Commissioner's behaviors

[hrguy]

Sadly, he wasn't making churned players available. My reference to making other "decisions" were typically players that were obtained after they played but before they went on waivers. Ex. he picked up B Jacobs around midnight Thur immediately after BJ had that one good game on TNF.

Edited December 19, 2013 by hrguy

[wpayers]

I am surprised at the collective niavete of many of the responses. Regardless of what you consider to be a Richard Move, if league rules don't prohibit or restrict churning/multiple drops then the issue can't be debated or changed DURING the season. If there is a flaw or loophole in the rules it should be addressed during the off-season.

Edited December 19, 2013 by wpayers

[tony2345]

Sadly, he wasn't making churned players available. My reference to making other "decisions" were typically players that were obtained after they played but before they went on waivers. Ex. he picked up B Jacobs around midnight Thur immediately after BJ had that one good game on TNF.

 

 

do you pay for this league? i woudl turned this thing upside down if a move like that was made. that is ridiculous and complete abuse of power.

[Joessfl]

I am surprised at the collective niavete of many of the responses. Regardless of what you consider to be a Richard Move, if league rules don't prohibit or restrict churning/multiple drops then the issue can't be debated or changed DURING the season. If there is a flaw or loophole in the rules it should be addressed during the off-season.

 

 

It was mentioned by the Hitter.

[SecondString]

I am surprised at the collective niavete of many of the responses. Regardless of what you consider to be a Richard Move, if league rules don't prohibit or restrict churning/multiple drops then the issue can't be debated or changed DURING the season. If there is a flaw or loophole in the rules it should be addressed during the off-season.

 

 

Two issues here:

 

1 - An owner who has resorted to churning

 

2 - An overstepping, over-officious Commish.

 

Neither is okay, in fact they are both egregious. The fact that #1 occurred doesn't make #2 acceptable. But just because somebody posts something against one of them in the thread doesn't mean that they are necessarily cop esthetic with the other.

[bowltr]

Maybe I'm interpreting this differently than you all but he said he originally picked up the players as sleepers and decided to cut them later in the week when it became clearer as to who would play. He kept one player an extra day in order to ensure his opponent could not pick him up.

That to me is not churning. Churning is done when there is intent by the party that picks up the player and drops the player to solely keep another team from having that player. IMO at least according to his explanation he did not do that. He made a strategic move to cover himself and give himself the most options he could. When he decide later in the week he would not use these players he cut them but he did it strategically. To me that is just smart and it's something lots of players do. We all reconsider lineups later in the week even if we picked a player off the WW earlier in the week.

To me he got screwed and also did nothing wrong.

[MikesVikes]

The truth of the matter is that there are people who play fantasy football get a rise out of looking for loopholes to exploit. Leagues can't account for every single issue that could possibly come up in advance of it becoming an issue. I've played in leagues like that. (No it wasn't me as far as i know.

 

How about the dude that has the last pick in the draft. Do you have a rule in place in case he waits for two weeks to make his pick so he can ride out the market? That is just one example of several that I have had with an owner.

 

Commish should have the power to maintain control of the league and not one owner hijack it for his benefit.

[MikesVikes]

The week before last, I picked up Dallas Clark early on Sunday morning. Later in the morning it was learned that he was going to be out that day. I dropped him for Ertz about 3 hours later but before games on Sunday began. Is that cheating? If so I would gladly accept the points for the TE I was trying to avoid starting that day.

 

That was the day Charles Clay had 97/2 against the Steelers. Ertz had a goose egg.

Edited December 19, 2013 by MikesVikes

[Sprtfan]

I don't see this as churning at all. He picked up someone that he might use and then dropped them when he decided he would not. He kept the player longer than he needed to so he wouldn't be available for someone to pick them up but it was not the intent of the pick up in the first place. Even then, picking someone up to keep the player from someone else is not churning.

To me at least, churning would be picking up a kicker, then dropping that kicker, picking up another kicker and repeating until no kickers were available to be picked up because you noticed that the guy you are playing has a kicker on bye and no back ups. This could really only happen in a "free for all" waiver set up.

My main league has waivers that clear every night and a player is available as soon as waviers clear again after they are dropped. I guess that would keep people from doing what the OP did but I still wouldn't consider it churning.

[Big Country]

Churning is an action - the intent is irrelevant.

 

In FF circles, churning is the dropping of a player that you picked up that week. In most leagues, this is not allowed, or, if it is done, the dropped player is immediately available. The extreme example mentioned earlier would be literally picking up and dropping every available free agent so no one else could. (Yes, waiver rounds allow some players to be picked up, but this would lock up every player from a FCFS pick up)

 

Pick up a player and drop him that week to block others from having him is churning.

