Tanking in a dynasty league... (1 Viewer)

[FunkyPlutos]

I was just wondering if tanking is acceptable in a dynasty league at all. I have always been one to field a competitive team just because of my pride (or competitive nature). I always think that you have to try to beat a team that has something to play for, but is it ok to field a poor team to try and lose if the team you are playing has nothing to play for (ie. has their playoff spot locked up or can't make the playoffs)?

It is hard for me to try and lose but is it really any different than dealing a strong player for a future first round pick? Isn't that a form of tanking for the year? Helping another team win while trying to improve your team for the next year?

Let's say that my team was horrible last year and I won a couple meaningless games at the end of the season against teams that didn't have anything to play for and I ended up with rookie pick #4 instead of pick #1 or #2. Instead of getting Peterson, Lynch or Calvin, I ended up with Meachem. That is a huge blow for my team just because I won a game or two that didn't matter.

Thoughts?

 

[purplehaze67]

IMO, you always have to start the players you think will do the best...you gotta play to win. You can trade players for picks and that's fine but you can't bench them for lesser alternatives in order to improve your draft slot.

Yeah, falling out of a coveted draft tier sucks, but them's the breaks and if you weren't bad enough to deserve to draft there, you shouldn't try to rig the system so that you can.

 

[The Houston Stallions]

IMO, you always have to start the players you think will do the best...you gotta play to win. You can trade players for picks and that's fine but you can't bench them for lesser alternatives in order to improve your draft slot.Yeah, falling out of a coveted draft tier sucks, but them's the breaks and if you weren't bad enough to deserve to draft there, you shouldn't try to rig the system so that you can.

Tanking should not be accepted in your league. I was in one dynasty league where this happened a bit too much. It was openly discussed but there were still tanking issues. One thing we did in that league to avoid tanking is to let the the bottom feeder teams set each others lineups. Making trades is not the same thing. First of all, no one should be trading away "studs" for draft pics. But there's nothing wrong with trading Kitna or Warner (for example) for future draft pics leaving you with John Beck as your starter. Most trade deadlines have passed for this purpose. No deadlines or late deadlines allow too many bottom teams to unload talent to the top tier teams. That being said, I traded AJ and Ward last year for draft pics and MJD. The moves put me in position with multiple 1st round picks plus an extra RB this season.

 

[nerangers]

The issue of tanking to get better draft picks is a tough one. In our league, you play for the better draft picks in the consolation playoffs. Also, teams in my league would rather be the spoiler and keep someone out of the playoffs by playing to win.

I think leagues need to be setup in a manner that there is no good reason to tank a game.

I would love for the team I am playing week 14 would tank. It would actually help us both out based on who we would have to play starting in the playoffs (the way it looks like it is shaking out). I guarantee you he will not tank!

 

[fsufan]

to me tanking can destroy a dynasty league

 

[Road Warriors]

My league just added the rule that the consolation bracket now plays for draft position, and this has worked out so far. I really like this approach, because you best improve your draft position by winning.

 

[Couch Potato]

As purplehaze said, a poor team is wise to gaining future talent/picks by unloading current year production that won't help when they do turn the corner in the future. And, to play less than your best starting lineup from among the players that remain on the roster is wrong. The former is not tanking, the latter is, and should never be OK.

The idea of bottom feeder teams setting each others' lineups is a good one. Another is requiring them, once out of any contention for playoffs, to use some standard for setting lineups. For example, a requirement that the best lineup based on Dodds' Sunday AM projections (or some other accepted unbiased source) be used.

 

[-OZ-]

IMO, you always have to start the players you think will do the best...you gotta play to win. You can trade players for picks and that's fine but you can't bench them for lesser alternatives in order to improve your draft slot.

Yeah, falling out of a coveted draft tier sucks, but them's the breaks and if you weren't bad enough to deserve to draft there, you shouldn't try to rig the system so that you can.

Tanking should not be accepted in your league. I was in one dynasty league where this happened a bit too much. It was openly discussed but there were still tanking issues. One thing we did in that league to avoid tanking is to let the the bottom feeder teams set each others lineups. Making trades is not the same thing. First of all, no one should be trading away "studs" for draft pics. But there's nothing wrong with trading Kitna or Warner (for example) for future draft pics leaving you with John Beck as your starter. Most trade deadlines have passed for this purpose. No deadlines or late deadlines allow too many bottom teams to unload talent to the top tier teams. That being said, I traded AJ and Ward last year for draft pics and MJD. The moves put me in position with multiple 1st round picks plus an extra RB this season.

who wouldn't?!?Depends on your league really. A few years ago, I trade 4 1sts for LT. Seems fair still in hindsight. Also traded a top 5 pick for Roethlisbeger - that is working fine now, but last year it looked bad.

