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!

Now What? (1 Viewer)

Mr. Know-It-All

Footballguy
Owner I am playing forgets to submit waivers, leaves bye week players in, has players that could have played going last night, could have played a player last night but didn't. I tell the commissioner clearly he would have not gone without a player at qb so he can put Alex Smith in for his bye week QB (Alex Smith was his only other qb). He could also swap out any bye week players for players that have not played yet to give him a full lineup.

So I check the scores today - he originally had Vernon Davis in his lineup but he is now not in the lineup (despite game being over with ZERO points). He put Alex Smith in (only 6 points - but better than zero)...but what ticked me off is he played two Seatlle defenders off that weren't in his original lineup and put them in for guys that weren't on bye that were originally not in his lineup but on his roster (AFTER the game).

Been with the league 20 years, having a terrible season anyway - so a loss is just another in a long litany of losses - but seems a bit much from me allowing him to replace bye players with guys that have already played to allowing him to essentially reset his entire lineup after games have already been played....no? What to do?

 
You complain about him having holes and then complain about the fix. It would be much worse if the commish picked up players to fill the holes.

 
You complain about him having holes and then complain about the fix.
It sounds like what happened wasn't simply a "fix" to the holes in his lineup. He swapped out active players for other active players after their game had started. It's definitely worth questioning and getting an explanation of the moves from the commissioner.
 
He should have only been allowed to replace players which were on a bye with other players, not substitute anyone who had a good game last night into his lineup, as well as take players out who had a bad game (And only because you allowed him to do so).

Ask him if you can have the same luxury on Monday with all your players who played on Sunday.

 
OP

1) Subbing in/out players that have already played is just wrong. Are you sure he did this after the game or did he just do it after the last time you checked?

2) If the owner has been doing this all season, I don't think the commish should intervene anyway. True, the byes haven't been going since week 1, but there are still injury and matchup factors that have been ignored since week 1. If owner A sucks, I think it's a bit unfair for someone to allow the suck to benefit some opponents (weeks 1-6) and not others (weeks 7-13).

3) Outside of subbing players that have already played, if you want someone to step in and fix it, you take what that brings. Asking the fixer to only make certain substitutions is silly. You either let it ride or you fix it as close as you can to what a real, active owner would do. There is no middle ground.

 
He should have only been allowed to replace players which were on a bye with other players, not substitute anyone who had a good game last night into his lineup, as well as take players out who had a bad game (And only because you allowed him to do so).
This. He's taking advantage of your generosity here. He can either leave the lineup spots empty according to the rules, or fill in the players for bye weeks because you're a nice guy. Those should be the only 2 options.
 
OP1) Subbing in/out players that have already played is just wrong. Are you sure he did this after the game or did he just do it after the last time you checked?2) If the owner has been doing this all season, I don't think the commish should intervene anyway. True, the byes haven't been going since week 1, but there are still injury and matchup factors that have been ignored since week 1. If owner A sucks, I think it's a bit unfair for someone to allow the suck to benefit some opponents (weeks 1-6) and not others (weeks 7-13).3) Outside of subbing players that have already played, if you want someone to step in and fix it, you take what that brings. Asking the fixer to only make certain substitutions is silly. You either let it ride or you fix it as close as you can to what a real, active owner would do. There is no middle ground.
His lineup AFTER the game last night (I checked because I was online watching the Baseball game while watching the football game on tv) was what is was before the game. Vernon Davis was still listed, Alex Smith was on the bench as were the two SEA LBs. This morning, I went in to check my own lineup to check injuries - and then I noticed the wholesale changes. Giving him the benefit of the doubt - maybe he had told the commish of the changes prior to the game and then the commish retroactively made the changes. I am fine with the changes that were legit - but changing ou LBs after the game was played and removing Davis from the TE spot because he got 0 seemed dicey - but maybe i is innocent. Like I said my team is horrible anyway - but it just seemd he took a littl elicense with my nicety.
 
You were too nice. If an owner is too busy/lazy/stupid to set their lineup accordingly in time, they should suffer the consequences.

 
OP1) Subbing in/out players that have already played is just wrong. Are you sure he did this after the game or did he just do it after the last time you checked?2) If the owner has been doing this all season, I don't think the commish should intervene anyway. True, the byes haven't been going since week 1, but there are still injury and matchup factors that have been ignored since week 1. If owner A sucks, I think it's a bit unfair for someone to allow the suck to benefit some opponents (weeks 1-6) and not others (weeks 7-13).3) Outside of subbing players that have already played, if you want someone to step in and fix it, you take what that brings. Asking the fixer to only make certain substitutions is silly. You either let it ride or you fix it as close as you can to what a real, active owner would do. There is no middle ground.
His lineup AFTER the game last night (I checked because I was online watching the Baseball game while watching the football game on tv) was what is was before the game. Vernon Davis was still listed, Alex Smith was on the bench as were the two SEA LBs. This morning, I went in to check my own lineup to check injuries - and then I noticed the wholesale changes. Giving him the benefit of the doubt - maybe he had told the commish of the changes prior to the game and then the commish retroactively made the changes. I am fine with the changes that were legit - but changing ou LBs after the game was played and removing Davis from the TE spot because he got 0 seemed dicey - but maybe i is innocent. Like I said my team is horrible anyway - but it just seemd he took a littl elicense with my nicety.
Call your commish. Usually the obvious answer is the correct one. You got hosed for being nice.Lesson learned: Don't meddle with other teams, let them crash and burn on their own.
 
