Tanking

[Lestat88]

I don't believe this issue that I'm about to describe is in the rulebook.

There is this one owner (who is the #1 seed) that matched up against a team last week that was mathematically eliminated from the playoffs. The team he was playing against was due to get the 2nd pick in the draft if he were to lose. The other owner owned which would have been the 3rd pick. In last week's match up he submitted a lineup of backups and players that were on the I.R. thereby tanking the game and as a result secured the overall #2 pick in the draft.

What is everyone's thoughts on this?

Stan, I would like you to chime in as well.

Bryon Brand
Lestat
Owner 194

[Natalie Portman]

That's an interesting issue.

On one hand, the way the game was played most resembles a top team resting most of their starters in Week 17 the way the Colts seem to almost every year. People often say that you can't knock a team for resting guys because they've earned that right with their success during the season.

On the other hand, the reason the Colts would rest Manning, Wayne, Addai, et al, is because of a true injury concern. In EFS, players don't get hurt or stay healthy based upon whether their owners start them.

The Bottom Line... for the purposes of EFS, this is a case of intentional manipulation and that is considered uncool. Whether it's specifically in the rules isn't really the point... it goes against every belief and attitude that the rulebook, and EFS in general, represents and stands for.

[Deacon Blues]

I see this go on during the regular season where teams do not set their lineups and have staters in their lineup who are on byes, hurt, or benched. In our league, we had no less than 9 different instances involving 5 different teams where the system started the lineups and as a result, outcomes/standings were adversely affected in those games. It was reported but very little was done. So when you say below "it goes against every belief and attitude that the rulebook, and EFS in general, represents and stands for", that statement seems to have little meaning.

And what does the part about resting players as the NFL Colts do because they have clinched a playoff spot have to do with EFS?

[paladisiac]

there is no true concept of "resting players" in fantasy football. From what Bryon described, they purposefully tanked to take the higher pick. That's not cool but not against the rules. I've seen it happen a bunch and there's not much that can be done.

Solutions? Until the nfl goes to a lottery system i'm -not- for one in efs. How about rookie salary inflation? Now that our salary cap goes up every year, why can't the price of rookies go up every year like the nfl, especially the top picks? That way, if a team purposefully tanks to take a higher pick, they're also burdened with a much higher salary (aka, a much bigger salary difference than exists today).

[FantasyGM]

there is no true concept of "resting players" in fantasy football. From what Bryon described, they purposefully tanked to take the higher pick. That's not cool but not against the rules. I've seen it happen a bunch and there's not much that can be done.

Solutions? Until the nfl goes to a lottery system i'm -not- for one in efs. How about rookie salary inflation? Now that our salary cap goes up every year, why can't the price of rookies go up every year like the nfl, especially the top picks? That way, if a team purposefully tanks to take a higher pick, they're also burdened with a much higher salary (aka, a much bigger salary difference than exists today).

All excellent points. The one thing I always fall back on is that a high rookie pick does not guarantee you success the following year. Sure, landing a stud rookie will help but if you're not a good GM, your other 21 starters will hold you back.

[Spartans]

I thought tanking games was considered collusion?

[Montana Grizzlies]

The thought of starting players that are listed out, or doubtful for the purpose of losing to improve a draft pick in which you own hurts the spirit, integrity and honesty of the game. Purposely starting players out of posistion to lose is against the rules. Cheating to gain an advantage is wrong. This is a black and white issue. And than to assume you done nothing wrong, and go on as if it really doesn't matter is bull. Rapture is not above the game. He knew when he put in the lineup it was wrong. Maybe he can live with it, knowing he can presuade others in the league to let it slide because of friendship. But we are not friends. Friends would not do this to another friend. I am not affected either way except if this kind of behaivior is condoned here, where will it stop? And the fact that he shows no remorse for what he did is my final straw. Read his email

Were in the EFS rulebook does it state I need to start
specific players each week?? I did not collude with
another owner. I did not affect another team's
playoff seeding. My less-than-optimal lineup was best
for team's future success. If I need to sleep with
the fat chick in order to marry the prom queen, then
buy me three tickets to the dance.

I would argue that a team like DBox with $15mm+ in cap
not winning UFA players like Hines Ward and Derrick
Mason is more damaging to league parity than a
one-spot move in the '08 draft.

RAPTURE (Champion 02.04.05)

Give the #2 overall to DBox. I'll take the #3. We'll
swap when trading is open.

I've got a Championship to focus on.

RAPTURE (Champion 02.04.05)

I'm being overly kind with switching the #2 with the
#3. I don't have to do this. I locked the #1 seed in
Week #12 by fielding a dominating team...the final
game did nothing but further improve my team by
bettering my draft pick for next year. Mark's
dominating win did absolutely no harm to the playoff
seedings.

Should Bryon be fined for transforming a Super Bowl
squad to a playoff wannabe?? Embarrassed maybe...but
not fined. Should Dan be penalized for holding JJ
Arrington since inception?? A CAT scan may be in
order, but not required. Where does it stop??

If you guys want a shot at catching me, man up and
improve your own teams. Quit screaming "Spy Gate" and
tring to strip the great dynasty squad of all time. I
pity the Week 15 team I play.

RAPTURE (Champion 02.04.05)

Bring it.

