What Should I Do To Address Tanking?

[Cult of Dionysus]

Not only was it not in the rules, this happened for two weeks! Where was the commish this whole time? He deserves all of the blame imo. So when I see him trying to pass it off onto someone else, that's going to draw some fire from me.

Also, if I'm reading your quote correctly, tanking is illegal all the time unless otherwise written? I don't agree with that.

Most of us are unable to devote as much time to commissioning as you seem able to do. You have some of the best leagues out there and your owners love you for it/them. I try to keep on top of things, but half the time, it's one of my owners who informs me when something is amiss (usually someone making an invalid Taxi Squad move).

The OP made this his first post. He might be a pretty novice commissioner, and he may also have a lot of other commitments. Think that deserves some consideration, moderation, when the guy is just trying to get feedback and help.

As for tanking, yes, I think it's something that's fundamentally wrong, unless it's expressly permitted. It's not just about the draft next year, it's also about skewing results and playoff races. Imagine you play team X in week 3, when the dude is still trying to win, and then your biggest playoff-spot rival plays team X in week 10, when he is tanking... that sucks (not just from a competitive standpoint, but grammatically too). It tears leagues apart. Not sure if you or AK thought about that element when you posted above.

Whoa.... that's setting a precedent that "If I don't like something, I'm going to change it on the spot". Terrible idea.... I know you said "when there is a short-coming", but that's still something that should be voted on by the league, not totalitarian-like by the commish.

One of the provisions in my bylaws, something I gleaned here from someone else's bylaws, states that "if any issues, ambiguities, loop holes or other problems come up, the commissioner will identify the issue to the league, seek input from managers and then determine the correct course of action. Any such course of action can be overturned if a majority of managers (6 of 11, excluding the commissioner) so vote." This is fairly common language, believe even the new DLF Fantasy Football leagues have this provision in them. I looked at the issue at hand from the perspective of this, as I think the situation falls squarely within this sphere (as the rules were silent on this, not by design, but very very likely by accident/oversight).

[bucsrule]

If you have do not have a NO TANKING rule in your League Rules and Bylaws, then he was golden doing so.

Personally I hate tanking and, as Commish of a couple leagues, have it stipulated in Rules that tanking is not allowed. Basically because everyone has money paid in and shouldn't have their fortunes ruined by someone not fielding a legitimate team.

[Fish Sticks]

Does it matter that he did this without even asking me? I feel like he at least should have when he was thinking about it.

Also, do any of the other commissioners in here check lineups each week? I feel like that's babysitting the league instead of managing it. Maybe I'm being harsh, but on a practical matter, I just don't have time to police everyone's lineup on a weekly basis.

Why does he have to include you in any football strategy he is taking part in. I agree with many that if it isn't against the rules, then it's fair game. I think it's clear that there are differing opinions on tanking. I also agree with others that this issue is entirely on you. I don't buy into this unwritten rule type thing. I don't think this falls into that category.

I guess I don't know what site you are using but I'm surprised that you didn't have it in your league settings to not allow inactive players to be started.

Also as a commissioner I do try to glance at the weekly lineups before Thursday and Sunday games. I don't go through them with a comb. If there are matters a league member usually points it out.

Anyways as the poll shows clearly.. make the rules going forward. No reason at all to kick him out or change the draft order. Use PP to help mitigate lineup tampering and move on.

[MEuRaH]

Does it matter that he did this without even asking me? I feel like he at least should have when he was thinking about it.

Also, do any of the other commissioners in here check lineups each week? I feel like that's babysitting the league instead of managing it. Maybe I'm being harsh, but on a practical matter, I just don't have time to police everyone's lineup on a weekly basis.

Why does he have to include you in any football strategy he is taking part in.

Also as a commissioner I do try to glance at the weekly lineups before Thursday and Sunday games.

This.

You set the rules, the owners play to them, end of story. They shouldn't have to go to you with every little question. Not only would that drive you insane, but that's the sole point of having rules.

I check lineups all the time. 160 owners. I make time by Sunday games. If one week gets past me, then I find out what happened. 2 weeks? Come on bro, that's on you.

[Pullo Vision]

Does it matter that he did this without even asking me? I feel like he at least should have when he was thinking about it.

Also, do any of the other commissioners in here check lineups each week? I feel like that's babysitting the league instead of managing it. Maybe I'm being harsh, but on a practical matter, I just don't have time to police everyone's lineup on a weekly basis.

No, asking you is irrelevant. Just because an idea doesn't agree with your compass doesn't mean an owner needs to seem permission. Just need to put a QUALITY anti-tanking rule in the books to prevent this in the future.

I agree that eagle eying each lineup every week is excessive, even if ideal. Is there a way to prevent owners from putting injured players or those on bye in the lineup? I know you can prevent teams with IR violations from submitting lineups in MFL.

[Defender]

HOWEVER, if you can make it so the rookie draft order is determined by potential points, you'll almost 100% get rid of tanking entirely. Do this, young padawan.

This.

[Hahaclintondix]

This smells like turcorox911 on a burner account.

[honcho55]

I much prefer leagues where tanking is clearly against the rules or there are incentives. That said, if its not in the rules, it should be allowed, period. Samesies for a team locked into the playoffs, facing a bubble team, and the team thats locked in decided a loss puts them in a better spot somehow (seen this happen, cant be too crazy uncommon)

I dont like it personally but if its a tactic thats not banned or incentivized against (thats maybe not a real word but whatever), then its fair game.

