What should the commish do here (1 Viewer)

[Nate]

Leaguemate isn't sure if he wants to make a big deal of this or not.

This start 2QB league has tight roster limits. Max of 3QBs, 3RBs, 4WRs, 2TEs, 2K, 2D + 1 bench "flex" spot which can be any position. These roster rules are made clear every year. You can't drop a player at any position for a player at a different position, unless the player you're dropping is your "flex" bench player.

MFL allows limits per position, but doesn't account for the flex spot, so we have to have the limits set as 4QB, 4RB, 5WR, even though you can only legally carry the MFL maximum at one of those positions.

We use blind bidding for waivers.

Team A has Edge. Two weeks ago, Team A drops a kicker for a WR - Derrick Mason. MFL allows it since it doesn't violate the maximum WR rule, though it's not legal since Team A is already using their "flex" spot to hold a QB (he's got 4). Nobody notices.

Last week (before Edge lost the job), Team A & Team B blind bid on Hightower. Team A, of course, drops Mason for Hightower. Team A wins the blind bid and gets Hightower. Carrying 4 RBs, 4 QBs.

After the games that week, Team B notices that Team A has an illegal roster and never should have had Mason to drop in the first place. Team B notifies the commish; who tells Team A that he's got to fix his roster by dropping a RB or QB for a kicker. Of course, Team A drops Edge.

Team A contends that the illegal roster move of dropping a kicker for a WR was an honest mistake and the commish should have caught it immediately, then he would have dropped someone else for Hightower anyway. Since he's dropped Edge now and fixed his roster, he thinks he should keep Hightower.

Team B is upset because Team A either knowingly or unknowingly broke the roster rules to pick up Hightower when the Edge/Hightower business was still unclear, then was able to keep the guy who won the job the week after and fix his roster. Team B contends that Team A would never have dropped Edge at the time with Whisenhunt giving assurances that Edge was still the starter (though Team A could still have dropped a QB for Hightower).

We have a good commish in this league but I don't know if he should be expected to monitor everyone's roster every day to make sure nobody breaks the rules. Re-bidding might be an option here but Hightower's value has obviously changed significantly; and the requests were made before he was named the starter.

What should the commish do?

Thanks for any opinions.

 

[Wu-banger]

with a wacked out roster systme like that the Commish should have to approve the transactions... to verify the rosters.

Team A should keep Hightower... he won the bid regardless and the Commisioner should have ensured that the transaction was legal.

Although if the Commisoner has denied bids due to illegal roster limits in the past , then Hightower should go to the next highest bidder based of past precedance.

 

[brewer]

with a wacked out roster systme like that the Commish should have to approve the transactions... to verify the rosters.

Strange roster limits plus automatic waiver claims will cause problems like this.That being said, I would likely rule that the transaction was invalid, although going back two weeks to fix things would be a bit of a pain.

 

[renesauz]

You've described in very good detail exactly WHY roster limits shouldn't be used.

There is no fair answer to the problem, and it's the commissioner's fault. If he set it up where people could accidently obtain illegal rosters, then he set himself up as responsible to monitor those rosters.

Nothing else to do about it now. He got Hightower in a fair bid. He fixed his roster as soon as it was noticed. Let it go and instead wory about fixing your leagues rules.

 

[Jersey35]

with a wacked out roster systme like that the Commish should have to approve the transactions... to verify the rosters.

Strange roster limits plus automatic waiver claims will cause problems like this.That being said, I would likely rule that the transaction was invalid, although going back two weeks to fix things would be a bit of a pain.

I'm commish of my league, and this is a tough call. I think I would rule it this way:Since MFL settings do not allow for full implementation of the rules, it's implied that the commissioner is responsible for overseeing all free agent transactions and preventing incorrect pickups.That being the case, the error is on the commissioner and not the fault of the owner making the erroneous pick up. There's no way to guess at what the owner would have done, had he been informed of the error, but Hightower is now on his team, and has been for two weeks. I would - sheepishly - accept responsibility for the error, allow the current owner to keep him, fix the system, and kill myself later that night for putting myself in that position.Seriously, though, it's a tough situation and a no-win decision for the commissioner. I'm assuming that there is no rule in place to punish this type of error - which again suggests that the Commissioner is there to prevent the error. Commissioner needs to apologize up-and-down, allow the owner to keep him, and fix his dang system.