RAPTURE (Champion 02.04.05)



--- Bryon Brand <bryon.brand@gmail.com> wrote:

> We will see what Stan has to say.
>


When I asked for an explanation in his own words, I may have accepted it if it was sincere. But no one is above the game.

[paladisiac]

Tanking games to help someone make the playoffs or help them become a better seed, if proven, is collusion. But if you're tanking to help yourself to higher picks while the guy you play against either is out of the playoffs or a win or loss doesn't help/hurt their seed, then it's technically not collusion.

I thought tanking games was considered collusion?

[alvin57]

Tanking games to help someone make the playoffs or help them become a better seed, if proven, is collusion. But if you're tanking to help yourself to higher picks while the guy you play against either is out of the playoffs or a win or loss doesn't help/hurt their seed, then it's technically not collusion.

This might not be "collusion" since it involves helping only your team,but it sure does seem to violate the spirit of the game.What if the "tanking" player was involved in a game that could have had some effect on the outcome of that years standings/playoffs?

[Spartans]

I'm in this league as well and last year a team tanked and he end up getting the number pick Adrian Peterson and I was the one who lost out and got Calvin Johnson. So yes something like this can screw you over bigtime!! Is there anyway you can put something in the rules then about tanking if nothing for it exists?

[Legend]

This is from the rule book under causes for orphans.

Making an attempt to “tank” games by playing unreasonable lineups. This job will fall to the EFS Court if we get two or more complaints.

So tanking is against the rules. Does say it's ok to tank if it doesn't hurt anyone, or if it helps your team.

Tanking is against the rules here and in almost every FF league out there run by a competent commish.

[chinchilla]

Its just wrong and is Tanking and should be punished. Its BS and I would be ticked if I was in the league.

And Roy is right, its in the rules as unacceptable.

What will EFS do? Wanna take bets?

[Spartans]

The funny part is that the guy is the commish! I can speak for the league when I say the last thing we want is the guy kicked out of the league but something needs to be done like a simple slap on the wrist. Some of us feel if he is stripped of the draft pick that would allow the punishment to fit the crime. However, its for efsports court to decide.

[KramericaOilers]

Who's responsiblity is it to monitor these things week to week? I don't think Stan, or Rock, or Keith should have to check everybody's weekly lineups to see if they're legit. That could take some time to do. Maybe we could leave that responsibility up to each leagues commish, or is that already in the rules? I gotta be honest, I havn't read the rules too closely. If that is Team 01's responsibility, I failed horribly the past couple years, in one league. My bad

[Spartans]

Who's responsiblity is it to monitor these things week to week? I don't think Stan, or Rock, or Keith should have to check everybody's weekly lineups to see if they're legit. That could take some time to do. Maybe we could leave that responsibility up to each leagues commish, or is that already in the rules? I gotta be honest, I havn't read the rules too closely. If that is Team 01's responsibility, I failed horribly the past couple years, in one league. My bad

I totally agree you guys shouldn't have to check every lineup. But when commish is doing this stuff what can you do besides plea our case?

[Montana Grizzlies]

I have formally request that EFS intervene in the L33 tanking issue, via email and posted in Court Cases in forums. Please process ASAP.

[Lestat88]

Sorry Keith,

But if you are going to be the voice of EFS, you have to make relevant points. Whether or not rookie picks guarantee you success should not factor in this debate whatsoever.

Bryon
Lestat



All excellent points. The one thing I always fall back on is that a high rookie pick does not guarantee you success the following year. Sure, landing a stud rookie will help but if you're not a good GM, your other 21 starters will hold you back.

[paladisiac]

With tanking against the rules (see http://dynasty.efsports.com/wiki/index.php/Rules_Chapter_19), such cases should be brought to the EFS Court.

i ask anyone that is contemplating bringing such a case to be 160% sure what you're doing is best for the league. If some people in the league feel the accusation unfounded, then it could cause hard feelings.

[Lestat88]

The accusation is fact. It's a matter if you ethically have a problem with the practice of tanking a game to improve your draft status. This case is a little unusual as it involves a third team.

This league has been plagued with owners that like to find holes and cracks in the rules and try to exploit them to their benefit. There has been several fishy RFA and trade transactions the past two year's as well.

About half the league has no problem with what is going on, the other half do.

Just because something is not specifically covered in the rulebook doesn't make a practice legal or right.

Bryon
Lestat




With tanking against the rules (see http://dynasty.efsports.com/wiki/index.php/Rules_Chapter_19) (http://dynasty.efsports.com/wiki/index.php/Rules_Chapter_19%29), such cases should be brought to the EFS Court.

i ask anyone that is contemplating bringing such a case to be 160% sure what you're doing is best for the league. If some people in the league feel the accusation unfounded, then it could cause hard feelings.

[Natalie Portman]

This is from the rule book under causes for orphans.

Making an attempt to “tank” games by playing unreasonable lineups. This job will fall to the EFS Court if we get two or more complaints.



This was my point earlier. I considered it a given that such behavior could cost an owner their team.

[DErickson88]

... If that is Team 01's responsibility, I failed horribly the past couple years, in one league. My bad

If you're talking about Lg 25, don't worry about it! I think we're all way too damned competitive for our own good in that league any way! ;-)

Even the lowest ranked team(s) in the league were still trying to stock up for next year in late November!!!

[KramericaOilers]

If you're talking about Lg 25, don't worry about it! I think we're all way too damned competitive for our own good in that league any way! ;-)

Even the lowest ranked team(s) in the league were still trying to stock up for next year in late November!!!

