Throwing Games In Week 14 To Prepare For Week 15 (1 Viewer)

[kyoun1e]

Curious if anyone who has clinched playoff spots in leagues are planning ahead for next week's first round playoffs by purposely ditching this week's game?

For example, in one league I've clinched a spot. If I lose, I'm pretty much locked into the #5 position. However, if I win, there's a chance a HIGHER seed has me facing a lower seeded team that's a dark horse for the championship with great matchups in week 15.

I'm toying with the idea of ditching week 14. Probably not entirely, but on the margins. For example:

* Keeping L. Jackson in the lineup (instead of maybe going Brissett).
* Playing the CHI D this week (against GB) despite better options. CHI faces CLE next week. Going with CHI would allow me to drop another D and think ahead to next week.
* Starting J. Elliott at K on Monday night. I could drop him Monday for a Purdy, Pearsall, or SF D (TN in week 15).

All that said, the fantasy gods always seem to punish me in these situations. I attempt to figure out all the future permutations and probabilities and then no matter what I do, I wake up to week 15 and I'm screwed anyway.

 

[tricky92]

Back in 2009, I had a win already wrapped up heading in to Monday night football. And, I already had a playoff spot locked up. What I did not have was a spot in a playoff bracket locked up. After looking at the potential brackets, I decided that one path to the championship seemed much easier than the other, and it was only separated by points.

I had the Eagles defense playing Monday night, and decided to sit them out locking me in to one of the brackets. Had I played the Eagles D I would have wound up in the other bracket.

Well, you've probably guessed where this is going... I wound up getting knocked out in the 2nd round, but had I played to win (and score as much as possible in the last week of the season) I would have won the championship that year. It still haunts me, and now I always play to win and score as much as possible, and let the chips fall where they may.

 

[kyoun1e]

Back in 2009, I had a win already wrapped up heading in to Monday night football. And, I already had a playoff spot locked up. What I did not have was a spot in a playoff bracket locked up. After looking at the potential brackets, I decided that one path to the championship seemed much easier than the other, and it was only separated by points.

I had the Eagles defense playing Monday night, and decided to sit them out locking me in to one of the brackets. Had I played the Eagles D I would have wound up in the other bracket.

Well, you've probably guessed where this is going... I wound up getting knocked out in the 2nd round, but had I played to win (and score as much as possible in the last week of the season) I would have won the championship that year. It still haunts me, and now I always play to win and score as much as possible, and let the chips fall where they may.

Exactly what I fear.

Just when you think you have it all figured out you don't.

And I envy owners where ignorance is bliss and they just seem to luck out repeatedly.

Best laid plans...

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

I've never agreed with the moral arguments against doing stuff like this -- your goal is to win a championship, so you should do whatever it takes to maximize those chances (short of cheating).

But like you guys, I do kinda believe in the karma angle. It's not even so much that, since it suggests some kind of moral payback. It's more that we have no idea how these things will play out; the team that looks like it will be easier to beat may end up having a great week. Meanwhile, any attempt to game the system will feel a million times worse if it backfires.

By the same logic, I refuse to make any changes to my lineup (absent one of my starters being declared a surprise inactive) after 12:45 on Sunday. Those last minute changes that don't work out up the regret factor by a million

 

[FarFromHome]

No matter the circumstances you play to win the game.

 

[Gatorade]

Another thing to consider is who you play ? Are they fighting for a playoff spot ? If you give them an easy win, does it knock another deserving team out of the playoffs ? I always play to win.

 

[JohnnyU]

NO, that person wouldn't play the next season in my leagues if it was obvious.

 

[Lion to myself]

I’ll be starting a player on BYE this week because I do not want to drop anyone on my bench in what is a meaningless game for me. My opponent is out of the playoffs too which factors into my decision. If my opponent was vying for a playoff spot or if our game could impact others I would reconsider.

 

[kyoun1e]

I’ll be starting a player on BYE this week because I do not want to drop anyone on my bench in what is a meaningless game for me. My opponent is out of the playoffs too which factors into my decision. If my opponent was vying for a playoff spot or if our game could impact others I would reconsider.

