faceplant Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 So my guys came out pretty flat this Sunday and I'm down big going into tonight. I've got Brandon Marshall and Reggie Bush going but I'd need about six touchdowns and a couple hundred yards to come close to winning. Is it bad form to mail it in so I can take priority on the waiver wire if its in my best interest to do so? FYI - I've definitely got first dibs on WW if I sit my guys tonight Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
major-tom Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 If you have to ask.... Bush league and many leagues have language in rules referring to submitting best lineup possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faceplant Posted September 12, 2011 Author Share Posted September 12, 2011 If you have to ask.... Bush league and many leagues have language in rules referring to submitting best lineup possible. We do not have a rule like that in place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 It is very weak sauce in my opinion. There may not be a rule against it in your league but there should be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Number 11 Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 (edited) So my guys came out pretty flat this Sunday and I'm down big going into tonight. I've got Brandon Marshall and Reggie Bush going but I'd need about six touchdowns and a couple hundred yards to come close to winning. Is it bad form to mail it in so I can take priority on the waiver wire if its in my best interest to do so? FYI - I've definitely got first dibs on WW if I sit my guys tonight I would think it is really up to you but I would hesitate only because in our league if there is a tie for a playoff spot it goes to the team with the most points scored..which if that is the case you would be hurting yourself...if you make it to the playoffs ;>) Edited September 12, 2011 by Number 11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubbahawk Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 under no circumstances do you ever tank a game or season or anything. if you were in one of my leagues and you pulled that crap you would be gone! no vote! just gone! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTSuper7 Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Sounds like you are going to lose anyway, no? So why bench these guys... It is bad form, and karma seems to always come back to bite moves like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
electricrelish Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 So my guys came out pretty flat this Sunday and I'm down big going into tonight. I've got Brandon Marshall and Reggie Bush going but I'd need about six touchdowns and a couple hundred yards to come close to winning. Is it bad form to mail it in so I can take priority on the waiver wire if its in my best interest to do so? FYI - I've definitely got first dibs on WW if I sit my guys tonight Who is on your waiver wire that's worth taking a "L" for? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MustOfBeenDrunk Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 NO ,,, NOT ,,,, And Never ,,, Tank ,,, period ,, end of story Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzlemaster Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 To avoid the urge to do that, our league awards the last playoff spot to the team with the highest points that is not already in a top 5 playoff spot. i.e. first 5 spots go on W/L record, last spot goes to high points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doobwaa Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 That would be a very weak move sir...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 So my guys came out pretty flat this Sunday and I'm down big going into tonight. I've got Brandon Marshall and Reggie Bush going but I'd need about six touchdowns and a couple hundred yards to come close to winning. Is it bad form to mail it in so I can take priority on the waiver wire if its in my best interest to do so? FYI - I've definitely got first dibs on WW if I sit my guys tonight Presumably WW is based on W-L record but since 6 of you will be 1-0 and the other 6 will be 0-1, total points are coming in to the picture, right? IMO, you should still start and play your best line up at all times. Might want to consider blind bids to avoid this nonsense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 (edited) If you have to ask.... Bush league and many leagues have language in rules referring to submitting best lineup possible. Who decides that? Trust me, I can't tell you how many weeks my dumbass would be saved by a rule like that. "Sorry Detlef, you're going to need to keep Ben Tate in your line-up and bench Brandon Jacobs instead." Not that I agree that the OP should tank, but what it seems your implying is a slippery slope to be sure. Didn't this come up last year with someone who benched a "stud" because she thought it was a bad start and people were all huffy because they thought she was doing it to help her husband's team? Among the all-time great Huddle threads. Edited September 12, 2011 by detlef Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RickC Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Don't tank. You will take a loss anyway so don't you end up with the same ww priority? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Don't tank. You will take a loss anyway so don't you end up with the same ww priority? No, tanking seemingly puts him first in line. Losing but not tanking probably puts him 3rd, 4th, 5th, something like that. So, technically, there's something to gain. Not that he should. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorcher Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Who decides that? Trust me, I can't tell you how many weeks my dumbass would be saved by a rule like that. "Sorry Detlef, you're going to need to keep Ben Tate in your line-up and bench Brandon Jacobs instead." Not that I agree that the OP should tank, but what it seems your implying is a slippery slope to be sure. Didn't this come up last year with someone who benched a "stud" because she thought it was a bad start and people were all huffy because they thought she was doing it to help her husband's team? Among the all-time great Huddle threads. I remember that thread, she benched CJ, saying she didn't think he would do well that week. She ended up being right and won her game. The object of FF to me is to show your skill in choosing and playing players: it is not to show how well one can manipulate the system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubbahawk Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Who decides that? Trust me, I can't tell you how many weeks my dumbass would be saved by a rule like that. "Sorry Detlef, you're going to need to keep Ben Tate in your line-up and bench Brandon Jacobs instead." Not that I agree that the OP should tank, but what it seems your implying is a slippery slope to be sure. Didn't this come up last year with someone who benched a "stud" because she thought it was a bad start and people were all huffy because they thought she was doing it to help her husband's team? Among the all-time great Huddle threads. I agree with this. no one should tell you who you can and can't start. However, this guy is talking about taking players out and not replacing them at all. it is blatant tanking and should be kicked out of any league for doing so. i am very much for freedom of managing your team how you see fit. i do not like trade veto's or even voting on trades. If you want to sit Austin for Jimmy Graham thats fine too(i did) There is just no excuse to for what he wants to do...period!