What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

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.

Would you consider this collusion or fair strategy (1 Viewer)

AcerFC

AcerFC

Footballguy
I commish a friends and family league for the past 11 seasons. We have tons of rules in place and have never had an issue. This one just popped up and it involves me so I'm looking to you guys to help out. I could be off base here and if so, would like to put a rule in effect either way.

Scenario: my father has spent $3 out of a possible $300 on blind bid waivers the past three years.

I have Mcgahee who he was mildly interested in

Me: since you never spend in blind bids, put in a $30 bid for Chiefs D for me and I'll give you Mcghaee for them

Father: that sounds like collusion to me and I'm not interested in taking part in a deal like that

Me: :shuked:

I dont see it as collusion. We are not blocking anyone else from bidding and winning. I'm not even sure I would look at it differently if he spent all $100

He didnt do it so no real issue, but if others consider it out of bounds, I won't think of doing something like it again and make sure there is a rule against it.

 
Blind bid dollars should be tradable assets, yes. He shouldn't put in a bid for you, but no reason you shouldn't trade player X for N blind bid dollars.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
My league allows trading of blind bid dollars, which is what I would suggest. While I have no problem with the trade as you stated it, simply allowing you to trade McGahee for $30 BB would prevent any appearances of impropriety.

 
If people in your league were privy to the conversation, they would call it collusion. It's really no different if you payed some money on the side for someone to go forward with a trade. In addition, you are ripping off your father. KC could be a top 3 defense the rest of the season and McGahee is fat plodding back who will lucky to break 70 total yards in a given week. That may not be collusion but it might appear strange to people see your father not spending money and then spending money and promptly trading. Just my .02

 
Why did you suges his bid? That's the part that could be construed as creepy. Does it matter in your league?

IMO, stating that you'd trade McGahee for KC could have been enough to get the wheels moving.

 
TakiToki said:
My league allows trading of blind bid dollars, which is what I would suggest. While I have no problem with the trade as you stated it, simply allowing you to trade McGahee for $30 BB would prevent any appearances of impropriety.
Click to expand...
Spelled out perfectly.

 
Does your league allow trading of BB dollars? If yes, trade for the $$ and make the claim yourself. If no, then it is collusion.

 
It's not collusion at all. You told him if he gets that defense you will trade him mcgahee for it. If not, no trade.

Anyone thinking that is collusion if far too serious, and wrong anyway. Even if it was a big money league. No, its fine. And make it a rule that it can be done if you need to.

 
I don't think there is anything wrong with saying you'd trade the player for the Chiefs D if he can get them. And I don't think it's wrong to share an isolated opinion on player value or what bid might or might not win. It's only an issue if working collectively an excessive amount.

But most leagues probably won't let you make a binding agreement that he'll bid on the Chiefs and the league enforces that you both have to make the trade if he wins them. It starts to cross the line there.

You can let him know what you'd trade the player for. He can pick up the Chiefs if he wants. He can trade them if he wants. But you also are under no obligation to make a trade should he win the Chiefs. He would have to pick them up with no guarantee the trade would happen if he did.

 
Its not collusion.

Why? Because you have not guaranteed anything.

Had the trade been announced pre-hand as official, then yes.

But since all it is is advice... advice isnt collusion.

Discussing possible trades and scenarios isn't collusion either.

He could still win the FA player and then NOT trade it to you.

Or he could bargain a better price from another team or even you.

 
Not collusion but a little shady since you told him a dollar amount to bid should've just left it at I'd trade McGahee for the Chiefs D...not a big deal though. The bigger question is how is the Chiefs defense still available?

 
Pipes said:
Not collusion but a little shady since you told him a dollar amount to bid should've just left it at I'd trade McGahee for the Chiefs D...not a big deal though. The bigger question is how is the Chiefs defense still available?
Click to expand...
This. I don't like the dollar amount specified - but telling him to get the Chiefs defense for you is not collusion. We have WW priority decided in reverse order of record (dyno league). In the past 8+ years, many teams have traded their WW priority (or picked a player at the request of someone further down and traded him). Having another team pick a player then trade him to you when you are not in position to pick him up and so request it, is not collusion.