I traded the 1.01 for Portis+, IMO Portis is a stud, but ADP was worth more.

Also depends what you mean by stud.

I would say no, tanking is never ok, but your league has to come up with its own rules to negate this. Whether that's a lottery, toilet bowl, allowing others to set lineups, etc. is up to the league.

I've never "tanked", although I have been in a position to. In that league I found I kept up less with the injury reports and once I set a lineup, I didn't tinker with it - unlike the leagues where I'm in contention, where I'll ensure my players are all healthy and I set the optimal lineup.

 

[Couch Potato]

My league just added the rule that the consolation bracket now plays for draft position, and this has worked out so far. I really like this approach, because you best improve your draft position by winning.

I love that, have thought about it a bunch of times, and swear if I ever start and commish a dynasty league I'd have it in the rules. Best solution of all IMO. Say, 14-team league, top eight make playoffs, remaining six play the consolation tourney for picks #1-6. Everyone will be trying to win all year. Structure money payouts so that no team would tank to just miss the playoffs in hopes of getting the #1 pick (especially since they could lose in the consolation tourney and end up with pick #5 or 6 and win no money).

I have never seen it in a league though, so kudos to you guys.

To those who would argue that the bottom team should just get the #1 pick (and that's most folks), I would say that there usually isn't a lot of difference between the bottom six teams (unless an owner is really clueless, and then he should probably move on). It's often a matter of injuries or bad luck that puts a team in the position to really suck by about week 8 and start thinking about maximizing future value rather than winning this year.

 

[Anthony Borbely]

My league just added the rule that the consolation bracket now plays for draft position, and this has worked out so far. I really like this approach, because you best improve your draft position by winning.

I love that, have thought about it a bunch of times, and swear if I ever start and commish a dynasty league I'd have it in the rules. Best solution of all IMO. Say, 14-team league, top eight make playoffs, remaining six play the consolation tourney for picks #1-6. Everyone will be trying to win all year. Structure money payouts so that no team would tank to just miss the playoffs in hopes of getting the #1 pick (especially since they could lose in the consolation tourney and end up with pick #5 or 6 and win no money).

I have never seen it in a league though, so kudos to you guys.

To those who would argue that the bottom team should just get the #1 pick (and that's most folks), I would say that there usually isn't a lot of difference between the bottom six teams usually (unless an owner is really clueless, and then he should probably move on). It's often a matter of injuries or bad luck that puts a team in the position to really suck by about week 8 and start thinking about maximizing future value rather than winning this year.

I do not agree with the bottom teams having a playoff for the first pick. The worst team should get the first pick. The best thing I have seen to address this is for draft order to be determined by best possible points, instead of points scored. That eliminates lineup decisions determining anything. If there is a negative to this, I haven't seen it. The true worst team gets the higher picks, and that's how it should be.

 

[Mister CIA]

My league just added the rule that the consolation bracket now plays for draft position, and this has worked out so far. I really like this approach, because you best improve your draft position by winning.

I love that, have thought about it a bunch of times, and swear if I ever start and commish a dynasty league I'd have it in the rules. Best solution of all IMO. Say, 14-team league, top eight make playoffs, remaining six play the consolation tourney for picks #1-6. Everyone will be trying to win all year. Structure money payouts so that no team would tank to just miss the playoffs in hopes of getting the #1 pick (especially since they could lose in the consolation tourney and end up with pick #5 or 6 and win no money).

I have never seen it in a league though, so kudos to you guys.

To those who would argue that the bottom team should just get the #1 pick (and that's most folks), I would say that there usually isn't a lot of difference between the bottom six teams usually (unless an owner is really clueless, and then he should probably move on). It's often a matter of injuries or bad luck that puts a team in the position to really suck by about week 8 and start thinking about maximizing future value rather than winning this year.

Something else to keep in mind is that usually it's the worst team in the league for which you have to find a replacement owner. I'd be far less likely to take over a bad team if I could not even get a good draft pick out of the deal, unless it were a salary league where the situation is a little more fluid.

 

[CaGamblers]

This year is the second year of my Dynasty League and after last season plus losing Vick and a few more initial draft mistakes - I knew my team was going to tank. This season I have been playing for Darren McFadden plus I traded Selvin Young to the Henry owner for a conditional 1st round pick - I could have the number one and number two overall pick in the rookie/FA draft in June.

Also by being bad this season I have taken advantage of the waiver wire - I picked up SYoung prior to week 1, AHall in week 4 and DWynn & RGrant in week 2 when no one had a clue about them.

I believe I smartly dogged it this season by not getting the best Defensive team available to play and maybe by playing a bad kicker, but mostly I prayed for losses against other bottom dwellers so they couldn't jump ahead of me in next year's draft.

