Rovers Posted December 23, 2007 Share Posted December 23, 2007 OK, just so I have this straight. Engaging in what is essentially a form of gambling with your friends where you put up an amount of money with hopes of a higher odds-driven payday is nothing like betting with a bookie but exactly like owning a real NFL team? Care to 'splain that? The idea behind FF at least in my obviously warped mind, especially in dynasty leagues, is to attempt to mimic what an NFL GM tries to do.... win the Super Bowl, and ALL the recognition and accolades that come with that. It is the spriit of competiion. Splitting is the wimp's way out. I mean, you are still in the money if you lose, if the money is all you care about. I won't taint a Super Bowl FF Championship that way, win or lose. If you are just in it for the money, I think there are better ways to gamble. Seems to me that people that split are only interested in the money, whether or not it is won according to the league rules they signed up for or not. It's a puzzlies way out, and I am not about to change my mind on it. You're fine with taking the low raod, that is your perogative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FWmaker Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 It's happening in one of my leagues this year (32 teams). The payments were to be: $350 for Superbowl Winner and $150 for Superbowl Loser. And while the other 30 teams are not damaged by the splitting of the pot, I DO think it tarnishes the League's integrity somewhat. So, in my mind, it is some form of collusion, where the 2 owners are working together to circumvent the agreed upon payout rules. It ends up cheapening the Superbowl, IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 It's happening in one of my leagues this year (32 teams). The payments were to be: $350 for Superbowl Winner and $150 for Superbowl Loser. And while the other 30 teams are not damaged by the splitting of the pot, I DO think it tarnishes the League's integrity somewhat. So, in my mind, it is some form of collusion, where the 2 owners are working together to circumvent the agreed upon payout rules. It ends up cheapening the Superbowl, IMO. What if you never knew about it? What if the 2 owners just contacted each other by email, and after the game was played, you sent out the winnings as prescribed, and they privately split it up with each other? Does that tarnish the league's integrity? Or what if a month or two from now the winning owner out of the kindness of his heart, sends his friend a check that happens to be for the difference of the two prizes? Is that allowed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted December 21, 2012 Author Share Posted December 21, 2012 So, here's an ironic twist: I play in a league that's set a $700/$100 split for the 1st and 2nd. A few years ago, the other finalist and I agreed to do it $500/$300. Mind you, we could have just as easily agreed to have the winner send $200 of his winnings to the loser. However, for some stupid reason, we asked the commish to send us each the different amounts which resulted in a chight-storm of the same juvenile and thin arguments that filled this thread. Two owners in particular made the biggest stink. My argument, of course, like I made above was "it stopped being your money the second you got eliminated from any chance of winning it. So this is our money and we can do with it how we see fit." Fast forward, I took a few years off from FF and, because these are old HS friends, they heckled me back into playing. Thing is, they had an even number, so I teamed up with one of them and shared a team. I now find myself in the finals with the two guys who made the biggest stink. One is my partner, the other my opponent. For various reasons, both could use the cash right now, so one sends out an e-mail, just to the three of us, "Hey, would you mind if we split it up $550/$250?" The other quickly agreed and I just smiled and wrote back, "Of course, it's our money. We can split it up however we please." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WashingtonD Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 I've done it twice. In both cases it was the same total points league where I was in second place but rapidly gaining and offered a 50/50 split on prize money - 200 to the winner if it was me and -250 to the winner if it was him (as a nod to the fact the other owner was ahead of me at the moment.) Worked out for be both times as I would have ended up in 2nd at end of season. Now no one will split with me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
electricrelish Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 I have but moreso because I felt sorry for the other person. I have also turned down the offer as well. Both times I won. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FWmaker Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 What if you never knew about it? What if the 2 owners just contacted each other by email, and after the game was played, you sent out the winnings as prescribed, and they privately split it up with each other? Does that tarnish the league's integrity? Or what if a month or two from now the winning owner out of the kindness of his heart, sends his friend a check that happens to be for the difference of the two prizes? Is that allowed? It's difficult. I certainly wouldn't condone it. To have it in public in front of the League, it sux. To have it in private - well it's their money - is better in that the League does not know. However, it is still 2 owners working together to change the outcome - not the score - but of the payouts. Maybe I'm a purist or something, but I personally would not like it. Also - if someone wanted to gift some of the prize-winnings to someone - I've got ZERO issues. Really as long as it isn't set up before the game. As stupid as it is, once people 'start' taking the rules and taking liberties with them, it is much easier to take additional liberties later on - like setting a precedent. If all rules - and the entire rules document - were held in high esteem, I believe there'd be less challenges to the rules, etc. Maybe I'm too idealistic. In a way, it's funny. As an accountant, I'm always trying to find ways AROUND the rules and to exploit loopholes when it's possible (and prudent). Here, I'm defending the integrity of the rules and League Integrity and such. