Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
First, big difference between two players and three players. Second, we're talking about 65-pt deficit. Is it possible to have that same scenario? Sure. BUt you're talking about a situation where you had most of your players playing early AND you're down by 65 AND you only have two guys left. Those parameters are not common. The idea that allowing it will lead to lots of teams doing it is...well, unrealistic. It just doesn't happen often enough.
Manipulating the outcome of waiver priority..And you can keep saying it as many times as you like.. Winners still won.. losers... or any of the other arguments that you've used that have already been rebutted... Simple fact is, that it's a D-bag way to play FF.. and nobody wants to play FF with a commissioner that'll play that way, or in a league that has a vague set of rules where the commissioner has set that president where if it's not specifically spelled out, you're free to do it.. You'd have no choice at that point as a league member but to scower the rules for loopholes and vague content that could be exploited..Just play the game the way it was intended and everyone can have fun..BTW, typically a league that keeps lineups open until each players game time typically is doing so in case of injuries and last minute substitutions... Not so that people can tank if they're losing...How is this trying to get an advantage by pushing the envelope every chance you get? The outcome of the game has already been decided. The winners still won; the losers still lost.Yea, set a president that you'll push the envelope if it means gaining an advantage over another team .... every chance you get... You shouldn't ever have any trouble finding people to join leagues you commish...Should be a really fun league...
Ok, so gaming the system to cheat another owner out of the top waiver priority slot is ok, check. Because that's what we are talking about here. I agree, make a rule about it so there is no question. If you agree that there should be a rule preventing then it seems me you think it is wrong. And the league rules don't ENCOURAGE this behavior, the rules just didn't contimplate this dooshy behavior, much like most leagues didn't start with anti tanking rules until some doosh in the league took advantage of said absence of the rule. Doesn't make the owner any less of a doosh for doing it.
There you go again. Now you're telling me the purpose of keeping lineups open when we both know the purpose of a bench is NOT to horde one position and freeze out your opponent. But who am I to tell you how to use your bench? And, by the same token... I think you know.Now, I understand that all kinds of folks play fantasy football. Some people think you have to announce your intention to utilize a rule if you think it's not a common interpretation. Some people think the NFL should forbid teams from calling timeout right before a field-goal kick. Some people think you should intentionally hurt your team in order to maintain your integrity. If you don't hurt your own team, you're a d-bag...even though it doesn't affect the outcome of any game. Cheating is wrong. Breaking the rules is wrong. Manipulating the outcome of a game is wrong. Trying to bounce back from a loss and help your team by not forfeiting waiver priority in addition to a game doesn't seem wrong, or finding a loophole, or anything else but strategy. Hopefully that doesn't make me a d-bag, and there are plenty of other reasons why I can earn that title. But none of them are related to me being a bad owner.Manipulating the outcome of waiver priority..And you can keep saying it as many times as you like.. Winners still won.. losers... or any of the other arguments that you've used that have already been rebutted... Simple fact is, that it's a D-bag way to play FF.. and nobody wants to play FF with a commissioner that'll play that way, or in a league that has a vague set of rules where the commissioner has set that president where if it's not specifically spelled out, you're free to do it.. You'd have no choice at that point as a league member but to scower the rules for loopholes and vague content that could be exploited..Just play the game the way it was intended and everyone can have fun..BTW, typically a league that keeps lineups open until each players game time typically is doing so in case of injuries and last minute substitutions... Not so that people can tank if they're losing...How is this trying to get an advantage by pushing the envelope every chance you get? The outcome of the game has already been decided. The winners still won; the losers still lost.Yea, set a president that you'll push the envelope if it means gaining an advantage over another team .... every chance you get... You shouldn't ever have any trouble finding people to join leagues you commish...Should be a really fun league...
I'm having a hard time seeing how this is a d-bag move. Is it really an owner's obligation to not only lose, but lose AND hurt their team? They're not throwing a game to keep a team out of the playoffs. They're not churning all the defenses to freeze out their opponent. They're going to lose either way. They just don't want to compound the loss. I'm not an "anything goes" owner. I just don't see how the other owner has a birthright to the top waiver spot because you have to lose AND forfeit that spot by starting people you know will cost you the spot. It seems like really bad strategy, not integrity.
Yikes...
First off I'm not really sure what a NORK is...and secondly since when did Florida no longer become part of the United States?Thirdly I'm not really sure talking about whether or not it's unethical to throw a fantasy football game is technically talking about sportsYou nork, you don't even live in the US, go watch some lawn darts, real men are talking about sports here..
The other owner has the right to the spot if he played what he thought was his best lineup, but still scored the least points.. Has nothing to do with Birth right, and it's exactly that type of exaggeration in your posts that's making this discussion rather ridiculous...
