Tanking

[Bandit]

It's a tough call as a commissioner because you really don't want to mess with people's lineups. A few years ago I had somebody bench Julio Jones for somebody that obviously he should have been in over but I can't remember who it was and it was clear that they weren't putting their best foot forward. Well it was a week Julio blew up so I got complaints about it and in the end it didn't end up mattering, but the funny thing was that the next week that guy outscored Julio so if it had been that week it wouldn't have mattered. So who am I to say that somebody shouldn't start Craig Reynolds the Lions practice squad guy called up at the last minute (11.9 PPR points) or Derrick Gore (16.9 PPR points) or Royce Freeman (12.6 PPR points) over Nick Chubb, Ezekiel Elliott, Joe Mixon, or Antonio Gibson all of who they all outscored last week. What do you do if you screw with their lineup and one of those guys outscores the "stud" you made him play? This is where Harold and I defer. To me, as long as the lineup is legal with no byes or inactives in it I just don't know what you can do as a commissioner. I do have a rule in my league that if the picks aren't traded, the 1-3 draft picks spots are done in a lottery of the bottom three teams for draft spot, but there's never been a year where at least one of the those picks wasn't traded already.

Now with all that being said, your guy didn't even try to fake having a full lineup which is a complete and utter fucking travesty in fantasy football terms. With that being the case I think as a commissioner you have to call them out on message board so the whole league sees it. It doesn't even have to be directed at them, you can just post something like, "Please remember that tanking of any kind is not permitted and multiple occurrences will result in losing your first round pick next year." The punishment has to be a first rounder because it's the only thing that would move the needle in dynasty. Once you post that, he and everybody else in the league will know it's directed at him, but doesn't call him out specifically.

And on a side note, when you are in a lot of leagues and a commissioner of multiple, you don't have time to police everybody's starting lineup for the week, so unless somebody else calls attention to it, as a commissioner I don't know how you notice this is happening beforehand to "change" their lineup as TKO said.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

i am really on the fence... its a lot like vetoes... where you have to guess whether there is collusion... but how much slack do you give the owner??

and tanking through trades, may look like collusion...


Tanking is more clear than collusion trades though...

but i do think there is a difference between tanking and being an irresponsible owner... not sure if you want to punish them both the same....

 

[HaroldSeattle]

It's a tough call as a commissioner because you really don't want to mess with people's lineups. A few years ago I had somebody bench Julio Jones for somebody that obviously he should have been in over but I can't remember who it was and it was clear that they weren't putting their best foot forward. Well it was a week Julio blew up so I got complaints about it and in the end it didn't end up mattering, but the funny thing was that the next week that guy outscored Julio so if it had been that week it wouldn't have mattered. So who am I to say that somebody shouldn't start Craig Reynolds the Lions practice squad guy called up at the last minute (11.9 PPR points) or Derrick Gore (16.9 PPR points) or Royce Freeman (12.6 PPR points) over Nick Chubb, Ezekiel Elliott, Joe Mixon, or Antonio Gibson all of who they all outscored last week. What do you do if you screw with their lineup and one of those guys outscores the "stud" you made him play? This is where Harold and I defer. To me, as long as the lineup is legal with no byes or inactives in it I just don't know what you can do as a commissioner. I do have a rule in my league that if the picks aren't traded, the 1-3 draft picks spots are done in a lottery of the bottom three teams for draft spot, but there's never been a year where at least one of the those picks wasn't traded already.

Now with all that being said, your guy didn't even try to fake having a full lineup which is a complete and utter fucking travesty in fantasy football terms. With that being the case I think as a commissioner you have to call them out on message board so the whole league sees it. It doesn't even have to be directed at them, you can just post something like, "Please remember that tanking of any kind is not permitted and multiple occurrences will result in losing your first round pick next year." The punishment has to be a first rounder because it's the only thing that would move the needle in dynasty. Once you post that, he and everybody else in the league will know it's directed at him, but doesn't call him out specifically.

And on a side note, when you are in a lot of leagues and a commissioner of multiple, you don't have time to police everybody's starting lineup for the week, so unless somebody else calls attention to it, as a commissioner I don't know how you notice this is happening beforehand to "change" their lineup as TKO said.

Tough on the Commish for sure. However if it's "OK" to bench your studs as long as it's legal lineup then it could be a contest to start the shittest lineup among the teams who could land the #1 draft pick ( actually for the #2 and #3 picks also). At that point the league is a joke. Fortunately raising a stink usually puts a end to this slick willy strategy.

