Not setting a lineup

[Jigga94]

Having some issues in a league where some owners are not setting lineups or checking before Thursday night or leaving a game time decision in on a late game and failing to switch them out when ruled inactive.

I'll be the first to say that being around all the time to set a lineup isnt priority in life and I understand when Thursday sneaks up or if you're passed out by Sunday night lol and just to clarify, I enjoy the league and owners in it. Please dont just say "Find a new league", that's not the purpose of this

From experience, what's your best rule of thumb when handling this? I feel like it should be that the owner is penalized and takes the 0 for not setting a lineup. But this can become a problem with tanking, fairness, etc. As long as it's not a team that is out of it, they take a 0? And teams that are out get penalized for tanking? Where do you draw the line?

[Pac_Eddy]

I assume you mean the zero for the inactive player's score, not for the whole week score.

If it's not intentional (tanking), most of my leagues leave the score alone and you get a $5 fine. It's an understandable situation and I've been guilty of it myself. I don't know if the fine helps the issue or not.

For me, I've started setting my lineup + the next week's lineup each Monday morning when I look at scores & matchup results. Creating this habit has helped in lineup errors and identifying bye week issues a week early.

[Jigga94]

Yes zero for the player score. The most recent was a team with Bethard (2QB) starting and the owner probably didnt hear that Mullins was getting the start. Beathard technically wansnt inactive. Mariota is on his bench.

We have a precedent to just set the lineup because we know sh1t happens and he would've obviously started Mariota had he known. But if this team was out of it, it could be viewed as tanking is my point

[skip]

I don't have any problem with owners not having a lineup set for Thursday night if the game doesn't involve their players. Or if it does but no lineup change is necessary. This can cover several scenarios. The only time I see it as a problem is if they left someone in who had previously been listed as out or they needed to start someone that night (and didn't) because their other options are hurt or on bye.

As for inactives, this depends a lot on when a player is listed as out. Last week Gronk was known to be a game time decision. Regardless of when that game is going to be played, penalizing am owner for leaving him in their lineup would have been wrong had he been declared inactive. IDK about you, but I'm in central time and in church when the early games kick off. Expecting me to switch up my lineup during the hour leading up to game time isn't going to happen.

[Pac_Eddy]

I've had a situation that I've intentionally started an inactive player that was not tanking. I don't want to drop anyone from my roster to replace one of my IDPs. In this league, IDPs don't score much and I'd rather take a zero at that spot that drop a more valuable player.

Just be aware that this is a possible situation.

[heyfeefellskee]

My rule is that a lineup needs to have players that are not on Bye or IR, and (as best as they can) not have "out" players (like someone that's obviously out, a la Hunter Henry, even though he's not on IR)

[jenkins.math]

Some of you guys have touched on some of the exceptions that you really dont want to penalize a guy for. What if the only player you have going Monday night is Zeke and he wakes up Monday morning with the flu and is out? Tanking or not, I'm not dropping Zeke just to pick up a RB to get a few points. I'll take my zero and chalk it up to bad luck. Should an owner really be fined or penalized for that? I dont think so.

Now when I read this, it sounded like the OP was talking about someone who has done this frequently over the course of multiple seasons. If that's the case the commish needs to find a replacement for that owner.

[JJRules]

We do things a little differently...

Last place team in each division suffers a monetary penalty which is paid to their respective division winner. Tanking is frowned upon but not specifically forbidden, as they literally pay for it. This has the added benefit of the rest of the league not worrying about the week-to-week lineup decisions of the other owners.

[heyfeefellskee]

We do things a little differently...

Last place team in each division suffers a monetary penalty which is paid to their respective division winner. Tanking is frowned upon but not specifically forbidden, as they literally pay for it. This has the added benefit of the rest of the league not worrying about the week-to-week lineup decisions of the other owners.

It's not a terrible idea, but I can see some guys deciding they don't want to pay the penalty at the end of the year and bailing. If you wanted a rule like this, you should up the entry fee required before the season and giving every non-last place team their "penalty money" back.