Right now for next seasons 7 rd draft I potentially have the #1, #2 picks in the first Rd, 2 picks in the 2nd rd (#14 & #18), 1 in the 3rd, 4th and 5th, 2 picks in the 6th rd and 1 pick in the 7th.

My team Dynasty will be a playoff team next season and years to come if I take total advantage of this season.

 

[Couch Potato]

My league just added the rule that the consolation bracket now plays for draft position, and this has worked out so far. I really like this approach, because you best improve your draft position by winning.

I love that, have thought about it a bunch of times, and swear if I ever start and commish a dynasty league I'd have it in the rules. Best solution of all IMO. Say, 14-team league, top eight make playoffs, remaining six play the consolation tourney for picks #1-6. Everyone will be trying to win all year. Structure money payouts so that no team would tank to just miss the playoffs in hopes of getting the #1 pick (especially since they could lose in the consolation tourney and end up with pick #5 or 6 and win no money).

I have never seen it in a league though, so kudos to you guys.

To those who would argue that the bottom team should just get the #1 pick (and that's most folks), I would say that there usually isn't a lot of difference between the bottom six teams usually (unless an owner is really clueless, and then he should probably move on). It's often a matter of injuries or bad luck that puts a team in the position to really suck by about week 8 and start thinking about maximizing future value rather than winning this year.

I do not agree with the bottom teams having a playoff for the first pick. The worst team should get the first pick. The best thing I have seen to address this is for draft order to be determined by best possible points, instead of points scored. That eliminates lineup decisions determining anything. If there is a negative to this, I haven't seen it. The true worst team gets the higher picks, and that's how it should be.

Best possible points does not tell you who is the weakest team going into next year if injuries were a major factor. If I own Larry Johnson and Ronnie Brown and Jake Delhomme and Marvin Harrison and Javon Walker and whoever else got hurt and caused me to have horrible 'potential points' because they were zeros, it still doesn't mean I'm the team in the worst shape after this season and deserving of the #1 overall pick.

 

[fsufan]

This year is the second year of my Dynasty League and after last season plus losing Vick and a few more initial draft mistakes - I knew my team was going to tank. This season I have been playing for Darren McFadden plus I traded Selvin Young to the Henry owner for a conditional 1st round pick - I could have the number one and number two overall pick in the rookie/FA draft in June.

Also by being bad this season I have taken advantage of the waiver wire - I picked up SYoung prior to week 1, AHall in week 4 and DWynn & RGrant in week 2 when no one had a clue about them.

I believe I smartly dogged it this season by not getting the best Defensive team available to play and maybe by playing a bad kicker, but mostly I prayed for losses against other bottom dwellers so they couldn't jump ahead of me in next year's draft.

Right now for next seasons 7 rd draft I potentially have the #1, #2 picks in the first Rd, 2 picks in the 2nd rd (#14 & #18), 1 in the 3rd, 4th and 5th, 2 picks in the 6th rd and 1 pick in the 7th.

My team Dynasty will be a playoff team next season and years to come if I take total advantage of this season.

not sure about next year, rookies take a while to develop if they pan out at all. I had a guy take over a bad dynasty team 4 years ago. he built it through the draft. this year, his 4th, was the first year he made the playoffs.

 

[Pskov1420]

Trading your best players for picks and younger up coming players is fine. Deliberately not starting your best players isn't. You have an obligation to put out the team which you believe will score you the most points every week.

 

[Mister CIA]

Tanking is best prevented with a monetary incentive. For example, in a 12 team, $100 league:

Raise league fees by $25, putting the additional $300 into a "quarterly" prize fund for the first three quarters, and the team with the highest cumulative score for each quarter wins $100. Tweak as appropriate, such as omitting the first quarter and paying three cash prizes for weeks 4-6, 7-9, 10-12 (or push it up to the last week of regular season, 5-7, 8-10, 11-13).

 

[CaGamblers]

My league is $1000.00 so it is very expensive to suck

 

[AhrnCityPahnder]

Next years draft positions are determined by the worst to first standings after week 10 in my keeper league.

it's not perfect, but it does remove the incentive to tank.

 

[Road Warriors]

-snip-I do not agree with the bottom teams having a playoff for the first pick. The worst team should get the first pick. The best thing I have seen to address this is for draft order to be determined by best possible points, instead of points scored. That eliminates lineup decisions determining anything. If there is a negative to this, I haven't seen it. The true worst team gets the higher picks, and that's how it should be.