 

[Bandit]

Tough on the Commish for sure. However if it's "OK" to bench your studs as long as it's legal lineup then it could be a contest to start the shittest lineup among the teams who could land the #1 draft pick ( actually for the #2 and #3 picks also). At that point the league is a joke. Fortunately raising a stink usually puts a end to this slick willy strategy.

But once again, what if the random guy he put in his lineup outscores the "stud" he benched him for. Then what do you do? The problem with policing lineups is what if you're wrong. It shouldn't make any difference that 99% of experts think you're an idiot if you think you're right. There's just absolutely no way to know for sure whether somebody is playing a "hunch" or they got a gut feeling that somebody was going to get hurt or a bench guy was going to go off. The only true way to know if somebody is tanking is to ask them their motivation for what they did in their lineup. If they want to say, "I read a report that there was a chance that the Bears might hold Montgomery out because he doesn't like cold weather, so I had no choice but to play Felton since he played earlier," then what can a commissioner possibly do about that? Is he an idiot, yes he is, but as long as he didn't make the move to intentionally lose there's really nothing that can be done. The problem with tanking is that it's not a lineup decision problem, it's a state of mind problem. What is illegal is actively trying to lose, but the only way to truly know that is know how that person is actually feeling when they switch those players out. And short of the commissioner just calling them or asking them to justify their lineup decision, there's really no way to police it. And even if you did have the time to police all of that, then where does it stop? Do you call a guy out for playing Craig Reynolds over Ezekiel Elliott? The thing about dynasty is that even the worst teams generally aren't going to be able to put a lineup out there that is completely trash if they adhere to the no bye week players and no inactive players in their lineup criteria, because you aren't going to be able to drop enough people to field a lineup of misfits since you're stuck with your roster. Here's an example from my dynasty league of which Harold is a part of, here is the roster of the team with the worst record:


So last week Mond was inactive, Tua was on bye and Winston is injured so he had to start Josh Allen, but if Tua wasn't on bye would benching Josh Allen for Tua be considered tanking? At running back he has Edwards-Helaire and David Montgomery, but if he benched them both for Demetric Felton and Justin Jackson would that be considered tanking? I mean it would certainly raise my eyebrow, but there is no way that you could unequivocally say that neither of those guys could possibly outscore the other two. At wide receiver, he could play any of the six guys he had that weren't injured and there'd be no problem, and he only had one tight end, and any active IDP is fine as well as kicker, so really the only way he could have tanked would have been to bench Edwards-Helaire and Montgomery, but at what point do you step in as a commissioner?

Honestly if he had benched both Edwards-Helaire and Montgomery and I caught it or it was brought to my attention before any games were played I would probably text him and ask them what was going on. If they gave me a legitimate reason as to why he was benching Edwards-Helaire and David Montgomery then I'd let him do it. If he backtracked and said that he'd put them back in then you know it was for tanking. The problem is that probably 90% of the time, you don't catch stuff like that as a commissioner until after the games are played and at that point the owner has a choice of either to make up some excuse as to why he didn't start the guys he should have or admit to tanking which he knows there will be consequences for. And that's why it's a nightmare to be a commissioner sometimes. Remember when the MBBRL blew up over Shady leaving a lineup spot blank one year? And Micro blatantly tanking and getting called out for it even before the season ended, yet continued to do it anyway and a whole new league had to be started? It sucks because no matter how well you know everybody in your league, there is always a chance that they lost their damn mind and integrity for a week. I think so much of it depends on their reaction once getting called out also. I would have a hard time punishing any owner if they came out and said they were sorry and they would never do it again as opposed to somebody that tried to deflect the blame and not take responsibility.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

But once again, what if the random guy he put in his lineup outscores the "stud" he benched him for. Then what do you do? The problem with policing lineups is what if you're wrong. It shouldn't make any difference that 99% of experts think you're an idiot if you think you're right. There's just absolutely no way to know for sure whether somebody is playing a "hunch" or they got a gut feeling that somebody was going to get hurt or a bench guy was going to go off. The only true way to know if somebody is tanking is to ask them their motivation for what they did in their lineup. If they want to say, "I read a report that there was a chance that the Bears might hold Montgomery out because he doesn't like cold weather, so I had no choice but to play Felton since he played earlier," then what can a commissioner possibly do about that? Is he an idiot, yes he is, but as long as he didn't make the move to intentionally lose there's really nothing that can be done. The problem with tanking is that it's not a lineup decision problem, it's a state of mind problem. What is illegal is actively trying to lose, but the only way to truly know that is know how that person is actually feeling when they switch those players out. And short of the commissioner just calling them or asking them to justify their lineup decision, there's really no way to police it. And even if you did have the time to police all of that, then where does it stop? Do you call a guy out for playing Craig Reynolds over Ezekiel Elliott? The thing about dynasty is that even the worst teams generally aren't going to be able to put a lineup out there that is completely trash if they adhere to the no bye week players and no inactive players in their lineup criteria, because you aren't going to be able to drop enough people to field a lineup of misfits since you're stuck with your roster. Here's an example from my dynasty league of which Harold is a part of, here is the roster of the team with the worst record:
View attachment 284791

