Strategy or douchebaggery?

[Phazool]

Scenario:

 

#1 seed is playing one of the 2 teams (the weaker one) competing for the wild card (his first playoff opponent.) This week he is starting Carolinas DEF and mentioned to me that he will also start his worst matchups so that he can play "team weak" instead of "team strong" in the playoffs. He says its just strategy.

 

There is no rule against this, but if it were me getting screwed out of at least the 4th place prize I'd be pretty pissed. How do I prevent this? Am I wrong about this? Can you even have a rule against this? It isn't impossible that his plan can backfire and he wins anyway.

 

This is not something I expected and it's eating away at me.

[Seahawk]

not that this is any constilation but I thnk things have a way of working out. Don't get yourself all bent out of shape. it will come back to him.

[Phazool]

not that this is any constilation but I thnk things have a way of working out. Don't get yourself all bent out of shape. it will come back to him.

 

Karma's a bitch, I know, but do I have a valid argument against this? I can and will call him out on it, but it won't change anything.

[Turf Smurf]

Karma's a bitch, I know, but do I have a valid argument against this? I can and will call him out on it, but it won't change anything.

No, you don't. This is America. The owner can and should manage his/her team any way they see fit. I don't see any problem here. I would look inward and seek to understand why you apparently need to control everything around you.

[Dr. Sacrebleu]

Scenario:

 

#1 seed is playing one of the 2 teams (the weaker one) competing for the wild card (his first playoff opponent.) This week he is starting Carolinas DEF and mentioned to me that he will also start his worst matchups so that he can play "team weak" instead of "team strong" in the playoffs. He says its just strategy.

 

There is no rule against this, but if it were me getting screwed out of at least the 4th place prize I'd be pretty pissed. How do I prevent this? Am I wrong about this? Can you even have a rule against this? It isn't impossible that his plan can backfire and he wins anyway.

 

This is not something I expected and it's eating away at me.

 

This sort of thing happens all the time in real life, though no one ever cops to it. In soccer or icehockey for example sitting starters because they 'needed the rest', or fielding a very defensive lineup, or making sure not to score if you know your match can get a strong team out of the competition etc.. never flagrant intentional losses, but no one would beleive that the team put in it's best effort either.

You're stuck with it this year

Next year put in a clause in your league that all owners are required to make every effort to win, and play with honor, or some such thing.

Then, though it will be hard to prove borderline cases, at least it will avoid outright douchebaggery ("what? I just think that fred lane, and steve grogan are really due this week").

Failing that it will at least stop said worry wartbag bragging about fielding a weak lineup

[frenzal rhomb]

I disgree - other teams are depending on him to field his best line up and play out their games. We had this happen last year and the guy who did it did lose in the first round to the team he let in, but the team on the outs was screwed, The rukes cant stop it, but hes being a dck and screwing the other teams over

[Turf Smurf]

This sort of thing happens all the time in real life, though no one ever cops to it. In soccer or icehockey for example sitting starters because they 'needed the rest', or fielding a very defensive lineup, or making sure not to score if you know your match can get a strong team out of the competition etc.. never flagrant intentional losses, but no one would beleive that the team put in it's best effort either.

You're stuck with it this year

Next year put in a clause in your league that all owners are required to make every effort to win, and play with honor, or some such thing.

Then, though it will be hard to prove borderline cases, at least it will avoid outright douchebaggery ("what? I just think that fred lane, and steve grogan are really due this week").

Failing that it will at least stop said worry wartbag bragging about fielding a weak lineup

Typical liberal idiocy. Prove it!

 

I was out fishing with my family. Yes, but you failed to pick up LT from the waiver wire. All said and done, you were negligent, and as such, you forfiet the championship.

 

I assume this is how it works in Bejing.....

[Dr. Sacrebleu]

Typical liberal idiocy. Prove it!

 

I was out fishing with my family. Yes, but you failed to pick up LT from the waiver wire. All said and done, you were negligent, and as such, you forfiet the championship.

 

I assume this is how it works in Bejing.....

I don't know how to interpret your last couple of sentences as they aren't really coherent. perhaps you could spell it out a little more clearly.

