Another commish problem

[cdrudge]

 

I really like this idea, especially the reverse order so the team probably loses but still gets some points. I would consider putting this in your league rules for next year Al.

If the goal is to make sure that there is at least a lineup that is submitted so that "integrity is maintained" (whatever that mgiht mean to your league), I think the better thing to do is not reverse draft order, but rather lowest score possible. Sometimes your late round picks are diamonds on the rough. For instance, Eddie Royal and Hank Baskett were probably late round picks if they were drafted at all. Yet they great weeks last week and both were in the top 5 WR in both leagues I'm in. It still would be possible for the reverse draft order to have a good week point wise. By making it the lowest score possible, you guarantee a loss (hopefully) and penalized the owner for not following the rules, but they at least get something.

[Grits and Shins]

Interesting. Setting aside the actual circumstances here, there are a number of issues. 2 teams get a free win if zero points, that affects outcomes down the road. If you *did* have lapsed owners, giving zero points and a loss for the first week won't help you find any new ones. For that matter, if they weren't lapsed owners, they might become so if you take that hard a line.

 

If it were me, I think I would have to conclude that the overall integrity of the league is more important than punishing the two teams who didn't submit a lineup. And yes, that means that the integrity of the league (as far as fairness, being able to keep owners or find new owners, playoff seeding later because of the win or loss this time, etc.) is more important than the precise written rules which may not have anticipated the situation in question. This would be a time for inserting an emergency rule change to add "If no lineup is submitted for Week 1, lineup will default to draft order." And maybe every league should have a catch-all rule: "We have endeavored to cover all possible scenarios in our rules, but any situation that should arise which is not expressly covered in these rules will be dealt with on a case-by-case basis." Something like that.

 

I am the commish (not the original one, but have been for several years now) of a 10-team roughly work-based redraft league with a $100 entry fee. It has a core of about half long-time participants, a couple more at least 2nd or 3rd year participants, and usually a newbie or two each year. We don't have this rule listed in our league, but if it did happen (and it sorta did last year although I hadn't considered the lineup aspect of it, only the sudden auto-draft when we had never had anyone auto-draft before) I would default to the draft order and all our owners would say "Yeah, that's reasonable".

 

This league is run as a benevolent dictatorship. We don't put things up for vote. If there's a decision like this to deal with, I deal with it, maybe also consulting with one other long-time player (who was commish for a while) who works in the same office. The guys are reasonable and respect it. We have fun. Heck, they continued to play even as three years in a row I took the largest portion of the prize money. After that finally included winning the SB (we have an equal prize for total points, as the league originated as points-only way back when, and that is the prize I took 3 years in a row, along with 2 SB loser prizes before finally winning the SB by a tiebreaker, LOL) I put up a league poll asking if I should retire since I was dominating so well. They all said no. Then the next year, I failed to make the playoffs, of course....

 

Default the lineups to draft order and say this should have been the rule and you'll have it in the actual wording of the rules from now forward. The reason it's not in the rules is because the scenario wasn't envisioned, not because it's a bad rule. Reasonable owners should ultimately respect this choice, even the one who loses his matchup because of it.

 

I also believe in the benevolent dictatorship philosophy and run my leagues in such a manner often consulting with one of the other long time owners when an issue arises. Untateve has a perfect example of this ... one year somebody made a draft mistake and asked him to correct it, because the rules did not prohibit this and because nobody else had selected yet he used his commissioner powers in a benevolent manner and corrected the draft, but this year when the same thing happened he had to abide by the rules. Whenever possible and whenever allowed by the rules I always consider owner intent ... but owner intent has to be verifiable.

 

So I have to disagree with your position. I believe the integrity of the league is harmed far more when the commissioner has free reign to make rules after the fact (and if you don't believe me ask any owner that has been in a league where the commissioner enacts any rule he wants whenever he wants). Deciding to implement a rule after week one about week one lineups is the equivalent of trying to implement a tie-breaker AFTER a tie has occured. Every new rule you try to implement will be percieved as wrong by somebody in the league. That is why you have to adhere to the rules in place. I you were to decide to retroactively set a lineup with no rule to support this the team that misses out on the play offs to the team that had his line up retroactively set will be pissed.