Picking up a player and dropping him because you changed your mind on who you wanted is churning.

 

 

In MikesVikes Clark/Ertz example, in most leagues I am in, he would not have been allowed to drop Clark. He could have still picked up Ertz, but would have had to drop a different player to do so.

[MustOfBeenDrunk]

Churning is an action - the intent is irrelevant.

 

In FF circles, churning is the dropping of a player that you picked up that week. In most leagues, this is not allowed, or, if it is done, the dropped player is immediately available. The extreme example mentioned earlier would be literally picking up and dropping every available free agent so no one else could. (Yes, waiver rounds allow some players to be picked up, but this would lock up every player from a FCFS pick up)

 

Pick up a player and drop him that week to block others from having him is churning.

Picking up a player and dropping him because you changed your mind on who you wanted is churning.

 

 

In MikesVikes Clark/Ertz example, in most leagues I am in, he would not have been allowed to drop Clark. He could have still picked up Ertz, but would have had to drop a different player to do so.

 

 

That's why I like BB real $ for waiver , this stuff would not go on

[boltnlava]

This is easy: Join the real world of FF and get into a BOTH league...At least when you lose OR win ...You actually do. I've joined 2 so far and never looked back. No one in these leagues want to win unless they do. Fairly ...Rules or no...Never seen anything else with these fine folks....BTW: Thank You Huddle and all in BOTH Leagues...

[wpayers]

The truth of the matter is that there are people who play fantasy football get a rise out of looking for loopholes to exploit. Leagues can't account for every single issue that could possibly come up in advance of it becoming an issue. I've played in leagues like that. (No it wasn't me as far as i know.

 

How about the dude that has the last pick in the draft. Do you have a rule in place in case he waits for two weeks to make his pick so he can ride out the market? That is just one example of several that I have had with an owner.

 

Commish should have the power to maintain control of the league and not one owner hijack it for his benefit.

 

Wise words but for every Commish that acts judiciously that will be one that jumps in without forethought, or worst, uses, "the power maintain control" in their own favor. Then there are the unintended consequences of changes on the fly and other owners that dissent.

 

A strong constitution and well thought out rules have to be maintained. If you have a bunch of Richards looking for loopholes than there's a more fundamental problem.

Edited December 19, 2013 by wpayers

[Sprtfan]

I would think having the recently picked up player become available right away would solve most of the churning issues. I've been in leagues (long time ago) were if you picked someone up, you had to keep them until the following week. That would really suck if you picked up Gerhart last week since AD was hurt and not be able to drop Gerhart when you found out he was going to be out as well.

 

All of my leagues charge for pick ups so it is not a problem. I guess if you drop a kicker to pick up someone to keep from the team you are playing and then drop that player before the games start to pick back up the kicker I can see it being churning. In most cases though, if the player was worth keeping away from someone they are probably worth having on my bench.

[hrguy]

I've informed the Commish in question of this topic. He could wade in soon.

[lzrdkng14]

Not sure if this has been asked, would you have won if you started todman instead of someone else? Maybe you should have just kept him?

[delusions of grandeur]

I would think having the recently picked up player become available right away would solve most of the churning issues. I've been in leagues (long time ago) were if you picked someone up, you had to keep them until the following week. That would really suck if you picked up Gerhart last week since AD was hurt and not be able to drop Gerhart when you found out he was going to be out as well.

 

All of my leagues charge for pick ups so it is not a problem. I guess if you drop a kicker to pick up someone to keep from the team you are playing and then drop that player before the games start to pick back up the kicker I can see it being churning. In most cases though, if the player was worth keeping away from someone they are probably worth having on my bench.

 

 

Dropped players go to waivers for the same reason why you do weekly waivers before opening it up to first come first serve on Wednesday or Thursday.

 

Its so that everyone gets equal opportunity, and the players don't just go to the guy who sits by his computer all day.

[hrguy]

I lost by around 2 pts. Todman got 19. The next best after Todman got 11 ish.

[stevegrab]

Well, to be fair to the commish, there appears to have been som precedence of unlocking churned players over the course of the season. It does not appear to be in the rules, so he may have only done it when he noticed it or was called on it. That doesn't make it right, but it also doesn't make this some kind of unique situation that just happened this year.

 

For what it's worth, every league I'm in has a rule that any player picked up via waiver/free agency can not be dropped by the team that acquires them until the following week. It prevents roster churning which should be illegal in every league. Otherwise, what is to prevent an owner from literally adding and dropping every single free agent player just to lock them up until the following week, then repeating the same thing again the following week.