LOL, sorry, I miss read your location... as Ontario... lol.. Don't ask me how... I'm from western NY, and Nork is a term of endearment that US border citizens in that area have for the folks across the border...First off I'm not really sure what a NORK is...and secondly since when did Florida no longer become part of the United States?Thirdly I'm not really sure talking about whether or not it's unethical to throw a fantasy football game is technically talking about sportsYou nork, you don't even live in the US, go watch some lawn darts, real men are talking about sports here..
It wouldn't be utilizing a rule, it would be utilizing the lack of the rule.. And typically if there is question about how you intend to use the rule or lack off based on an uncommon interpretation, the right thing would be to ask...
Another blatant exaggeration.. Obviously there can be several ways of breaking the rules that would help your team, following the rules at that point shouldn't be considered intentionally hurting your team. And if you are as much a veteran as you implied earlier, you know this would count as tanking, and you would know that a play like this by the commissioner is not good for the league...
See, now you're getting it.. The fact that anything is dependent on manipulating the outcome of the game whether it be by points totals or wins, or draft order, playoffs, or waiver priority, would suggest you follow the implied rules, the way the game was intended to play...
Well, you do as you see fit in leagues you play in, you pay the consequences.. As I've said earlier, you wouldn't play that way in a league I commish, and I wouldn't stay in a league that allowed that, especially if the commish was taking advantage of loopholes he found in his own rules...
The guy said he was thinking of throwing the game to manipulate the points total and rob the next guy in line of waiver priority.... And asked if that sounded unethical.. Include the fact that he constructed this set of rules and he is the commish, also include the fact that most who know this game, know that throwing a game is a no-no...
I didn't see that he constructed the rules and is the commish. I'd assumed this ruleset was just something that was forced upon him and that the league should all know about this "exploit" he is contemplating. If this is the first time it's come up, you're the commish, and you made these rules that reward tanking, then the best course is to have a league discussion about changing the rules, and not tank this game.
"throwing the game" - He already lost"manipulate the points" - I manipulate the points each week when I change my lineup. Am I required to start the top ranked guys each week? Do I use ESPN? Footballguys? Rotoworld? No, I start whoever I want to help me win the league."rob the next guy" - How is he robbing anyone? The week isn't over. "constructed this set of rules and he is the commish" - everyone knows the rules of the league. He "lucked" into this situation. He didn't intentionally create confusing rules so he could find some loophole. I think it would be "unethical" if someone else was in this situation and the commish told him how to run his team.I 100% believe its OK to throw a game if its in your team's best interest. If you throw a game to intentionally play a significantly weaker opponent in the playoffs. that is absolutely acceptable. I mean look at major league sports. Teams are presented with this situation every now and then and occasionally they "rest star players". Now like I said I play in league's where we created rules to eliminate these scenarios
OP is the commish of the league in question... And if had come up before and rest of the league was amenable to the interprtation, he wouldn't be here asking us or even contemplating.. He'd have done it already..
Yea, I know.. You're ok with throwing games to get better picks next year..He's the one that said he was trying to lower his points output, he called it throwing the game himself...
If you are eliminated from the playoffs and the worst record gets the top pick are you saying you feel obligated to try to win the rest of the season? How far does that go? Just starting the best line up each week? Do you have to make saavy waiver wire pick ups? What about if its a keeper league, are you required to make trades to help you win that season instead of helping you win in the future? Instead of declaring all these "unwritten" rules that everyone disagrees on, why not create rock solid rules that encourage the desired behavior?
maybe you should just not type for a little bit, guy. You're not coming off very well here, and that's being generous. This thread has devolved from whether shaving points in FF is ethical to arguing that outright tanking is acceptable.
Even if the outcome is decided? Specifically, is it unethical to lose by more instead of losing by less when those are your only options? Assuming it's a loss either way, is it more ethical to intentionally hurt your team? At that point, scoring more points hurts his team. He can't win; he can only hurt himself. Tanking (to me) means intentionally losing when you know you could have won. The guy is losing either way. Is it unethical to accept his loss in a way that helps him down the road? Or is he supposed to be on auto-pilot, playing as if the score is 0-0 and he is oblivious to what is happening and the ramifications of his decisions?
Have you attempted to make the same point yet again?
The only lesson here is that you aren't very good at coming up with examples to support your argument.
Overapply? I haven't seen much evidence you apply them at all. I think it was a pretty clear indication of where you are coming from when you referred to those who disagree with your views on ethics in games as "communists."
Reading Comprehension downI play to win but I FOLLOW THE RULES. Aka I do not cheat aka I have ethics. But that is different from wanting to give my opponents a big group hug and intentionally do something that will hurt my chances of winning and rationalize the move as being ethical.