In my case, my opponent already has a top 3 seed locked up. If I throw the game, he would actually have an increased chance at the top seed.

 

[the moops]

NO, that person wouldn't play the next season in my leagues if it was obvious.

That’s a pretty weak move. We are all trying to win a championship. Trying to lose a game on purpose is every bit of a strategy as trying to win.

 

[JohnnyU]

NO, that person wouldn't play the next season in my leagues if it was obvious.

That’s a pretty weak move. We are all trying to win a championship. Trying to lose a game on purpose is every bit of a strategy as trying to win.

I respectfully disagree. I’ll leave it at that.

 

[the moops]

NO, that person wouldn't play the next season in my leagues if it was obvious.

That’s a pretty weak move. We are all trying to win a championship. Trying to lose a game on purpose is every bit of a strategy as trying to win.

I respectfully disagree. I’ll leave it at that.

I wouldn't want to play in a league where people have an issue with this, so we would be all good anyway

 

[JohnnyU]

NO, that person wouldn't play the next season in my leagues if it was obvious.

That’s a pretty weak move. We are all trying to win a championship. Trying to lose a game on purpose is every bit of a strategy as trying to win.

I respectfully disagree. I’ll leave it at that.

I wouldn't want to play in a league where people have an issue with this, so we would be all good anyway

A-men, I think my leagues would be happy not condoning that kind of behavior. Good luck on Sundays.

 

[Stoneworker]

All that said, the fantasy gods always seem to punish me in these situations. I attempt to figure out all the future permutations and probabilities and then no matter what I do, I wake up to week 15 and I'm screwed anyway.

This is an illusion of control that permeates FF and gambling in general

There are no such things as fantasy gods

On the margin at the SP level, FF is primarily luck anyway since the vast majority of skill has already been applied during drafts, WW moves, WDIS, etc

So just play the game and enjoy the dopamine rush

 

[Mitchie]

I’ll be starting a player on BYE this week because I do not want to drop anyone on my bench in what is a meaningless game for me. My opponent is out of the playoffs too which factors into my decision. If my opponent was vying for a playoff spot or if our game could impact others I would reconsider.

In my case, my opponent already has a top 3 seed locked up. If I throw the game, he would actually have an increased chance at the top seed.

But you'd be decreasing the chances of others for a top seed. It's not fair to those teams as they had to play you at full strength.

If you throwing a game impacts the seeds/standing of others still in contention than this should be not permitted. Now realize it can be tough to police and if you do it at the margins as you're suggesting you can prob get away with it.

If there's a scenario where you're playing a team that is completely out of it, in that case I would be ok with it.

 

[JohnnyU]

I’ll be starting a player on BYE this week because I do not want to drop anyone on my bench in what is a meaningless game for me. My opponent is out of the playoffs too which factors into my decision. If my opponent was vying for a playoff spot or if our game could impact others I would reconsider.

If dynasty you have to factor in the draft. It’s not fair to affect draft positioning, whether your team or not, by throwing a game. That hurts league integrity.

 

[The Frankman]

You always play to win your week, no shenanigans.

 

[Proteus]

Back in 2009, I had a win already wrapped up heading in to Monday night football. And, I already had a playoff spot locked up. What I did not have was a spot in a playoff bracket locked up. After looking at the potential brackets, I decided that one path to the championship seemed much easier than the other, and it was only separated by points.

I had the Eagles defense playing Monday night, and decided to sit them out locking me in to one of the brackets. Had I played the Eagles D I would have wound up in the other bracket.

Well, you've probably guessed where this is going... I wound up getting knocked out in the 2nd round, but had I played to win (and score as much as possible in the last week of the season) I would have won the championship that year. It still haunts me, and now I always play to win and score as much as possible, and let the chips fall where they may.

Exactly what I fear.

Just when you think you have it all figured out you don't.

And I envy owners where ignorance is bliss and they just seem to luck out repeatedly.