I agree in a true dynasty format that the worst teams need to get the top picks. In my league situation, it is a keeper (keep 2) format so the draft is closer to a redraft than a rookie draft. There is no reason beyond poor prep or bad luck for sucking for multiple years in this format. In that format, the playoff for top pick has kept all teams invested and submitting their top lineups all year, although to be fair to these guys, if we played for free most would still play to the end.I guess whatever works to keep all teams playing it out to the end is all I ask for.

 

[Anthony Borbely]

My league just added the rule that the consolation bracket now plays for draft position, and this has worked out so far. I really like this approach, because you best improve your draft position by winning.

I love that, have thought about it a bunch of times, and swear if I ever start and commish a dynasty league I'd have it in the rules. Best solution of all IMO. Say, 14-team league, top eight make playoffs, remaining six play the consolation tourney for picks #1-6. Everyone will be trying to win all year. Structure money payouts so that no team would tank to just miss the playoffs in hopes of getting the #1 pick (especially since they could lose in the consolation tourney and end up with pick #5 or 6 and win no money).

I have never seen it in a league though, so kudos to you guys.

To those who would argue that the bottom team should just get the #1 pick (and that's most folks), I would say that there usually isn't a lot of difference between the bottom six teams usually (unless an owner is really clueless, and then he should probably move on). It's often a matter of injuries or bad luck that puts a team in the position to really suck by about week 8 and start thinking about maximizing future value rather than winning this year.

I do not agree with the bottom teams having a playoff for the first pick. The worst team should get the first pick. The best thing I have seen to address this is for draft order to be determined by best possible points, instead of points scored. That eliminates lineup decisions determining anything. If there is a negative to this, I haven't seen it. The true worst team gets the higher picks, and that's how it should be.

Best possible points does not tell you who is the weakest team going into next year if injuries were a major factor. If I own Larry Johnson and Ronnie Brown and Jake Delhomme and Marvin Harrison and Javon Walker and whoever else got hurt and caused me to have horrible 'potential points' because they were zeros, it still doesn't mean I'm the team in the worst shape after this season and deserving of the #1 overall pick.

Chances are, if the above happens, your team is going to have a bad year either way. But at least you can't intentionally set a poor lineup with best possible points...which is the main way teams tank.

 

[jwb]

Trying to lose a game is wrong, period. However, I don't like any of the fixes either. A toilet bowl playoff hurts the 2-11 team, and helps the 6-7 team. Setting each other's lineups? No thanks. Total points... as already pointed out, this might not accurately reflect the worst team.

The best fix is to call out those who are suspected of doing it. It's not hard to spot someone tanking - we all play hunches and matchups from time to time, but a team with "something to lose for" starting (say) Terrance Copper over Santonio Holmes (assuming both were healthy, both team's QB's were healthy, etc) probably warrants looking into.

I'm in the running for the top overall pick in two dynasty leagues (took over both teams - WW pickups Grant, Ward, and Wynn probably will take me out of #1 overall, though). To be honest, I'd rather win another game or two and have the #2 or #3 pick.

To the OP - for what it's worth, you could have had Bowe. Or James Jones. Or even Jacoby Jones.

 

[-OZ-]

My league is $1000.00 so it is very expensive to suck

big $ also provides incentive to tank this year, if you aren't winning anyway.If you're unlucky and 3-10 after week 13, tied with someone for last place, and you see ADP or McFadden coming in next year, can you honestly tell me knowing that you're paying $1,000 a year (or do you mean total?) isn't incentive to try and get ADP or McFadden? Less expensive leagues would have less incentive to tank.

 

[Riffraff]

My team Dynasty will be a playoff team next season and years to come if I take total advantage of this season.

Biakabutuka, Phillips, Carter, Enis, Bennett, TJones, Dayne, Canidate, Caddy, Benson, Perry, WGreen, Duckett, Avery, Ant Smith, Wheatley, Kaufman, Salaam, Stewart, Hill, Hearst, TSmith, and Dunbar.Those were first round RBs going back 15 years.People are way too focused on the impact that the rare few that do succeed. Expect to miss more times than you hit. Studs don't come along every year.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

in KEEPER leagues without rules against it I say it flies. I know I am in the minority here.

 

[nerangers]

I know many leagues try to mirror the NFL as closely as possible, and the NFL drafts worst to first, including the playoffs. The difference is that teams like the 49ers, Jets, Rams, Dolphins, etc won't be tanking games right now to get the better draft pick, eventhough they are out of the playoff hunt. Why wouldn't a FF team tank once there is nothing to play for and the worse record is guaranteed the top pick? This is why I think you need to do something else for the top draft picks.

Like I said earlier, you have to have rules in place that would stop a team from wanting to tank.

Almost every league I have been in does a payout for the single highest score of the season. Keeps you playing even if you are out of it.

By playing for draft picks, all of our teams are in it for the full 16 weeks, instead of done when the playoffs come around.

