Has anyone tried to objectively define tanking?

[lukkynumber13]

I personally don't bother. I'm pretty hands off as a commish. Our league dues are fairly high and the managers have all been around for years now. As long as you're paid up, do as you like.

I tend to subscribe to this line of thinking

[ckrumm24]

Anyone who has any sense can do subtle things to tank without making it obvious. This is especially easier in IDP or deep leagues.

Would you consider starting Jaron Brown over Everette, Fant, Knox, or Uzomah (without knowing the results)? I’m not going to claim this guy is tanking in the sense we should do something about it but knowing his knowledge of fantasy football he clearly knows Jaron Brown is like the 5th WR on that team now, had two zero weeks prior to being injured, and Gordon now on the team. There’s no way he’s seeing the field more than a few snaps. All the other flex TE options are clearly better options even though they are shitty options.

So if someone is blatantly tanking, just kick them out for being idiots

[sloth8u]

I personally don't bother. I'm pretty hands off as a commish. Our league dues are fairly high and the managers have all been around for years now. As long as you're paid up, do as you like.

I tend to subscribe to this line of thinking

tanking has so many forms that its easiest to just let owners run their teams. most don't even notice or care until it impacts them. imagine a league where every owner is trying to win.... seems a lot of leagues have turned in to a contest reguarding the 1.1 rather than the championship.

[bjd5211]

I personally don't bother. I'm pretty hands off as a commish. Our league dues are fairly high and the managers have all been around for years now. As long as you're paid up, do as you like.

I tend to subscribe to this line of thinking

tanking has so many forms that its easiest to just let owners run their teams. most don't even notice or care until it impacts them. imagine a league where every owner is trying to win.... seems a lot of leagues have turned in to a contest reguarding the 1.1 rather than the championship.

I have never seen a league where every single team has a legitimate chance to win the championship that year. It's just not a realistic goal for every team year in and year out, the teams that are "tanking" are trying to win just as much as anyone else, they just aren't trying to win that specific year because they know they realistically can't. By accepting that you aren't going to be winning the championship for a year or two you can put yourself in a stronger position to eventually be one of those true contenders by collecting valuable young assets and draft capital and then building your roster around them or trading them for the pieces you need. The worst place you can be is middle of the pack without a lot of draft capital or high upside youth because you keep trying to win immediately, you'll just end up being stuck in that position forever and never really have a chance to win.

[sloth8u]

^^^ive been playing for several years, I get it.

to define tanking...id start with losing on purpose. selling your best players to lose now, so that you can hopefully win later....is losing on purpose. think about the team that you are making better and how the other "contenders" may feel.

I know exactly what your referring to and some consider that tanking, and even moreso if an owner wants to do that and then bitch when another owner wants to tank aswell.

that's why I prefer to just let everyone run their own team. if I truly do have an issue with someone setting lineups....id just replace.

let me give you an example of a tank job that I benefitted from, and im not sure anyone could bitch.
the year before Elliot, I had some early struggles and may have only started 1.-4, 0-5....I had some solid guys but were injured or underperforming...I made it clear to the league that I was selling my win now pieces (they were hurt or valued low) and would be starting the same guys (prospects) the rest of the way.... I received several offers for the guys on ir, but no one wanted my productive players....the rookie draft rolls around and I take ee at 1.1, go on to win the league the next season with guys that no one wanted a year earlier. there are ways to rebuild in the flow of the game without parting ways with your good players.

[badbuddah]

We had an owner who won the championship the year before, start slow and have a couple injuries, well he went full tank and landed Barkley as a result. Thanks to him we had to switch to a "best ball" or points system to determine draft order since standings are too easy to manipulate.

[JJRules]

We don't specifically ban tanking, but the last place team in each division is hit with an additional monetary penalty. Tank if you want to, but you'll literally pay for it.

[badbuddah]

We don't specifically ban tanking, but the last place team in each division is hit with an additional monetary penalty. Tank if you want to, but you'll literally pay for it.

That seems like a terrible idea. How would you ever get ppl to take over orphans, or have a person want to keep a horrible team?

[WhatWouldDitkaDo]

We don't specifically ban tanking, but the last place team in each division is hit with an additional monetary penalty. Tank if you want to, but you'll literally pay for it.

x2 There is a $30 fee in addition to the $50 annual dues for the last place team getting the 1.01 rookie pick. Also, in my league, the bylaws state that the best possible lineup must be started each week in the regular season. Every team must field a full lineup, but byes and injuries are okay if you're rebuilding and don't want to drop prospects for starters.

There is no rule against trading away players for picks and prospects to get a higher draft pick, as I believe this to be a legitimate strategy in a rebuild. At the end of the day, the bylaws should clearly state what is allowed and what is not depending on what the commissioner / league prefer.

[sloth8u]

We had an owner who won the championship the year before, start slow and have a couple injuries, well he went full tank and landed Barkley as a result. Thanks to him we had to switch to a "best ball" or points system to determine draft order since standings are too easy to manipulate.

Why would the league change the rules because someone drafted a certain player? Thats like changing because of a trade...not sure i understand here. Did the league have other teams trying to "not win"? If so, whats the difference?