Best laid plans...

A key word that tricky92 used: haunted. It's easy to argue that had he lost because he DIDN'T make his strategic tanky move, then he'd be haunted by THAT.

So, because you've identified this fork in the road, which will haunt you less if it blows up in your face?

You're right, ignorance is bliss but you've dug deep enough such that ignorance is no longer an option.

And this is why Gawd damned Adam and Eve for taking a bite of the apple.

Anyway.

Now that we've got theologically based, psychological hyperbole out of the way . . .

What will haunt you less?

I know my answer. Those dark horse teams that surge at the right time usually seem to wreck $hit and win leagues.

 

[JohnnyU]

Another thing to consider is who you play ? Are they fighting for a playoff spot ? If you give them an easy win, does it knock another deserving team out of the playoffs ? I always play to win.

This

 

[Stoneworker]

My league has a meaningful "beat down" bonus given annually to the team that wins by the largest victory margin paid directly by the loser of that game

It pretty much deters this scenario

 

[JohnnyU]

My league has a meaningful "beat down" bonus given annually to the team that wins by the largest victory margin paid by the loser of that game

It pretty much deters this scenario

I like that

 

[Mitchie]

My league has a meaningful "beat down" bonus given annually to the team that wins by the largest victory margin paid by the loser of that game

It pretty much deters this scenario

it doesn't really though b/c pretty easy to tank a game w/ o going full tank mode, can just swap out a couple studs for some middling guys

 

[Stoneworker]

My league has a meaningful "beat down" bonus given annually to the team that wins by the largest victory margin paid by the loser of that game

It pretty much deters this scenario

it doesn't really though b/c pretty easy to tank a game w/ o going full tank mode, can just swap out a couple studs for some middling guys

And those middling guys could easily put up stud numbers any given week which would totally backfire the tanking gambit. See: any Denver WR or RBBC running back

 

[menobrown]

I’ll be starting a player on BYE this week because I do not want to drop anyone on my bench in what is a meaningless game for me. My opponent is out of the playoffs too which factors into my decision. If my opponent was vying for a playoff spot or if our game could impact others I would reconsider.

It's a fine line but if you if you don't have an active player to put into a position I do not consider it tanking or throwing a game. Not if you don't have an easy cut to make. It's very different to me then losing on purpose, sometimes you just don't have roster space. Again very different to me from throwing a game on purpose.

The expectation should be that you make your best attempt to win. The expectation should not be that you need to hurt your team's future roster making your best attempt to win.

I'm very anti-tank, but have faced this situation a few times, always in dynasty, sometimes just nothing you can do.

 

[eighsse2]

My opinion is, I don't really care, just there should be a rule about whether it's allowed or not. Just like tanking. I'd be okay with tanking in a league where there weren't a rule against it.

And also my opinion is that this is a lot more similar to tanking than people think.
One can say in a case like you're proposing: "Okay so I am indeed trying to LOSE a GAME, but I'm trying to put myself in a position to WIN the CHAMPIONSHIP, and that's the ultimate goal."
But then one who is trying to tank a season for the 1.01 can say: "Okay so I am indeed trying to LOSE multiple GAMES, but I'm trying to put myself in a position to WIN one, or even multiple, FUTURE CHAMPIONSHIPS, and that's the ultimate goal."

 

[Cowboysfan8]

There are no such things as fantasy gods

Oh man, you’re screwed now

 

[Deranged Hermit]

Throwing games is a monumentally bad idea. I’ve been playing fantasy sports for 35 years and I can't remember a time where it worked out.

 

[efactor]

NO, that person wouldn't play the next season in my leagues if it was obvious.

That’s a pretty weak move. We are all trying to win a championship. Trying to lose a game on purpose is every bit of a strategy as trying to win.

 

[Marauder]

I’ll be starting a player on BYE this week because I do not want to drop anyone on my bench in what is a meaningless game for me. My opponent is out of the playoffs too which factors into my decision. If my opponent was vying for a playoff spot or if our game could impact others I would reconsider.