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted December 21, 2012 Author Share Posted December 21, 2012 (edited) If this is a form of collusion, then every trade is a form of collusion. In both cases, you have two parties agreeing on a mutually beneficial arrangement. I get a better RB, you get a better WR. We are essentially creating a brief alliance that pits us against the rest of the league, willingly making one other squad stronger if they agree to do the same for ours. Rest of the league be damned. The irony is that, actually, the pot-split form of "collusion" does nothing to the competitive balance of the league and, at worst, gets someone else's panties in a twist. A mutually beneficial trade actually has some affect on the rest of the league because it could be the difference those two teams needed to actually make the finals at the exclusion of every other team. Suffice to say, I'm certainly not trying to paint a simple trade as anything sinister, just pointing out the folly of the collusion argument when it comes to a pot split. Edited December 21, 2012 by detlef Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
electricrelish Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 (edited) Suffice to say, I'm certainly not trying to paint a simple trade as anything sinister, just pointing out the folly of the collusion argument when it comes to a pot split. Agreed. It's not collusion. I don't know why one would care if anyone split the pot. Obviously, I am assuming that it is not some situation where you agree on it beforehand and then work to make sure each other get to the championship game via trades, etc with the intent to split the pot from the get-go. Splitting the pot is not as fun. It takes the thrill out of it for me, but I have done so in the past, especially if I have reason to believe that the person really needs the money moreso than it just being icing on the cake. If I know that's not the case, then I don't split the pot cause I play primarily for the fun of it, and dividing the prize beforehand is anticlimactic. Edited December 21, 2012 by electricrelish Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted December 21, 2012 Author Share Posted December 21, 2012 (edited) For the record, I've never "split" the pot. Rather agreed to a distribution other than what it set forth by the league that was friendlier to the loser. I still want something to root for. That's brings up another question. For those who feel this is wrong. Not simply something you wouldn't do, but actually wrong and something you'd be pissed about someone in your league doing. Would you feel the same way if the two teams decided to move the distribution the other way? Make it winner-take-all instead of some other split the league set up? Is your issue that they're violating the rules of the league or violating them in a manner that you find to be pu$$yish? Edited December 21, 2012 by detlef Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zooty Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 It's difficult. I certainly wouldn't condone it. To have it in public in front of the League, it sux. To have it in private - well it's their money - is better in that the League does not know. However, it is still 2 owners working together to change the outcome - not the score - but of the payouts. Maybe I'm a purist or something, but I personally would not like it. Also - if someone wanted to gift some of the prize-winnings to someone - I've got ZERO issues. Really as long as it isn't set up before the game. As stupid as it is, once people 'start' taking the rules and taking liberties with them, it is much easier to take additional liberties later on - like setting a precedent. If all rules - and the entire rules document - were held in high esteem, I believe there'd be less challenges to the rules, etc. Maybe I'm too idealistic. In a way, it's funny. As an accountant, I'm always trying to find ways AROUND the rules and to exploit loopholes when it's possible (and prudent). Here, I'm defending the integrity of the rules and League Integrity and such. I don't know if you play poker but do you feel the same way about people splitting tournament winnings? Its some what common there but all on the down low. I didn't look back to see what my opinion was 5 years ago but I have offered splits in leagues that were heavily biased towards 1st place ($300/$100) and also declined splits in the same league. I offered a split this year but was declined, I accepted one this year as well but we're still playing for $50. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted December 21, 2012 Author Share Posted December 21, 2012 (edited) I didn't look back to see what my opinion was 5 years ago but I have offered splits in leagues that were heavily biased towards 1st place ($300/$100) and also declined splits in the same league. I offered a split this year but was declined, I accepted one this year as well but we're still playing for $50. Maybe it's an age thing... You play to win the game not to split although if I lucked my way intro the SB, I probably would Or maybe it's an actually making it to the SB thing... Edited December 21, 2012 by detlef Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nelsosi Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 You play to win the game 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FWmaker Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 POINT 1 If this is a form of collusion, then every trade is a form of collusion. In both cases, you have two parties agreeing on a mutually beneficial arrangement. I get a better RB, you get a better WR. We are essentially creating a brief alliance that pits us against the rest of the league, willingly making one other squad stronger if they agree to do the same for ours. Rest of the league be damned. POINT 2 The irony is that, actually, the pot-split form of "collusion" does nothing to the competitive balance of the league and, at worst, gets someone else's panties in a twist. POINT 3 A mutually beneficial trade actually has some affect on the rest of the league because it could be the difference those two teams needed to actually make the finals at the exclusion of every other team. POINT 4 Suffice to say, I'm certainly not trying to paint a simple trade as anything sinister, just pointing out the folly of the collusion argument when it comes to a pot split. POINT 1 Agreed. POINT 2 Agree - on competitive balance. BUT - at worst - it diminishes "rules." Specifically, the one rule on payouts, and the rules document in totality