Managing 31 other owners...

[oogieboogie]

Hey, I am in a league of 32 teams. It is split into two 16 team conferences and we have 1 month of playoffs concluding in week 16 with a "Superbowl" between the two conference champions. It's an awesome setup. We are in our 2nd season and there is a small buy in of $25.

We have two co-commissioners and I am one of them.

I have noticed that our league has a few individuals that seem to forget checking their lineup on some weeks and bye week or injured players are in active lineups.

The league is also very quiet in the off-season and during the season there is little discussion but trade activity is so-so, imo.

When trying to collect payments it can be like pulling teeth and some owners did not play till this season was underway.

The league is filled with majority great owners and even a few "experts" but there are also a few who treat the league like a free redraft league.

Anyway, my question is, how would you handle issues like this? perhaps something as simple as increasing the buy-in and speaking to these owners individually.

[MEuRaH]

If you are allowing people to play before they pay, then you're doing it wrong. That is just asking for trouble. I am a commish of 3 leagues, and nobody plays without paying. I replace rather easily, too.

[oogieboogie]

If you are allowing people to play before they pay, then you're doing it wrong. That is just asking for trouble. I am a commish of 3 leagues, and nobody plays without paying. I replace rather easily, too.

I completely agree.

Unfortunately I was not the co-commissioner till about mid-way into this season. (FWIW, everyone is paid now).

[Plank]

All you can do really is monitor the transactions .. and if a guy hasn't made a roster move or waiver in over 3-4 wks, I wouldn't invite him back for the next season, that many owners has to be frustrating, ... have to be careful, if its just one week or two I wouldn't sweat it, because real life can get in the way .. I know some leagues on different sites approach line-ups make it a little more obvious if someone hasn't submitted an active roster (like MFL) .. also shows log in activity also ... The league fee I would move up around the NFL draft for the upcoming year, that way it gives you plenty of time to screen new owners before the upcoming season ..

Simple eMails just inquiring if everything is ok with the owner often works, but for the most part if they go inactive, they won't respond .. I would just post deadlines and League news, those who want to be in will respond ..

[npowellff]

The only real answer is to be diligent and monitor everything and kick people out who don't pay and/or have multiple examples or illegal lineups. Everybody makes mistakes, but clear tanking/consistently not setting LU's is unacceptable

[joeymags220]

Find new owners. Especially if there are repeat offenses. With that many teams, you could always shrink it down too, if you can't find replacements. I'd rather play in a little smaller league with people that play, than in a big league with people that don't.

[Dingram]

Increasing the buy-in is something that would need a vote. Slippery slope of you just decide to double the buy-in. I had to replace a few owners last year due to inactivity. it happens

[drobes]

Increasing the buy-in will help with owner involvement and cut down on issues with starting bye week or injured players but it will make collecting dues and finding replacement owners even harder.

[oogieboogie]

Thanks for the suggestions folks, I appreciate it.

I have been going through each team and charting on a graph which weeks they had illegal lineups -- players who were declared out and inactive.

Anyway, I almost through the entire league and it looks like we had 9 teams that submitted illegal lineups at least 3 weeks and the majority are at 4-6 weeks.

That type of inactivity is reason enough to simply not re-invite and w/o discussion, correct?
I mean, I don't even want to give them a chance. It's like, you either want to play or not. I understand the league was slow this year but that isn't reason to totally bail on your team missing 25% or MORE of the season!! (it is just 12 weeks due to 4 weeks of playoffs and no week 17 obviously). Especially in dynasty where it affects things like future draft picks.

[TommyL31]

Thanks for the suggestions folks, I appreciate it.

I have been going through each team and charting on a graph which weeks they had illegal lineups -- players who were declared out and inactive.

Anyway, I almost through the entire league and it looks like we had 9 teams that submitted illegal lineups at least 3 weeks and the majority are at 4-6 weeks.

That type of inactivity is reason enough to simply not re-invite and w/o discussion, correct?
I mean, I don't even want to give them a chance. It's like, you either want to play or not. I understand the league was slow this year but that isn't reason to totally bail on your team missing 25% or MORE of the season!! (it is just 12 weeks due to 4 weeks of playoffs and no week 17 obviously). Especially in dynasty where it affects things like future draft picks.

