Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'league rules'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Huddle Forums
    • Fantasy Football
    • Fantasy Football Advice
    • Individual Defensive Players
    • Find a League / Find an Owner
    • College Football
    • Non-Football
    • The Tailgate
    • Site & Forum Support
  • League Forums
    • BoTH Fantasy Football League Forums
    • Other Fantasy Football League Forums
    • Non-Football Fantasy League Forums

Blogs

There are no results to display.


Found 9 results

  1. please keep All comments in this thread related to Changing 5.1.2 wording ONLY Current Owner votes to Chang wording of rule 5.1.2: For Changing: Gameday Demons, Necessary Roughness, NOT for Changing: On the fence: Donkey Power
  2. please keep All comments in this thread related to RE-DRAFTING LEAGUE AUCTION STYLE ONLY Current Owner votes to Re-Draft the League: Re-Draft: Alex Gee No Re-Draft: Gameday Demons On the fence:
  3. please keep All comments in this thread related to EXPANSION OF ROSTERS ONLY Expand Team Rosters: Alex Gee NOT to expand Team Rosters: Gameday Demons, On the fence: Necessary Roughness
  4. please keep All comments in this thread related to REMOVING/KEEPING KICKERS ONLY Current Owner votes to Keep/Remover Kickers from the League: Keep Kickers: JD Bartell's Team, Donkey Power, Remove Kickers: Alex Gee On the fence: Gameday Demons, Necessary Roughness
  5. please keep All comments in this thread related to IDP DEFENSE ONLY Current Owner votes to implement IDP Defense to the League: For Implementing IDP: Alex Gee, NOT for Implementing IDP: Donkey Power, On the fence: Gameday Demons, Necessary Roughness, JD Bartell's,
  6. please keep All comments in this thread related to TEAM DEFENSE ONLY Fix Team Defense: Alex Gee Leave Team Defense as-is: On the fence: Gameday Demons, Necessary Roughness
  7. $300 - Yahoo 12T H2H 8x8 Categories - Offline Slow Draft Batting cats: R, HR, RBI, AVG, OPS, XBH, NSB, K Pitching cats: QS, L, K, ERA, WHIP, K/BB, NSV, HLD We do an offline draft over the course of about a ´╗┐week and a half in March through clickydraft we use LeagueSafe for dues Let me know if you want to join! Have a couple openings currently
  8. Attached are all the rules, but we will being doing the draft as soon as we get every spot filled. It will be a massive slow veteran draft followed by the developmental draft. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1zblArm7_3TglU30yokHL3mpnKl0meoV-yrdxvU4D2yw/edit?ts=5c7b01d9#gid=1112514556
  9. Let's say the commissioner of a dynasty league discovered that someone tanked during a few games at the end of the season (Year 2 of the league) to get a better draft pick in this year's upcoming rookie draft. There aren't any explicit anti-tanking rules and the way the rookie draft order is calculated for the upcoming draft has been posted since the league started (i.e. it has been posted and disclosed to the owners for over two years). The owner that tanked had a screenshot of a text message where he and the commissioner discussed starting inactive (bye week, injured, suspended, free agent, retired) players. The tanking owner asked if it was something he could do, and the commissioner said that "if you don't have anybody else to start, then yes, but if you just don't want to, then I don't know." The tanking owner then pointed out that the site did not prevent someone from starting inactive players, to which the commish responded "Cool. Yeah." The tanking owner understood this as a grant of permission to start such inactive players, and a pro-tanking position in general. The commissioner claims that the owner never explicitly asked about tanking, and as it turns out, the commish is actually strongly against tanking (something that was not known until now). The commissioner collected dues for the upcoming season (the season for which the rookie draft will take place), but he did not like the fact that somebody tanked. On the other hand, the tanking owner had a screenshot of conversation where the commissioner says that the order of the draft "must" be the way that it is currently posted in the league's bylaws. However, the commissioner still decided to change the draft order regardless, because he is really anti-tanking. He changed one of the tiebreakers from total points scored by starting lineups, to total points scored by each team's optimal lineups. This rule change actually violated the league's bylaws, as he was supposed to announce such a change on the league's internal boards and allow for a review period where teams could vote on the rule. The rule was not posted on the boards, and therefore it was not reviewed or voted on. For what it is worth, the tanking owner has played in leagues where tanking has occurred, specifically, leagues where teams were allowed to bench their star players in order to lose a game (to get themselves a better matchup in the first round, a better draft pick, etc.), or to bench players in order to secure a win (prevent someone from scoring negative points). However, the commissioner has never seen this tactic in 10+ years of playing. The tanking owner also believes that tanking happens in real life, but the commissioner is of the firm opinion that it does not. On top of that, the tanking owner has hard evidence that tanking happened in Year 1 of the league, but the commissioner is unaware of this. It is also worth noting that in the final game of the season, the commissioner did spot the tanking and after a brief exchange, the tanking owner agreed to set a new lineup because, although he thought it was fair game, he just didn't want to "start any drama" among the league members. During this exchange, the tanking owner showed the commissioner the text message exchange they had about starting inactive players. After receiving the message, the commissioner said that he was fine with people starting weak lineups, just not inactive players. So maybe the commish is more anti-inactive players than he is anti-tanking. Many league members complained about the tanking owner during the last week of the season because it either affected their chances of securing a top draft slot, or their playoff hopes. Some owners are upset that it wasn't caught earlier, because other games where the owner tanked are now in the books. The commish and vice-commish apparently agreed to create different tie-breakers for this coming season, but never updated the rulebook or disclosed such a change to the rest of the league. Even so, the commish still thought that he was perfectly within his rights to implement the unposted order now. He is really concerned with the integrity of the league. But as of right now, there is no rule against tanking, the league has never discussed tanking, and the tanking owner thought it was fine based off of previous experiences, his own self-interest, and the text message exchange he had with the commish. The commish doesn't think an anti-tanking rule is needed, nor is one needed to tell people that they must only start active players each week. Considering all of this, do you think the commissioner made a mistake? Was it wrong for him to unilaterally implement any "corrective" measures after dues were paid? Please explain below.