Penalty for Starting a Player on BYE (1 Viewer)

[ukshane]

As a brief background, I'm in a hybrid league with a serpentine kicker and defense draft followed by a regular auction for the remaining skill players. We require each team to draft two kickers and two defenses who have different bye weeks.

This week one owner started David Akers (who was on bye) and left John Kasey on his bench. I doubt it was intentional because I think he is dealing with some personal issues. Nevertheless, this "mistake" allowed another owner to eek out a victory in a particularly low scoring matchup.

Giving away wins like this could impact which teams make the playoffs and which teams don't. How do other commissioners and/or leagues deal with this situation? Especially, when these types of lineup "mistakes" are appearing to become a habit. I'm looking for suggestions as well as enforcement language to add to our league rules.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Limp Ditka]

They get a zero for the position?

 

[Bri]

Pretty hard to make rules about superceding human error. Probably just have to take it

 

[g5jamz]

Issue a league warning that invites to the league next year might not come if the owners aren't taking the time to set legal lineups. There are a lot of willing people that love fantasy football and will pay attention.

 

[ukshane]

They get a zero for the position?

Yes, but I was more concerned about effecting the rest of the league standings by giving "easy wins" to certain opponents.

 

[Bri]

Issue a league warning that invites to the league next year might not come if the owners aren't taking the time to set legal lineups. There are a lot of willing people that love fantasy football and will pay attention.

he said the guy had some personal issues he was dealing with.

 

[Bri]

They get a zero for the position?

Yes, but I was more concerned about effecting the rest of the league standings by giving "easy wins" to certain opponents.

you're overreacting to a Ks influence on the scoring of one game and that one game's impact to the whole league's standings. Take a deep breath man.You know he could have won without the K.Take a deep breath

 

[CrossEyed]

Issue a league warning that invites to the league next year might not come if the owners aren't taking the time to set legal lineups. There are a lot of willing people that love fantasy football and will pay attention.

So you kick guys out of your league for not thinking that fantasy football is more important than having to deal with real issues in life?

 

[NoCheese]

Here's how our league deals with it (from the rules)

You MUST field a complete lineup. In the event that you fail to give a complete lineup (based on byes only) you are given the lowest applicable score at that position among that week's active players already on your roster (i.e. if you only carried one K, you will be given that kickers score).

 

[ukshane]

They get a zero for the position?

Yes, but I was more concerned about effecting the rest of the league standings by giving "easy wins" to certain opponents.

you're overreacting to a Ks influence on the scoring of one game and that one game's impact to the whole league's standings. Take a deep breath man.You know he could have won without the K.Take a deep breath

He lost by 12 points with no kicker. Kasey scored 14. He would have won if he started his only kicker that wasn't on a bye.

 

[ukshane]

Here's how our league deals with it (from the rules)You MUST field a complete lineup. In the event that you fail to give a complete lineup (based on byes only) you are given the lowest applicable score at that position among that week's active players (i.e. if you only carried one K, you will be given that kickers score).

I like it. Thanks for the suggestion.

 

[jeter23]

Our league has a rule against starting players that have been ruled out or are on bye. If you break this rule, you are fined $75, which goes the the Super Bowl winner. You are also given a 0 for the week overall. If you do not have something already written in your rules, it is too late now to enact that. Our rules seem harsh, but it is more for the tanking issue than human error. As commish, I check lineups every Sunday to be sure they are okay and email/call anyone who may have an issue.

BTW, personal issues would supersede these rules in most cases.

 

[TommyGilmore]

The only "penalty" should be that the player gets a zero.

I have deliberately started players on a BYE many times -- sometimes it was because I didn't want to drop someone just for a 1-week filler, and other times it was because I legitimately believed that "zero" was a higher score than what I might get from a waiver wire player.

 

[Tree Fiddy]

It really depends on intent.

If the guy just forgot and left a player in on a bye he already got 0 points for that player - it's his own penalty.