So, if my opinion isnt clear, the next step is deciding which anti-tank method you want to pursue.

[clarion contrarion]

AH yes tanking , the last refuge of the incompetent or perhaps semi competent.

They could not build a decent team so they gut their squad to try to be good 3 or 4 years from now - the thing is their same lack of foresight or ability transfers with them generally . I know it can work if you really load up on picks and hit them but it is a tacit admission you cannot cut the mustard on level ground and thus must be the most incompetent today in the hopes of getting an edge a few years from now. I would forego that gambit and move along to a different hobby !



I posted this ^^^^ in a different tanking thread - with that in mind if it isn't against the law ..... there is no punishment forthcoming or warranted . I would amend the constitution unilaterally to outlaw and punish tankers to whatever severity you deem necessary to keep the league whole.

[jeffster]

Definitely make this a rule going forward that is written in bylaws, then move on.

I have a hard time understanding people who think there's something intrinsically wrong with tanking, absent a rule. There's clearly an incentive to finish last if you can't make the playoffs, and I think everyone would agree that owners should get to manage their own teams, so why would it be a problem for them to pursue that incentive?

You have two options: change the incentive somehow, or make rules that prevent it, like setting valid starting lineups. Personally I don't like tanking either, so all of my leagues have anti tanking rules.

But in the absence of them, it's silly to say that doing what is best for your team is somehow intrinsically wrong.

[Cult of Dionysus]

Think there's a lot of good advice forthcoming in this thread.

I do find it very interesting that many of you think that if something isn't expressly prohibited in the bylaws, that it is then fair game. Let's take this a little further, using some scenarios. What if an owner decides to pay another owner monetary compensation (e.g. I offer the 1.01 owner $50 to trade me 1.01 for a relatively cheap deal, or what if I do it outright, $50 for 1.01). What if a commish forgot to address collusion. What if I had some IT abilities, and I can screw with another owner's laptop, internet connection, team settings or starting order. Most of our bylaws do not speak to these kind of actions, so are they therefore permissible? I would hope the answer is "no."

I get that tanking is a lot less out there than some of these hypotheticals. But tanking is still generally believe to be inappropriate and should be prohibited, right. Think almost everyone agrees with that, or that a rule should be included that essentially prevents tanking (by making it useless). So why say it's permitted unless it's expressly prohibited? I'm struggling a bit with that...

[jeffster]

I do find it very interesting that many of you think that if something isn't expressly prohibited in the bylaws, that it is then fair game. Let's take this a little further, using some scenarios. What if an owner decides to pay another owner monetary compensation (e.g. I offer the 1.01 owner $50 to trade me 1.01 for a relatively cheap deal, or what if I do it outright, $50 for 1.01). What if a commish forgot to address collusion. What if I had some IT abilities, and I can screw with another owner's laptop, internet connection, team settings or starting order. Most of our bylaws do not speak to these kind of actions, so are they therefore permissible? I would hope the answer is "no."

A key difference for me is that in all the cases you described, it's an owner trying to use means from outside the league (cash, hacking, collusion) to change something about another team. In tanking, it's an owner using an internal mechanic (lineup setting) to change something about their own team.

That's pretty fundamental.

[MEuRaH]

I do find it very interesting that many of you think that if something isn't expressly prohibited in the bylaws, that it is then fair game. Let's take this a little further, using some scenarios. What if an owner decides to pay another owner monetary compensation (e.g. I offer the 1.01 owner $50 to trade me 1.01 for a relatively cheap deal, or what if I do it outright, $50 for 1.01). What if a commish forgot to address collusion. What if I had some IT abilities, and I can screw with another owner's laptop, internet connection, team settings or starting order. Most of our bylaws do not speak to these kind of actions, so are they therefore permissible? I would hope the answer is "no."

A key difference for me is that in all the cases you described, it's an owner trying to use means from outside the league (cash, hacking, collusion) to change something about another team. In tanking, it's an owner using an internal mechanic (lineup setting) to change something about their own team.

That's pretty fundamental.

Took the words right out of my mouth. Those are all outside factors, and there's an infinite amount of outside factors that can be listed. Can't cover them all.

But as far as leagues are concerned you have: Drafts, Trades, Lineups, Taxi/IR, Waivers/Add-Drops, Scoring, Schedules, Playoffs, & Payouts, plus others if you have specific league types (Keeper, Salary, etc). If you cover all that stuff in your rules, you should be fine. If you don't, expect there to be problems.

[BigBawseRoss]

This smells like turcorox911 on a burner account.

he hasnt commented on his own post 10 times and the explanation needed to be way more in depth haha

[skip]

I have a hard time understanding people who think there's something intrinsically wrong with tanking, absent a rule. There's clearly an incentive to finish last if you can't make the playoffs, and I think everyone would agree that owners should get to manage their own teams, so why would it be a problem for them to pursue that incentive?

And I have a hard time understanding the idea that there is something intrinsically right with tanking... It is a myopic view to believe that the only team impacted is the one purposely throwing games. There is a marked difference between allowing an owner to manage their own team and allowing them to purposely lose due to the implications it has for other teams.