[TireFactory]

We do something a little different that I feel covers those last minute Monday night inactives and other late inactives. Each owner has the option to (and should be required to in my opinion...but is not) submit backups for each position. So, prior to Thursday game, I will submit my subs as an email to the league. I list one QB, two RBs, three WRs and one TE to cover just in case my starter, or even one of my backups are suddenly inactive.
Outside of that, we fine $5 for starting players that are listed as inactive or on bye. I've certainly forgotten to list my subs at times and have been fined, but it prevents tanking from that perspective.

[Pac_Eddy]

We do something a little different that I feel covers those last minute Monday night inactives and other late inactives. Each owner has the option to (and should be required to in my opinion...but is not) submit backups for each position. So, prior to Thursday game, I will submit my subs as an email to the league. I list one QB, two RBs, three WRs and one TE to cover just in case my starter, or even one of my backups are suddenly inactive.
Outside of that, we fine $5 for starting players that are listed as inactive or on bye. I've certainly forgotten to list my subs at times and have been fined, but it prevents tanking from that perspective.

Good idea, but I'd hate to be that commish and have to manually police that.

[JJRules]

We do things a little differently...

Last place team in each division suffers a monetary penalty which is paid to their respective division winner. Tanking is frowned upon but not specifically forbidden, as they literally pay for it. This has the added benefit of the rest of the league not worrying about the week-to-week lineup decisions of the other owners.

It's not a terrible idea, but I can see some guys deciding they don't want to pay the penalty at the end of the year and bailing. If you wanted a rule like this, you should up the entry fee required before the season and giving every non-last place team their "penalty money" back.

This is a group of RL friends and family where everybody knows most of everybody else. Not paying isn't an option

I could see that being an issue in leagues with more random or less-in-touch members tho.

[Jigga94]

I completely understand the MNF situation if it's your only player and a surprise inactive. Theres no switching that.

I also understand and agree it's not tanking if you have everyone on the same bye week and dont want to drop then to fill out a lineup. Its strategy. For example, in my rebuild its 2 QB. I am likely not going to have another option at QB when Baker goes on bye as i have Cam (starting), Tyrod (bye) and Jimmy G (IR)

But for a guy to start someone who didnt play (Beathard) but wasnt inactive it seems like there shouldn't be a penalty, but i dont think he should get the switcharoo treatment just because he wasn't starting.

We're talking about getting rid of the Commish switching lineups for people unless it's obvious tanking. That way it is simply cut and dry. Some counter arguments seem to be from top teams where they feel it's not keeping it competitive if there is an inactive in a lineup. I think it's part of FF and partly what contributes to strategy and the competitiveness

[TireFactory]

We do something a little different that I feel covers those last minute Monday night inactives and other late inactives. Each owner has the option to (and should be required to in my opinion...but is not) submit backups for each position. So, prior to Thursday game, I will submit my subs as an email to the league. I list one QB, two RBs, three WRs and one TE to cover just in case my starter, or even one of my backups are suddenly inactive.
Outside of that, we fine $5 for starting players that are listed as inactive or on bye. I've certainly forgotten to list my subs at times and have been fined, but it prevents tanking from that perspective.

Good idea, but I'd hate to be that commish and have to manually police that.

Requires the owner, and the league members (who are very good about watching other's P's and Q's) to ensure the commish changes it. Not easy for sure!

[Friction]

I would definitely at a minimum look at it as a case by case basis if you have to. If you are thinking of a penalty of sorts, at least. Look at the player in questions/situation. Like you said, not everyone can or even wants to bother sitting around all Sunday morning to wait on a players status. Some people will leave a truly GTD stud in their lineup and hope for the best. I had this happen with Marshawn a few years ago where it was not announced until after lineups locked that he was sick or something. Maybe that is too unique of an example, but if Brown is probable and he is far better than his replacement I roster, what is the better play? Setting a lineup poorly on purpose is a whole different ball of wax.