If they guy continually forgets he's just a bad player and someone who shouldn't be back next year because he's just not into it enough when other guys are trying to play.

Now if the intent is to throw games and help out other teams, that's collusion and he should be kicked out.

 

[g5jamz]

Issue a league warning that invites to the league next year might not come if the owners aren't taking the time to set legal lineups. There are a lot of willing people that love fantasy football and will pay attention.

So you kick guys out of your league for not thinking that fantasy football is more important than having to deal with real issues in life?

No...you issue a warning. And if it happens again...then they're just replaced to give them plenty of time to deal with real life issues.Actually..if the dude had an emergency and had a replacement player on his bench but just didn't get it done. I'd let it slide. But it's the aholes that are 1) uncaring or 2) too cheap to spend a buck on a pickup that warrant the boot.

 

[Avery]

Here's how our league deals with it (from the rules)You MUST field a complete lineup. In the event that you fail to give a complete lineup (based on byes only) you are given the lowest applicable score at that position among that week's active players (i.e. if you only carried one K, you will be given that kickers score).

I like it. Thanks for the suggestion.

We use that rule as well.It prevents team from trying to throw games which, IMO, can ruin the integrity of the league, but it doesn't penalize a team that is out of options. (i.e. You carry two kickers and one is on a bye on the other is hurt)

 

[BeachBums]

Here's how our league deals with it (from the rules)You MUST field a complete lineup. In the event that you fail to give a complete lineup (based on byes only) you are given the lowest applicable score at that position among that week's active players (i.e. if you only carried one K, you will be given that kickers score).

So if you blow off submitting your lineup or even stack your byes and don't have a body to play you still get 'the lowest applicable score at that position among that week's active players'? That seems like an incentive to me.

 

[Avery]

Here's how our league deals with it (from the rules)You MUST field a complete lineup. In the event that you fail to give a complete lineup (based on byes only) you are given the lowest applicable score at that position among that week's active players (i.e. if you only carried one K, you will be given that kickers score).

So if you blow off submitting your lineup or even stack your byes and don't have a body to play you still get 'the lowest applicable score at that position among that week's active players'? That seems like an incentive to me.

I assumed it went without saying that he meant "that week's active players" that are on your roster, not from any team.

 

[NoCheese]

Here's how our league deals with it (from the rules)You MUST field a complete lineup. In the event that you fail to give a complete lineup (based on byes only) you are given the lowest applicable score at that position among that week's active players (i.e. if you only carried one K, you will be given that kickers score).

So if you blow off submitting your lineup or even stack your byes and don't have a body to play you still get 'the lowest applicable score at that position among that week's active players'? That seems like an incentive to me.

The lowest applicable score is an incentive? Now, I'm confused. Wouldn't you rather try to win instead of accepting the lowest score?Edited to add: The original reason the rule was established is because an owner had picked up a defense to cover his primary D's bye week, but thought the waiver pickup would supplant the defense that had been in his lineup the previous week but were now on bye. Other owners thought it was absurd that he shouldn't have been able to get the points for his waiver defense since his intent was clear, he picked up a bye replacement, and had no other options, so we decided to make it a rule for bye weeks only.

 

[NoCheese]

Here's how our league deals with it (from the rules)You MUST field a complete lineup. In the event that you fail to give a complete lineup (based on byes only) you are given the lowest applicable score at that position among that week's active players (i.e. if you only carried one K, you will be given that kickers score).

So if you blow off submitting your lineup or even stack your byes and don't have a body to play you still get 'the lowest applicable score at that position among that week's active players'? That seems like an incentive to me.

I assumed it went without saying that he meant "that week's active players" that are on your roster, not from any team.

Correct.

 

[BeachBums]

Here's how our league deals with it (from the rules)You MUST field a complete lineup. In the event that you fail to give a complete lineup (based on byes only) you are given the lowest applicable score at that position among that week's active players (i.e. if you only carried one K, you will be given that kickers score).