 

[Jersey35]

You've described in very good detail exactly WHY roster limits shouldn't be used.There is no fair answer to the problem, and it's the commissioner's fault. If he set it up where people could accidently obtain illegal rosters, then he set himself up as responsible to monitor those rosters.Nothing else to do about it now. He got Hightower in a fair bid. He fixed his roster as soon as it was noticed. Let it go and instead wory about fixing your leagues rules.

and far more succinct than mine...

 

[belljr]

You've described in very good detail exactly WHY roster limits shouldn't be used.There is no fair answer to the problem, and it's the commissioner's fault. If he set it up where people could accidently obtain illegal rosters, then he set himself up as responsible to monitor those rosters.Nothing else to do about it now. He got Hightower in a fair bid. He fixed his roster as soon as it was noticed. Let it go and instead wory about fixing your leagues rules.

We do have roster limits but not that strict above. I have to approve all transactions. It takes me a few minutes longer but in the end it's worth it

 

[glumpy]

We've got real similar roster limits in my league--though it might be different rules regarding the wild card.

Namely: if the wildcard is a RB, then that's the designated RB which would have to be dropped to pick up a fourth WR.

Maybe that's not how your league plays it, but in either case that does require some serious oversight to make sure that the rule is followed--because it is easy to misfire. We did have a similar situation in my league a couple weeks ago when the wrong WR was dropped--and it was actually me seeing it and flagging the other team owner that enabled him to straighten the error out within the same waiver wire period. (All the owners help keep an eye on these--especially if it's with players they might have wanted!)

Which sort of leads to your question--I think the biggest problem here is that it was not caught for two weeks. If you look at the impact that had on the game roster over that time it might impact more than just this Hightower pickup. It would seem to be a major miss that nobody caught it when Team A dropped a kicker for a wideout--I doubt anyone is using their wildcard to carry a third kicker. The fact that Team A is also carrying four QB's after picking up hightower would suggest that his original wildcard was actually a QB.

In our league, #1--the owner would not have been allowed to drop another RB trying to correct the error simply because one became expendable--he would have had to drop that wildcard QB to switch to a RB and dealt with the Edge issue later. In effect, that would have glossed over the missed week where he dropped a kicker for a WR and gone directly to the current transaction of trading his wildcard for another RB. If I were the commish, I would at least make that call; it might be impossible to do more than that, especially if Mason was active.

The requested ruling--that Team B get the services of Hightower based on the transaction being illegal to begin with--is up to your commish's/league's interpretation. If there is a precedent for this then he should follow suit and give Hightower to Team B as suggested above--but if not then he's got to make a management decision.

Meanwhile--is Team A currently only carrying one Kicker? Is there a roster requirement (as with my league) not only that two is the maximum standard--but also the minimum? If so then that needs addressing as well.

I gotta add one thought--I find this spewl unbelievable:

Team A contends that the illegal roster move of dropping a kicker for a WR was an honest mistake and the commish should have caught it immediately, then he would have dropped someone else for Hightower anyway. Since he's dropped Edge now and fixed his roster, he thinks he should keep Hightower.

He dropped a kicker for a WR by mistake? and then places the blame on the commish for not catching it... ETA--ok, I see where people disagree with me on the commish not being to blame; I can see that. I would at least look at how Team A took further advantage of the situation to drop the wrong player (Edge) according to the league rules.

 

[Black]

Team A should follow the rules, but the league (commish or MFL) should enforce it.

There is no way to tell Team A's 'intent', just that the system in place let him do it (and the commish did not enforce anything that MFL could not do).

I would not do anything retroactively. You have to let it slide, try to fix it for next time.

 

[Nate]

We've got real similar roster limits in my league--though it might be different rules regarding the wild card.

Namely: if the wildcard is a RB, then that's the designated RB which would have to be dropped to pick up a fourth WR.

