Should Non-Playoff Teams be allowed Waivers? (1 Viewer)

[Maui Monster]

We have a 4 team playoff that starts this week. Some key FA's were picked up by non-playoff teams. We do have a toilet bowl for draft slots, but should a non-playoff team be able to take players away from the playoff teams? Possibly affecting the outcome?

 

[jonboltz]

We have a 4 team playoff that starts this week. Some key FA's were picked up by non-playoff teams. We do have a toilet bowl for draft slots, but should a non-playoff team be able to take players away from the playoff teams? Possibly affecting the outcome?

 

[boom king]

yeah why not? they can still compete cant they? maybe they had a side bet or something for total points.

 

[rowediggy]

We have a 4 team playoff that starts this week. Some key FA's were picked up by non-playoff teams. We do have a toilet bowl for draft slots, but should a non-playoff team be able to take players away from the playoff teams? Possibly affecting the outcome?

Exactly. There is no debate about this-- you can't have it both ways. Forcing teams to compete for something (draft slots) then crippling their ability to add/drop is inexcusable.

 

[Zoomanji]

We have a 4 team playoff that starts this week. Some key FA's were picked up by non-playoff teams. We do have a toilet bowl for draft slots, but should a non-playoff team be able to take players away from the playoff teams? Possibly affecting the outcome?

Exactly. There is no debate about this-- you can't have it both ways. Forcing teams to compete for something (draft slots) then crippling their ability to add/drop is inexcusable.

 

[suchislife]

Yes. You can't tell teams they have to stay competitive till the end then tell them they can't pick up players. Even if its not for the "Toilet Bowl". If teams have to submit a lineup, it should be their best lineup. You can't tell them all the waiver players are reserved for the good teams.

 

[Maui Monster]

So in a scenario where a playoff team loses a player and is going for their backup and a consolation bracket team picks then up instead...

This would not be considered interfering with outcome of play-offs?

 

[BusterTBronco]

We have a 4 team playoff that starts this week. Some key FA's were picked up by non-playoff teams. We do have a toilet bowl for draft slots, but should a non-playoff team be able to take players away from the playoff teams? Possibly affecting the outcome?

Since you have a toilet bowl which counts for something, I'd say yes.A couple of years ago, some non-playoffs teams in my league decided they were going to continue playing against each other "off-line" just for fun. They went into the league and made real FA pickups. Some of the playoff teams were furious.

 

[Da Guru]

Every team can drop and add as they see fit.

If not then the last team in the playoffs would basically have the first pick in drop and add that they otherwise would not have had. That would unfair in itself.

 

[kevinray]

As of now my league locks free agency and waviers before the playoffs.

 

[CalBear]

So in a scenario where a playoff team loses a player and is going for their backup and a consolation bracket team picks then up instead... This would not be considered interfering with outcome of play-offs?

Barring a team that's still playing from picking up players on waivers would be interfering with the outcome of the playoffs. Even if the playoff is just for draft spots, you have to let people compete if they're still playing meaningful games.

 

[delusional]

Yea since the toilet bowl is for draft slots, have to leave it open.

I have a toilet bowl but it is a redraft league. I do my waivers by playoff teams first, then the toilet bowl guys next

 

[radballs]

So in a scenario where a playoff team loses a player and is going for their backup and a consolation bracket team picks then up instead... This would not be considered interfering with outcome of play-offs?

Which of your RBs got hurt and why didn't you have his backup?

 

[mozzy84]

So in a scenario where a playoff team loses a player and is going for their backup and a consolation bracket team picks then up instead... This would not be considered interfering with outcome of play-offs?

no, the playoff team should have had the backup or a decent replacement. People still like to try and win and to screw over other people even if they are out of the money, thats fantasy football.

 

[Wu-banger]

......as long as the teams are still playing for something .

 

[Nemesis]

Here's a suggestion for next yr that I did for my league:

Lock FA moves after wk "x" (for my league, it's wk 12)

Then, give each team 1 and only FA move after the lock........but charge a higher than normal transaction fee for this move (for my league, normal trans fee is $4......emergency trans fee is $10)

Would allow someone desperate to make a move whether they are in the playoffs or not, but limits the schnanigans while still building the pot.

Makes an owner ask, "Is player X worth that amount?"

 

[TinHat]

"24. Non-playoff teams took the guys I was trying to get off of the wire."