So if you blow off submitting your lineup or even stack your byes and don't have a body to play you still get 'the lowest applicable score at that position among that week's active players'? That seems like an incentive to me.

I assumed it went without saying that he meant "that week's active players" that are on your roster, not from any team.

Correct.

OK, that makes sense. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[jbalicki10]

What happens if on Monday night comes around and your winning and have Rex Grossman playing. (Bad Rex) Are you allowed to start a player with a bye to solidify the victory instead of a chance to lose it?

 

[RandyDB]

As a brief background, I'm in a hybrid league with a serpentine kicker and defense draft followed by a regular auction for the remaining skill players. We require each team to draft two kickers and two defenses who have different bye weeks.

Since you require teams to draft two Kickers and DEF with different bye weeks, it seems the intent is to assure that no team has to pick up a kicker or Def in order to cover for the byes. I think a natural assumption might be that when one is on bye the other on the roster is an automatic start.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

Our league has a rule against starting players that have been ruled out or are on bye. If you break this rule, you are fined $75, which goes the the Super Bowl winner. You are also given a 0 for the week overall. If you do not have something already written in your rules, it is too late now to enact that. Our rules seem harsh, but it is more for the tanking issue than human error. As commish, I check lineups every Sunday to be sure they are okay and email/call anyone who may have an issue.BTW, personal issues would supersede these rules in most cases.

Suppose you have a number of Colts (Clark, Vinatieri, etc) and you don't want to drop 3-4 guys on your roster just to pick up a crappy sub on the bye week? Suppose you have two "roster spots" but three holes to fill and don't want to drop a good player? Why can't you choose to keep your depth and take a zero at a position? Isn't that different than just ignoring your roster?

 

[LordOpie]

Six teams in my 14 team league had players that were OUT or on BYE in their starting roster.

I've moved all my players to the BENCH until the league decides to play or remove those teams that have no excuse and 're-draft' those players.

 

[Genester]

We have a very simple rule in the re-draft league I commish. You lose all tie-breakers if you start a player on a bye. This is a highly competitive, 16-team league, with 6 teams making the play-offs. There's almost always a tie-breaker involved at the end as teams are scrambling to get in. If you have the same record, and started a player on a bye, you automatically lose the tie-breaker and therefore have a great chance of missing the play-offs. We haven't had folks start someone on a bye since that rule went in ;-)

 

[jeter23]

Our league has a rule against starting players that have been ruled out or are on bye. If you break this rule, you are fined $75, which goes the the Super Bowl winner. You are also given a 0 for the week overall. If you do not have something already written in your rules, it is too late now to enact that. Our rules seem harsh, but it is more for the tanking issue than human error. As commish, I check lineups every Sunday to be sure they are okay and email/call anyone who may have an issue.BTW, personal issues would supersede these rules in most cases.

Suppose you have a number of Colts (Clark, Vinatieri, etc) and you don't want to drop 3-4 guys on your roster just to pick up a crappy sub on the bye week? Suppose you have two "roster spots" but three holes to fill and don't want to drop a good player? Why can't you choose to keep your depth and take a zero at a position? Isn't that different than just ignoring your roster?

The rules were there before we drafted and all owners had a chance to read them in advance of the draft. We also have somewhat large rosters (26 players), so that helps a little.

 

[LionsFan78]

We all voted unanimously on it, and for years now we have no rule against starting players on a bye week. And frankly, I couldn't agree more. So many people insist on ####### up their draft and their roster simply because they fear having one or two bad weeks due to byes. While others field the best possible team they can, at the expense of being short one or two weeks out of the year, and yet still end up steamrolling their way through.

 

[Genester]

Our league has a rule against starting players that have been ruled out or are on bye. If you break this rule, you are fined $75, which goes the the Super Bowl winner. You are also given a 0 for the week overall. If you do not have something already written in your rules, it is too late now to enact that. Our rules seem harsh, but it is more for the tanking issue than human error. As commish, I check lineups every Sunday to be sure they are okay and email/call anyone who may have an issue.