I know. I'm thrilled with that league. It's gotta be one of the better leagues, top to bottom, at EFS.

[tec]

I know. I'm thrilled with that league. It's gotta be one of the better leagues, top to bottom, at EFS.

Jimmy and I are the only originals left in lg25, we have had quite a bit of owner turnover the past 2 years, but as you note i think we finally have a solid group. activity has increased greatly due to all you new guys!

we appreciate it.....lg25 is the only non enhanced league i am in, i am still here because of the owners we have!

good luck to all

tc

[Lestat88]

Coincidentally, one of the owners that left league 25 is the owner smack dab in the middle of this current controversy. As I remember, he orphaned the team without consequence.

Bryon
Lestat

Jimmy and I are the only originals left in lg25, we have had quite a bit of owner turnover the past 2 years, but as you note i think we finally have a solid group. activity has increased greatly due to all you new guys!

we appreciate it.....lg25 is the only non enhanced league i am in, i am still here because of the owners we have!

good luck to all

tc

[RAPTURE]

Coincidentally, one of the owners that left league 25 is the owner smack dab in the middle of this current controversy. As I remember, he orphaned the team without consequence.

Bryon
Lestat

Without consequence?? I purchased a below-average, orphaned team and improved it. In fact, it won the championship. However, Lg 25 was not an active league at the time and I chose not to renew the following year.

It sounds as if the league is much active now. Congrats for the current members of Lg 25. I'm glad it made a turnaround.

[RAPTURE]

The thought of starting players that are listed out, or doubtful for the purpose of losing to improve a draft pick in which you own hurts the spirit, integrity and honesty of the game. Purposely starting players out of posistion to lose is against the rules. Cheating to gain an advantage is wrong. This is a black and white issue. And than to assume you done nothing wrong, and go on as if it really doesn't matter is bull. Rapture is not above the game. He knew when he put in the lineup it was wrong. Maybe he can live with it, knowing he can presuade others in the league to let it slide because of friendship. But we are not friends. Friends would not do this to another friend. I am not affected either way except if this kind of behaivior is condoned here, where will it stop? And the fact that he shows no remorse for what he did is my final straw. Read his email

Were in the EFS rulebook does it state I need to start
specific players each week?? I did not collude with
another owner. I did not affect another team's
playoff seeding. My less-than-optimal lineup was best
for team's future success. If I need to sleep with
the fat chick in order to marry the prom queen, then
buy me three tickets to the dance.

I would argue that a team like DBox with $15mm+ in cap
not winning UFA players like Hines Ward and Derrick
Mason is more damaging to league parity than a
one-spot move in the '08 draft.

RAPTURE (Champion 02.04.05)

Give the #2 overall to DBox. I'll take the #3. We'll
swap when trading is open.

I've got a Championship to focus on.

RAPTURE (Champion 02.04.05)

I'm being overly kind with switching the #2 with the
#3. I don't have to do this. I locked the #1 seed in
Week #12 by fielding a dominating team...the final
game did nothing but further improve my team by
bettering my draft pick for next year. Mark's
dominating win did absolutely no harm to the playoff
seedings.

Should Bryon be fined for transforming a Super Bowl
squad to a playoff wannabe?? Embarrassed maybe...but
not fined. Should Dan be penalized for holding JJ
Arrington since inception?? A CAT scan may be in
order, but not required. Where does it stop??

If you guys want a shot at catching me, man up and
improve your own teams. Quit screaming "Spy Gate" and
tring to strip the great dynasty squad of all time. I
pity the Week 15 team I play.

RAPTURE (Champion 02.04.05)

Bring it.

RAPTURE (Champion 02.04.05)



--- Bryon Brand <bryon.brand@gmail.com> wrote:

> We will see what Stan has to say.
>


When I asked for an explanation in his own words, I may have accepted it if it was sincere. But no one is above the game.


To state the facts...

I never persuaded other league members to "let it slide". Much like others in this thread, they formulated their own opinions regarding the NFL/EFS structure for league parity. In fact, the "angry" owners are in the minority on this issue in the league.

John...you're very selective in the posts you wish to paraphrase. When the "angry" owners voiced their opinion, I immediately offered to flip-flop picks with the owner I leap-frogged in the draft in an effort to re-direct the focus back to the playoffs. What were the responses?? Each "angry" owner began to cherry-pick punishments which were tailored to their respective teams.

Jeremy (Spartans)...you wanted me to sacrifice a pick. However, the pick had to be a pick higher than your #6 overall. You were not satisfied with me sacrificing a pick lower than the #6 overall. I wonder why??

John (Montana)...you wanted a playoff ban. Ironically, the teams not in the playoffs did not agree. Hmmm. Also, much like Jeremy, you were not satisfied with me sacrificing a pick lower than your #5 overall. I wonder why??

Bryon (Lestat)...you go into a rant against me which turned personal. You openly questioned my integrity in the "real-world". I could have easily removed the gloves and done the same...but chose not to. Dude, it's a game. I've got drunk with you more times than I've played you in EFS.

If "tanking" is truly illegal, than give the punishment I deserve. With that being said, I fully expect the same exact punishments be forced upon the League members who have done the same in the past (...in worse degrees, inclusive of throwing multiple games and effecting playoff seedings of other teams). I do not wish to be the poster-boy for a new sanctio simply b/c I have historically been the best team in the League.