This is the same situation I'm in in one Dynasty league. All three of my TE's are on a bye this week (Kittle, Theo Johnson and Hunter Henry). I'm locked into the 6th seed. My opponent is the worst team in the league and is locked into the top seed in the toilet bowl playoffs. There's nobody on my roster I'm willing to drop to pick up a crappy TE, and frankly I'll probably win this week anyway (I have Gibbs). I'll gladly take the zero in my TE spot.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

I don’t love it but as long as you’re fielding a complete team of starters it seems legal.

Personally I never tempt fate like this. Angers the FF gods. I’d fear them smiting me mightily for it come playoffs.

 

[kyoun1e]

I’ll be starting a player on BYE this week because I do not want to drop anyone on my bench in what is a meaningless game for me. My opponent is out of the playoffs too which factors into my decision. If my opponent was vying for a playoff spot or if our game could impact others I would reconsider.

In my case, my opponent already has a top 3 seed locked up. If I throw the game, he would actually have an increased chance at the top seed.

But you'd be decreasing the chances of others for a top seed. It's not fair to those teams as they had to play you at full strength.

If you throwing a game impacts the seeds/standing of others still in contention than this should be not permitted. Now realize it can be tough to police and if you do it at the margins as you're suggesting you can prob get away with it.

If there's a scenario where you're playing a team that is completely out of it, in that case I would be ok with it.

I'm locked into a top 5 seed and my opponent is locked into a top 3 seed. There are five teams battling for the final three spots. What my team and my opponent does this week has zero impact on the final three seeds/bottom 5 teams.

 

[zamboni]

Another thing to consider is who you play ? Are they fighting for a playoff spot ? If you give them an easy win, does it knock another deserving team out of the playoffs ? I always play to win.

This

x2

The commissioner in me would be concerned about the potential ripple effects that tanking a game could have on other teams vying for playoff spots. Should always put forth maximum effort IMO.

 

[JohnnyU]

My league has a meaningful "beat down" bonus given annually to the team that wins by the largest victory margin paid by the loser of that game

It pretty much deters this scenario

it doesn't really though b/c pretty easy to tank a game w/ o going full tank mode, can just swap out a couple studs for some middling guys

It’s like porn, you know it when you see it. Get rid of those owners too.

 

[Gally]

I’ll be starting a player on BYE this week because I do not want to drop anyone on my bench in what is a meaningless game for me. My opponent is out of the playoffs too which factors into my decision. If my opponent was vying for a playoff spot or if our game could impact others I would reconsider.

In my case, my opponent already has a top 3 seed locked up. If I throw the game, he would actually have an increased chance at the top seed.

Then don't throw the game. It's not right for the rest of the league.

 

[eighsse2]

I’ll be starting a player on BYE this week because I do not want to drop anyone on my bench in what is a meaningless game for me. My opponent is out of the playoffs too which factors into my decision. If my opponent was vying for a playoff spot or if our game could impact others I would reconsider.

In my case, my opponent already has a top 3 seed locked up. If I throw the game, he would actually have an increased chance at the top seed.

Then don't throw the game. It's not right for the rest of the league.

If an NFL team has the #1 seed locked up, they sit their starters (no it's not "throwing the game" but they're giving themselves a very low win probability to increase their likelihood of success in the playoffs -- very similar). What if that team's opponent is in a fight for a playoff spot? Should the #1 seed play their starters?

 

[Gally]

I’ll be starting a player on BYE this week because I do not want to drop anyone on my bench in what is a meaningless game for me. My opponent is out of the playoffs too which factors into my decision. If my opponent was vying for a playoff spot or if our game could impact others I would reconsider.

This is the same situation I'm in in one Dynasty league. All three of my TE's are on a bye this week (Kittle, Theo Johnson and Hunter Henry). I'm locked into the 6th seed. My opponent is the worst team in the league and is locked into the top seed in the toilet bowl playoffs. There's nobody on my roster I'm willing to drop to pick up a crappy TE, and frankly I'll probably win this week anyway (I have Gibbs). I'll gladly take the zero in my TE spot.