 

I fully understand the feeling that a team got a free win and I agree it is distasteful, but this is beside the point. I presume the commissioner does not correct lineups when owners start players that are inactive, on bye or hurt. Additionally, and this is A VERY KEY POINT, when my opponent fails to submit his lineup and I get his previous week's line up that includes 3 players on a bye week I realize the SAME advantage as the guy that got the free pass in week one, just on a smaller scale.

Edited September 13, 2008 by Grits and Shins

[CrazyOne]

I also believe in the benevolent dictatorship philosophy and run my leagues in such a manner often consulting with one of the other long time owners when an issue arises. Untateve has a perfect example of this ... one year somebody made a draft mistake and asked him to correct it, because the rules did not prohibit this and because nobody else had selected yet he used his commissioner powers in a benevolent manner and corrected the draft, but this year when the same thing happened he had to abide by the rules. Whenever possible and whenever allowed by the rules I always consider owner intent ... but owner intent has to be verifiable.

 

So I have to disagree with your position. I believe the integrity of the league is harmed far more when the commissioner has free reign to make rules after the fact (and if you don't believe me ask any owner that has been in a league where the commissioner enacts any rule he wants whenever he wants). Deciding to implement a rule after week one about week one lineups is the equivalent of trying to implement a tie-breaker AFTER a tie has occured. Every new rule you try to implement will be percieved as wrong by somebody in the league. That is why you have to adhere to the rules in place. I you were to decide to retroactively set a lineup with no rule to support this the team that misses out on the play offs to the team that had his line up retroactively set will be pissed.

 

I fully understand the feeling that a team got a free win and I agree it is distasteful, but this is beside the point. I presume the commissioner does not correct lineups when owners start players that are inactive, on bye or hurt. Additionally, and this is A VERY KEY POINT, when my opponent fails to submit his lineup and I get his previous week's line up that includes 3 players on a bye week I realize the SAME advantage as the guy that got the free pass in week one, just on a smaller scale.

 

Hm. I can see where you're going with the idea of missing players in bye weeks and such.

 

I suppose part of it may be my own league experience. Because we draft so late, intent for Week 1, barring a last-minute practice injury or something, is nearly 100% clear in our league. I saw not a rule bending but a permanent change that affects just Week 1 for this and future years. But it's true that in leagues that draft early (this wasn't one, apparently; one of the posts said the draft was pushing against the start of the season) the intent would be less clear perhaps. Such leagues probably couldn't implement this kind of rule for Week 1.

 

Intent for later weeks would be harder to pin down. Yeah, clearly intent would be to replace the player on bye, but with which other player? You wouldn't know. If no lineup had been set and one or more players were on bye or injured, I would attempt to contact that owner. But yes, it would stop short of actually setting the lineup. Someone would indeed realize the same kind of advantage there. If this kind of thing happened with any frequency, and by frequency I mean more than maybe once a season, I'd be It's indicative of a crop of inattentive owners.

 

I have read about ridiculous commissioner antics here and there. I'm sure that would be a problem. I've also read about leagues where nothing happens because everything has to be voted upon (including trades, etc.) With reasonable people you can strike a reasonable balance.

 

Maybe I just have had the luxury of playing with people who are more reasonable than most fantasy owners. ;-) We're also pretty evenly matched, and even the newbies when we have them tend to be on their game. Everyone puts in some effort and pretty much everyone over the years has shared in the rewards. We don't tinker with things much, because it seems to work so well.

 

Anyway, to me, I still think a rule specifically for Week 1 could be implemented even though the season has started. I don't see it as free reign. I see it as a necessary judgment call. Clearly it's going to come up as a question, and that would be my choice if it came up in my league. Either choice will be perceived as wrong by someone. If I were one of the teams that would stand to benefit in such a case, clearly I'd have to let it go and save the change for next season. If it were an earlier draft, I'd probably wouldn't feel quite the same because too many things can happen when the draft is 2 or 3 weeks before the season starts.