Fact of the matter is I have never played FF for more than a 100$ buy in, and most often it has been 20-50$ range. Mostly with huddlers who are either friends or people I respect but that I want to pound the snot out of. So while I always want to win I would not consider throwing a game and my integrity for the sake of a possible advantage (check out the 12 page thread on the board about a wife being accused of throwing a game. Many people were suggesting throwing the two out of the league for an offense way less obvious). Were I playing a WCOFF style tourney with all the money on the line against a bunch of strangers, you bet that I would do all I could to get an opponent out, even if it involved fielding dead players.

I am not sure that I understand your angry vehemence, but the guy was asking advice on how to stop this from happening (i assume that he means happening again, rather than stopping this event, as as far as I am concerned there is nothing you can do about that)

Look there are leagues that play with no holds barred, this guy obviously would like that not to be the case for his league. I suggested a solution for him. While it doesn't completely curtail chicanery, it certainly would let owners know that this was a league where intentionally losing was not acceptable. I am not sure why that sends you into a tissy fit

 

And please explain what the heck does the negligence of an owner that you mention at the end of your post have to do with this argument?

[i_am_the_swammi]

The other owner can field whatever team he wishes....he put himself into the top-seeded position by fielding the strongest team all year, and one of those benefits is the chance to manipulate who he might play in the playoffs, based on the matchups for that week.

 

I;d have had more of a problem if he had said "I am tanking this week to keep you out of the playoffs". Instead, he gave a lucid and valid reason for fielding the team he did: to get the best matchup on paper in the playoffs to give his team the best chance to win.

 

Winning fantasy football is often about scoring the most points....other times, it is about facing a team that score the least points. I think he has every right strategically to try to face the team he feels will score the least.

[Turf Smurf]

I don't know how to interpret your last couple of sentences as they aren't really coherent. perhaps you could spell it out a little more clearly.

Fact of the matter is I have never played FF for more than a 100$ buy in, and most often it has been 20-50$ range. Mostly with huddlers who are either friends or people I respect but that I want to pound the snot out of. So while I always want to win I would not consider throwing a game and my integrity for the sake of a possible advantage (check out the 12 page thread on the board about a wife being accused of throwing a game. Many people were suggesting throwing the two out of the league for an offense way less obvious). Were I playing a WCOFF style tourney with all the money on the line against a bunch of strangers, you bet that I would do all I could to get an opponent out, even if it involved fielding dead players.

I am not sure that I understand your angry vehemence, but the guy was asking advice on how to stop this from happening (i assume that he means happening again, rather than stopping this event, as as far as I am concerned there is nothing you can do about that)

Look there are leagues that play with no holds barred, this guy obviously would like that not to be the case for his league. I suggested a solution for him. While it doesn't completely curtail chicanery, it certainly would let owners know that this was a league where intentionally losing was not acceptable. I am not sure why that sends you into a tissy fit

 

And please explain what the heck does the negligence of an owner that you mention at the end of your post have to do with this argument?

My bad.....I assumed the object was to WIN!.....silly me.

[Turf Smurf]

The other owner can field whatever team he wishes....he put himself into the top-seeded position by fielding the strongest team all year, and one of those benefits is the chance to manipulate who he might play in the playoffs, based on the matchups for that week.

 

I;d have had more of a problem if he had said "I am tanking this week to keep you out of the playoffs". Instead, he gave a lucid and valid reason for fielding the team he did: to get the best matchup on paper in the playoffs to give his team the best chance to win.

 

Winning fantasy football is often about scoring the most points....other times, it is about facing a team that score the least points. I think he has every right strategically to try to face the team he feels will score the least.

 

THIS.

[Dr. Sacrebleu]

The other owner can field whatever team he wishes....he put himself into the top-seeded position by fielding the strongest team all year, and one of those benefits is the chance to manipulate who he might play in the playoffs, based on the matchups for that week.

 

I;d have had more of a problem if he had said "I am tanking this week to keep you out of the playoffs". Instead, he gave a lucid and valid reason for fielding the team he did: to get the best matchup on paper in the playoffs to give his team the best chance to win.

 

Winning fantasy football is often about scoring the most points....other times, it is about facing a team that score the least points. I think he has every right strategically to try to face the team he feels will score the least.

 

I will repeat what I said earlier, namely that the owner who is tanking is doing nothing wrong rules wise. I prefer to play in non-tanking leagues myself because I play this game mostly for fun, and a little for money, everyone else is free to do as he wishes.