This is not thr same thing as trying to lose a game on purpose because you like that opponent better for the playoffs. This is trying to win the game but also looking big picture realizing dropping a player for a crappy TE is detrimental to your roster. Apples to oranges.

 

[Lansdowne]

Cue up the Herm Edwards clip

 

[kyoun1e]

F it. Decided I'm playing for the win.

I believe in Santa Claus...

...and the existence of fantasy gods.

 

[JohnnyU]

I’ll be starting a player on BYE this week because I do not want to drop anyone on my bench in what is a meaningless game for me. My opponent is out of the playoffs too which factors into my decision. If my opponent was vying for a playoff spot or if our game could impact others I would reconsider.

In my case, my opponent already has a top 3 seed locked up. If I throw the game, he would actually have an increased chance at the top seed.

Then don't throw the game. It's not right for the rest of the league.

If an NFL team has the #1 seed locked up, they sit their starters (no it's not "throwing the game" but they're giving themselves a very low win probability to increase their likelihood of success in the playoffs -- very similar). What if that team's opponent is in a fight for a playoff spot? Should the #1 seed play their starters?

NFL <> Fantasy. Any commissioner, at least from a dynasty perspective, cannot allow teams to throw games. Two reasons, first, allowing this can help or hurt other teams trying to make the playoffs. Second, allowing this can help or hurt other teams draft position. Nothing will cause a league to fold quicker.

 

[eighsse2]

I’ll be starting a player on BYE this week because I do not want to drop anyone on my bench in what is a meaningless game for me. My opponent is out of the playoffs too which factors into my decision. If my opponent was vying for a playoff spot or if our game could impact others I would reconsider.

In my case, my opponent already has a top 3 seed locked up. If I throw the game, he would actually have an increased chance at the top seed.

Then don't throw the game. It's not right for the rest of the league.

If an NFL team has the #1 seed locked up, they sit their starters (no it's not "throwing the game" but they're giving themselves a very low win probability to increase their likelihood of success in the playoffs -- very similar). What if that team's opponent is in a fight for a playoff spot? Should the #1 seed play their starters?

NFL <> Fantasy. Any commissioner, at least from a dynasty perspective, cannot allow teams to throw games. Two reasons, first, allowing this can help or hurt other teams to make the playoffs Second, allowing this can help or hurt other teams draft position. Nothing will cause a league to fold quicker.

Every fundamental reason you're giving applies the same to the NFL. The only difference you're stating is that it will make the league fold. So what does that mean, fantasy players worry about it while NFL teams find it acceptable? Why is that?

 

[Gally]

I’ll be starting a player on BYE this week because I do not want to drop anyone on my bench in what is a meaningless game for me. My opponent is out of the playoffs too which factors into my decision. If my opponent was vying for a playoff spot or if our game could impact others I would reconsider.

In my case, my opponent already has a top 3 seed locked up. If I throw the game, he would actually have an increased chance at the top seed.

Then don't throw the game. It's not right for the rest of the league.

If an NFL team has the #1 seed locked up, they sit their starters (no it's not "throwing the game" but they're giving themselves a very low win probability to increase their likelihood of success in the playoffs -- very similar). What if that team's opponent is in a fight for a playoff spot? Should the #1 seed play their starters?

Not the same thing in any way, shape, or form. NFL teams sit players due to injury concerns and physical toll on players. That is not a concern for FF. If the NFL had no risk of injury they would not sit players in that situation.

 

[eighsse2]

I’ll be starting a player on BYE this week because I do not want to drop anyone on my bench in what is a meaningless game for me. My opponent is out of the playoffs too which factors into my decision. If my opponent was vying for a playoff spot or if our game could impact others I would reconsider.

In my case, my opponent already has a top 3 seed locked up. If I throw the game, he would actually have an increased chance at the top seed.

Then don't throw the game. It's not right for the rest of the league.