Maybe that's not how your league plays it, but in either case that does require some serious oversight to make sure that the rule is followed--because it is easy to misfire. We did have a similar situation in my league a couple weeks ago when the wrong WR was dropped--and it was actually me seeing it and flagging the other team owner that enabled him to straighten the error out within the same waiver wire period. (All the owners help keep an eye on these--especially if it's with players they might have wanted!)

Which sort of leads to your question--I think the biggest problem here is that it was not caught for two weeks. If you look at the impact that had on the game roster over that time it might impact more than just this Hightower pickup. It would seem to be a major miss that nobody caught it when Team A dropped a kicker for a wideout--I doubt anyone is using their wildcard to carry a third kicker. The fact that Team A is also carrying four QB's after picking up hightower would suggest that his original wildcard was actually a QB.

In our league, #1--the owner would not have been allowed to drop another RB trying to correct the error simply because one became expendable--he would have had to drop that wildcard QB to switch to a RB and dealt with the Edge issue later. In effect, that would have glossed over the missed week where he dropped a kicker for a WR and gone directly to the current transaction of trading his wildcard for another RB. If I were the commish, I would at least make that call; it might be impossible to do more than that, especially if Mason was active.

The requested ruling--that Team B get the services of Hightower based on the transaction being illegal to begin with--is up to your commish's/league's interpretation. If there is a precedent for this then he should follow suit and give Hightower to Team B as suggested above--but if not then he's got to make a management decision.

Meanwhile--is Team A currently only carrying one Kicker? Is there a roster requirement (as with my league) not only that two is the maximum standard--but also the minimum? If so then that needs addressing as well.

I gotta add one thought--I find this spewl unbelievable:

Team A contends that the illegal roster move of dropping a kicker for a WR was an honest mistake and the commish should have caught it immediately, then he would have dropped someone else for Hightower anyway. Since he's dropped Edge now and fixed his roster, he thinks he should keep Hightower.

He dropped a kicker for a WR by mistake? and then places the blame on the commish for not catching it... ETA--ok, I see where people disagree with me on the commish not being to blame; I can see that. I would at least look at how Team A took further advantage of the situation to drop the wrong player (Edge) according to the league rules.

Unfortunately there's no precedent for this. This is our first year on MFL and our first year where the commish doesn't process every waiver move manually.Mason was active the first week but the game was a blowout; there was no impact. The 4th WR was on a bye.

I personally also think that Team A has abused the system here. I don't buy that dropping the kicker for a WR was an honest mistake. He's been in the league for 5+ years now and these rules are the same every year. I'm trying to give him the benefit of the doubt but it's a bit hard to swallow.

I can understand how some would say that it's up to the commish to monitor the roster limits. However this is a face to face league and we all know each other. It's been all the same guys for about 5 years and as good as our commish has been, he's a busy guy and I think the least we can do is follow the rules to make life a bit easier for him.

This is all compounded by the fact that both teams are really hurting at RB and are fighting each other for playoff spots. It seems almost inevitable that a Hightower performance will be the difference in the season for one of these teams; which would cause a lot of bad blood regardless of the ruling.

 

[Road Warriors]

Leaguemate isn't sure if he wants to make a big deal of this or not.

This start 2QB league has tight roster limits. Max of 3QBs, 3RBs, 4WRs, 2TEs, 2K, 2D + 1 bench "flex" spot which can be any position. These roster rules are made clear every year. You can't drop a player at any position for a player at a different position, unless the player you're dropping is your "flex" bench player.

MFL allows limits per position, but doesn't account for the flex spot, so we have to have the limits set as 4QB, 4RB, 5WR, even though you can only legally carry the MFL maximum at one of those positions.

We use blind bidding for waivers.

Team A has Edge. Two weeks ago, Team A drops a kicker for a WR - Derrick Mason. MFL allows it since it doesn't violate the maximum WR rule, though it's not legal since Team A is already using their "flex" spot to hold a QB (he's got 4). Nobody notices.

Last week (before Edge lost the job), Team A & Team B blind bid on Hightower. Team A, of course, drops Mason for Hightower. Team A wins the blind bid and gets Hightower. Carrying 4 RBs, 4 QBs.

