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!
Yes in each round.. Why is it ridiculous? No money on the line. We all know what happens to these picks during the draft. Especially when a player falls unexpectedly. I would think some would be motivated to get any edge they could and this would be an easy way to get one.
If you don't care more about being the champion of your league then you shouldn't be playing fantasy football. What's the point in getting that better pick if you don't even care if you win the league?
If you got to play best out of 5 or something I might agree with this, but fantasy football is mostly luck, especially in any 1 given week. You could be a heavy favorite and 1 unlucky break costs you the championship (and lots of money).
That's probably true but also the reason I went into some depth in the op, we really do have equally strong teams. Of course, he has Antonio Brown and Mike Evans, both of which I have in my other league. So now I can just be happy when they light it up.
I'm in 3 free leagues. 1 pick, even over 7 rounds each vs being the champ? The person that would make that choice probably isn't in the position to make it.
Why would they cut their winnings in half (split, then tank) if they were motivated by money? The one spot in each round is worth slashing your payday? So they can get better players, make the championship game...and split again? They're playing for less money than everyone else. That's not what a person motivated by the money would do imo.
This exactly. It's no different than people wanting to chop at some point during the final table of a poker tournament. The entire pot they're splitting will be distrusted between those two owners only anyways, so why would anyone care.Hawkeye21 said:
I was offered this just today and said no. Chopping or splitting the pot just feels off to me, against the spirit of the game. But In a situation like this, I would not agree to or offer a split, but would cut him a check if I won as a Christmas gift.
Yeah, I couldn't even imagine. I don't think there's any way I could take $ knowing the situation they're in. What an awful way to spend Christmas. T&P to that family.
I'd probably take out my entry fee and just give him the rest in this scenario. Go buy your kids something a little extra for Christmas. The Karma would come back to me at some point.
I was in the bowl last year and had OBJ. I still would not have split. And ended up winning. Suspensions, injuries, bad beats, all are part of the game. The league rules for each league set the payouts and the "proper" split between champion and runner up. Circumventing that with a side deal just seems against the spirit of the game. Risk is our business.
I don't remember for sure but don't think so. The games weren't on Christmas, so the reason he gave this year wouldn't have applied.
In economics, you go from risk aversion (loss aversion) to risk neutral (pure expected value no extra weighting to losses or gains) to risk preferring
![[icon]](/data/avatars/m/5/5167.jpg?1660313464){kind=avatar}
We played the game, crowned a team the champ. Thank you for sharing your opinion, and your point about pride is understood but please explain why this is an ethics issue for you.
It's a competition/league with fees associated for a predetermined prize structure, I don't understand how going against these pre-determined things would not be deemed unethical or against the rules.
So your rules makes it so the 2 teams in the finals have to text each other, agree to split and then do it without you knowing. Doesn't seem very difficult
a Christmas gift among friends.So your rules makes it so the 2 teams in the finals have to text each other, agree to split and then do it without you knowing. Doesn't seem very difficult
I'd have more of an issue with keeping this a secret.
Interesting perspective, thanks for sharing. FWIW, the rules state " The opportunities to win a payout are listed below"
Lol. "How dare you guys decide to do what you want with your money- I will not stand for that!"
How dare I have an opposing opinion regarding this issue? I commission a league and we have rules that we follow regarding this issue.humpback said:
You're perfectly entitled to your opinion, just like I am to mine. It's their money, they can choose to do whatever they wish with it, and saying you'd kick them out of the league for it is absurd IMO. It has nothing to do with ethics, and why on earth is having (your definition of) "pride" a requirement to play fantasy football? Rhetorical question, I'm not trying to change your opinion, I just think it's silly.
While his opinion isn't "wrong" it is certainly hilariously ridiculous. IMO
I just disagree about pre-splitting a the pot, how is this so hilarious to you? You make it sound like I'm on some kind of island with this line of thought? I play in a bunch of leagues and this has not come up once in the last 4-5 years. Maybe I'm just lucky that way, but it doesn't seem to be a common thing in any leagues I play in.
Hypothetical scenario - winner gets $1000, second gets $500. Either way $1500 is going to be disbursed. How in the hell is it an ethical issue whether one team gets $1000 and the other gets $500 versus both teams getting $750? It isn't like there are Vegas betting lines on random fantasy leagues. There is still a champion crowned, so no integrity issues. Don't get how this is an offense that would force teams out of a league or call ethics into question. Say its a 12 teams league - does the payout structure impact any of the other teams? Nope. So no collusion.candian fantasy guy said:
Personally, I don't think it's collusion, it's just an unethical thing to do as I have explained. We had a league vote about this years ago with a unanimous "no-split pot" vote and I honestly never really thought about it until I read this thread today.
No, you really haven't explained the ethics issue. If your league has a set rule, that would make splitting a violation of rules, but even that isn't really unethical.
It's obviously not an ethics issue. I don't think he knows what ethics means. It would unethical in his league because they set the rule but it would be fine in nearly every other league on the planet.
Obviously you're entitled to your opinion, and I don't think anyone thinks your opinion has to be the same as anyone elses.
I think what you are neglecting to consider is that unlike poker (where many times tournaments actually end once the remaining players agree to chop up a prize pool), that in fantasy football--the week is still getting played out. There will still be a champion by the rules of your league--etc. Essentially when people agree to split a prize pool even in your league--they are making an agreement that is to be settled POST THE RESULTS OF THE CHAMPIONSHIP WEEK. Therefore--your rule by definition would essentially be null and void--unless you feel it ethical that the rules of a fantasy league can determine what owners do with their own money AFTER a season has ended. Maybe in your league--you paypal the 1st and 2nd place prizes by how your league defined they should be paid out--but once that is done--the two winning owners absolutely have the right to settle up amongst themselves without any involvement of the league. Trying to legislate against that is absolutely absurd.