I also believe EFS should have a "UNETHICAL" section in the rulebook to address these gray areas. For example...

1) If my opponent for a particular week is only carrying one punter/kicker and places a UFA bid on a new punter/kicker on Saturday, am I allowed to "block" the owner from receiving the punter by placing a bid on Sunday morning?? Is this "not in the spirit of the game"?? If this is a punishable offense, I will simply carry one punter and kicker next year.

2) If...in Week 13...I hold the key between two teams fighting for a playoff seeding. If I view Team A as a much stronger opponent than Team B, do I have the discretion to purposely lose to Team B to ensure their access into the playoffs?? Is this "not in the spririt of the game"?? Is this a punishable offense??

3) If I'm having cap/contract issues late in the season, am I allowed to trade multiple "crap" players plus a draft pick to a non-playoff team?? I get cap/contract relief and the non-playoff team gets a pick for the following year, right?? Is this "not in the spirit of the game"?? Is this a punishable offense??

4) If I have the best team and, consequently, the lowest waiver-wire priority, am I allowed to offer a "pick-for-waiver-claim" on a player who just hit the waiver wire?? I get the player I want...the last-place team would get essentially a free pick, right??. Is this "not in the spirit of the game"?? Is this a punishable offense??

What's my point?? No matter how NFL-lifelike we attempt to make EFS, it's still a game. Gray areas will exist. If these gray areas are to be punished, so be it. However, please define the punishments in an effort to curb the locals from public lynchings.

[Montana Grizzlies]

Marty

This league has been very entertaining to say the least. But before you try and come up with all the if's and but's, maybe admitting you cheated would help. Clearly knowing you were tanking for the sole purpose of losing, thus allowing the team that beat you win, made your draft pick which you own a step better than the team that beat you. You knew it would come up, but you though is would just pass. But it didn't. Your email all suggests that you have done nothing wrong, and you don't think EFS will do anything anyway. But cheating is cheating, just like stealing is stealing. Tanking games is clearly against the rules. You have even gone as far as suggesting that tanking was put in the rules after you got caught. Like a true criminal you can not admit your guilt. Now we wait for Keith and Stan to take this up, and I will pursue it until they rule. If they say you did nothing wrong, so be it. This was not a grey area, this is a black and white area. And you knew when you were doing it it just wasn't right.

[BLKnBLU]

I very rarely jump in on disputes being discussed in these forums but this time I will throw my two cents into the fray.

Rapture, your are missing a vital point to your argument. Tanking is in the rule book and is not allowed. All the points you bring up, while they are aggrivating events, are not areas that are directly addressed in the rules and due fall into the grey area which you describe. Tanking a loss to improve your draft position definitely does not fall into any such grey area. You also state that intentionally losing that game did not effect your league but I would like to ask the guy who was suppose to receive the 2nd pick if he agrees.

You tried to manipulate the system and some of your league mates have called you out. While it is unfortunate and I hope it is not detrimental to the long term health of your league, please stop trying to justify your obvious error in judgement.

Sedentary

[KramericaOilers]

I'll never tank games, you know why? Because I seem to always trade away all my picks, and I certainly wouldn't want to give the guy, who I traded the picks to, a better draft position. We could all avoid this by adopting my technique :D

[DErickson88]

I also believe EFS should have a "UNETHICAL" section in the rulebook to address these gray areas. For example...

1) If my opponent for a particular week is only carrying one punter/kicker and places a UFA bid on a new punter/kicker on Saturday, am I allowed to "block" the owner from receiving the punter by placing a bid on Sunday morning?? Is this "not in the spirit of the game"?? If this is a punishable offense, I will simply carry one punter and kicker next year.

2) If...in Week 13...I hold the key between two teams fighting for a playoff seeding. If I view Team A as a much stronger opponent than Team B, do I have the discretion to purposely lose to Team B to ensure their access into the playoffs?? Is this "not in the spririt of the game"?? Is this a punishable offense??

3) If I'm having cap/contract issues late in the season, am I allowed to trade multiple "crap" players plus a draft pick to a non-playoff team?? I get cap/contract relief and the non-playoff team gets a pick for the following year, right?? Is this "not in the spirit of the game"?? Is this a punishable offense??

4) If I have the best team and, consequently, the lowest waiver-wire priority, am I allowed to offer a "pick-for-waiver-claim" on a player who just hit the waiver wire?? I get the player I want...the last-place team would get essentially a free pick, right??. Is this "not in the spirit of the game"?? Is this a punishable offense??



I think you are confusing competitiveness with ethics. A couple of these issues, I think any way, ARE in the spirit of the game. Purposely losing a game however is NOT, and unless I am struggling with big words again, IS prohibited by the EFS rules.

Fairness of a trade goes a long way toward whether or not it's considered "ethical". Fair trades are fair trades, regardless of cap space, record, etc.

I don't see outbidding any opponent on any FA as unethical. But, if you have that much "discretionary" cap/roster space laying around, you might consider spending it on something that could help you rather than waiting around to screw someone else! :-)

Sizzerman

[alvin57]

Hey dude....why don't you just admit you were wrong and all move on.Are you the commish of the league that you were cheating in? Man..that's nasty!

[Spartans]

To state the facts...

I never persuaded other league members to "let it slide". Much like others in this thread, they formulated their own opinions regarding the NFL/EFS structure for league parity. In fact, the "angry" owners are in the minority on this issue in the league.