[jenkins.math]

We don't specifically ban tanking, but the last place team in each division is hit with an additional monetary penalty. Tank if you want to, but you'll literally pay for it.

x2 There is a $30 fee in addition to the $50 annual dues for the last place team getting the 1.01 rookie pick. Also, in my league, the bylaws state that the best possible lineup must be started each week in the regular season. Every team must field a full lineup, but byes and injuries are okay if you're rebuilding and don't want to drop prospects for starters.

There is no rule against trading away players for picks and prospects to get a higher draft pick, as I believe this to be a legitimate strategy in a rebuild. At the end of the day, the bylaws should clearly state what is allowed and what is not depending on what the commissioner / league prefer.

Who determines what the best possible lineup is? The player that started Lazard, Parker, and James Washington over MT, OBJ, and Mike Evans would have won last week. Would you have gone in and changed that person's lineup? Would you have talked to them before hand and tried to force a change? What if you had done that and they lost as a result?

I also don't understand how you can state "you must start the best possible lineup but byes and injuries are ok if you're rebuilding and don't want to drop prospects for starters." How can you tell any owner they are rebuilding or not? What if you are rebuilding, but so far have been lucky with match ups and find yourself with a great record, but your plan all along was to really go for it the following year?

[WhatWouldDitkaDo]

Who determines what the best possible lineup is? The player that started Lazard, Parker, and James Washington over MT, OBJ, and Mike Evans would have won last week. Would you have gone in and changed that person's lineup? Would you have talked to them before hand and tried to force a change? What if you had done that and they lost as a result?

I rarely, if ever, have had to edit a lineup. The only time was actually this past week when an owner started Jordan Howard and Matt Breida when both were out, but it wasn't a huge deal because his only other options were j.D. McKissic and Trey Edmunds. I have no issue with risk taking in lineups as you said with benching Evans etc. I would only edit a lineup if they benched a clear start for a guy who hasn't even gotten targets like Keelan Doss or something.

How can you tell any owner they are rebuilding or not? What if you are rebuilding, but so far have been lucky with match ups and find yourself with a great record, but your plan all along was to really go for it the following year?

I'm not sure I understand your question. I'm not deciding for anyone if they're rebuilding or contending. All I'm saying is that they do not need to drop prospects to field a full roster due to bye weeks or injuries. The only requirement is that they must have a full roster during the regular season (i.e. must roster a K, DST, at least 1 QB, etc.). Ultimately, the rules are a guideline. Obviously rostering only a QB like Blake Bortles in LAR over clear options on the waiver wire would not be okay.

[brward]

I think there are too many corner cases to objectively define tanking and cover all scenarios. It's sort of a "you know it when you see it" sort of thing, imo. We use potential points to determine the draft order for the non playoff teams. Then we use the final standings to determine rest of the draft order for the playoff teams. Potential points certainly makes intentional tanking way harder with deep rosters. We also have a rule that anything the league unanimously votes on as "detrimental to the league" will have consequences such as loss of draft picks. We've never had an issue

[Mephistopheles]

We had someone in a league that started Ryan Finley (0 points and inactive), Kalen Ballage (0 points) and Adrian Peterson (14 points) ahead of Zeke (21 points), Nick Chubb (10 points) and Jacoby Brissett (19 points). He also deactivated WR's that he could have started so he ended up with 5 WR that all put up zero points on his active roster (trying to cover it up, I think).

He lost his matchup by 30 points which he would have won. He also very nearly cost someone the #2 seed (the team he played ended up with the #2 seed because of the win). He ended up moving up 3 spots in the draft because 2 other suckers, I mean franchise owners, set legit lineups and won their games. I was one of those owners and I knocked a team out of the playoffs by beating them.

And the asshole ADMITTED to it. Didn't see anything wrong with it. Fortunately, the commish took away his 3rd round pick which I thought was too light for a guy who almost completely bleeped somebody over on his playoff seed.

It's simple, if you have to ask if you're tanking you probably are. Someone trying to justify that kind of lineup setting as an acceptable method of tanking or planning for next year, needs to just stop sounding like a dumb bleep.

[brward]

We had someone in a league that started Ryan Finley (0 points and inactive), Kalen Ballage (0 points) and Adrian Peterson (14 points) ahead of Zeke (21 points), Nick Chubb (10 points) and Jacoby Brissett (19 points). He also deactivated WR's that he could have started so he ended up with 5 WR that all put up zero points on his active roster (trying to cover it up, I think).

He lost his matchup by 30 points which he would have won. He also very nearly cost someone the #2 seed (the team he played ended up with the #2 seed because of the win). He ended up moving up 3 spots in the draft because 2 other suckers, I mean franchise owners, set legit lineups and won their games. I was one of those owners and I knocked a team out of the playoffs by beating them.

And the asshole ADMITTED to it. Didn't see anything wrong with it. Fortunately, the commish took away his 3rd round pick which I thought was too light for a guy who almost completely bleeped somebody over on his playoff seed.

It's simple, if you have to ask if you're tanking you probably are. Someone trying to justify that kind of lineup setting as an acceptable method of tanking or planning for next year, needs to just stop sounding like a dumb bleep.

This is exactly why my league moved to potential points for determining non playoff team draft order. I mentioned in my post above that we also have a rule that anything "detrimental to the league" can be voted on. Throwing matches is detrimental to the league and would carry consequences. Owners are expected to try and set their best lineup and win every match up.