BTW, personal issues would supersede these rules in most cases.

Suppose you have a number of Colts (Clark, Vinatieri, etc) and you don't want to drop 3-4 guys on your roster just to pick up a crappy sub on the bye week? Suppose you have two "roster spots" but three holes to fill and don't want to drop a good player? Why can't you choose to keep your depth and take a zero at a position? Isn't that different than just ignoring your roster?

Because this gives your opponent a competitive advantage vs. the rest of the league, which isn't fair to the other owners?Because there's no team in the world that doesn't start a player at a position?Because that's what managing a team is all about?

 

[j3r3m3y]

Our league has a rule against starting players that have been ruled out or are on bye. If you break this rule, you are fined $75, which goes the the Super Bowl winner. You are also given a 0 for the week overall. If you do not have something already written in your rules, it is too late now to enact that. Our rules seem harsh, but it is more for the tanking issue than human error. As commish, I check lineups every Sunday to be sure they are okay and email/call anyone who may have an issue.

BTW, personal issues would supersede these rules in most cases.

Suppose you have a number of Colts (Clark, Vinatieri, etc) and you don't want to drop 3-4 guys on your roster just to pick up a crappy sub on the bye week? Suppose you have two "roster spots" but three holes to fill and don't want to drop a good player? Why can't you choose to keep your depth and take a zero at a position? Isn't that different than just ignoring your roster?

Because this gives your opponent a competitive advantage vs. the rest of the league, which isn't fair to the other owners?Because there's no team in the world that doesn't start a player at a position?Because that's what managing a team is all about?

I have started TE's and K's on their bye in my league if I didn't want to spare the roster slot to pick up another.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

Our league has a rule against starting players that have been ruled out or are on bye. If you break this rule, you are fined $75, which goes the the Super Bowl winner. You are also given a 0 for the week overall. If you do not have something already written in your rules, it is too late now to enact that. Our rules seem harsh, but it is more for the tanking issue than human error. As commish, I check lineups every Sunday to be sure they are okay and email/call anyone who may have an issue.BTW, personal issues would supersede these rules in most cases.

Suppose you have a number of Colts (Clark, Vinatieri, etc) and you don't want to drop 3-4 guys on your roster just to pick up a crappy sub on the bye week? Suppose you have two "roster spots" but three holes to fill and don't want to drop a good player? Why can't you choose to keep your depth and take a zero at a position? Isn't that different than just ignoring your roster?

The rules were there before we drafted and all owners had a chance to read them in advance of the draft. We also have somewhat large rosters (26 players), so that helps a little.

Those are large rosters, so that would help a lot.

 

[Godsbrother]

We levy a $5 fine for each bye player that is started. It isn't much but I am in a league with a bunch of cheapskates.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

Our league has a rule against starting players that have been ruled out or are on bye. If you break this rule, you are fined $75, which goes the the Super Bowl winner. You are also given a 0 for the week overall. If you do not have something already written in your rules, it is too late now to enact that. Our rules seem harsh, but it is more for the tanking issue than human error. As commish, I check lineups every Sunday to be sure they are okay and email/call anyone who may have an issue.

BTW, personal issues would supersede these rules in most cases.

Suppose you have a number of Colts (Clark, Vinatieri, etc) and you don't want to drop 3-4 guys on your roster just to pick up a crappy sub on the bye week? Suppose you have two "roster spots" but three holes to fill and don't want to drop a good player? Why can't you choose to keep your depth and take a zero at a position? Isn't that different than just ignoring your roster?

Because this gives your opponent a competitive advantage vs. the rest of the league, which isn't fair to the other owners?Because there's no team in the world that doesn't start a player at a position?Because that's what managing a team is all about?