John...you're very selective in the posts you wish to paraphrase. When the "angry" owners voiced their opinion, I immediately offered to flip-flop picks with the owner I leap-frogged in the draft in an effort to re-direct the focus back to the playoffs. What were the responses?? Each "angry" owner began to cherry-pick punishments which were tailored to their respective teams.

Jeremy (Spartans)...you wanted me to sacrifice a pick. However, the pick had to be a pick higher than your #6 overall. You were not satisfied with me sacrificing a pick lower than the #6 overall. I wonder why??

John (Montana)...you wanted a playoff ban. Ironically, the teams not in the playoffs did not agree. Hmmm. Also, much like Jeremy, you were not satisfied with me sacrificing a pick lower than your #5 overall. I wonder why??

Bryon (Lestat)...you go into a rant against me which turned personal. You openly questioned my integrity in the "real-world". I could have easily removed the gloves and done the same...but chose not to. Dude, it's a game. I've got drunk with you more times than I've played you in EFS.

If "tanking" is truly illegal, than give the punishment I deserve. With that being said, I fully expect the same exact punishments be forced upon the League members who have done the same in the past (...in worse degrees, inclusive of throwing multiple games and effecting playoff seedings of other teams). I do not wish to be the poster-boy for a new sanctio simply b/c I have historically been the best team in the League.

I also believe EFS should have a "UNETHICAL" section in the rulebook to address these gray areas. For example...

1) If my opponent for a particular week is only carrying one punter/kicker and places a UFA bid on a new punter/kicker on Saturday, am I allowed to "block" the owner from receiving the punter by placing a bid on Sunday morning?? Is this "not in the spirit of the game"?? If this is a punishable offense, I will simply carry one punter and kicker next year.

2) If...in Week 13...I hold the key between two teams fighting for a playoff seeding. If I view Team A as a much stronger opponent than Team B, do I have the discretion to purposely lose to Team B to ensure their access into the playoffs?? Is this "not in the spririt of the game"?? Is this a punishable offense??

3) If I'm having cap/contract issues late in the season, am I allowed to trade multiple "crap" players plus a draft pick to a non-playoff team?? I get cap/contract relief and the non-playoff team gets a pick for the following year, right?? Is this "not in the spirit of the game"?? Is this a punishable offense??

4) If I have the best team and, consequently, the lowest waiver-wire priority, am I allowed to offer a "pick-for-waiver-claim" on a player who just hit the waiver wire?? I get the player I want...the last-place team would get essentially a free pick, right??. Is this "not in the spirit of the game"?? Is this a punishable offense??

What's my point?? No matter how NFL-lifelike we attempt to make EFS, it's still a game. Gray areas will exist. If these gray areas are to be punished, so be it. However, please define the punishments in an effort to curb the locals from public lynchings.


Marty,
To be honest I could give a rats ass about moving up in the draft as you claim. You need to be punished! Hell award the pick to another team so I don't move up as long you don't have it. Maybe John's idea about you being banned from the playoffs this year could be a good idea if you are so worried about other teams having a hidden agenda! Fact is you cheated, you got called on it, and of course you don't admit you're wrong!

[RAPTURE]

Since "tanking" is prohibited in the rulebook, it's obviously wrong. However...for whatever reason...the "tanking" rule is listed in the rulebook under a section entitled "ORPHANS". Huh?!?! Can we get a heading entitled "PROHIBITED ACTS"??

When Lestat and Montana originally posted their displeasure, they did not even know "tanking" was specifically prohibited in the rulebook. Much like me, they had absolutely no clue. The same holds true with two of EFS administrators (Paladisiac and Fantasy GM). Lestat and Montana were originally arguing the tanking is against the "spirit of the game"...the rulebook was not even referenced until Legend posted the rule one day later. Since Lestat and Montana were originally arguing...what they believe...was a "gray" area, I believe other "gray" areas should be addessed going forward.

The again clarify my ponts:

1) Tanking is in the rulebook. Therefore, it was wrong.

2) If a punishment is given, I fully expect the same exact punishment to be given to other league members who have also tanked in the past. For example, Spartans (now known as Turfkings) tanked multiple games over multiple seasons in the past in an effort to improve his draft position. In addition, I would also ask the prescedent that my punishment was or will be based upon.

RAPTURE

[Natalie Portman]

Just wondering as a curious bystander...

It is very easy to imagine ways that a penalty of some sort could be applied for rules violations which have just taken place or for those that will occur in the future.

How would you logistically and reasonably go about clearly identifying undeniable violations which may have taken place during years past, and even then, what would be an appropriate method for assessing punishment?

It would seem to be quite a complicated issue to deal with incidents that occurred in past seasons. Did you consider this point and do you have a method which can effectively and fairly apply punishment for incidents spread out over years should past transgressions be proven or admitted to?

This desire to retroactively penalize teams raises several interesting issues.

[Spartans]

Marty if you have read my previous posts I admitted doing this my first year back in 2002. I did not do this multiple years! I have NEVER had my original first round pick when we had our rookie drafts. However, unlike you, I admitted it was wrong and stated I would never do that again. So if they want to punish people for doing this in the past then I'm the first to confess. You see this is how an adult takes responsiblity for his actions.

UNLIKE YOU!