After the games that week, Team B notices that Team A has an illegal roster and never should have had Mason to drop in the first place. Team B notifies the commish; who tells Team A that he's got to fix his roster by dropping a RB or QB for a kicker. Of course, Team A drops Edge.

Team A contends that the illegal roster move of dropping a kicker for a WR was an honest mistake and the commish should have caught it immediately, then he would have dropped someone else for Hightower anyway. Since he's dropped Edge now and fixed his roster, he thinks he should keep Hightower.

Team B is upset because Team A either knowingly or unknowingly broke the roster rules to pick up Hightower when the Edge/Hightower business was still unclear, then was able to keep the guy who won the job the week after and fix his roster. Team B contends that Team A would never have dropped Edge at the time with Whisenhunt giving assurances that Edge was still the starter (though Team A could still have dropped a QB for Hightower).

We have a good commish in this league but I don't know if he should be expected to monitor everyone's roster every day to make sure nobody breaks the rules. Re-bidding might be an option here but Hightower's value has obviously changed significantly; and the requests were made before he was named the starter.

What should the commish do?

Thanks for any opinions.

Sticky situation created when you have rules in place that the site can't enforce correctly. My first thought is to modify the rules to fit what the site can manage. I also am 100% against putting the onus of roster police on the commissioner. That's way too much to ask, IMO. We have a similar issue in one league as it relates to the IR spots. The commissioner offered up a rule that we effectively implemented midseason, and it goes something like this.

It is the responsibility of all owners to verify rule compliance. Any owner not in compliance with the roster rules will have 24 hours to get their roster in compliance. If the 24 hours passes, the commish will reverse transactions until the roster is in compliance.

I think that could work here. Assume the owner not in compliance did so by accident, not knowingly. Once notified, he corrected the issue. I think you must let everything else stand. Retroactive enforcement gets very messy.

 

[sartre]

The only clear answer to me is that #3 would not be an option. I don't see how re-bidding rectifies the matter, it is simply a weak compromise.

While the commish missed the illegal move 2 weeks ago, so did the rest of the league. Presumably they have access to see these moves.

There's no obvious resolution to the matter. I would treat this scenario like a game of Uno, where no one noticed that Team A has forgotten to say "Uno!" despite having played his next-to-last card. There's a window for action that closes once the next turn is taken. You can't go back and assess a penalty 2 turns later. What's done is done.

Going forward, folks should be more vigilant.

 

[sartre]

I personally also think that Team B has abused the system here. I don't buy that dropping the kicker for a WR was an honest mistake. He's been in the league for 5+ years now and these rules are the same every year. I'm trying to give him the benefit of the doubt but it's a bit hard to swallow.

Wait... I thought this was Team A? In fact, I would've guessed you were team B

 

[MondayQB]

Wow. I'm Commish in my league and this is a bit confusing.

You can't go back two weeks and retroactively change the rosters/lineups. Nobody noticed and I'm not sure it's the Commish's job to spot this type of error. Is there a rule that spells out any punishment for violating roster limits? If not, you need to enact one right away and carry that forward. What has happened has happened. It doesn't sound malicious, probably just an honest mistake. I wouldn't burn bridges since everyone knows each other and has been playing together for five years.

I would suggest changing the roster limits to something that would be caught by the system. Otherwise, this will probably occur again.

 

[mozzy84]

We've got real similar roster limits in my league--though it might be different rules regarding the wild card.

Namely: if the wildcard is a RB, then that's the designated RB which would have to be dropped to pick up a fourth WR.

Maybe that's not how your league plays it, but in either case that does require some serious oversight to make sure that the rule is followed--because it is easy to misfire. We did have a similar situation in my league a couple weeks ago when the wrong WR was dropped--and it was actually me seeing it and flagging the other team owner that enabled him to straighten the error out within the same waiver wire period. (All the owners help keep an eye on these--especially if it's with players they might have wanted!)