Managing a team is all about winning a championship. If I think that my depth is more important that the scrub points I'd get out of a backup tight end, why can't I pursue that strategy? Why is the league trying to manage my team for me? As long as I'm trying to win, why can't I try to win? My depth keeps talent away from the rest of the league, helps cover bye weeks and helps me survive a season where everyone is getting injured. Now I have to drop someone decent for a one-week scrub at kicker? That seems unfair.

I will say that leagues where you have to draft two at each position, or where someone has a viable player on their roster already is different. Being too lazy to sub in your starting kicker for one on the bye is unacceptable. But if I have an every-week option at a position (Gates, for example) that I wouldn't bench, why should I lose a good player to pick up somebody who might get me one point for one week?

 

[ukshane]

Our league has a rule against starting players that have been ruled out or are on bye. If you break this rule, you are fined $75, which goes the the Super Bowl winner. You are also given a 0 for the week overall. If you do not have something already written in your rules, it is too late now to enact that. Our rules seem harsh, but it is more for the tanking issue than human error. As commish, I check lineups every Sunday to be sure they are okay and email/call anyone who may have an issue.

BTW, personal issues would supersede these rules in most cases.

Suppose you have a number of Colts (Clark, Vinatieri, etc) and you don't want to drop 3-4 guys on your roster just to pick up a crappy sub on the bye week? Suppose you have two "roster spots" but three holes to fill and don't want to drop a good player? Why can't you choose to keep your depth and take a zero at a position? Isn't that different than just ignoring your roster?

Because this gives your opponent a competitive advantage vs. the rest of the league, which isn't fair to the other owners?Because there's no team in the world that doesn't start a player at a position?Because that's what managing a team is all about?

I have started TE's and K's on their bye in my league if I didn't want to spare the roster slot to pick up another.

I wasn't advocating cutting a quality player to pick up a bye week fill in. We expanded our rosters and set up our draft to "give" everyone two kickers and two defenses so you won't need to draft a bye week replacements (unless a kicker gets injured). In fact you aren't allowed to have fewer than two kickers or d's on your roster. This guy had two kickers on his roster and since he started the one on a bye he gave someone an easy win. If he had started his only eligible kicker, he wins the game.

 

[GoBears84]

As a brief background, I'm in a hybrid league with a serpentine kicker and defense draft followed by a regular auction for the remaining skill players. We require each team to draft two kickers and two defenses who have different bye weeks. This week one owner started David Akers (who was on bye) and left John Kasey on his bench. I doubt it was intentional because I think he is dealing with some personal issues. Nevertheless, this "mistake" allowed another owner to eek out a victory in a particularly low scoring matchup. Giving away wins like this could impact which teams make the playoffs and which teams don't. How do other commissioners and/or leagues deal with this situation? Especially, when these types of lineup "mistakes" are appearing to become a habit. I'm looking for suggestions as well as enforcement language to add to our league rules.Thanks in advance.

I think you need to take into account:The competitiveness of the league (does everybody really care)The competitiveness of the player (does he really care)Life (Is FF the most improtant thing in this guy's life?)Having read through all of these posts, not one mentioned the fact that "maybe" he's not happy he lost because he didn't swap out his kicker.Each player has his own method of managing his team depending on the size and roster requirements of their own league. I have one league where we only have 14 players and everybody only carries one TE and PK. Depending on how well my team matches up, I have gone with a TE or PK on a BYE because I thought I'd win anyway and I didn't want to drop my TE.Remeber, if you had swapped it out for him, the guy he was playing would have been mad...The fact is that he could have called you and asked you to change his roster. I'm betting he probably forgot. I'd let it go and send a note along the lines of "hey, you could have won if you'd started your kicker - in the future you can call me and I'll fix it for you."Without rules in place to address this (and you can't institute them until next year) you have to live with the current results.

 

[RJS113]

My league "fines" a team $5 when they start a player on a bye week. (We also charge $5 for any free agent signings).

 

[pghrob]

We had a huge debate about this at our predraft meeting. We have a 12 team $ league that is very competitive in our 8th year.