 
Thanks guys. Looks like most of you say it isnt collusion, but should have left the dollar amount out of it

2 things to note

1. we had a vote in 2008 to see if teams wanted to trade blind bid dollars. It got voted down 7-5

2. I only suggested a dollar amount because as proven, my father doesnt bid. He would have put in a bid for $1-3 and would not have won

But I see the point in not suggesting a dollar amount and will not do that again. Maybe it is time to bring up the blind bid money trade vote again.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Apparently you cannot make the bid for yourself, or would not want to. That's the part that seems uncool to me. IMO, make a rule against this.

 
I wouldn't view it as collusion... he's still trying to improve his team, you're still trying to improve your team. Friendly advice about how much to bid shouldn't be prohibited... I think it would be a rare circumstance (like this one) where it would come up. I don't see a problem with it.

 
daveR said:
Apparently you cannot make the bid for yourself, or would not want to. That's the part that seems uncool to me. IMO, make a rule against this.
Click to expand...
I could have and ultimately did but I wanted to save the money

 
There isnt anything about this being collusion. Silly that people think it is. Hell next time ask everyone in the league to do it for you, and whoever gets that Defense gets your trade. You either get it, or bait someone into bidding all their dollars if they really want that player/defense

 
The two things that would make this appear fishy is you are asking your father to do something he does not ordinarily do (bid a lot on a blind bid), and then trade a good

defense for a marginal running back to you, his son.

Even if the trade benefits his team, even in a small way, which defends against this being collusion, it has the appearance of impropriety. Since you are commissioner, I think

you really want to avoid those situations. It can spread distrust of you from the other owners.

 
dhockster said:
The two things that would make this appear fishy is you are asking your father to do something he does not ordinarily do (bid a lot on a blind bid), and then trade a good

defense for a marginal running back to you, his son.

Even if the trade benefits his team, even in a small way, which defends against this being collusion, it has the appearance of impropriety. Since you are commissioner, I think

you really want to avoid those situations. It can spread distrust of you from the other owners.
Click to expand...
I think you worded what I was trying to say perfectly. Collusion? No, but it`s cracking open a potential pandora`s box and once there is doubt in the commish, you may never get it back.
 
AcerFC said:
I commish a friends and family league for the past 11 seasons. We have tons of rules in place and have never had an issue. This one just popped up and it involves me so I'm looking to you guys to help out. I could be off base here and if so, would like to put a rule in effect either way.

Scenario: my father has spent $3 out of a possible $300 on blind bid waivers the past three years.

I have Mcgahee who he was mildly interested in

Me: since you never spend in blind bids, put in a $30 bid for Chiefs D for me and I'll give you Mcghaee for them

Father: that sounds like collusion to me and I'm not interested in taking part in a deal like that

Me: :shuked:

I dont see it as collusion. We are not blocking anyone else from bidding and winning. I'm not even sure I would look at it differently if he spent all $100

He didnt do it so no real issue, but if others consider it out of bounds, I won't think of doing something like it again and make sure there is a rule against it.
Click to expand...
Collusion because you told him to do something to bring about the trade

If you had just said to him that you would trade McGahee for a top DST the offer should then have come from him

Again most important as others have said in various ways the ability and appearance of a commissioner to stand above any scrutiny or questions should have prevented you from saying that.

 
Captain Hook said:
AcerFC said:
I commish a friends and family league for the past 11 seasons. We have tons of rules in place and have never had an issue. This one just popped up and it involves me so I'm looking to you guys to help out. I could be off base here and if so, would like to put a rule in effect either way.

Scenario: my father has spent $3 out of a possible $300 on blind bid waivers the past three years.