Which sort of leads to your question--I think the biggest problem here is that it was not caught for two weeks. If you look at the impact that had on the game roster over that time it might impact more than just this Hightower pickup. It would seem to be a major miss that nobody caught it when Team A dropped a kicker for a wideout--I doubt anyone is using their wildcard to carry a third kicker. The fact that Team A is also carrying four QB's after picking up hightower would suggest that his original wildcard was actually a QB.

In our league, #1--the owner would not have been allowed to drop another RB trying to correct the error simply because one became expendable--he would have had to drop that wildcard QB to switch to a RB and dealt with the Edge issue later. In effect, that would have glossed over the missed week where he dropped a kicker for a WR and gone directly to the current transaction of trading his wildcard for another RB. If I were the commish, I would at least make that call; it might be impossible to do more than that, especially if Mason was active.

The requested ruling--that Team B get the services of Hightower based on the transaction being illegal to begin with--is up to your commish's/league's interpretation. If there is a precedent for this then he should follow suit and give Hightower to Team B as suggested above--but if not then he's got to make a management decision.

Meanwhile--is Team A currently only carrying one Kicker? Is there a roster requirement (as with my league) not only that two is the maximum standard--but also the minimum? If so then that needs addressing as well.

I gotta add one thought--I find this spewl unbelievable:

Team A contends that the illegal roster move of dropping a kicker for a WR was an honest mistake and the commish should have caught it immediately, then he would have dropped someone else for Hightower anyway. Since he's dropped Edge now and fixed his roster, he thinks he should keep Hightower.

He dropped a kicker for a WR by mistake? and then places the blame on the commish for not catching it... ETA--ok, I see where people disagree with me on the commish not being to blame; I can see that. I would at least look at how Team A took further advantage of the situation to drop the wrong player (Edge) according to the league rules.

Unfortunately there's no precedent for this. This is our first year on MFL and our first year where the commish doesn't process every waiver move manually.Mason was active the first week but the game was a blowout; there was no impact. The 4th WR was on a bye.

I personally also think that Team B has abused the system here. I don't buy that dropping the kicker for a WR was an honest mistake. He's been in the league for 5+ years now and these rules are the same every year. I'm trying to give him the benefit of the doubt but it's a bit hard to swallow.

I can understand how some would say that it's up to the commish to monitor the roster limits. However this is a face to face league and we all know each other. It's been all the same guys for about 5 years and as good as our commish has been, he's a busy guy and I think the least we can do is follow the rules to make life a bit easier for him.

This is all compounded by the fact that both teams are really hurting at RB and are fighting each other for playoff spots. It seems almost inevitable that a Hightower performance will be the difference in the season for one of these teams; which would cause a lot of bad blood regardless of the ruling.

we have pretty much the exact same roster limits. Guys gap that stuff out sometimes (its happened in our league where I know it wasnt on purpose and we're going for 10+ with these rules) especially if they arnt on the site everyday or thinking about there team 24/7 like some of us do.Also if you guys all know each other and no one else noticed the illegal roster I think the commish did the right thing, its really the only thing he could do. Now you just get to call the other guy a cheater and give him crap for the rest of the year, or thats what we would do anyways.

 

[Nate]

I personally also think that Team B has abused the system here. I don't buy that dropping the kicker for a WR was an honest mistake. He's been in the league for 5+ years now and these rules are the same every year. I'm trying to give him the benefit of the doubt but it's a bit hard to swallow.

Wait... I thought this was Team A? In fact, I would've guessed you were team B

Hehe whoops, fixed that now, thanks.I have no direct concern in this at all. I'm sympathetic to Team B but I don't know what the best option is. Lucky for me, I don't have to decide

 

[davearm]

Team A knew the rules and violated them, either intentionally or unintentionally (doesn't really matter). If the most fair outcome isn't also the most favorable one for him, then tough. He created the mess.

What I'd do is put Team A's roster back in compliance by restoring Edge and whichever kicker he dropped. Mason and Hightower back to the FA pool (sounds as though Mason's already there).

Then I'd allow all teams to re-bid on Hightower. High bid gets the guy and this time be sure the subsequent drop conforms to the rules.

After the season the flex roster spot is gone, or some other rule change is enacted to prevent this from being an issue in the future.