Like a few others mentioned here, injuries can be why you were the worst team vs. actually having the worst team. Letting the bottom teams fight it out for the top picks is not a bad thing.

 

[az_prof]

Tanking is best prevented with a monetary incentive. For example, in a 12 team, $100 league:Raise league fees by $25, putting the additional $300 into a "quarterly" prize fund for the first three quarters, and the team with the highest cumulative score for each quarter wins $100. Tweak as appropriate, such as omitting the first quarter and paying three cash prizes for weeks 4-6, 7-9, 10-12 (or push it up to the last week of regular season, 5-7, 8-10, 11-13).

I have never in all my years not at least been in contention for playoffs up to the end in every league--but this year I am out of it and now I see things a bit differently...First, people who get high on their righteous pulpits about this are being unreasonable. I don't see any difference between the guy who trades away his best players for future draft picks and who doesn't pick up good, one week players on waivers in order to field a bad team and someone who tanks. If Justin Gage is available and you don't pick him up and all your players are either on IR or not starting so you get a zero, how is that any different than someone who HAS Gage sitting him to play Matt Jones?Dynasty is still so new that people haven't solved this problem; but the only solution is to provide an incentive NOT to tank. When your league simply rewards the worst team with the best pick and doesn't have a garbage bowl with some meaningful money for the winner, then there is no financial incentive to not tank, and then the responsibility for tanking is the leagues and commishioners. I haven't tanked but I look at another team that deliberately weakened his team and who doesn't pick up short term value FA and it doesn't seem fair.

 

[renesauz]

IN many redraft leagues I have run, I've had a WEEKLY high score prize. It is usually pretty small, but 10-15 bucks is a couple lunches, right? IN a friendly league, that might be all it takes.

You don't even have to do that all season...you could double that prize but only do it week 8 through the end of the regular season. That way, even a bad team has a chance to recoup some fees.

 

[pollardsvision]

tough issue and i'm sure it depends on the league.

personally, i think it's best just to play to try to win. i do believe in fantasy karma.

i don't even think there's anything wrong with taking team management rights away from problem owners once they are mathematically eliminated (only if you know they'll be a problem).

i've seen owners do crazy things at the end of a rough season, out of sheer boredom or frustration, i think. (sort of like when real teams are getting destroyed)

my dynasty league uses an auction, so it's not a big deal. the last place teams only get a few more bucks than the top teams. not enough for their pride to get in the way of tanking.

we also give some of the prize $ to the team that scores the most points over the final 4-6 weeks of the season, whether they're in the playoffs or not.

 

[JohnnyU]

My league just added the rule that the consolation bracket now plays for draft position, and this has worked out so far. I really like this approach, because you best improve your draft position by winning.

I love that, have thought about it a bunch of times, and swear if I ever start and commish a dynasty league I'd have it in the rules. Best solution of all IMO. Say, 14-team league, top eight make playoffs, remaining six play the consolation tourney for picks #1-6. Everyone will be trying to win all year. Structure money payouts so that no team would tank to just miss the playoffs in hopes of getting the #1 pick (especially since they could lose in the consolation tourney and end up with pick #5 or 6 and win no money).

I have never seen it in a league though, so kudos to you guys.

To those who would argue that the bottom team should just get the #1 pick (and that's most folks), I would say that there usually isn't a lot of difference between the bottom six teams usually (unless an owner is really clueless, and then he should probably move on). It's often a matter of injuries or bad luck that puts a team in the position to really suck by about week 8 and start thinking about maximizing future value rather than winning this year.

I do not agree with the bottom teams having a playoff for the first pick. The worst team should get the first pick. The best thing I have seen to address this is for draft order to be determined by best possible points, instead of points scored. That eliminates lineup decisions determining anything. If there is a negative to this, I haven't seen it. The true worst team gets the higher picks, and that's how it should be.

Best possible points does not tell you who is the weakest team going into next year if injuries were a major factor. If I own Larry Johnson and Ronnie Brown and Jake Delhomme and Marvin Harrison and Javon Walker and whoever else got hurt and caused me to have horrible 'potential points' because they were zeros, it still doesn't mean I'm the team in the worst shape after this season and deserving of the #1 overall pick.

Excellent post !!

 

[D.O.M.]

I really like the idea of using the standings at week 10 to set the draft order. At that point in the season, every one is still pretty much in it and so tanking shouldn't come into play.

 

[JohnnyU]

I really like the idea of using the standings at week 10 to set the draft order. At that point in the season, every one is still pretty much in it and so tanking shouldn't come into play.

That's an idea worthy of some thought.

 

[The Man Who Met Andy Griffith]

My league just added the rule that the consolation bracket now plays for draft position, and this has worked out so far. I really like this approach, because you best improve your draft position by winning.