if any rule is allowed to be diminished. POINT 3 Agreed. POINT 1 Understood - with the problem (pt. 2) discussed above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FWmaker Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 For the record, I've never "split" the pot. Rather agreed to a distribution other than what it set forth by the league that was friendlier to the loser. I still want something to root for. That's brings up another question. For those who feel this is wrong. Not simply something you wouldn't do, but actually wrong and something you'd be pissed about someone in your league doing. Would you feel the same way if the two teams decided to move the distribution the other way? Make it winner-take-all instead of some other split the league set up? Is your issue that they're violating the rules of the league or violating them in a manner that you find to be pu$$yish? Det - both. Mostly that they're "violating" the rules. It certainly doesn't help that the "theme" of this league is Pirate related. Who ever heard of pirates getting together to split the burried treasure? THAT is just going to help the SMACK value of their deeds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FWmaker Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 I don't know if you play poker but do you feel the same way about people splitting tournament winnings? Its some what common there but all on the down low. Actually, don't play poker for THAT type of stakes to have real perspective on it. I did like xMRogers point on it that a whole season of work went in to get you where you are in the playoffs, and not going for the win is uncool. Also, since MOST of us play football to see how we'd be able to GM a team, playing for a tie (in money, at least) just goes against the grain, imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wpayers Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 You play to win the game This^ But I could say it better... http://www.hark.com/clips/bxwsytrlwv-you-play-to-win Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted December 21, 2012 Author Share Posted December 21, 2012 Det - both. Mostly that they're "violating" the rules. It certainly doesn't help that the "theme" of this league is Pirate related. Who ever heard of pirates getting together to split the burried treasure? THAT is just going to help the SMACK value of their deeds. So do you seriously not trust the judgment of those you play in leagues with so much that you're worried that this would open the floodgates on "breaking the rules"? That someone would use the harmless arrangement between two adults to split a pot of money that will imminently belong to them and nobody else as justification for breaking other rules that actually have an unfair affect on others in the league? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted December 21, 2012 Author Share Posted December 21, 2012 Actually, don't play poker for THAT type of stakes to have real perspective on it. I did like xMRogers point on it that a whole season of work went in to get you where you are in the playoffs, and not going for the win is uncool. Also, since MOST of us play football to see how we'd be able to GM a team, playing for a tie (in money, at least) just goes against the grain, imo. You do realize that GM's of actual NFL teams are able to separate the glory of winning the title and the reality of making money, right? That the NFL is not a "winner-take-all" or even a "winner-take-nearly-all" league, right? That if your intent is to pattern your behavior after the NFL, every team in the league would basically split the pot and the winner would just get a little off the top? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trojanmojo Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 Det - both. Mostly that they're "violating" the rules. It certainly doesn't help that the "theme" of this league is Pirate related. Who ever heard of pirates getting together to split the burried treasure? THAT is just going to help the SMACK value of their deeds. This. Given the theme of the league, I find the pot splitting to be especially heinous. Not sure I like it in other leagues but it definitely has no place in this particular league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 I'd never do it and I would be very disappointed to learn that anyone in any money leagues I was in was doing it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wpayers Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 So do you seriously not trust the judgment of those you play in leagues with so much that you're worried that this would open the floodgates on "breaking the rules"? That someone would use the harmless arrangement between two adults to split a pot of money that will imminently belong to them and nobody else as justification for breaking other rules that actually have an unfair affect on others in the league? Intriguing post here...but the intent of a "harmless arrangement", contemplated at anytime during any type of a competition, undermines fundamental the basis of trust by the participants. This simply brings doubt into the discussion, or in this case, a FF league. Going forward I would feel uneasy about league owners that shared a pot. What else would they do? I'd rather not stick around to find out and would join other leagues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted December 21, 2012 Author Share Posted December 21, 2012 Intriguing post here...but the intent of a "harmless arrangement", contemplated at anytime during any type of a competition, undermines fundamental the basis of trust by the participants. This simply brings doubt into the discussion, or in this case, a FF league. Going forward I would feel uneasy about league owners that shared a pot. What else would they do? I'd rather not stick around to find out and would join other leagues. Wow, so the answer is no then. You don't trust the judgement of your league-mates to differentiate between an arrangement that does not affect anyone else and true collusion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 Wow, so the answer is no then. You don't trust the judgement of your league-mates to differentiate between an arrangement that does not affect anyone else and true collusion. Why would I? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 I might do it if asked and leave the decision up to them, but I prefer not. 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.