties as well? Because the failure of some of these guys to actively play the wire absolutely impacts the integrity of the league as well, as players they don’t pick up fall to other owners.
Right?
This is great shtickHow would you handle this? Not invite the guy back next year?
I figured I would go back to your OP. It's obvious by the replies most everyone here is siding with the busybody. So, to answer your original questions...Been playing fantasy for 25+ years and never had a situation where a league member goes through all the lineups every Sunday morning and replies to all on the league text chain pointing out guys who have holes in their starting lineups. We busted his balls about being it at first, but it didn’t stop.
For context - this isn’t a “big money” league, but it’s $100 a head 12 teamer, so it’s not a free Yahoo league either.
How would you handle this? Not invite the guy back next year? Or am I overreacting?
I would hesitate to call those type of owners, "often good leaguemates" as that clearly isn't true.Most fantasy leaguers I have known would view start/sit advice from a leaguemate with skepticism. There is ample information out there, so unless they are simply not paying attention, they would give little thought to that kind of "advice", and, in fact, they would find it annoying and unwelcomed. However, I have also known several leaguemates (often good leaguemates) who stop settling their lineups once they are eliminated from playoff contention, and that has implications beyond just their record. It affects draft position (dynasty), but more importantly, it affects the competitive balance of the league as teams jockey for playoff positions. As Commissioner, I don't necessarily worry about "less than optimal" lineups, but when a team fails to replace an injured or bye-week player, I give them a gentle nudge, which is almost always sufficient. There are times when a league member might keep a bye-week kicker or defense in their lineup, and it is not always that they simply forgot to hit the waiver wire. Sometimes, it is more desirable to take a zero at kicker than drop a developmental player (or a premium kicker) for a one-week plug-in. I view this as roster management decisions, and we do not penalize a team for such a decision; however, when it is obvious an owner has simply checked out for the season, I contact that owner with a gentle nudge, and if that does not solicit a response, I reach out to make sure they are still interested in remaining in the League. If I still get no response, I remove them, and we have rules in place for managing orphan teams, if a replacement owner cannot be immediately installed.
Those are referred to as "lame duck" owners who won't be returning.How about notifying guys that they should make waiver wire moves instead of continuing to roster guys who are hurt or not productive? Is that part of the commissioners duties as well? Because the failure of some of these guys to actively play the wire absolutely impacts the integrity of the league as well, as players they don’t pick up fall to other owners.
Right?
The mental gymnastics by the OP to avoid admitting he was wrong, the slippery slope stuff...it’s a bad look. Makes me wonder if he was one of the owners reminded about his lineup, or if he’s the commish everyone is saying needs to be doing a better job. This is just pure, obtuse stubbornness at this point.
To still be questioning the guy’s past and future motives after he’s outed himself as a poster here and weighed in is also lame.