I have Mcgahee who he was mildly interested in

Me: since you never spend in blind bids, put in a $30 bid for Chiefs D for me and I'll give you Mcghaee for them

Father: that sounds like collusion to me and I'm not interested in taking part in a deal like that

Me: :shuked:

I dont see it as collusion. We are not blocking anyone else from bidding and winning. I'm not even sure I would look at it differently if he spent all $100

He didnt do it so no real issue, but if others consider it out of bounds, I won't think of doing something like it again and make sure there is a rule against it.
Click to expand...
Collusion because you told him to do something to bring about the trade
Click to expand...
What?

How do you think 3 way trades get done in real sports if no one can talk in a pointed manner with one another?

 
It is absolutely collusion since the team that would have rightly gotten the KC defense on waivers with a good faith bid would have been blocked from doing so by these potential actions. That owner would have been rightly cheesed about it had this gone the way the op wanted it to go.

 
Area51Inhabitant said:
It is absolutely collusion since the team that would have rightly gotten the KC defense on waivers with a good faith bid would have been blocked from doing so by these potential actions. That owner would have been rightly cheesed about it had this gone the way the op wanted it to go.
Click to expand...
I don't play in a FAAB league but don't people blow large portions of their FAABs for individual players fairly routinely? Is there a "good faith" benchmark price that each winning bid gets compared against?

 
You shouldn't have told him how much to bid. I'd have no problem if you offered to trade him McGahee for the Cheifs D/ST, and reminded him that his normal bidding level probably isn't going to be enough to win them. But telling him the exact amount seems like you're trying to get around the rule against trading FAAB dollars.

Also, his bidding an unusual amount will look shady, no matter what. So probably a bad idea.

 
shadyridr said:
You telling him how much to bid is clear collusion
Click to expand...
Technically, you might be right, but I don't think think it's a big problem either.

In leagues with friends, this sort of thing is just going to happen.

You are just going to talk about these things, and advising isn't really the same as collusion. As long as there's no promise not to compete against each other, I wouldn't have a problem with that.

Honestly, I do this in my main league. I like to blow my FAAB wad early, so it's happened quite often that if I'm one talking to a buddy about a big FA coming up that I have no chance of landing personally. The "how much do you think it'll take to get him?" question has come up.

Not any different than pre-draft discussion of players (in those times where you are actually speaking honestly).

I think it's fine for opponents to talk players and touch on strategy, but if both players are trying to always do what's best for their team and there's no agreement to hurt one team to benefit another, I don't think it's a problem.

 
habsfan said:
Area51Inhabitant said:
It is absolutely collusion since the team that would have rightly gotten the KC defense on waivers with a good faith bid would have been blocked from doing so by these potential actions. That owner would have been rightly cheesed about it had this gone the way the op wanted it to go.
Click to expand...
I don't play in a FAAB league but don't people blow large portions of their FAABs for individual players fairly routinely? Is there a "good faith" benchmark price that each winning bid gets compared against?
Click to expand...
No. People will bid all kinds of different prices for all kinds of different reasons. If you don't bid enough, that's just on you.

In this case, I wouldn't give a crap about the guy that didn't bid enough on the KC def, even with Acer advising his father that it'll take a healthy bid to get him.

 
pollardsvision said:
habsfan said:
Area51Inhabitant said:
It is absolutely collusion since the team that would have rightly gotten the KC defense on waivers with a good faith bid would have been blocked from doing so by these potential actions. That owner would have been rightly cheesed about it had this gone the way the op wanted it to go.
Click to expand...
I don't play in a FAAB league but don't people blow large portions of their FAABs for individual players fairly routinely? Is there a "good faith" benchmark price that each winning bid gets compared against?
Click to expand...
No. People will bid all kinds of different prices for all kinds of different reasons. If you don't bid enough, that's just on you.

In this case, I wouldn't give a crap about the guy that didn't bid enough on the KC def, even with Acer advising his father that it'll take a healthy bid to get him.
Click to expand...
I was being a bit coy there.