I love that, have thought about it a bunch of times, and swear if I ever start and commish a dynasty league I'd have it in the rules. Best solution of all IMO. Say, 14-team league, top eight make playoffs, remaining six play the consolation tourney for picks #1-6. Everyone will be trying to win all year. Structure money payouts so that no team would tank to just miss the playoffs in hopes of getting the #1 pick (especially since they could lose in the consolation tourney and end up with pick #5 or 6 and win no money).

I have never seen it in a league though, so kudos to you guys.

To those who would argue that the bottom team should just get the #1 pick (and that's most folks), I would say that there usually isn't a lot of difference between the bottom six teams usually (unless an owner is really clueless, and then he should probably move on). It's often a matter of injuries or bad luck that puts a team in the position to really suck by about week 8 and start thinking about maximizing future value rather than winning this year.

I do not agree with the bottom teams having a playoff for the first pick. The worst team should get the first pick. The best thing I have seen to address this is for draft order to be determined by best possible points, instead of points scored. That eliminates lineup decisions determining anything. If there is a negative to this, I haven't seen it. The true worst team gets the higher picks, and that's how it should be.

Best possible points does not tell you who is the weakest team going into next year if injuries were a major factor. If I own Larry Johnson and Ronnie Brown and Jake Delhomme and Marvin Harrison and Javon Walker and whoever else got hurt and caused me to have horrible 'potential points' because they were zeros, it still doesn't mean I'm the team in the worst shape after this season and deserving of the #1 overall pick.

No system is perfect. Under your hypothetical scenario, you would probably end up with the worst record in the league too, so I don't really see the relevance.

 

[squistion]

I really like the idea of using the standings at week 10 to set the draft order. At that point in the season, every one is still pretty much in it and so tanking shouldn't come into play.

That's an idea worthy of some thought.

I never considered it before, but that sounds like a pretty good idea to me, too.

 

[BigTuna]

In the Dynasty league I was in, no one really intenionally tanked. But they would go with incomlete rosters on occation. Our waiver moves cost 20 bucks a piece. If you had an injured player or had made a trade with someone that needed your playoff players. You'd on occations have incomplete lineups. The only time I saw somone not start their best lineup in that league was when the Commish had 2 teams and was trying to throw the game for his better team. From then on in when an owner with 2 teams played his own team, we checked the lineup to see if it were fair before the games were played. Incomplete lineups were acceptable though, as long as they had no other options at that position.

 

[fsufan]

In the Dynasty league I was in, no one really intenionally tanked. But they would go with incomlete rosters on occation. Our waiver moves cost 20 bucks a piece. If you had an injured player or had made a trade with someone that needed your playoff players. You'd on occations have incomplete lineups. The only time I saw somone not start their best lineup in that league was when the Commish had 2 teams and was trying to throw the game for his better team. From then on in when an owner with 2 teams played his own team, we checked the lineup to see if it were fair before the games were played. Incomplete lineups were acceptable though, as long as they had no other options at that position.

i hare never heard of a league that allows an owners to have 2 teams. can he trade players between his 2 teams?

 

[BigTuna]

In the Dynasty league I was in, no one really intenionally tanked. But they would go with incomlete rosters on occation. Our waiver moves cost 20 bucks a piece. If you had an injured player or had made a trade with someone that needed your playoff players. You'd on occations have incomplete lineups. The only time I saw somone not start their best lineup in that league was when the Commish had 2 teams and was trying to throw the game for his better team. From then on in when an owner with 2 teams played his own team, we checked the lineup to see if it were fair before the games were played. Incomplete lineups were acceptable though, as long as they had no other options at that position.

i hare never heard of a league that allows an owners to have 2 teams. can he trade players between his 2 teams?

No there was no trading between teams. 2-3 years ago it seemed like people in our area lost interest in FFL. We were having a hard time keeping our league full. At one time we had three owners with 2 teams. Which made trading almost an impossibility. We allowed it in lieu of folding the league. I think part of the problem was the cost of the league. No one wanted to lay down that kind of money to play. Let alone spend that kind of money to buy a bad team, since that's usually who walked away from their teams. I quit the league last year. I grew tired of it. They didn't have any trouble selling my team. It won my division last year and won the superbowl the year before.

 

[Craig_MiamiFL]

Tanking is absolute okay if there's nothing to play for.

If commissioners want to ##### and moan, put in an incentive to not tank. Period.

 

[thayman]

It's ok if there is no rule against it. Personally I get more satisfaction playing spoiler than I do losing to someone. It's always fun to listen to a buddy piss and moan about how the one loss to you cost him the postseason.