If an NFL team has the #1 seed locked up, they sit their starters (no it's not "throwing the game" but they're giving themselves a very low win probability to increase their likelihood of success in the playoffs -- very similar). What if that team's opponent is in a fight for a playoff spot? Should the #1 seed play their starters?

Not the same thing in any way, shape, or form. NFL teams sit players due to injury concerns and physical toll on players. That is not a concern for FF. If the NFL had no risk of injury they would not sit players in that situation.

And they're worried about injuries because .....

 

[JohnnyU]

I’ll be starting a player on BYE this week because I do not want to drop anyone on my bench in what is a meaningless game for me. My opponent is out of the playoffs too which factors into my decision. If my opponent was vying for a playoff spot or if our game could impact others I would reconsider.

In my case, my opponent already has a top 3 seed locked up. If I throw the game, he would actually have an increased chance at the top seed.

Then don't throw the game. It's not right for the rest of the league.

If an NFL team has the #1 seed locked up, they sit their starters (no it's not "throwing the game" but they're giving themselves a very low win probability to increase their likelihood of success in the playoffs -- very similar). What if that team's opponent is in a fight for a playoff spot? Should the #1 seed play their starters?

NFL <> Fantasy. Any commissioner, at least from a dynasty perspective, cannot allow teams to throw games. Two reasons, first, allowing this can help or hurt other teams to make the playoffs Second, allowing this can help or hurt other teams draft position. Nothing will cause a league to fold quicker.

Every fundamental reason you're giving applies the same to the NFL. The only difference you're stating is that it will make the league fold. So what does that mean, fantasy players worry about it while NFL teams find it acceptable? Why is that?

I already gave my reasons from a dynasty point of view and don’t need to defend it further. Especially to do the NFL comparisons.

 

[eighsse2]

I’ll be starting a player on BYE this week because I do not want to drop anyone on my bench in what is a meaningless game for me. My opponent is out of the playoffs too which factors into my decision. If my opponent was vying for a playoff spot or if our game could impact others I would reconsider.

In my case, my opponent already has a top 3 seed locked up. If I throw the game, he would actually have an increased chance at the top seed.

Then don't throw the game. It's not right for the rest of the league.

If an NFL team has the #1 seed locked up, they sit their starters (no it's not "throwing the game" but they're giving themselves a very low win probability to increase their likelihood of success in the playoffs -- very similar). What if that team's opponent is in a fight for a playoff spot? Should the #1 seed play their starters?

NFL <> Fantasy. Any commissioner, at least from a dynasty perspective, cannot allow teams to throw games. Two reasons, first, allowing this can help or hurt other teams to make the playoffs Second, allowing this can help or hurt other teams draft position. Nothing will cause a league to fold quicker.

Every fundamental reason you're giving applies the same to the NFL. The only difference you're stating is that it will make the league fold. So what does that mean, fantasy players worry about it while NFL teams find it acceptable? Why is that?

I already gave my reasons from a dynasty point of view and don’t need to defend it further. Especially to do the NFL comparisons.

To me it seems totally subjective. Like any other league settings. If the league wants it such and such, make it so. If they want it the other way, do that then. If it's the case that a vast majority of fantasy players would prefer this not be allowed, then that's the case, I don't doubt you.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

F it. Decided I'm playing for the win.

I believe in Santa Claus...

...and the existence of fantasy gods.

This is the way.

 

[eighsse2]

I’ll be starting a player on BYE this week because I do not want to drop anyone on my bench in what is a meaningless game for me. My opponent is out of the playoffs too which factors into my decision. If my opponent was vying for a playoff spot or if our game could impact others I would reconsider.

In my case, my opponent already has a top 3 seed locked up. If I throw the game, he would actually have an increased chance at the top seed.

Then don't throw the game. It's not right for the rest of the league.

If an NFL team has the #1 seed locked up, they sit their starters (no it's not "throwing the game" but they're giving themselves a very low win probability to increase their likelihood of success in the playoffs -- very similar). What if that team's opponent is in a fight for a playoff spot? Should the #1 seed play their starters?