[Grits and Shins]

Anyway, to me, I still think a rule specifically for Week 1 could be implemented even though the season has started. I don't see it as free reign. I see it as a necessary judgment call. Clearly it's going to come up as a question, and that would be my choice if it came up in my league. Either choice will be perceived as wrong by someone. If I were one of the teams that would stand to benefit in such a case, clearly I'd have to let it go and save the change for next season. If it were an earlier draft, I'd probably wouldn't feel quite the same because too many things can happen when the draft is 2 or 3 weeks before the season starts.

 

So you are totally disregarding the ESTABLISHED PRESCENDENT in the league then.

 

If an owner neglects to set his line up in week 6 he carries over his line up in week 5, REGARDLESS OF THE NUMBER OF OFF PLAYERS. So if I play that owner in week 6, per the rules I get a 'free pass' for every player that team has on a bye in week 6. So if he has 3 players on a bye that is almost certainly a win for me and really it is irrelevant that it wasn't his whole team on a bye. It is conceivable for a team to submit a lineup in week 5 of players that ARE ALL OFF IN WEEK 6 ... how would that be different then no lineup submitted in week 1? Would you as commissioner arbitrarily change the rules and submit a line up?

 

The ESTABLISHED PRESCEDENT in the league is that the previous week's line up carries forward regardless of off weeks. It just means in week 1 ALL OF THE PLAYERS WERE ON BYE THE PREVIOUS WEEK.

 

I really don't see how you can interpret any other way.

[Robash]

 

holy crap...i was the owner that did not try to submit a lineup. i never bothered because i assumed the draft had to be over and it finished very late. only realized what i did...or didnt do rather untill after kickoff of the thursday game. All of my roster are NYG's so there was no one left to start.

 

i was fully expecting to take a zero...and my lineup is set for this week

[Furd]

I think that you've made the call and are just looking for affirmation.

 

Its your league. Run it however you like. The only thing that makes sense to me in that situation is that each team receives zero points. You're making schit up as you go along if you do it any other way. IMO, making schit up as you go along is always a bad idea,

 

Teams in FF get "penalized" all the time based upon what other owners do or don't do. Bad trades. Starting guys on their bye week, Forgetting to pick up a PK when the only PK on his roster is on his bye week. Those decisions may influence the results of the game. You going to change those too?

 

Letting an owner insert a single player into a lineup after the games are complete is bs. A whole team? You gotta be kidding me.

[CrazyOne]

So you are totally disregarding the ESTABLISHED PRESCENDENT in the league then.

 

If an owner neglects to set his line up in week 6 he carries over his line up in week 5, REGARDLESS OF THE NUMBER OF OFF PLAYERS. So if I play that owner in week 6, per the rules I get a 'free pass' for every player that team has on a bye in week 6. So if he has 3 players on a bye that is almost certainly a win for me and really it is irrelevant that it wasn't his whole team on a bye. It is conceivable for a team to submit a lineup in week 5 of players that ARE ALL OFF IN WEEK 6 ... how would that be different then no lineup submitted in week 1? Would you as commissioner arbitrarily change the rules and submit a line up?

 

The ESTABLISHED PRESCEDENT in the league is that the previous week's line up carries forward regardless of off weeks. It just means in week 1 ALL OF THE PLAYERS WERE ON BYE THE PREVIOUS WEEK.

 

I really don't see how you can interpret any other way.

 

In my league, nobody is that stupid on bye weeks. :-)

 

Seriously, I don't see it as breaking with any precedent because Week 1 is not the same as Week 6. And 8 players out is not the same as 2 or even 3. And we have 8-man starting lineups with only 14-man rosters, with strict minimums that leave only 2 open slots. If I have a top TE or DEF that has an early bye, then I might take the 0 on purpose, not by accident. I drafted Gates and no other TE one year, and he was out the first week. We don't have waivers the first week! I think I still won my game with the 0, but I can't remember.

 

It is theoretically possible to have a starting lineup with all the same byes, and it is theoretically possible for me to win the PowerBall lottery. I think the odds of those are about the same.