So last week Mond was inactive, Tua was on bye and Winston is injured so he had to start Josh Allen, but if Tua wasn't on bye would benching Josh Allen for Tua be considered tanking? At running back he has Edwards-Helaire and David Montgomery, but if he benched them both for Demetric Felton and Justin Jackson would that be considered tanking? I mean it would certainly raise my eyebrow, but there is no way that you could unequivocally say that neither of those guys could possibly outscore the other two. At wide receiver, he could play any of the six guys he had that weren't injured and there'd be no problem, and he only had one tight end, and any active IDP is fine as well as kicker, so really the only way he could have tanked would have been to bench Edwards-Helaire and Montgomery, but at what point do you step in as a commissioner?

Honestly if he had benched both Edwards-Helaire and Montgomery and I caught it or it was brought to my attention before any games were played I would probably text him and ask them what was going on. If they gave me a legitimate reason as to why he was benching Edwards-Helaire and David Montgomery then I'd let him do it. If he backtracked and said that he'd put them back in then you know it was for tanking. The problem is that probably 90% of the time, you don't catch stuff like that as a commissioner until after the games are played and at that point the owner has a choice of either to make up some excuse as to why he didn't start the guys he should have or admit to tanking which he knows there will be consequences for. And that's why it's a nightmare to be a commissioner sometimes. Remember when the MBBRL blew up over Shady leaving a lineup spot blank one year? And Micro blatantly tanking and getting called out for it even before the season ended, yet continued to do it anyway and a whole new league had to be started? It sucks because no matter how well you know everybody in your league, there is always a chance that they lost their damn mind and integrity for a week. I think so much of it depends on their reaction once getting called out also. I would have a hard time punishing any owner if they came out and said they were sorry and they would never do it again as opposed to somebody that tried to deflect the blame and not take responsibility.

IMO being correct after the fact and being correct at the time are two totally different things... so yes, i dont care if the scrub outscored the stud, it was the wrong move!!

i do agree that policing is difficult and dangerous... but when there is an actual reward, everyone else might start doing the same or just complain about the ones doing it... which is just as harmful, if not more...

 

[HaroldSeattle]

But once again, what if the random guy he put in his lineup outscores the "stud" he benched him for. Then what do you do? The problem with policing lineups is what if you're wrong. It shouldn't make any difference that 99% of experts think you're an idiot if you think you're right. There's just absolutely no way to know for sure whether somebody is playing a "hunch" or they got a gut feeling that somebody was going to get hurt or a bench guy was going to go off. The only true way to know if somebody is tanking is to ask them their motivation for what they did in their lineup. If they want to say, "I read a report that there was a chance that the Bears might hold Montgomery out because he doesn't like cold weather, so I had no choice but to play Felton since he played earlier," then what can a commissioner possibly do about that? Is he an idiot, yes he is, but as long as he didn't make the move to intentionally lose there's really nothing that can be done. The problem with tanking is that it's not a lineup decision problem, it's a state of mind problem. What is illegal is actively trying to lose, but the only way to truly know that is know how that person is actually feeling when they switch those players out. And short of the commissioner just calling them or asking them to justify their lineup decision, there's really no way to police it. And even if you did have the time to police all of that, then where does it stop? Do you call a guy out for playing Craig Reynolds over Ezekiel Elliott? The thing about dynasty is that even the worst teams generally aren't going to be able to put a lineup out there that is completely trash if they adhere to the no bye week players and no inactive players in their lineup criteria, because you aren't going to be able to drop enough people to field a lineup of misfits since you're stuck with your roster. Here's an example from my dynasty league of which Harold is a part of, here is the roster of the team with the worst record:
View attachment 284791

So last week Mond was inactive, Tua was on bye and Winston is injured so he had to start Josh Allen, but if Tua wasn't on bye would benching Josh Allen for Tua be considered tanking? At running back he has Edwards-Helaire and David Montgomery, but if he benched them both for Demetric Felton and Justin Jackson would that be considered tanking? I mean it would certainly raise my eyebrow, but there is no way that you could unequivocally say that neither of those guys could possibly outscore the other two. At wide receiver, he could play any of the six guys he had that weren't injured and there'd be no problem, and he only had one tight end, and any active IDP is fine as well as kicker, so really the only way he could have tanked would have been to bench Edwards-Helaire and Montgomery, but at what point do you step in as a commissioner?