[RAPTURE]

Marty if you have read my previous posts I admitted doing this my first year back in 2002. I did not do this multiple years! I have NEVER had my original first round pick when we had our rookie drafts. However, unlike you, I admitted it was wrong and stated I would never do that again. So if they want to punish people for doing this in the past then I'm the first to confess. You see this is how an adult takes responsiblity for his actions.

UNLIKE YOU!

Hmmmm...is that right?? When you get a free moment, take a gander at your lineups in 2004 from Week 12 thru the end of the season...

...or was taking goose eggs on FIVE players each week a strategy other than tanking?? It looks like your imaginery apology from '02 had a one-year expiration date attached to it.

Do you now confess twice??

[Spartans]

I overbid on a player and I couldn't make enough drops to get a valid roster so I was stuck. You know that as well as I do! see my drop of Amani Toomer. Man your really reaching here. It's sort of pathetic.

Nice try!

[KramericaOilers]

I don't know about any other bystanders, but this is pretty entertaining. Personaly, I think it's useless to go back to years past because we weren't proactive. I think, since this is in the present, we should focus on what to do in the future to prevent these kinds of things

[RAPTURE]

I overbid on a player and I couldn't make enough drops to get a valid roster so I was stuck. You know that as well as I do! see my drop of Amani Toomer. Man your really reaching here. It's sort of pathetic.

Nice try!

In other words, you admit to breaking the following rule: "Failure to have a roster capable of submitting a valid starting lineup."

This rule is listed immediately above the "tanking" rule in the ORPHANS section.

[Spartans]

Nope. It was a valid line up when I put it in everyone was fine. But when I was awarded the player, I couldn't drop enough players to get my line up valid. So week by week I was stuck with these guys and some of them got hurt and there was nothing I could do about it. Hell, I made it to the second round of the playoffs if you recall and would have beaten you if I was able to change my line up. Besided I didn't even have my first rounder that year.

So lets review.... I was awarded a player, was unable to to make my changes to my line up because I went crazy with the spending.

The only thing I'm guilty of was doing something incredibly stupid.

I think you are taking this personal.

[Spartans]

I don't know about any other bystanders, but this is pretty entertaining. Personaly, I think it's useless to go back to years past because we weren't proactive. I think, since this is in the present, we should focus on what to do in the future to prevent these kinds of things

If he would admit this was wrong that would eliminate all this drama.

There is more drama in this thread than Days of Our Lives

[RAPTURE]

Nope. It was a valid line up when I put it in everyone was fine. But when I was awarded the player, I couldn't drop enough players to get my line up valid. So week by week I was stuck with these guys and some of them got hurt and there was nothing I could do about it. Hell, I made it to the second round of the playoffs if you recall and would have beaten you if I was able to change my line up. Besided I didn't even have my first rounder that year.

So lets review.... I was awarded a player, was unable to to make my changes to my line up because I went crazy with the spending.

The only thing I'm guilty of was doing something incredibly stupid.

I think you are taking this personal.

So...in other words, you failed "to have a roster capable of submitting a valid starting lineup". Thanks for the clarification.

Jeremy, you're dead-last in the worst division of our league for a reason.

[Spartans]

Two teams from the worst division has made it to the semi finals so our division is not that bad. Besides, didn't I beat you this year so I guess I don't suck that bad after all.

Keep trying to take cheap shots. It's what you're best at.

[KramericaOilers]

So...in other words, you failed "to have a roster capable of submitting a valid starting lineup". Thanks for the clarification.


I don't mean to overstep my bounds, but if you don't have a "valid" roster, it won't allow you to submit a lineup. He admits to poor salary cap managing which would ultimately put him in a bad predicament should any of his players get hurt. What's a guy to do? It appears that he was able to submit "valid" lineups, even though he knew he was going to get a handful of guys with Zero points. That doesn't really mean he had "no" chance of pulling off a victory.

By your reasoning, I gather, that you expect everybody's weekly lineup to have ALL players capable of playing that specific week. Right? I know I've seen administrators on this forum say, "if you have to start an injured player, in order to submit a valid lineup, then do so". What would be the difference in this case? He got himself in salary cap trouble and had to start guys that would get him "ZERO" points. That doesn't mean he's tanking or doing anything unethical.

[RAPTURE]

I don't mean to overstep my bounds, but if you don't have a "valid" roster, it won't allow you to submit a lineup. He admits to poor salary cap managing which would ultimately put him in a bad predicament should any of his players get hurt. What's a guy to do? It appears that he was able to submit "valid" lineups, even though he knew he was going to get a handful of guys with Zero points. That doesn't really mean he had "no" chance of pulling off a victory.

By your reasoning, I gather, that you expect everybody's weekly lineup to have ALL players capable of playing that specific week. Right? I know I've seen administrators on this forum say, "if you have to start an injured player, in order to submit a valid lineup, then do so". What would be the difference in this case? He got himself in salary cap trouble and had to start guys that would get him "ZERO" points. That doesn't mean he's tanking or doing anything unethical.


I think you're missing the point, or maybe we simply disagree over the definition of "valid starting lineup". IMO, starting five injured players is not a valid lineup. One...maybe two...sure, no problem out of necessity b/c of lack of depth. But five?? For comparative purposes, in my recent Week 13 game, I started seven injured players and it's considered tanking.