 

Now they've cancelled the Baltimore at Houston game and those guys will have bye weeks. I already sent them an email reminder. They're smart, they'll get someone else in their lineup, I'm sure of it. Get some smarter owners, maybe. That is the best option for the best league.

 

To me, intent in a late draft is right in the draft. Week 1 is different than Week 6. That's just how I see it. You won't be playing in my league as far as I know, so you don't have to like it. ;-) I can't think of a single contentious rule problem we've actually had, so it's not as if we're doing it all wrong. When I hear the kinds of things that are apparently commonplace in other leagues, rule arguments, trying to swindle people out of good players, etc. it makes me happy that we've managed to keep our league the way it is.

[Grits and Shins]

In my league, nobody is that stupid on bye weeks. :-)

 

Seriously, I don't see it as breaking with any precedent because Week 1 is not the same as Week 6. And 8 players out is not the same as 2 or even 3. And we have 8-man starting lineups with only 14-man rosters, with strict minimums that leave only 2 open slots. If I have a top TE or DEF that has an early bye, then I might take the 0 on purpose, not by accident. I drafted Gates and no other TE one year, and he was out the first week. We don't have waivers the first week! I think I still won my game with the 0, but I can't remember.

 

It is theoretically possible to have a starting lineup with all the same byes, and it is theoretically possible for me to win the PowerBall lottery. I think the odds of those are about the same.

 

Now they've cancelled the Baltimore at Houston game and those guys will have bye weeks. I already sent them an email reminder. They're smart, they'll get someone else in their lineup, I'm sure of it. Get some smarter owners, maybe. That is the best option for the best league.

 

To me, intent in a late draft is right in the draft. Week 1 is different than Week 6. That's just how I see it. You won't be playing in my league as far as I know, so you don't have to like it. ;-) I can't think of a single contentious rule problem we've actually had, so it's not as if we're doing it all wrong. When I hear the kinds of things that are apparently commonplace in other leagues, rule arguments, trying to swindle people out of good players, etc. it makes me happy that we've managed to keep our league the way it is.

 

How many teams can win with 3 players in their starting line up that are off? I'd speculate that the number is very very low. So effectively having 3 players off is the same as having 8 off .... the end result is an easy win for the other team. Unless the rules state that week 1 is different than any other week ... then IT I S NOT DIFFERENT.

 

So for some reason you are okay giving an owner a free pass ... as long as it is week 4 or later.

 

I think you are right ... I won't ever be in a league with you. You live on a slippery slope where rules are only rules at your whim.

 

 

If I'm the owner in week 6 that forgets to set my line and loses because 3 of my players are off ... why don't I have the same right to have the commissioner fix my starting lineup as the guy in week 1?

Edited September 14, 2008 by Grits and Shins

[alchico]

 

holy crap...i was the owner that did not try to submit a lineup. i never bothered because i assumed the draft had to be over and it finished very late. only realized what i did...or didnt do rather untill after kickoff of the thursday game. All of my roster are NYG's so there was no one left to start.

 

i was fully expecting to take a zero...and my lineup is set for this week

 

Nah if you read closely, i said 2 owners forgot to submit a lineup and only 1 of them would result in a change of the winner. You still lost even with the lineup i entered for you. The reason i havn't changed the other one is i thought i would get some opinions before i took it to the league. I havn't done that yet and i was also hoping to hear from the opponent and see if he had any problem with my solution which could have made all of this mute.

[CrazyOne]

How many teams can win with 3 players in their starting line up that are off? I'd speculate that the number is very very low. So effectively having 3 players off is the same as having 8 off .... the end result is an easy win for the other team. Unless the rules state that week 1 is different than any other week ... then IT I S NOT DIFFERENT.

 

So for some reason you are okay giving an owner a free pass ... as long as it is week 4 or later.

 

I think you are right ... I won't ever be in a league with you. You live on a slippery slope where rules are only rules at your whim.

 

If I'm the owner in week 6 that forgets to set my line and loses because 3 of my players are off ... why don't I have the same right to have the commissioner fix my starting lineup as the guy in week 1?