Honestly if he had benched both Edwards-Helaire and Montgomery and I caught it or it was brought to my attention before any games were played I would probably text him and ask them what was going on. If they gave me a legitimate reason as to why he was benching Edwards-Helaire and David Montgomery then I'd let him do it. If he backtracked and said that he'd put them back in then you know it was for tanking. The problem is that probably 90% of the time, you don't catch stuff like that as a commissioner until after the games are played and at that point the owner has a choice of either to make up some excuse as to why he didn't start the guys he should have or admit to tanking which he knows there will be consequences for. And that's why it's a nightmare to be a commissioner sometimes. Remember when the MBBRL blew up over Shady leaving a lineup spot blank one year? And Micro blatantly tanking and getting called out for it even before the season ended, yet continued to do it anyway and a whole new league had to be started? It sucks because no matter how well you know everybody in your league, there is always a chance that they lost their damn mind and integrity for a week. I think so much of it depends on their reaction once getting called out also. I would have a hard time punishing any owner if they came out and said they were sorry and they would never do it again as opposed to somebody that tried to deflect the blame and not take responsibility.

Well the commish in the league I referring to (sleeper league) actual said about the same-if it a legal lineup it's out of his hands. Well these things don't come up unless it becomes obvious to all. The response from those in the league who had poor team was "Oh really? OK, wait until you see my lineup going forward" Even a playoff bound team ( who had just lost key players to injury) mentioned he just as soon miss the playoffs for a better draft choice. The league was looking like 6-7 teams actually trying for the worse lineup ( like a bust league) and a few playoff teams trying to win. You do see the insanity of that right? The whole tanking by not starting your best players only works if your the only one doing it and why would others allow that?

 

[Bandit]

Well the commish in the league I referring to (sleeper league) actual said about the same-if it a legal lineup it's out of his hands. Well these things don't come up unless it becomes obvious to all. The response from those in the league who had poor team was "Oh really? OK, wait until you see my lineup going forward" Even a playoff bound team ( who had just lost key players to injury) mentioned he just as soon miss the playoffs for a better draft choice. The league was looking like 6-7 teams actually trying for the worse lineup ( like a bust league) and a few playoff teams trying to win. You do see the insanity of that right? The whole tanking by not starting your best players only works if your the only one doing it and why would others allow that?

Well yes, that's ridiculous. That's what I mean about the reaction means a lot. First of all if you have that many guys trying to tank then you need different guys in your league. Second of all, if I'm the commissioner of that shitshow I just tell everybody that for the last week of the season it's best ball scoring, so unless they want to drop the stud they might as well play them.

 

[obxyankeefan]

Try this one I just came across. Team has clinched a playoff spot but started 2 guys the final week that were on the IR?

 

[averagejoe]

Ok. Appreciate the dialogue.
So if the punishment is that his first round pick essentially becomes the 12th overall pick, what if he traded his first round pick? Lose the 2nd round pick entirely?

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Ok. Appreciate the dialogue.
So if the punishment is that his first round pick essentially becomes the 12th overall pick, what if he traded his first round pick? Lose the 2nd round pick entirely?

if he trades his first round pick, then there was no reason for him to tank... so if he is tanking purposely, then you KNOW there is actual collusion...

 

[averagejoe]

if he trades his first round pick, then there was no reason for him to tank... so if he is tanking purposely, then you KNOW there is actual collusion...

It didnt happen. Just throwing out the scenario. (And that may not be a case of collusion either. He may have traded his first round pick early in the season and then saw his season spiral south. But I digress...)
Unfortunately, i am simply trying to plan for various scenarios (which isnt easy).

Said owner can be penalized on:
First rnd pick
2nd
3rd
4th
Waiver priority
Maybe vacate a player on taxi?

 

[TKOSpikes]

Ok. Appreciate the dialogue.
So if the punishment is that his first round pick essentially becomes the 12th overall pick, what if he traded his first round pick? Lose the 2nd round pick entirely?

That’s why the 1st round penalty is crazy to me.

I accept the struggle for a commish to police empty lineups, but if by chance, you do it.

Otherwise, as I began, just change after the fact.

There certainly is a difference with legal lineup vs empty. Starting a fart in the wind (practice squad promotion guy) is different than starting a fart under the blankets (buried on the depth chart guy), but both are choices to be made. Sitting studs is a long common mistake often duplicated for justifiable reasons. It led to the blooming of fantasy talk radio probably… “always start your studs” segments... (Mecold Hardman outscored Decoy Metcalf last week)

Empty is empty.