Not the same thing in any way, shape, or form. NFL teams sit players due to injury concerns and physical toll on players. That is not a concern for FF. If the NFL had no risk of injury they would not sit players in that situation.

I will say this though, the actual homologous situation in the NFL would be frowned upon, and probably would never be done. No NFL team would be bold enough to say "We think the #6 seed team is a lot better than the #5 seed team, so we're going to lose on purpose because that will match us with the #5 seed." But ultimately I wouldn't see anything wrong with that, at least nothing wrong with it if there's nothing wrong with sitting players to keep your team healthy. Either way you are potentially affecting the rest of the league by doing something only to aid your team in the playoffs.

 

[Cowboysfan8]

F it. Decided I'm playing for the win.

I believe in Santa Claus...

...and the existence of fantasy gods.

Smart

 

[Mitchie]

I’ll be starting a player on BYE this week because I do not want to drop anyone on my bench in what is a meaningless game for me. My opponent is out of the playoffs too which factors into my decision. If my opponent was vying for a playoff spot or if our game could impact others I would reconsider.

In my case, my opponent already has a top 3 seed locked up. If I throw the game, he would actually have an increased chance at the top seed.

Then don't throw the game. It's not right for the rest of the league.

If an NFL team has the #1 seed locked up, they sit their starters (no it's not "throwing the game" but they're giving themselves a very low win probability to increase their likelihood of success in the playoffs -- very similar). What if that team's opponent is in a fight for a playoff spot? Should the #1 seed play their starters?

Not the same thing in any way, shape, or form. NFL teams sit players due to injury concerns and physical toll on players. That is not a concern for FF. If the NFL had no risk of injury they would not sit players in that situation.

And they're worried about injuries because .....

Players get hurt?

 

[eighsse2]

I’ll be starting a player on BYE this week because I do not want to drop anyone on my bench in what is a meaningless game for me. My opponent is out of the playoffs too which factors into my decision. If my opponent was vying for a playoff spot or if our game could impact others I would reconsider.

In my case, my opponent already has a top 3 seed locked up. If I throw the game, he would actually have an increased chance at the top seed.

Then don't throw the game. It's not right for the rest of the league.

If an NFL team has the #1 seed locked up, they sit their starters (no it's not "throwing the game" but they're giving themselves a very low win probability to increase their likelihood of success in the playoffs -- very similar). What if that team's opponent is in a fight for a playoff spot? Should the #1 seed play their starters?

Not the same thing in any way, shape, or form. NFL teams sit players due to injury concerns and physical toll on players. That is not a concern for FF. If the NFL had no risk of injury they would not sit players in that situation.

And they're worried about injuries because .....

Players get hurt?

Well right haha. But my point is they're making the decision because it helps their chances in the playoffs.

 

[Gally]

I’ll be starting a player on BYE this week because I do not want to drop anyone on my bench in what is a meaningless game for me. My opponent is out of the playoffs too which factors into my decision. If my opponent was vying for a playoff spot or if our game could impact others I would reconsider.

In my case, my opponent already has a top 3 seed locked up. If I throw the game, he would actually have an increased chance at the top seed.

Then don't throw the game. It's not right for the rest of the league.

If an NFL team has the #1 seed locked up, they sit their starters (no it's not "throwing the game" but they're giving themselves a very low win probability to increase their likelihood of success in the playoffs -- very similar). What if that team's opponent is in a fight for a playoff spot? Should the #1 seed play their starters?

Not the same thing in any way, shape, or form. NFL teams sit players due to injury concerns and physical toll on players. That is not a concern for FF. If the NFL had no risk of injury they would not sit players in that situation.

And they're worried about injuries because .....

I have no idea where you are going with this.

FF and NFL are not the same thing. Throwing games in the NFL would not be tolerated at all. One big difference in NFL teams sitting players vs FF managers sitting players is the NFL teams have a player that will actually play. In FF playing a guy on bye or that is inactive to throw a game gives you a zero. There is no chance of scoring. Not at all close to the same thing.