Jeremy pre-set his lineup for the upcoming month knowing he was going to be malicious with his spending and unable to make future roster changes. Once he was awarded the player(s) and it was impossible for him to make any changes to his lineup going forward. His opponents for the final month of the season had "gimmie" wins b/c he could not alter his lineup and remove injuried players. His act had negative effects on the league's playoff race in Weeks 12 & 13. Jeremy's act is the precise reason EFS no longer allows owners the ability to pre-set a lineup futher than one week out. Pick your poison...Jeremy was either "tanking" or "failed to have a roster capable of submitting a valid starting lineup".

Jeremy is obviously living in a glass house with his recent remarks.

[KramericaOilers]

I think you're missing the point, or maybe we simply disagree over the definition of "valid starting lineup". IMO, starting five injured players is not a valid lineup. One...maybe two...sure, no problem out of necessity b/c of lack of depth. But five?? For comparative purposes, in my recent Week 13 game, I started seven injured players and it's considered tanking.

Jeremy pre-set his lineup for the upcoming month knowing he was going to be malicious with his spending and unable to make future roster changes. Once he was awarded the player(s) and it was impossible for him to make any changes to his lineup going forward. His opponents for the final month of the season had "gimmie" wins b/c he could not alter his lineup and remove injuried players. His act had negative effects on the league's playoff race in Weeks 12 & 13. Jeremy's act is the precise reason EFS no longer allows owners the ability to pre-set a lineup futher than one week out. Pick your poison...Jeremy was either "tanking" or "failed to have a roster capable of submitting a valid starting lineup".

Jeremy is obviously living in a glass house with his recent remarks.

Ahh, ok. I see your point now. With me OLI, it's tough not having all the details (not that it's any of my business)

[Spartans]

That season I didn't' purposely tank. The whole line up was a cautionary measured if you recalled I try to cut players but I couldn't. Presetting the line up was a caution but at the time it wasn't against the rules. Your case is against the rules plain and simple. It wasn't until the last two games when I had all those players injured and I still won one of those games so how is that tanking? So go ahead and take your shots at me.

See ya at Christmas :)

[RioMike]

Just wondered what they decided... I think this is being a bit blown out of proportion.

On a positive note, I think this new 32 team league looks pretty cool and look forward to it. Good work guys. Let me ask you this, what happens if Michael Vick gets a starting job in 2010??? Someone in "The 32' is going to be Fucked.


There are players like Michael Pittman who have been convicted of multiple violent crimes. One instance that included him driving his Hummer into his wife's Mercedes while there child was in the back seat. Jimmy Smith did enough cocaine to fund the al Qaida network back in his day. That is fine, they can stay.

Let the NFL handle that shit, let the leagues govern themselves.

[Lestat88]

I'm not sure you are up to snuff for this 32 team league. Last place finishes in the only two leagues you are in now?

I think you may need to concentrate on what you have than to take on this endeavor.

I think I would rather endorse Bill Hermanson for the 32-team league than Michael Schwaiger.

Lestat



Just wondered what they decided... I think this is being a bit blown out of proportion.

On a positive note, I think this new 32 team league looks pretty cool and look forward to it. Good work guys. Let me ask you this, what happens if Michael Vick gets a starting job in 2010??? Someone in "The 32' is going to be Fucked.


There are players like Michael Pittman who have been convicted of multiple violent crimes. One instance that included him driving his Hummer into his wife's Mercedes while there child was in the back seat. Jimmy Smith did enough cocaine to fund the al Qaida network back in his day. That is fine, they can stay.

Let the NFL handle that shit, let the leagues govern themselves.

[Spartans]

Look on the bright side Bryon ..........Mike is in our division

[RioMike]

I'm not sure you are up to snuff for this 32 team league. Last place finishes in the only two leagues you are in now?

I think you may need to concentrate on what you have than to take on this endeavor.

I think I would rather endorse Bill Hermanson for the 32-team league than Michael Schwaiger.

Lestat

Something tells me that fantasy football isn't the root of your recent negative attitude.

49ers Reloaded

[Spartans]

Something tells me that fantasy football isn't the root of your recent negative attitude.

49ers Reloaded


Once again 49ers trying to take personal shots. Nothing more then a cheap shot artist.

[Lestat88]

Once again 49ers trying to take personal shots. Nothing more then a cheap shot artist.

That's right Spartans. I was just merely looking out for the betterment of our new 32 team league. It should only have strong owners who are here for the long haul and I'm just voicing concern on whether 49ers has what it takes.

Lestat

[RAPTURE]

Once again 49ers trying to take personal shots. Nothing more then a cheap shot artist.

????

Wow. Mike gives his thoughts on the tanking issue and excitement for the 32-team league, and Bryon responds with...

"I'm not sure you are up to snuff for this 32 team league. Last place finishes in the only two leagues you are in now?

I think you may need to concentrate on what you have than to take on this endeavor.

I think I would rather endorse Bill Hermanson for the 32-team league than Michael Schwaiger.

Lestat"

Seriously...who's taking the personal pot shots?? Jeremy...take the blinders off. Bryon...pull the corn cob from your hiney.

[KramericaOilers]

????

Wow. Mike gives his thoughts on the tanking issue and excitement for the 32-team league, and Bryon responds with...

"I'm not sure you are up to snuff for this 32 team league. Last place finishes in the only two leagues you are in now?

I think you may need to concentrate on what you have than to take on this endeavor.

I think I would rather endorse Bill Hermanson for the 32-team league than Michael Schwaiger.

