Taxi squad rules

[Mika1205]

I think I know what most think of this question/scenario, but I need proof for my league.

Scenario:
I am rebuilding, trying to be strong for the 2021 season and beyond. I have my own 2021 picks.
We have a league rule stating that you have to set your strongest lineup to prevent tanking. I choose not to promote JT, Swift, Akers, Reagor and Edwards from my taxi squad for this season. Instead my best lineup includes Duke Johnson and Dede Westbrook.

Should this be allowed? Or is it considered tanking?

Personally, I don't see the point in having taxi squads, if you are forced to promote players based on whether or not they are good enough to be in your lineup on a given week. Best available lineup has to be fielded from the active roster alone, and does not include players on taxi squads.
That's my opinion.

What do you guys think?

[FantasyFreak]

Tax's should not be policed by the commish. I run leagues without taxi's for this reason, but IF you have a taxi squad, then people can do what they want with them, as long as that player is allowed on it. If a league doesn't want people hiding potential points, then don't have a taxi, it's pretty simple.

Can't have a commish going around telling people what to do with their taxi's, I had this issue, and left a league over it. Commish was also doing it out of self interest, as he had an early first and wanted people's potential points to be higher. Too much grey area with a commish policing who has to be promoted and who doesn't with rookies. Obviously you are doing this to gain a better pick next year, but it's within the rules. Again, if people/commishes don't want this, then don't have taxi squads and simply expand rosters.

The idea isn't an uncommon one. You are maximizing your roster by filling your taxi squad, and rostering players like Dede etc. Maybe those guys can net you a 3rd next year, by carrying them, rather than having to drop a player to roster one of those rookies when you could use the taxi squad. Even if you choose to roster a rookie, like Hightower on your active roster, while having CEH on your taxi, it's within the rules. Is it going to please everybody? Nope. Again, that's the reality of taxi's though, a savvy owner will use it to maximize the potential of his rebuild. If people don't want that, don't have taxi squads. As long as you set your best lineup from your active roster, there should be no issue.

[Csl312]

Outside of contract/salary cap leagues I don't really understand the point of a taxi squad unless explicitly designed to keep higher performing young players off your active roster. Given that it would seem to me you are using it exactly as intended. Otherwise like FF said why have a taxi squad when you can just expand rosters.

[FiremanEd]

Taxi Squad is a holding ground for developmental talent in concept, but absolutely gets used across my leagues for the purpose of 'hiding' potential points and 'tanking' for draft position purposes. In my leagues this is allowed, as people can choose to manage the available roster spots available to them as they like, with the expectation that Active Roster is what is applicable for lineup setting anti-tanking monitoring, as those are the only players eligible to be used within the Starting Lineup. I certainly understand the logic of 'that's tanking' when putting starting caliber players there because it sort of is. However, this is part of Taxi Squad availability. If the Commissioner just wanted people to be able to hold young players, then just increase the Active Roster size. There isn't a notable reason to have Taxi Squad if you just want extra roster spots to let those players develop but also want the best lineup started. The only other reason i can think of is to enable Taxi Poaching (also an option to implement).

I have four leagues that have Taxi Squads. Two are Taxi Poaching leagues and two are the scenario of the OP, and none have enforcement of anti-tanking on them. It is simply part of the Taxi Squad equation. If he wants to eliminate that behavior, he needs to implement poaching or remove the Taxi Squad all together IMO.

Edit: Taxi Poaching means another team can claim your player on taxi squad, compensating the owner for a draft pick of the round they were drafted in and a draft pick a round above they were drafted.

[sloth8u]

What your doing is within the rules, it's also why I don't use the taxi squad in the leagues I commish. As mentioned, if the league overall doesn't like it, expand rosters and eliminate the taxi.

[Vectorgod]

I use taxi squads in all of the contract and salary cap leagues I commish. As others have stated, expanded rosters are more appropriate than taxi squads if you are not using contract years and/or salary cap. As to your specific scenario, I believe you are doing exactly what is expected by holding young players on your taxi squad while you attempt to rebuild. If your league bylaws do not specifically require you to promote from the taxi squad in order to field a better lineup, then you should not be coerced into it.

On a related note, I started a salary cap league a few years ago where we implemented "taxi squad raids". The process closely mimics what the NFL does with practice squads. So if you are hiding a stud on your taxi squad another team can come offer that player an active roster contract and force your hand. You are then forced to either promote the player or let him go and take a compensatory draft pick a round higher than where you drafted the player. It is a limited process, but it adds an extra layer of strategy.

[DLF3000]

Tanking is way overblown - and unsolvable gray area regardless. Similarly, "stashing" players is way overblown - and available in some minor form to every single GM regardless.

Leave people alone, let them manage their damn rosters - taxi, IR/Out slots, or otherwise - however they see fit within the rules and inevitable, impossible-to-ever-fully-address gray areas, whether short or long term strategy.

Which means, be OK with some GMs basically setting their league fees on fire for their current team status/situation if they want to, or being OK with some GMs making tough roster or partial/incomplete starting lineup decisions that you might never make. Be open to all the possibilities and strategies you might not agree with.

Only GMs with overwhelmingly consistent, persistent, extreme negative behaviors should be addressed (they tank every year, they submit partial lineups almost every week, they make league-changing and terrible-value trades every year, they ignore, attack and abuse other GMs in the league all the time) - and address only the problem GM, directly.

As in, talk to these extreme-problem GMs once, and next violation, boot them. Don't punish or micromanage the entire league for that one horrible and/or lazy GM who goes to great, consistent, multiple lengths to be horrible and/or lazy.

P.S. If I were commissioner, I would have removed all "special" roster slots many years ago - all the headaches around taxi, IR/out, etc. aren't worth the administrative BS and constant questioning/criticism. Instead, expand the hell out of the rosters total and make them all the same type of active/everything slot. No special designations for anyone to worry or complain about, and tons of extra roster space for every reason. So what if the waiver wire sucks? This is dynasty, not redraft.