You yourself define a line wherein it is okay to tank and not okay to tank. In real life these things are a little more complicated, what is to stop an owner from claiming that he is helping the weaker team through when in fact it is merely animus that is motivating him (one can easily argue that team A is stronger than team B, as the inverse based on record, matchups, injuries etc...). Hey what about just tanking and declaring "I earned the priviledge to tank, and I just don't like the guy on the outside trying to get in, so I am tanking"?

Having a no tank policy ensures that there is less of a grey area, and just makes it clear that this league does not beleive in tanking. Rules can be written in more or less stringent ways (ie. "c'mon, don't be a dick" or making provisions for not allowing lineups with insufficient players)

Put another way over the years I have played with many great Huddle members (sky, BJ, chavez, wiegie, Spain, driveby etc...) I can not imagine being in a league with those guys where tanking would be considered. And I am fairly confident that were one to tank it would have marked the last year that that league would be going.

[Dr. Sacrebleu]

My bad.....I assumed the object was to WIN!.....silly me.

 

-I don't tackle the guy from behind with a good chance of injuring the guy when playing a game of pick up soccer in the park with a bunch of 40 year olds

 

Even though it could be a foul worth giving in order to win the game. The day I play a soccer game for a pro team, I'm all over that guy's ass

As I said earlier, if the pot at the end of the campaign is worth being a total douch an alienating your friends over fine. If it isn't, I just don't see myself throwing a game.

 

 

I feel sorry for you if the only reason you play this game is to win no matter the cost.

Your words and tone are those of alittle little man

[Clubfoothead]

I don't like it. I don't like the argument that the objective is to win so you intentionally lose. I would not do it but I don't fear anyone.

 

That being said, I don't think there's any way to rule around it happening and to some extent I guess there is a valid strategic reason to do it. Talk a lot of $hit and let Karma do your heavy lifting.

[osu1322]

As long as he isn't doing something like not putting anyone in his team slot to auto lose the I don't have a problem with this move

 

From the sounds of it he is playing people so that is a non issue (this is also where I think people have to have a legal line up should be a rule in every leauge)

 

Yes I'll admitt this guy is a bit of a douch but he making a stratigical move to help his chances in the playoffs. I also agree that it screws over someone in the leauge from making the playoffs it sucks. However how many times have u had an oppertunity to make the playoffs if so and so lose and u win and they just win, Or u lose and don't make it in.

 

My point is things like this happen that r out of ur control. U may not like it but if u had a better record u would have been in the playoofs. When u win enough games to put urself into a position like that he has gained the oppertunity to make decisions like tha

[skylive5]

Scenario:

 

#1 seed is playing one of the 2 teams (the weaker one) competing for the wild card (his first playoff opponent.) This week he is starting Carolinas DEF and mentioned to me that he will also start his worst matchups so that he can play "team weak" instead of "team strong" in the playoffs. He says its just strategy.

 

This happens in so many leagues every year it is almost the norm. What is wrong about it is that he said something.... most of the time you can see what the person is doing but they just keep their mouth shut. Which is what he should have done.

 

It is an unfortunate situation that occurs more often than anyone wants to believe. Playing to win no matter what and let the chips fall where they may isn't the mantra anymore.

 

Personally don't like his "strategy" but don't think you should say anything or do anything about it this year. You need to fix your rules so that at a minimum owners are held to account for not fielding a competitive team. (Stay away from managing their teams though....not a good thing.)

 

Putting ones best foot forward should always be the way to go.

[Bronco Billy]

Typical liberal idiocy. Prove it!

 

I was out fishing with my family. Yes, but you failed to pick up LT from the waiver wire. All said and done, you were negligent, and as such, you forfiet the championship.

 

I assume this is how it works in Bejing.....

 

 

I didn't realize FF was that popular in China...

[Bronco Billy]

Scenario:

 

#1 seed is playing one of the 2 teams (the weaker one) competing for the wild card (his first playoff opponent.) This week he is starting Carolinas DEF and mentioned to me that he will also start his worst matchups so that he can play "team weak" instead of "team strong" in the playoffs. He says its just strategy.