My reading comprehension is fine. And I would disagree with you that having ethics is defined simply as not cheating. Finding a loophole in the rules that perhaps had occured to no one in the league is playing within the rules, but that does not automatically make that behavior ethical IMO.
Can we just end this thread? So far we have established:1. Ethical behavior requires more than just following the letter of the rules
Actually, I was asking someone else who I think has a better grasp of the issue. I understand your position and you've expressed it as well as you're capable of expressing it. I respect the fact that you have your position, you wouldn't play in a league where anyone sees it differently and you'd kick out anyone who sees it differently. That's all really interesting...but doesn't address my point. So rather than ask you to expand further, I simply went to someone who might be able to do that.While you think saying it "does not matter" is a "more than adequate" rebuttal, it's still just your opinion. It's nice that you feel so strongly about it. But "scoring as many points as you can" is only strategy when you're in a total points league or you can win the game. If not, and the outcome is decided, the ethics of intentionally hurting your team with no upside whatsoever can be questioned without being unethical. I don't see anything noble or ethical in "losing by less" and costing yourself a better waiver position when the outcome is already decided because it conforms to someone's vision of how they should run their team-- even if they wouldn't play in your league or would kick you out of their league (as if anyone cares about that on a message board).So while I understand and respect your position, I'm moving on to someone who might be able to express themselves beyond offering opinion as refutation and judging their own rebuttals as more than adequate. Thanks, and good luck this week.Carolina Hustler said:
Point one makes sense. Points two and three sound like they come from a high horse. It's not possible to be ethical and see a strategic move that doesn't affect the outcome of a game to be okay? All "ethical people" see this situation the same? I think league dynamics are interesting and I appreciate all the opinions in this thread, even if I disagree with them. As our hobby grows in popularity, we'll see more and more clashes in personality in leagues-- different financial, ethnic and societal backgrounds. I don't think it has much effect on how you draft or trade or use the waiver wire...but it does affect how owners interact with each other, play the game and enjoy it.
1) There are no "tanking" rules in the NFL...2) We aren't playing real football.. Or we wouldn't be getting points for yards or receptions... We'd be getting our lazy buts some real excise...
Also, Finger breaking, eye gouging, head stomping (Hanesworth) and other things go on during real NFL games, all for the sake of gaining an advantage or "win at all cost" that doesn't make it ethical behavior...
Tanking is losing a game on purpose. The OP has lost. The Question is about losing a game by more points rather than less points.GB could lose by 7 (24-17); or by 3 (20-17); or possibly put the game in OT at 24-24.There is no tanking in either scenario. But if GB "let's" Chicago score they certainly aren't trying their hardest on every play (aka playing their best players in every game), but they are doing everything in their power to win the game. See the similarity.
Those are your definitions and opinions...And as I've said, we aren't playing real football...
Gotcha
Keep up the good work 
Good luck this week. May your team win and be ethical (your definition of course) 
So you're an advocate for point shaving? If they're in control of the game and will win, no harm in giving up a FG to cover the spread...
I personally would have held the moral high ground and started my best team.Regardless of rules and what you do, I have my doubts that Jennings & Finley would get 35 points anyhow. So given that this is the situation, and noting that you are commish (as one of the later posts tells me) why put yourself in that position where people would question your Integrity.you are most likely picking first anyhow. Start your best team and let the chips fall where they may.
I wasn't saying the MNF was point shaving. i should have been more clear and just bolded your statement that essentially accepts points shaving. Intent is the most important piece that you seem to avoid talking about.
I rolled out Mason in a meaningless game and thought twice about it. (I'm way in with the one seed and was locked in unless I benched all of my guys, thanks. Commitment to Excellence and all.)
The guy that tried to tank by starting Ryan Fitzpatrick over Manning sure got his this week.A guy in my work league has the #3 playoff spot sewn up. I am fighting for the #6 spot. I needed to win today (I did) and have this owner beat the team which is currently occupying the #6 spot. He played Martavis Bryant in his flex spot, and benched Julio, Maclin and Mason. He's played Julio and Maclin every other week. My team has been on fire. I started off 2-5. It's pretty obvious he did not want to face me in the 3/6 game next week.
The funny thing is he still might win .... by accident. His game is a 50/50 shot tomorrow night. I don't want to list the particulars for fear of jinxing it.
But I guess my question would be, can you see ANY valid reason to roll Bryant out there over those other 3? Maybe he was afraid Peterson would blanket Julio. Okay, I can buy that. But who would be afraid of Maclin against Dallas and Mason against the Raiders. If there is a fantasy God, I will advance and then pay him back.
The worst part is that he's a really good dude. The worserer part is that I probably would have done the same thing.
BTW, there are short benches in this league, so he couldn't totally tank. He kept it as subtle as possible.
What did you do pipman?