I'm always amused by the contrast between the ulta-competitive and unforgiving sport of football and the delicate, almost child-like perception of "fair" and "unfair" some people in fantasy football seem to have. When an NFL player gets hurt, we want him to "rub some dirt on it" and get back out there yet we'll turn around and cry foul when something relatively benign like this happens in our fantasy league.

 
habsfan said:
pollardsvision said:
habsfan said:
Area51Inhabitant said:
It is absolutely collusion since the team that would have rightly gotten the KC defense on waivers with a good faith bid would have been blocked from doing so by these potential actions. That owner would have been rightly cheesed about it had this gone the way the op wanted it to go.
Click to expand...
I don't play in a FAAB league but don't people blow large portions of their FAABs for individual players fairly routinely? Is there a "good faith" benchmark price that each winning bid gets compared against?
Click to expand...
No. People will bid all kinds of different prices for all kinds of different reasons. If you don't bid enough, that's just on you.

In this case, I wouldn't give a crap about the guy that didn't bid enough on the KC def, even with Acer advising his father that it'll take a healthy bid to get him.
Click to expand...
I was being a bit coy there.I'm always amused by the contrast between the ulta-competitive and unforgiving sport of football and the delicate, almost child-like perception of "fair" and "unfair" some people in fantasy football seem to have. When an NFL player gets hurt, we want him to "rub some dirt on it" and get back out there yet we'll turn around and cry foul when something relatively benign like this happens in our fantasy league.
Click to expand...
Ah, got ya.
 
habsfan said:
Captain Hook said:
Collusion because you told him to do something to bring about the trade
Click to expand...
What?

How do you think 3 way trades get done in real sports if no one can talk in a pointed manner with one another?
Click to expand...
Don't think about real sports like fantasy sports or vice versa. The players are the same; everything else is different.

 
Captain Hook said:
AcerFC said:
I commish a friends and family league for the past 11 seasons. We have tons of rules in place and have never had an issue. This one just popped up and it involves me so I'm looking to you guys to help out. I could be off base here and if so, would like to put a rule in effect either way.

Scenario: my father has spent $3 out of a possible $300 on blind bid waivers the past three years.

I have Mcgahee who he was mildly interested in

Me: since you never spend in blind bids, put in a $30 bid for Chiefs D for me and I'll give you Mcghaee for them

Father: that sounds like collusion to me and I'm not interested in taking part in a deal like that

Me: :shuked:

I dont see it as collusion. We are not blocking anyone else from bidding and winning. I'm not even sure I would look at it differently if he spent all $100

He didnt do it so no real issue, but if others consider it out of bounds, I won't think of doing something like it again and make sure there is a rule against it.
Click to expand...
Collusion because you told him to do something to bring about the trade

If you had just said to him that you would trade McGahee for a top DST the offer should then have come from him

Again most important as others have said in various ways the ability and appearance of a commissioner to stand above any scrutiny or questions should have prevented you from saying that.
Click to expand...
that is not collusion, but a term of the deal. The father could counter and say I will only bid 5, or 10, etc.You people have no idea what collusion means.

 
So, the league voted against the direct trading of FA dollars and yet, as the commish, you bring up a specific amount for your father to bid on the KC D. Why did you tell him such a specific amount and not just indicate that you would trade Willis for the KC D and allow him to decide how to proceed from there?

 
bagger said:
that is not collusion, but a term of the deal. The father could counter and say I will only bid 5, or 10, etc.

You people have no idea what collusion means.
Click to expand...
Technically, collusion is any agreement. More commonly, it's a secret agreement for an anti-competitive/illegal purpose. And the gist of it in fantasy sports is that you have 2 people who are trying to get 1 player's team to win.

This is a borderline case since Acer was trying to direct his father's team. Ultimately, the trade is wrong because if you can't trade FAAB dollars, you shouldn't be telling someone to, "Spend $X FAAB dollars and I'll trade you Y". But it's almost wrong for collusion reasons on its own.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Judge Smails
  • Poll
Would you veto this trade?
Replies
34
Views
1K
beef
beef
socrates
Would you rather (Rookie Edition)
Replies
22
Views
649
massraider
massraider
rockaction
Since When Did We Get All Scoldy About How To Spend Our Dollars By Being Told To "Get With It" Or Something Like That
Replies
21
Views
577
JohnnyU
JohnnyU

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top