 

[DropKick]

It's ok if there is no rule against it. Personally I get more satisfaction playing spoiler than I do losing to someone. It's always fun to listen to a buddy piss and moan about how the one loss to you cost him the postseason.

One thing I've learned while playing FF is that you really don't know someone until you've played FF with them. And I've found many people don't have an ounce of integrity. Apparently, you are in that mix. Does there have to be an explicit rule against something to make it wrong? What you have basically said is that it is acceptable for someone to throw their game this season for a slightly better draft position next year. This doesn't seem selfish to you? So... someone MIGHT get a better draft pick and they MIGHT do something with it that MIGHT have an effect on NEXT season? This justifies ending someone's season who probably deserves better. Given the money or bragging rights involved and the commitment many of us obviously put into this hobby, I can't rationalize that behavior. I have too much respect for the people in my league. Also, any victim of tanking has a legitimate complaint. Pissing and moaning? Great blanket response to avoid the heart of the issue!

 

[Dr. Awesome]

What if you're in a really large league? Say...32 team league. And in order to compete you need a qb. But in order to draft a qb you need to have a top 15 draft pick? But your team is good enough to avoid a pick that high? Do you tank to actually build a contender or do you continue your guaranteed path to mediocrity?

This issue is popping up in my dynasty league and the team owner makes a valid point that he needs to tank to build a better team.

 

[Jersey35]

Our dynasty league sets draft order by final record. last place = 1st pick. We then have a playoff between the bottom 4 teams for an additional pick that is inserted before the 1st overall pick. So in theory, the team with the worst record *could* win the playoff and essentially have the top 2 picks in the draft.

This system has worked fantastic for us. The worst team gets the #2 pick in the draft at worst, but with a little luck, can really jumpstart their improvement. Other teams are fighting tooth and nail for that ToiletBowl pick as well, so everyone stays interested.

 

[pittstownkiller]

I have on occasions in the past, if my match-up seemed formidable, tanked the first game of the season to be #1 on the waiver-wire; I haven't used this "strategy" in the last few years because of a combination of, games that I thought I couldn't win were closer than I thought they would be and discerning WW stars after week 1 is a little beyond my skill, with most not staying on my roster anyway. Staying active and trying to win, keeps you closer to the game and the players; this can only help to make your team stronger in the long run. I will concede that desperate times cause for desperate measures, though.

 

[Dr. Awesome]

Let's say that my team was horrible last year and I won a couple meaningless games at the end of the season against teams that didn't have anything to play for and I ended up with rookie pick #4 instead of pick #1 or #2. Instead of getting Peterson, Lynch or Calvin, I ended up with Meachem.

Btw, look at this part. Tanking at the end of that season would have landed him Peterson or Calvin. Instead he gets Lynch or Meachem. That's a HUGE difference.

 

[Shutout]

For me, tanking is never ok because every game means so much and in the crapshoot that is the FF playoffs, it all means so much. A team that beat someone early in the season but then lays down for someone else later can do something as slight as flip team's playoff spots...but even that can mean everything in how it plays out. But even more drastic, it can possibly change who makes the playoffs. Just seems nothing is ever right with it.

In our dynasty leagues, we don't allow it and will find better owners if it occurs.

As far as trading players for picks, that is different. A fading team with a good player might jumpstart their whole rebuilding process by trading the player that will do nothing for them but could fetch draft picks or other long-term players. That part is always going to have lots of different opinions, but it IS fair. I like it better when it makes very logical sense (like a losing team trading an older RB like FJAX or Gore or Turner for youth/picks). We all know what that's doing; you're renting a player that won't likely be around in 2 seasons and you are giving a lot of youth/flexibility away.

The ones I DON'T like are the ones that trade away studs from bad teams but again, who knows what the future holds, so even in that case, it is far different from a guy purposely trying to lose games by starting his worst players or guys that are hurt.

 

[dickey moe]

IN many redraft leagues I have run, I've had a WEEKLY high score prize. It is usually pretty small, but 10-15 bucks is a couple lunches, right? IN a friendly league, that might be all it takes.You don't even have to do that all season...you could double that prize but only do it week 8 through the end of the regular season. That way, even a bad team has a chance to recoup some fees.

Better yet, impose a monetary penalty for the lowest score each week.

 

[eric rymer]

My league just added the rule that the consolation bracket now plays for draft position, and this has worked out so far. I really like this approach, because you best improve your draft position by winning.

I love that, have thought about it a bunch of times, and swear if I ever start and commish a dynasty league I'd have it in the rules. Best solution of all IMO. Say, 14-team league, top eight make playoffs, remaining six play the consolation tourney for picks #1-6. Everyone will be trying to win all year. Structure money payouts so that no team would tank to just miss the playoffs in hopes of getting the #1 pick (especially since they could lose in the consolation tourney and end up with pick #5 or 6 and win no money).