Communicate with both the commish and the other owner. Restate what you said originally, that you were only ok with changing the starting lineup status of a player whose game had started in the case of Alex Smith since he was the only option he had on his roster to fill his bye.

 
You were too nice. If an owner is too busy/lazy/stupid to set their lineup accordingly in time, they should suffer the consequences.
There maybe should even be a rule about if an owner fails to set their lineup 2 or more times during a season the owner gets the boot for neglecting to manage their team.But maybe the league likes extra byes in it?
 
I keep hearing your actions described as "nice" or "generous". Since you're out of it, in essence you're being nice at the expense of this guy's competitors. It's no sweat off your A to give this guy lineup freedom but it might negatively impact the rest of the league. Commish has to come down hard on this guy, esp. concerning the SF & SEA guys.

 
I had this happen in a fantasy league title game once.

Commissioner swapped in a player off of his cousin's bench after the weekend to give him the win.

Crooked fantasy leagues aren't worth your time and attention.

Better to just cut your losses and bail.

 
is it me or is Vernon Davis mentioned in every post this week that involves someone complaining about something? a whole lot of disgruntled vdavis owners around here... :popcorn:

 
It's very simple.

Players that were on a bye... yes, if he had other options.

Active players that were in his lineup... no, must remain in his lineup.

Active players that were on his bench... no, must remain on the bench.

Have a nice day.

 
What an ahole. Call the commish on it and get it fixed. I cannot imagine this happening in a 20 yr league. First the commish shouldn't have entered so many changes. Second, if the owner did it intentionally I wouldn't trust the guy again.

 
'Ghost Rider said:
You were too nice. If an owner is too busy/lazy/stupid to set their lineup accordingly in time, they should suffer the consequences.
This, nothing worse than people commit to something and then decide well this isn't important anymore.
 
Get a hold of the commish and the guy your player, try to work something out.

(something that YOU feel comfortable with)

But if it does not work out you really do have yourself to blame telling him he

can "fix" his lineup, he shouldn't have been able to do anything that he couldn't

do on his own accord without help from commish powers. (but you pushed it there)

 
Get a hold of the commish and the guy your player, try to work something out.

(something that YOU feel comfortable with)



But if it does not work out you really do have yourself to blame telling him he

can "fix" his lineup, he shouldn't have been able to do anything that he couldn't

do on his own accord without help from commish powers. (but you pushed it there)
There it is. :shrug:
 
The comment earlier about your graciousness to one owner affecting the rest of the league is exactly why you should have just left well enough alone. You can't speak for the league and by trying to help the homeless guy on the corner, you've ######ed the effort of getting the homeless off the streets.

 
'Ghost Rider said:
You were too nice. If an owner is too busy/lazy/stupid to set their lineup accordingly in time, they should suffer the consequences.
This, nothing worse than people commit to something and then decide well this isn't important anymore.
Well to be fair, thursday night games ended up impacting me personally more than I imagined. Love FF and play in multiple leagues, but this hobby is becoming more of a full time thing year to year. I got stuck default starting Golden Tate in a league because I was busy at work thursday night and my only options were to sneak out and change my lineup or get my work done.
 
So you said he could start Alex Smith after kickoff, but now are objecting that he benched Vernon Davis after kickoff? Those actions are equivalent. So I think you, your opponent, and the commish are all acting a little crazy. You may never bench/start a player after their kickoff, ever, under any circumstance. Would he have taken you up on your nice offer if Alex Smith broke his leg on the first play? Nope. He'd cut him and pick up another QB.

The point above about you being "nice" is just you screwing someone else is right on. I can never understand why people in fantasy think player A can do something outside the rules as long as his opponent of the week thinks it is OK. That makes no difference.

You should tell the commish that your original remarks were totally outside of the rules and should carry no weight.

As for the general problem of deadbeat owners, the two strikes and you're out rule above is what we use.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
So you said he could start Alex Smith after kickoff, but now are objecting that he benched Vernon Davis after kickoff? I think you, your opponent, and the commish are all acting a little crazy. You may never bench/start a player after their kickoff, ever, under any circumstance. Would he have taken you up on your nice offer if Alex Smith broke his leg on the first play? Nope. He'd cut him and pick up another QB.The point above about you being "nice" is just you screwing someone else is right on. I can never understand why people in fantasy think player A can do something outside the rules as long as his opponent of the week thinks it is OK. That makes no difference. You should tell the commish that your original remarks were totally outside of the rules and should carry no weight.As for the general problem of deadbeat owners, the two strikes and you're out rule above is what we use.
Very well thought out post Blood
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top