Two guys stated they often times will strategically ignore bye weeks rather than manage the roster headaches that go with them. They said they would rather take a zero at kicker than waive a good player.

This resulted in a very heated discussion about the expectation of fielding a legal starting lineup. Needless to say, there was some contention that if it was a strategic decision, maybe it deserved consideration as being OK. Others (myself included) argued that a legal starting lineup is required as that is fundamental to the game....plus it forces roster management into the game.

Eventually, we put it to a vote, and it was decided 9 to 3 that a positions must be filled in the lineup with active players. At first we discussed nominal penalty, and found that that was not strong enough to deter people from failing to replace bye starters. As such, we finally arrive at a strict deterrant: Failure to do filef a proper lineup results in forfeiture.

 

[tonystrong]

My league:

(Free agents = $5)

If you start a player that's on a bye AND you have another option on the bench: $5 per player for first offense. $10 there after. And at the end of the season make a decision on if the owner comes back next year.

I hate when people do that. It ruins the integrity of your league. You have all week to submit a line up, RTsports allows you to submit line ups through mobile access too.

If your are not going to be into enough to put in a line up, then don't bother participating in FF.

We're not saying you have to cut a player during bye weeks. Just if you have another option on your bench, then you have to put that option in.

 

[Paddy O'Seanessy]

They get a zero for the position?

Yes, but I was more concerned about effecting the rest of the league standings by giving "easy wins" to certain opponents.

I continue to have trouble understanding the mindset that allows one to invite oneself into the working of a team while accepting no responsibility for inviting the guy in the first place. How about a rule stating that if "we (I) don't like how you do things we (I) will take your team away and run it BETTER because we're (I'm) so much better at this than you appear to be. This, by no means suggests we (I) don't want you and your league fee back next year for the draft."I know you think that the bye week case makes it cut-and-dried but, it never stops there. Next it's injury status and eventually "the other guy was clearly the better choice."I would just let it go.

 

[Paddy O'Seanessy]

Here's how our league deals with it (from the rules)You MUST field a complete lineup. In the event that you fail to give a complete lineup (based on byes only) you are given the lowest applicable score at that position among that week's active players already on your roster (i.e. if you only carried one K, you will be given that kickers score).

Unbelievable

 

[Paddy O'Seanessy]

Here's how our league deals with it (from the rules)You MUST field a complete lineup. In the event that you fail to give a complete lineup (based on byes only) you are given the lowest applicable score at that position among that week's active players (i.e. if you only carried one K, you will be given that kickers score).

So if you blow off submitting your lineup or even stack your byes and don't have a body to play you still get 'the lowest applicable score at that position among that week's active players'? That seems like an incentive to me.

I assumed it went without saying that he meant "that week's active players" that are on your roster, not from any team.

and that makes it all better???

 

[fsufan]

As a commish of 10 years, owners starting a player(s) on a bye is my biggest pet peeve. But I had an owner start 4 players this past week against me that where on a bye (all Philly players) and he still won .

 

[Avery]

Here's how our league deals with it (from the rules)You MUST field a complete lineup. In the event that you fail to give a complete lineup (based on byes only) you are given the lowest applicable score at that position among that week's active players (i.e. if you only carried one K, you will be given that kickers score).

So if you blow off submitting your lineup or even stack your byes and don't have a body to play you still get 'the lowest applicable score at that position among that week's active players'? That seems like an incentive to me.

I assumed it went without saying that he meant "that week's active players" that are on your roster, not from any team.

and that makes it all better???

Ummm... yeah.

 

[Paddy O'Seanessy]

Six teams in my 14 team league had players that were OUT or on BYE in their starting roster.I've moved all my players to the BENCH until the league decides to play or remove those teams that have no excuse and 're-draft' those players.

Your mom must be proud

 

[Paddy O'Seanessy]

Here's how our league deals with it (from the rules)You MUST field a complete lineup. In the event that you fail to give a complete lineup (based on byes only) you are given the lowest applicable score at that position among that week's active players (i.e. if you only carried one K, you will be given that kickers score).

