• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About chomper173

  • Rank
  1. First, sorry if this is the wrong forum for this. First time posting here. Looked at the other forums and felt like this was the proper place for it sorry if it is not. As the topic suggests, do you all feel someone would be justified in demanding their money back over the following circumstances that occurred in our league this year? So for the last 4 years now my group of friends and I have played a fantasy football league and had the same commissioner during this time period. Up until this year, we had been using the ESPN as our platform. About 10 days before our draft, our commissioner comes to us and asks us if we are ok with swapping to sleeper. Almost all of us were fine with it, and the only concerns raised on such short notice would be that we could keep the settings as close to ESPN as possible so that no one had to go out of there way to learn new rules and account for them. Our commissioner said he could "Make it like espn, with some slight changes to scoring that should not be noticable". So, we made the swap to sleeper. This is where things start to get weird. Here is a list of events that have happened since we swapped: -Every year we would randomize our draft order 1 hour before the draft. This year, after we swapped, our commissioner randomized the draft early and said it was to "test the randomize draft button on sleeper" but did so with out telling any of us. This caused 3 people to quit. Those players were refunded, and we moved on and filled the spots. As a side effect, some people in the league wanted to rerandomize multiple times 1 hour before the draft, but the commisioner refused to even do a vote on it, randomizing one time only, and the result was he moved up from the 9th pick to the 2nd pick. -Bench spots dropped from 7 to 5. This was not voted on by anyone and the commissioner only spoke to 1 person in the league about the difference as far as I know. -Week 2 we found out the scoring is noticably different. QB ints are 1 point difference (minor and inconsequential). Defensive scoring is completely different, going from yards allowed being counted against a defense to not counting them at all, significantly altering the value of a shut out defense. What's interesting about this, is some of us in the league were under the impression the scoring would be the same as ESPN. Our commissioner flat out told a couple select people about the change, and failed to mention it to other people in the league, and then when we noticed this, justified it under when he said "slight changes" when it was brought up originally swapping to sleeper. -Week 3, we have just found out that the player waiver lockins are different. In espn, the default is once a player plays, they cannot be dropped or moved in any matter till the week ends. In sleeper there is an option to turn that on or off. None of us were told we'd be changing that, and we find out this week that you can drop a player who played thursday night and put someone else in that slot on your bench. When confronted, the commissioner said that 'he didn't even know that was a setting'. I find this exceptionally interesting since he felt the need to test the 'randomize draft' button to see what it did, but wasn't even aware of the player waiver settings he picked???? Note: Some of the responsibility is obviously on us, the players, for not thoroughly going through the rules/settings before the draft. That's our fault, for certain. It was specifically brought up about swapping that things would not be changed because on such short notice, people can be busy and not have time to figure all those things out. Some other notes about the situation: -The events that occurred previous to weeks 2/3 resulted in the commissioner saying he will resign and turn the league over to someone else next year. -50$ buy in (yes, money amount certainly effects things like this) -The commish is our boy and we've known him for awhile. -I've tried to present this issue in an unbiased as possible manner so it can be discussed in a vacuum, leaving out previous history/events in previous years. -The voting of 'demanding money back' is the most extreme, so it's ok to vote no even if you think the situation is BS. I'm mainly posting this and asking because I want to see how a larger group of people would feel/react to this situation. Is it justified to be outraged over this and demand our money back? Here is a straw poll to vote. Thanks for your time and inputs.