The Wolf Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 I agree that in theory if a person wanted to own and manage two teams and was open and upfront with the league about it then it could be both ethical and fair. However, in practice I don't think it can be done. Moreso though, if a person used separate identities to own two separate teams in the same league and did not inform the league about it, that clearly is grounds for expulsion. It's actually grounds for an arse-kicking but were I in the league, expulsion would be just fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 And wouldn't he have paid twice as much in dues? The odds of his winning in relation to what he risked is identical as all other owners. Only fair if every other owner was given the exact same opportunity to purchase better odds for themselves. And as others have pointed out, there really isn't a way for the two teams to not interact (each team has a relationship with all of the others in the way that teams draft and claim players on the waiver wire, etc.). Basically it is collusion, only it involves just one owner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillyBalata Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 I could see ways a guy could manipulate his starting lineups during the year that might benefit his other team. No way would I knowingly play in a league with one person owning two teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 They at least know each other well Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 I don't see how it can be ehtical or fair. while many have pointed to the playoffs, the draft, and waivers as potential issues, I see the ability to decide on trades being affected. Suppose this owner owns Team A and Team B, both in separate divisions to avoid "interacting". Then, another team from Team A's division offers Team B a trade that would normally be win-win for both. As the owner is pondering this trade, the minute he begins to evaluate how making this trade would affect Team A, it becomes unethical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolf Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 (edited) They at least know each other well They joined one day apart... Edited August 4, 2009 by The Wolf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peepinmofo Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 Its not that hard to prove. I've had this problem before and all I did was email MFL with an investigation request for both teams. They will find out the IP addy for both and log in times. Problem solved. Im not gonna get too much more involved in this, but I will say MFL was already involved. As for the Huddle, yes they can do it, but I would guess DMD and crew wouldnt want to get involved as they just host the message boards and not actual league politics. I would think this would be close to the EXACT answer DMD would give. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolf Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 Im not gonna get too much more involved in this, but I will say MFL was already involved. As for the Huddle, yes they can do it, but I would guess DMD and crew wouldnt want to get involved as they just host the message boards and not actual league politics. I would think this would be close to the EXACT answer DMD would give. Given this topic, I have to ask the question... ...are you DMD also...? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patriots Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 What would happen if both his teams made the superbowl. How do you know he didn't tank one team so the other could win? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peepinmofo Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 Given this topic, I have to ask the question... ...are you DMD also...? I dont think my wife would stay with me if that were the case! Just kidding big guy!! FYI: I'm also Brentastic. Or maybe not. He accused me of being irish when I first joined and made a huge deal out of it. Cuz of that, I'm going to PM these usernames this thread and give them the chance to deny the allegations. And irish was chappy. Does that mean you too are chappy? What the hell is this place coming to? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 No way. Two teams don't have to interact with each other in order to effect the draft to the benefit of one team OR the waiver wire. That was my first thought too though the playing each other at the end of the season question also militates against this situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBoog Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 It is both fair and ethical if the other owners tolerate it and accept it as a condition of playing in the league. I would NOT play in a league where this is the case because there is just too much other BS that can go on. These teams, I assume, would have to play each other at least once during the year. Who sets those line-ups? Just one example. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 (edited) What does this have to do with an owner owning 2 teams in the same league ? I think the question has been revised. When I first read it, the implication I got was one owner was paying for another owner's team. Nah, I misread the question. Edited August 4, 2009 by Caveman_Nick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted August 4, 2009 Author Share Posted August 4, 2009 I dont think my wife would stay with me if that were the case! Just kidding big guy!! :banned: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peepinmofo Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 :banned: Can I ban myself? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawks21 Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 Take ethics out of it for a second. Isn't the whole theory behind fantasy football that of making the game more entertaining and FUN? Wouldn't it be much more fun to have different minds and different owners competing for the championship? I wouldn't want to be in the league because I think it would take away too much of the fun. It is probably unethical, but either way, I personally wouldn't want to be a part of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 I think the question has been revised. When I first read it, the implication I got was one owner was paying for another owner's team. Nah, I misread the question. It happens cn. It happens Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted August 4, 2009 Author Share Posted August 4, 2009 It happens cn. It happens I think he's just trying to piss me off... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolf Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 Here's what I just wrote in the Practice Squad forum: FWIW, Loyalboyd was in All Pro last year and I commished. He was away for work a lot, and his girlfriend was making his picks for him. She was a FFer too. Now, it is possible the she was the one who owned SMV, hence the IP address coming up the same when MFL looked into it. I'm with MV...personally I don't know what to think but he is a cool guy from what little I have interacted with him, and I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. For the concerns of those in a Ladder league with him, just make sure Loyalboyd and SMV are not in the same league. That's all. Before we skewer up the dude, let's be sure all the facts are known. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 (edited) I'm not sure that "ethical" is the right word. Certainly, a person that owned two teams could manage them ethically. However, is this realistic? That is, could the owner manage each team without any consideration to the other, consciously or subconsciously. I don't think so. I think that it would be improper. Cartainly the appearance of impropriety, and the doubts and potential controversies that "dual" ownership would likely raise, are such that the practice should not be allowed. Edited August 4, 2009 by Furd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyalboyd Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 Unfortunately this is untrue. I need a commish to call SMV yourself. I took the rap for this bull. Smv is without a phone and is going to use his brother in law Internet. I will give the commish or ever wants it his number. He had me to keep up with his leagues to try to stay in them. After the incident I told him he would be on his own and he knows this. So commish send me a private and get his number from me. This is something the other league would nit do which is call. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Irish Doggy Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 I've seen it done on a temporary basis (one season) for teams in separate divisions. But that was in a league with some trustworthy people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyalboyd Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 Also go back and check ip from last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
__HAUSE__ Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 Here's what I just wrote in the Practice Squad forum: FWIW, Loyalboyd was in All Pro last year and I commished. He was away for work a lot, and his girlfriend was making his picks for him. She was a FFer too. Now, it is possible the she was the one who owned SMV, hence the IP address coming up the same when MFL looked into it. I'm with MV...personally I don't know what to think but he is a cool guy from what little I have interacted with him, and I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. For the concerns of those in a Ladder league with him, just make sure Loyalboyd and SMV are not in the same league. That's all. Before we skewer up the dude, let's be sure all the facts are known. I can agree with this, my girlfriend and I are in a league together on MFL. We only have one computer in the house and it is used by both of us. I'm sure the same thing could be said about us as well. We usally check our teams at the same time, so it looks like one team log's on and then the other does in the same time frame. Because of this I have made it clear to everybody in the league that we are together. I also have the commish look at any trades we work out before they hit the main web page, just to keep it fair and honest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peepinmofo Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 Unfortunately this is untrue. I need a commish to call SMV yourself. I took the rap for this bull. Smv is without a phone and is going to use his brother in law Internet. I will give the commish or ever wants it his number. He had me to keep up with his leagues to try to stay in them. After the incident I told him he would be on his own and he knows this. So commish send me a private and get his number from me. This is something the other league would nit do which is call. So does he have a phone or not? Also, if there was an "incident", why didnt you ever let the league know? Why did SMV continue to make posts as if he was making the deals? And also, why were the deals so damned lopsided? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.