 

 

Good point, but if the commish was doing this it should be communicated to the league so everybody knows. Not kept to himself and the 1-2 owners involved.

 

Maybe the OP is admitting to churning, but their initial post didn't indicate that.

 

I understand the rule to prevent roster churning but that like many things can have negative affect. I might pick somebody up on waivers on Tuesday then they get hurt and I want to replace them, not have to drop another player to add somebody who will actually be active. We don't see roster churning so we haven't bothered to prevent it.

 

I like the alternative that BA mentions, they become a free agent if you need to drop them (instead of forcing you to keep them). Still prevents churning but also allows owner flexibility.

[stevegrab]

Sadly, he wasn't making churned players available. My reference to making other "decisions" were typically players that were obtained after they played but before they went on waivers. Ex. he picked up B Jacobs around midnight Thur immediately after BJ had that one good game on TNF.

 

 

That is a total BS move, whether the commish did it for themselves or another team. I would never return to that league, as the commish seems crooked.

[stevegrab]

Maybe I'm interpreting this differently than you all but he said he originally picked up the players as sleepers and decided to cut them later in the week when it became clearer as to who would play. He kept one player an extra day in order to ensure his opponent could not pick him up.

That to me is not churning. Churning is done when there is intent by the party that picks up the player and drops the player to solely keep another team from having that player. IMO at least according to his explanation he did not do that. He made a strategic move to cover himself and give himself the most options he could. When he decide later in the week he would not use these players he cut them but he did it strategically. To me that is just smart and it's something lots of players do. We all reconsider lineups later in the week even if we picked a player off the WW earlier in the week.

To me he got screwed and also did nothing wrong.

 

Yep pointed that out myself, but either people are ignoring it or don't care. Once some decide "somebody made a dick move" they cannot be reasoned with.

[stevegrab]

Churning is an action - the intent is irrelevant.

 

In FF circles, churning is the dropping of a player that you picked up that week. In most leagues, this is not allowed, or, if it is done, the dropped player is immediately available. The extreme example mentioned earlier would be literally picking up and dropping every available free agent so no one else could. (Yes, waiver rounds allow some players to be picked up, but this would lock up every player from a FCFS pick up)

 

Pick up a player and drop him that week to block others from having him is churning.

Picking up a player and dropping him because you changed your mind on who you wanted is churning.

 

 

In MikesVikes Clark/Ertz example, in most leagues I am in, he would not have been allowed to drop Clark. He could have still picked up Ertz, but would have had to drop a different player to do so.

 

I agree with your opinion most of the time but have to strongly disagree with you here.

 

He picked up a player he thought he would need. Later decided he didn't and dropped them late to prevent them being available. That is not churning, and INTENT absolutely does matter. As in order to churn you are making the pickup knowing you will drop the player later. If you want to have a rule in your league that works differently fine, but otherwise you cannot define churning however you like.

 

By your definition it would be churning even if the player I dropped is still available that week.

Edited December 20, 2013 by stevegrab

[delusions of grandeur]

 

Yep pointed that out myself, but either people are ignoring it or don't care. Once some decide "somebody made a dick move" they cannot be reasoned with.

 

 

He said he waited an extra day to drop him so no one could pick him up, so I don't get where you guys are getting this "he wasn't trying to churn", he was.

 

I still side with him over the commish, but no, he made it very clear that e held the player for the sole purpose of performing, IMO a dick move.

[Sprtfan]

Dropped players go to waivers for the same reason why you do weekly waivers before opening it up to first come first serve on Wednesday or Thursday.

 

Its so that everyone gets equal opportunity, and the players don't just go to the guy who sits by his computer all day.

 

 

I had mentioned earlier, but was not clear in the quoted post, that waivers could clear every night. You could still keep someone and drop them the day of the game I guess but you wouldn't be able to pick any one up then either.

[wpayers]

He said he waited an extra day to drop him so no one could pick him up, so I don't get where you guys are getting this "he wasn't trying to churn", he was.

 

I still side with him over the commish, but no, he made it very clear that e held the player for the sole purpose of performing, IMO a dick move.

 

 

In my opinion you are making a DICK move by insisting on calling this a dick move. The real context is the guy didn't do anything wrong based on his league rules.

 

Look at it this way, even though it may offend you the Huddle allows me to call you a dick. There is no posting rule barring me saying that.

 

For what it's worth...you seem like a nice guy. I am just calling you a dick to prove a point.