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 I remember that thread, she benched CJ, saying she didn't think he would do well that week. She ended up being right and won her game. The object of FF to me is to show your skill in choosing and playing players: it is not to show how well one can manipulate the system. I agree with this. no one should tell you who you can and can't start. However, this guy is talking about taking players out and not replacing them at all. it is blatant tanking and should be kicked out of any league for doing so. i am very much for freedom of managing your team how you see fit. i do not like trade veto's or even voting on trades. If you want to sit Austin for Jimmy Graham thats fine too(i did) There is just no excuse to for what he wants to do...period!! FWIW, I think it's doochie as hell what he's doing. I'm just saying you can't have a rule about it because you get stuck in that BS argument where people are implying that someone is tanking because they're not playing a guy "they" think that person should start. All you can do is make it advantageous to start a good team in this situation (like the total points tie-breaker for the play-offs) or have blind bids or have the waiver wire order in week one be determined by reverse order of the draft order. Either that or just recognize that you're playing with a Thighmaster and not worry about it. Ultimately, nobody "deserves" to have the first choice of waivers because they sucked worse the first week of the season than everyone else. It's one week. The NFL's deal with draft and waiver order is a bit more big picture than that and has to do with taking teams who, quite obviously, sucked compared to everyone else and improve the overall product by giving them a shot at the best new talent. And, for many reasons, even that doesn't work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubbahawk Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 The NFL will sit players when a team has locked up it's playoff spot in week 16-17. Teams do it. I don't know of teams that will sit a player when they're 2-13 in hopes of getting the #1 pick, but I wouldn't be surprised if private conversations were held to that end. If his league is okay with it, then does it matter what we think? An NFL team still needs to play 11 men on the field. What he wants to do is like playing with 8! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Karma is a sumbitch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 This says nothing of the embarrassment that one should feel about bringing up the rear out the gate. You have a draft, where everyone walks away thinking their team is great. Then there's the chight talk leading up to week one. Then, someone's team goes off, plenty of others put up solid numbers either in a winning or losing cause, and some d-bag stinks it up and wins the Randal Cobb sweepstakes. Trust me, I'm in the running for that "prize" in one of my leagues and I'm not exactly happy about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubbahawk Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 FWIW, I think it's doochie as hell what he's doing. I'm just saying you can't have a rule about it because you get stuck in that BS argument where people are implying that someone is tanking because they're not playing a guy "they" think that person should start. All you can do is make it advantageous to start a good team in this situation (like the total points tie-breaker for the play-offs) or have blind bids or have the waiver wire order in week one be determined by reverse order of the draft order. Either that or just recognize that you're playing with a Thighmaster and not worry about it. Ultimately, nobody "deserves" to have the first choice of waivers because they sucked worse the first week of the season than everyone else. It's one week. The NFL's deal with draft and waiver order is a bit more big picture than that and has to do with taking teams who, quite obviously, sucked compared to everyone else and improve the overall product by giving them a shot at the best new talent. And, for many reasons, even that doesn't work. I think we agree on this. I wouldn't care if he put in scrubs. He wants to not field a complete team. there can be no bs arguement about that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Bush League. The simple fact that you are here asking means you know it too. First your league should implement a rule next year that requires teams to field complete starting lineups - this would lessen the impact of dead beat owners attempting to manipulate their lineups Monday night to improve their waiver wire positions. Second your league should implement a rule next year that states bye players can't be started - this would lessen the impact of dead beat owners attempting to manipulate their lineups Monday night to improve their waiver wire positions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RokoMotion Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 The thread question was whether the poster's actions would be immoral. I don't know if it's against the rules - that would depend on your league. But it definitely would be immoral. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearBroncos Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 The NFL will sit players when a team has locked up it's playoff spot in week 16-17. Teams do it. I don't know of teams that will sit a player when they're 2-13 in hopes of getting the #1 pick, but I wouldn't be surprised if private conversations were held to that end. If his league is okay with it, then does it matter what we think? I remember one very good example. Remember the Jimmy Johnson Hershall Walker trade to the Vikings that led to the Troy Aikman getting man handled his first year due to "conditional" draft picks based upon the performance of those traded players? Brilliant trade, mind you, but Dallas never put their best players forward, nearly at the expense of their hall of fame QB. 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.