 

I feel like I'm debating the US Constitution here. We are the Supreme Court justices. I can be Souter or Breyer or something, and you can be Scalia or Thomas. ;-)

 

Why don't you have the same right in Week 6 as Week 1? Because Week 1 is rushed and by Week 6 you should know better! Look, there is no prior week to default to. The rules say it defaults to the prior week, so what do you do when there is no prior week? It's not in the rules that Week 1 is different, but guess what, because Week 1 has no prior week, it clearly IS DIFFERENT even if the rules DON'T say so. To deny that Week 1 is different is to deny the reality in front of you. It is different, clearly. The question is in how you deal with it.

 

We've never had anyone carry over a lineup with 3 players off. I don't even think we've had anyone carry over with 2 players off. We've had some one player off lineups, most if not all on purpose. I guess I come at this from an ideal-type situation, and most leagues are less than ideal. Oh well.

 

Did you miss the part where I said we did this last year? One of the new guys (we had 2 last year) was away on draft week/Week 1. He planned to auto draft and didn't tell me. (He told one of the other owners though.) He had paid his entry fee even. What should I have done then? Run a 9-team league? Yeah, right. I set his team up for auto draft. I then told everyone I would set the Week 1 lineup to the draft order. Everyone said that sounded fair. Nobody looked at the wording of the rules and went "Hey, it doesn't make any exceptions for Week 1; he should get a carry-over lineup of no players." Because nobody who has ever played in our league is that freakin PETTY.

[Grits and Shins]

I feel like I'm debating the US Constitution here. We are the Supreme Court justices. I can be Souter or Breyer or something, and you can be Scalia or Thomas. ;-)

 

Why don't you have the same right in Week 6 as Week 1? Because Week 1 is rushed and by Week 6 you should know better! Look, there is no prior week to default to. The rules say it defaults to the prior week, so what do you do when there is no prior week? It's not in the rules that Week 1 is different, but guess what, because Week 1 has no prior week, it clearly IS DIFFERENT even if the rules DON'T say so. To deny that Week 1 is different is to deny the reality in front of you. It is different, clearly. The question is in how you deal with it.

 

We've never had anyone carry over a lineup with 3 players off. I don't even think we've had anyone carry over with 2 players off. We've had some one player off lineups, most if not all on purpose. I guess I come at this from an ideal-type situation, and most leagues are less than ideal. Oh well.

 

Did you miss the part where I said we did this last year? One of the new guys (we had 2 last year) was away on draft week/Week 1. He planned to auto draft and didn't tell me. (He told one of the other owners though.) He had paid his entry fee even. What should I have done then? Run a 9-team league? Yeah, right. I set his team up for auto draft. I then told everyone I would set the Week 1 lineup to the draft order. Everyone said that sounded fair. Nobody looked at the wording of the rules and went "Hey, it doesn't make any exceptions for Week 1; he should get a carry-over lineup of no players." Because nobody who has ever played in our league is that freakin PETTY.

 

There IS a prior week to week 1 ... EVERY PLAYER IS ON A BYE. You are advocating an uneven application of the rules which results in an uneven playing field. The rules are cut and dried .. you carry last week's line up forward. There is no line up for the previous week thus you get no line up and you get a zero.

 

What you did last year IS NOT THE SAME ...you made a ruling BEFORE WEEK 1 had been played. You even informed the league about your decision.

 

The rules exist for a reason. They exist so that everybody is playing by the same rules and there is a level playing field. As the commissioner you may have the best intentions but your actions MUST be considered fair and equitable by all or you are going to start having problems in your league. And if you were to retroactively alter the starting line ups today ... all the owners may say they agree today. But then 10 weeks later when a team realizes he won't make the playoffs because of that decision he may change his mind and starting raising a stink.

 

Of course I guess you can feel free to throw the rule book away in your leagues and apply whatever rules you like whenever you like. See how that works for you.

[CrazyOne]

I love how interpreting an issue not covered by the rules is "throwing the rule book away". Whatever. Our league has been around for over a decade, with at least half of us playing since at or near the beginning. It's always competitive, friendly and controversy-free. Very few teams are ever out of the money hunt before the last few weeks. In other words it works pretty damn well, thank you. And we'll leave it at that.