If it continues, buh-bye. If they won’t honor the friendship of the league, no reason for the others to feel that need. Not like it would extend outside the fantasy world.

“Not tolerated”
A draft pick penalty is tolerating. Buh-bye is not. Just sayin’

 

[SmokingMonkey]

I like to use personal experience to wrap my head around issues like this, even though anecdotal evidence is a trash way to analyze things.

In D2, I believe the year was 2019 or 2018, I completely blew my squad to pieces, sold off anything resembling any value (Cam Newton, Lamar Miller, Amari Cooper, Hunter Henry) to amass 1st round picks and built my team around Robert Woods....yup, Woods was my anchor. In my opinion, I was tanking. I purposely chose to field a garbage lineup of active players, in efforts to get as early of a 1st round pick as possible.

I'm sure several folks on these message boards hated what I was doing with my team. Especially if one of my pieces ended up on a team they were competing with for a title. I have a bye week and the #1 seed heading into the playoffs this weekend. As long as an active lineup is being submitted for the games each week, let people play how they want to play.

 

[obxyankeefan]

I have started a Travon Austin type over a stud on a gut feeling. That is not tanking, might be called stupid but not tanking.

 

[broncosmitty]

Ok. Appreciate the dialogue.
So if the punishment is that his first round pick essentially becomes the 12th overall pick, what if he traded his first round pick? Lose the 2nd round pick entirely?

Why would somebody tank if they don’t have their first?


That don’t make no sense.

 

[molsaniceman]

I like to use personal experience to wrap my head around issues like this, even though anecdotal evidence is a trash way to analyze things.

In D2, I believe the year was 2019 or 2018, I completely blew my squad to pieces, sold off anything resembling any value (Cam Newton, Lamar Miller, Amari Cooper, Hunter Henry) to amass 1st round picks and built my team around Robert Woods....yup, Woods was my anchor. In my opinion, I was tanking. I purposely chose to field a garbage lineup of active players, in efforts to get as early of a 1st round pick as possible.

I'm sure several folks on these message boards hated what I was doing with my team. Especially if one of my pieces ended up on a team they were competing with for a title. I have a bye week and the #1 seed heading into the playoffs this weekend. As long as an active lineup is being submitted for the games each week, let people play how they want to play.


View attachment 284797

this ^^^^
if its ok to trade away studs for possible future stars then why is it not ok to try to lose to get a better draft pick?
if u trade away your studs u r trying to lose
reality is its not a #1 pick either depending on the keepers its a early round pick

 

[wilwhite]

I've been thinking about this a little bit. One way to cure tanking is to lock in the relevant stat as of the week they were eliminated, the easiest example being if lowest FF points per week determines draft order for those who didn't make the playoffs. Once you've been eliminated from playoff contention subsequent weeks don't count, your FF points per week are locked, and tanking gets you nothing.

Just a thought.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

this ^^^^
if its ok to trade away studs for possible future stars then why is it not ok to try to lose to get a better draft pick?
if u trade away your studs u r trying to lose
reality is its not a #1 pick either depending on the keepers its a early round pick

If your trading good players for picks , your giving value for value. Benching your good players for stiffs is not giving value for value , it's trying to game the system. If you have a league where 3-5 teams have similar bad records and one team benches his good players , what do you think the other teams will do? The same of course. Is there any point in a league where half the league is filling there starting line up with stiffs? It's a slimy practice that only gives one an advantage if the others in the league don't follow suit and it should be dealt with pronto, before many leave the league in protest.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

It is quite obvious that tanking should not be tolerated.
But what is the punishment?

This is a group of friends, and this was a one-time occurrence in the final week of the fantasy dynasty season.
He essentially left his entire lineup on his bench.

I am fairly certain he will not be asked to be banished since we are all friends. I don't want that either.
The other scenario is that it really doesn't impact the standings. He was not a playoff team. He was not playing against a potential playoff team.
And since this was the final week of the season (and prior to the Monday Night game) a loss would not have moved him from the eighth seed (which would mean he is fifth to pick in next year's rookie draft).

So what if all these scenarios did impact playoff spots and seeding?
If expulsion is not an immediate option, what kind of penalties can be imposed?
Curious to hear your thoughts.

How about this...all non playoff teams go into a pool where draft positions 1 through 6 get drawn out of hat.

 

[Bandit]

How about this...all non playoff teams go into a pool where draft positions 1 through 6 get drawn out of hat.

See I thought of that too, but what if the guy that finished dead last didn't do any tanking but the teams that finished 2nd and 3rd to last did, then you're potentially punishing the guy that played it straight up but still finished last.