I have never seen it in a league though, so kudos to you guys.

To those who would argue that the bottom team should just get the #1 pick (and that's most folks), I would say that there usually isn't a lot of difference between the bottom six teams usually (unless an owner is really clueless, and then he should probably move on). It's often a matter of injuries or bad luck that puts a team in the position to really suck by about week 8 and start thinking about maximizing future value rather than winning this year.

I do not agree with the bottom teams having a playoff for the first pick. The worst team should get the first pick. The best thing I have seen to address this is for draft order to be determined by best possible points, instead of points scored. That eliminates lineup decisions determining anything. If there is a negative to this, I haven't seen it. The true worst team gets the higher picks, and that's how it should be.

I think this is the best idea I've heard yet. We had a hugs issue in my dynasty league with an owner tanking to get Calvin Johnson a few years ago. he had a bad run of injuries that put him in the running for the #1 pick and he tanked a game at the end and got Calvin the next year. We won the championship the previous year and has since won two more.

We put in a rule about tanking and even tried a draft lottery. I just don't like the randomness of the lottery even though it is weighted. I am going to push this at the next owners meeting.

 

[az_prof]

IMO, you always have to start the players you think will do the best...you gotta play to win. You can trade players for picks and that's fine but you can't bench them for lesser alternatives in order to improve your draft slot.Yeah, falling out of a coveted draft tier sucks, but them's the breaks and if you weren't bad enough to deserve to draft there, you shouldn't try to rig the system so that you can.

Tanking should not be accepted in your league. I was in one dynasty league where this happened a bit too much. It was openly discussed but there were still tanking issues. One thing we did in that league to avoid tanking is to let the the bottom feeder teams set each others lineups. Making trades is not the same thing. First of all, no one should be trading away "studs" for draft pics. But there's nothing wrong with trading Kitna or Warner (for example) for future draft pics leaving you with John Beck as your starter. Most trade deadlines have passed for this purpose. No deadlines or late deadlines allow too many bottom teams to unload talent to the top tier teams. That being said, I traded AJ and Ward last year for draft pics and MJD. The moves put me in position with multiple 1st round picks plus an extra RB this season.

Our league has a no tanking rule; if it looks like you are tanking you may be called on it by commish and have to explain your starting lineup.

 

[Touchdown There]

IN many redraft leagues I have run, I've had a WEEKLY high score prize. It is usually pretty small, but 10-15 bucks is a couple lunches, right? IN a friendly league, that might be all it takes.You don't even have to do that all season...you could double that prize but only do it week 8 through the end of the regular season. That way, even a bad team has a chance to recoup some fees.

Better yet, impose a monetary penalty for the lowest score each week.

I like that. And it all goes into a pool for the winner of the survivor picks.

 

[Dr. Awesome]

For me, tanking is never ok because every game means so much and in the crapshoot that is the FF playoffs, it all means so much. A team that beat someone early in the season but then lays down for someone else later can do something as slight as flip team's playoff spots...but even that can mean everything in how it plays out. But even more drastic, it can possibly change who makes the playoffs. Just seems nothing is ever right with it.

You're not there to help other teams. You're there to make your team the best team it can be. And if you're clearly out of the playoffs, wouldn't you rather tank to get the next Calvin Johnson than play it out and end up with a Robert Meachem? How much better would your team be?Isn't it in the best long term interest of the Colts to tank to lock up Andrew Luck?

 

[FUBAR]

I was just wondering if tanking is acceptable in a dynasty league at all. I have always been one to field a competitive team just because of my pride (or competitive nature). I always think that you have to try to beat a team that has something to play for, but is it ok to field a poor team to try and lose if the team you are playing has nothing to play for (ie. has their playoff spot locked up or can't make the playoffs)? It is hard for me to try and lose but is it really any different than dealing a strong player for a future first round pick? Isn't that a form of tanking for the year? Helping another team win while trying to improve your team for the next year? Let's say that my team was horrible last year and I won a couple meaningless games at the end of the season against teams that didn't have anything to play for and I ended up with rookie pick #4 instead of pick #1 or #2. Instead of getting Peterson, Lynch or Calvin, I ended up with Meachem. That is a huge blow for my team just because I won a game or two that didn't matter. Thoughts?

There are two parts to this. First - personnel decisions should be made in the best interests of your team. Whether you go for it this year and trade youth for performing veterans, balance youth and performance, or build for the future by trading performers for picks or prospects is entirely up to the owner and isn't subject to question IMO. (barring collusion of course)Second - start your best players for the given week. This would be a lot easier if leagues were "best ball" format, where the best performers on your team automatically start, but that takes a lot of fun out of it.