 

There is no rule against this, but if it were me getting screwed out of at least the 4th place prize I'd be pretty pissed. How do I prevent this? Am I wrong about this? Can you even have a rule against this? It isn't impossible that his plan can backfire and he wins anyway.

 

This is not something I expected and it's eating away at me.

 

Personally, I like to think sportsmanship is a part of FF and that owners will be ethical in their behavior. Intentionally fielding a lesser lineup - and outright admitting it - falls on the wrong side of the line. This is condoning tanking and is no different than an owner out of the playoffs fielding a lesser team to enhance next year's draft position.

 

If you don't have a rule against tanking there isn't much you can do this season, but you can let him do whatever he feels works best for him this season and then simply not invite him back to play next season. When he takes umbrage, remind him of what he did and tell him that isn't the type of league any of your leaguemates want to be a part of.

 

It's unfortunate that some individuals act this way - and even take great pride in it. Winning at any cost is a cancer to any league. Hopefully it works out that his plan backfires, he loses to the weaker team, and then you can send him packing.

Edited December 8, 2010 by Bronco Billy

[detlef]

Interesting. In the husband and wife deal, we needed to know that she was benching CJ in an earnest attempt to win her game. And that wasn't even good enough for some who, at very least, think those two should be watched in the future, and some, well one actually, saying they'd block the move from happening because they don't believe her explanation.

 

In this case, dude is flat out saying he's trying to throw the game to help get a particular team into the play-offs.

 

Sort of an odd double standard. Mind you, the team pulling the stunt has something to gain, theoretically, because he earns an easier play-off match-up. So, does the fact that there's something in it for him make it cool? Is that the criteria? Because there's also something in it for the wife if her husband wins the money. Most every year that I won, depending on how much, something often made it back to my wife. In low pay out years, it might be a dinner out. One year, bought lumber and tools and built a new bed. So it's not a stretch to say she profits from her husband winning and, by the same, all is fair logic that is being applied here, should be off the hook.

 

Now, I for one don't think she was trying to lose anyway, but we've already kicked that dead horse.

 

As for this guy, it is both strategy and d-baggery. Like Dr. says, there are a lot of things that are technically allowed but are quite frowned upon in a game among friends. And I think this qualifies. So, while there's no way to legislate this out of the game, nor would this warrant, "I wouldn't invite the owner back", there's no question that dude is being a d-bag.

 

As an aside, and this would not solve this issue but perhaps situations somewhat like it. We installed a "pick your poison" rule where the top seed got to pick his 1st round opponent from the play-off field. Just one more bit of drama to add to the mix.

[i_am_the_swammi]

Personally, I like to think sportsmanship is a part of FF and that owners will be ethical in their behavior. Intentionally fielding a lesser lineup - and outright admitting it - falls on the wrong side of the line. This is condoning tanking and is no different than an owner out of the playoffs fielding a lesser team to enhance next year's draft position.

 

If you don't have a rule against tanking there isn't much you can do this season, but you can let him do whatever he feels works best for him this season and then simply not invite him back to play next season. When he takes umbrage, remind him of what he did and tell him that isn't the type of league any of your leaguemates want to be a part of.

 

It's unfortunate that some individuals act this way - and even take great pride in it. Winning at any cost is a cancer to any league. Hopefully it works out that his plan backfires, he loses to the weaker team, and then you can send him packing.

 

I am sure this argument has been held each and every year, but since its being renewed, I'll chime in with why I think its OK.

 

Most major sports teams hold out their best players at the end of the year if they have put themselves into a position to do so. Most do it to rest their players do give them the certainty that they are healthy for the playoffs. Very occasionally, they also do it so they can play a certain team and tailor their playoff-path the way they want. Either way, its done for one reason: to try to put yourself in the best possible position to win. If you have played well enough all year to completely control your own destiny, even to the point where you have the ability to manipulate who you are going to play, then kudos to you for having an excellent team.

 

I see no reason why fantasy football should be any different. And I certainly don't think there is any reason why you'd want to take that competitiveness OUT of the league.

 

Whose fault is it that the owner who is whining is on the cusp of not making the playoffs? Stop the pussification. If you don't want it to happen, field a better team!

[policyvote]

It still astounds me how many people think trying to lose is ever okay. Everyone has to field their best lineup each week. Period.