So if you blow off submitting your lineup or even stack your byes and don't have a body to play you still get 'the lowest applicable score at that position among that week's active players'? That seems like an incentive to me.

I assumed it went without saying that he meant "that week's active players" that are on your roster, not from any team.

and that makes it all better???

Ummm... yeah.

Uhhhhh... noYou give someone points for doing something to which you object. What do you get if you start a QB in place of a TE? Double the points?

 

[LordOpie]

Six teams in my 14 team league had players that were OUT or on BYE in their starting roster.I've moved all my players to the BENCH until the league decides to play or remove those teams that have no excuse and 're-draft' those players.

Your mom must be proud

Your mom must've been drunk.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

To each their own! Play in the leagues that fit how you like things.

But lets cut this "holier than thou" nonsense that someone dealing with a real life issue in some way deserves to have new rules written, meetings held, sanctions levied because God forbid some other team got a "cheap" win that makes your drive to glory and the gold slightly more difficult.

 

[TommyGilmore]

Six teams in my 14 team league had players that were OUT or on BYE in their starting roster.I've moved all my players to the BENCH until the league decides to play or remove those teams that have no excuse and 're-draft' those players.

Your mom must be proud

Your mom must've been drunk.

:reported:

 

[Avery]

Here's how our league deals with it (from the rules)

You MUST field a complete lineup. In the event that you fail to give a complete lineup (based on byes only) you are given the lowest applicable score at that position among that week's active players (i.e. if you only carried one K, you will be given that kickers score).

So if you blow off submitting your lineup or even stack your byes and don't have a body to play you still get 'the lowest applicable score at that position among that week's active players'? That seems like an incentive to me.

I assumed it went without saying that he meant "that week's active players" that are on your roster, not from any team.

and that makes it all better???

Ummm... yeah.

Uhhhhh... noYou give someone points for doing something to which you object. What do you get if you start a QB in place of a TE? Double the points?

You seem to be missing the point, intentionally or not.The point is to keep teams from overtly throwing a game by intent or lack of interest. The rule substitutes the lowest scoring player at that position on your team if you start a player on a bye. It would give the team in question the worst option of the players whose teams were actually playing that week.

In my league, we instituted the rule when a team who had locked up a playoff spot clearly threw a week by starting bye week players, as he was jockeying for playoff position. Because of this, the team that "beat" his team that week got into the playoffs and another team didn't. (If the guys started his starting players, he would have easily won).

To us, this was not in the spirit of fair competition and we set the rule.

To each his own.

 

[Nemesis]

In the league that I commish, we implemented this rule to help this situation:

1-Rosters are tight - 14 players. (this includes 1 k + 1 Def)

2-If your K or Def is on bye, that owner gets a Free Temp pickup for that wkend only to replace the K/Def. (to execute it in the website, the owner puts the Bye wk K/Def on the extra IR slot I created for everyone)

3-After the wkend, he has to drop the Temp K/D that he picked up so that it can be available next week.......unless he wanted to keep it at which point he is charged the normal $4 transaction fee.

4-In the website, I gave everyone 2 transaction credits so I don't have to mess with this.

As a commissioner, this has made my life much easier b/c I don't have to worry about fantasy teams managing the cost of K/Def pickups vs their record. Now.......if a team was downright lazy or didn't utilize this rule, I'd suspect collusion/tanking and would look to boot them from the league.

Also note that our league gives away wkly high scorer money that escalates as the season goes on so that you'd better believe teams that are mathematically eliminated are still trying to be competitive and recoup some of their loss up to that point.

I know this might not be for EVERY league's style, but we didn't want the hassle b/c nobody in our league keeps more than 1 kicker or def on their roster. Also, this rule might work out better than the leagues that REQUIRE teams to keep 2 K and 2 Def on each roster b/c in those leagues sometimes there aren't any K's / Def's on the WW for teams to select from when you combine injuries and bye weeks.