 

[Texican]

Curious. If there was nothing to play for (no toilet bowl, etc.) and a redraft league....should waivers be locked to those out of the playoffs?

 

[andy_b]

we added the following to our league.

4 teams make the playoffs.

Everyone else (including the team that comes in 4th) gets to play for a consolation prize (basically your money back) based on total points over the 4 weeks of the playoffs.

This has kept all managers interested through out the year since even if they were out of it early, they can build back up for the consolation prize. We had one team that started the season 0-5. With out the consolation prize, he likely would have given up, but with it he kept managing and picking up players and now he is favored to win the consolation prize.

Find ways to keep all managers interested, it makes for a much more fun and fair playing field. There is absolutely nothing worse than a team manager giving up in the second half of the season and biasing some of those games because he was not fielding anywhere near as good a lineup as he could have.

 

[Statcruncher]

should a non-playoff team be able to take players away from the playoff teams? Possibly affecting the outcome?

No. Nothing as tainted and lowly as non-playoff team should ever appear near let alone have a negative bearing on the treasure that is a fantasy playoff team. Ideally franchises that are mathmatically eliminated from playoff contention will immediately be ejected and/or eliminated from the league until next year's draft. At that point playoff contenders can then pick up players from the now abandoned roster.Seriously though, there is no point in locking them from waivers. Even in a no toilet bowl scenario they still have every right to improve their team or shaft another team if waivers are open. Closing waivers for everyone in week X solves all these problems.

 

[Maui Monster]

Yea since the toilet bowl is for draft slots, have to leave it open. I have a toilet bowl but it is a redraft league. I do my waivers by playoff teams first, then the toilet bowl guys next

This sounds the most logical to me... Thanks

 

[rick6668]

So in a scenario where a playoff team loses a player and is going for their backup and a consolation bracket team picks then up instead... This would not be considered interfering with outcome of play-offs?

Correct, just like in the last week of the regular season, the same thing can happen with a team out of contention.

 

[Road Warriors]

Curious. If there was nothing to play for (no toilet bowl, etc.) and a redraft league....should waivers be locked to those out of the playoffs?

Yes. If you are out of the playoffs ( or Toilet bowl, if applicable ) you should no longer make roster moves. In keeper/dynasty, I've added a rule that states your keeper "roster" is locked at the end of the regular season. While still alive, you can make any pickups you deem necessary. However, there is no reason to make a claim after your team is eliminated by adding that rule.

 

[rick6668]

Yea since the toilet bowl is for draft slots, have to leave it open. I have a toilet bowl but it is a redraft league. I do my waivers by playoff teams first, then the toilet bowl guys next

This sounds the most logical to me... Thanks

This sounds like a way for you to get the guy you want.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

No wiavers for non-playoff teams unless you have a weekly high score payout and they are still eligible to win that $

 

[rick6668]

Curious. If there was nothing to play for (no toilet bowl, etc.) and a redraft league....should waivers be locked to those out of the playoffs?

Yes. If you are out of the playoffs ( or Toilet bowl, if applicable ) you should no longer make roster moves. In keeper/dynasty, I've added a rule that states your keeper "roster" is locked at the end of the regular season. While still alive, you can make any pickups you deem necessary. However, there is no reason to make a claim after your team is eliminated by adding that rule.

Do you lock a team out that is 0-10 before the end of the season? Why not? They are out of the playoffs.

 

[Maui Monster]

Yea since the toilet bowl is for draft slots, have to leave it open. I have a toilet bowl but it is a redraft league. I do my waivers by playoff teams first, then the toilet bowl guys next

This sounds the most logical to me... Thanks

This sounds like a way for you to get the guy you want.

Ha, Guess you could take it that way. Most of the message board is pretty judgemental. Just to clarify. I am the commish and this does not involve my team. There is no way I think a team that has lost and is not in the playoffs should be able to influence anything in the playoffs... Consolation Bracket or not.

 

[GroveDiesel]

The best thing to do is not tie draft spots to the consolation bracket and then lock down those rosters. If you choose to tie draft spots to the results of the consolation bracket though, you need to give them equal run at the waiver wire. You can't make it mean something and then tie their hands.

 

[jscout]

If your current rules don't specifically bar teams for whatever reason, you have to leave it open. Then alter the rules for next season as the league sees fit. You can use this season to explain it. But as it stands, fair is fair. If your rules had covered this scenario from the beginning, then some of the owners might not have made any of these moves.