 

Peace

policy

[Bronco Billy]

I am sure this argument has been held each and every year, but since its being renewed, I'll chime in with why I think its OK.

 

Most major sports teams hold out their best players at the end of the year if they have put themselves into a position to do so. Most do it to rest their players do give them the certainty that they are healthy for the playoffs. Very occasionally, they also do it so they can play a certain team and tailor their playoff-path the way they want. Either way, its done for one reason: to try to put yourself in the best possible position to win. If you have played well enough all year to completely control your own destiny, even to the point where you have the ability to manipulate who you are going to play, then kudos to you for having an excellent team.

 

I see no reason why fantasy football should be any different. And I certainly don't think there is any reason why you'd want to take that competitiveness OUT of the league.

 

Whose fault is it that the owner who is whining is on the cusp of not making the playoffs? Stop the pussification. If you don't want it to happen, field a better team!

 

And you don't see a difference between a NFL team holding its star players out for a playoff run when it has already clinched and a FF team intentionally tanking? Really?

[detlef]

I am sure this argument has been held each and every year, but since its being renewed, I'll chime in with why I think its OK.

 

Most major sports teams hold out their best players at the end of the year if they have put themselves into a position to do so. Most do it to rest their players do give them the certainty that they are healthy for the playoffs. Very occasionally, they also do it so they can play a certain team and tailor their playoff-path the way they want. Either way, its done for one reason: to try to put yourself in the best possible position to win. If you have played well enough all year to completely control your own destiny, even to the point where you have the ability to manipulate who you are going to play, then kudos to you for having an excellent team.

 

I see no reason why fantasy football should be any different. And I certainly don't think there is any reason why you'd want to take that competitiveness OUT of the league.

 

Whose fault is it that the owner who is whining is on the cusp of not making the playoffs? Stop the pussification. If you don't want it to happen, field a better team!

I think the argument against your stance is that pro sports is all about the money and FF shouldn't be. Like Dr. Sac says, in an over 40 soccer league, you don't tackle much, because winning is not important enough to risk injuring your CPA who happens to be on the other team.

 

Guys really need to check themselves sometimes in FF. In fact, I stopped playing in my old school league because everyone was always bickering. I initially wanted to stay in it after I moved cross country because I thought it would be a great way to stay in touch with my bros. Turns out, it was just a great way to get into pissing matches with old friends over petty crap like this. Screw that. Now I may talk to these guys less, but at least every time I do, we're not b!tching about FF rules. And from what I gather from those still in the league, nothing has changed. And that's too bad.

[i_am_the_swammi]

And you don't see a difference between a NFL team holding its star players out for a playoff run when it has already clinched and a FF team intentionally tanking? Really?

 

Isn't the NFL team holding out its best QB/RB intentionally not fielding its best team? Of course they aren't. Its even been discussed in the NFL offices how to fix this so fans who have tickets can see a meaningful game. It happens, and its a strategy that most teams employ if they are in a position to do so.

 

Is it different than fantasy football? Of course. But the underlying objective is the same: to put yourself in the best possible position to win.

 

ETA: I guess I should add that I don't particularly like the idea, but that is besides the point. There's a lit of things I don't necessarily like, but live with because its part of life/sports/whatever. This is one of them. The top team has earned the right to field whatever lineup he wants. He is taking the chance that he may make his bed, then have to lie in it. Karma has a way of catching up with teams that overthink. it's happened to pro teams that rest their starters, then they come out flat in the playoffs. I don't like that pro teams sometimes rest their guys, affecting who makes the playoffs and who doesn't. But it happens late in the season. And its happening to the OP. Grin and bear it.

Edited December 8, 2010 by i_am_the_swammi

[Bronco Billy]

Isn't the NFL team holding out its best QB/RB intentionally not fielding its best team? Of course they aren't. Its even been discussed in the NFL offices how to fix this so fans who have tickets can see a meaningful game. It happens, and its a strategy that most teams employ if they are in a position to do so.

 

Is it different than fantasy football? Of course. But the underlying objective is the same: to put yourself in the best possible position to win.

 

So minimizing the risk of injury and making sure the team is at its strongest in the playoffs is the same in FF as it is in the NFL? There's no way to make a comparable argument out of the two situations. It's difficult to believe that anyone would actually try to do so.