Lestat"

Seriously...who's taking the personal pot shots?? Jeremy...take the blinders off. Bryon...pull the corn cob from your hiney.

That's what I was thinking. Gettin' a lil catty in here

[RioMike]

That's what I was thinking. Gettin' a lil catty in here

C'mon let's not gang up on Thelma and Louise.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=pcT8say6g3k

49ers Reloaded

[Spartans]

To me there is a difference between making wise cracks at one's fantasy football record and trying to take shots at one's personal life.

That's just me though.

[KramericaOilers]

Something tells me that fantasy football isn't the root of your recent negative attitude.

49ers Reloaded

I guess I didn't see what was wrong with this post after what Lestat had chimed in with. I thought Lestat's post was just a playful joke, but I'm not quite sure now. It appears some guys in here "may" not get along.

[Lestat88]

Something tells me that fantasy football isn't the root of your recent negative attitude.

49ers Reloaded


What is something that tells you that? I've had a relatively good year all around.

This is about nothing more than being tired of teams in this league skirting the rules and making a mockery of EFS and its management. Mike you have a long and tenuous history with EFS and if it wasn't for me, you would have not played in EFS this year and beyond. I asked Stan, as a personal favor, to let you keep your leagues last year. Have you forgotten?

Kramerica, I'm also glad that you are enjoying this cat-fight.


Lestat

[Spartans]

Meeeeeeeeeeeooooooooooow

[KramericaOilers]

Kramerica, I'm also glad that you are enjoying this cat-fight.


Lestat

It's hard to tell the tone of someone's post. Emoticons "might" help to tip off the tone, but that still wouldn't be a given :D I thought there was just some playful jabs thrown in until I saw another poster say something about someone being a "cheap shot artist". Then I took a step back and thought, "man, some of these guys are serious".

[RioMike]

What is something that tells you that? I've had a relatively good year all around.

This is about nothing more than being tired of teams in this league skirting the rules and making a mockery of EFS and its management. Mike you have a long and tenuous history with EFS and if it wasn't for me, you would have not played in EFS this year and beyond. I asked Stan, as a personal favor, to let you keep your leagues last year. Have you forgotten?

Kramerica, I'm also glad that you are enjoying this cat-fight.


Lestat

I assume you are using the term "management" in it's loosest form. (LOL, JK SID... don't poop your pants)

[RioMike]

It's hard to tell the tone of someone's post. Emoticons "might" help to tip off the tone, but that still wouldn't be a given :D I thought there was just some playful jabs thrown in until I saw another poster say something about someone being a "cheap shot artist". Then I took a step back and thought, "man, some of these guys are serious".

Spartans and LeStat must expect a couple of lumps of coal in their stockings this year. Too bad...

[Guardian]

I also believe EFS should have a "UNETHICAL" section in the rulebook to address these gray areas. For example...

1) If my opponent for a particular week is only carrying one punter/kicker and places a UFA bid on a new punter/kicker on Saturday, am I allowed to "block" the owner from receiving the punter by placing a bid on Sunday morning?? Is this "not in the spirit of the game"?? If this is a punishable offense, I will simply carry one punter and kicker next year.

2) If...in Week 13...I hold the key between two teams fighting for a playoff seeding. If I view Team A as a much stronger opponent than Team B, do I have the discretion to purposely lose to Team B to ensure their access into the playoffs?? Is this "not in the spririt of the game"?? Is this a punishable offense??

3) If I'm having cap/contract issues late in the season, am I allowed to trade multiple "crap" players plus a draft pick to a non-playoff team?? I get cap/contract relief and the non-playoff team gets a pick for the following year, right?? Is this "not in the spirit of the game"?? Is this a punishable offense??

4) If I have the best team and, consequently, the lowest waiver-wire priority, am I allowed to offer a "pick-for-waiver-claim" on a player who just hit the waiver wire?? I get the player I want...the last-place team would get essentially a free pick, right??. Is this "not in the spirit of the game"?? Is this a punishable offense??

What's my point?? No matter how NFL-lifelike we attempt to make EFS, it's still a game. Gray areas will exist. If these gray areas are to be punished, so be it. However, please define the punishments in an effort to curb the locals from public lynchings.

I think Rapture, the guy in the middle of this S-storm, is on the right track here.

"Unethical behavior" is going to happen each year in differing leagues involving differing owners. It's going to take many forms. One of the biggest challenges to making official rules about this stuff is that it's near-impossible to create an all-encompasing rule for the kind of stuff that goes down.

I feel reflecting upon reality for things that go on in our virtual worlds is a tough thing to do, but often times the most rewarding way to do it. On this topic, what would the NFL commissioner do if he had evidence of one of the NFL team owners conducting unethical business. I have the feeling he'd be pretty harsh. Sure, the first offense may be some sort of easy-to-pay fine. But behind the scenes he and the ownership core probably would either put that offending owner on a short leash or make appropriations to get rid of them.

Reflect that here in the EFS and don't give it definite parameters. If for instance I thought that Sid would remove my ownership in a team should I unethically manage it, I'd find little value in doing so.

There's a similar setup in the 3001/3002 leagues where poorly managed teams can be taken away from their privelaged owners. Not only does that make you appreciate ethecial behavior and competing strongly, but it's also nice assurance that others in the league are more likely to keep the same high moral standards.

2 cents.