Wow, with the 2 16 team conferences are there duplicate player pools or just 1 of each player throughout the entire league? If it's one throughout the entire league, depending on starting requirements I can see a couple of guys getting nailed with a bye week or two where they don't want to drop anyone or there's no one available but if there are duplicate rosters that makes no sense at all.

And even if there aren't. 9 teams with 3 weeks of illegal lineups? I think you either need to clean house in the offseason and/or shrink the league down.

[oogieboogie]

Thanks for the suggestions folks, I appreciate it.

I have been going through each team and charting on a graph which weeks they had illegal lineups -- players who were declared out and inactive.

Anyway, I almost through the entire league and it looks like we had 9 teams that submitted illegal lineups at least 3 weeks and the majority are at 4-6 weeks.

That type of inactivity is reason enough to simply not re-invite and w/o discussion, correct?
I mean, I don't even want to give them a chance. It's like, you either want to play or not. I understand the league was slow this year but that isn't reason to totally bail on your team missing 25% or MORE of the season!! (it is just 12 weeks due to 4 weeks of playoffs and no week 17 obviously). Especially in dynasty where it affects things like future draft picks.

Wow, with the 2 16 team conferences are there duplicate player pools or just 1 of each player throughout the entire league? If it's one throughout the entire league, depending on starting requirements I can see a couple of guys getting nailed with a bye week or two where they don't want to drop anyone or there's no one available but if there are duplicate rosters that makes no sense at all.

And even if there aren't. 9 teams with 3 weeks of illegal lineups? I think you either need to clean house in the offseason and/or shrink the league down.

there were two startup auctions to begin the league. So, it is essentially two 16 team leagues where the champion from each one face off for the League Champion title. We even have 1 week per season where you play someone from the other conference who could own/start some of the same players.

Clean house coming up. I think the core owners and setup is so badass that the ship can be righted.

[sloth8u]

ive played in a few 32 team leagues, and your issue is a common one. so much so, that i currently only play in free leagues of this size. ive found it very frustrating to try to compete with other owners taking advantage of lacking teams or 3/4 of the teams "rebuilding". i will say that if your looking to replace, its a sticky ground to walk on if everyone is paying. some may be not setting lineups to get better picks, which in a league this size, may be the only way to improve your team.

i dont know how the competitive balance in your league is, but ive seen some pretty cool supplemental pick type scenarios to help improve the bottom teams and make the league as a whole alot more competitive and more fun to participate in. the key in a 32 teamer is to keep everyone involved if you want the league to be successful. if not, you will find that you are constantly replacing owners from year to year. even the best owners get tired of trying to build a contender while others are swinging lopsided trades, not setting line ups, etc.

[italian_stallion21]

ive played in a few 32 team leagues, and your issue is a common one. so much so, that i currently only play in free leagues of this size. ive found it very frustrating to try to compete with other owners taking advantage of lacking teams or 3/4 of the teams "rebuilding". i will say that if your looking to replace, its a sticky ground to walk on if everyone is paying. some may be not setting lineups to get better picks, which in a league this size, may be the only way to improve your team.

i dont know how the competitive balance in your league is, but ive seen some pretty cool supplemental pick type scenarios to help improve the bottom teams and make the league as a whole alot more competitive and more fun to participate in. the key in a 32 teamer is to keep everyone involved if you want the league to be successful. if not, you will find that you are constantly replacing owners from year to year. even the best owners get tired of trying to build a contender while others are swinging lopsided trades, not setting line ups, etc.

Competitive balance isn't an issue either oddly enough, my division is currently 6-5/6-5/6-5/5-6. And it's team 1 in my sig, so it's not like it's middling teams either. I didn't even realize it was that bad, as it's quiet, but I've always had people respond to trades and whatnot, but the lineup thing is unacceptable to me.

[oogieboogie]

I have been individually contacting the owners with 2-4 illegal weeks and giving them benefit of the doubt, asked them about those lineups. Most have apologized for the lineup problems and/or bowed out of the league for 2015.

However, there are 4 teams remaining that had 5-6 weeks of illegal lineups and (as you know) we have only played 11 weeks of the 12 week regular season.

Do those teams even deserve benefit of the doubt?

I think it might be unfair to allow them to continue playing when their future draft picks have been unfairly improved.

I am tempted to simply replace those owners as soon as playoffs begin with new owners and begin a dispersal draft asap so new league rules can be voted on.

what do you think

[italian_stallion21]

I have been individually contacting the owners with 2-4 illegal weeks and giving them benefit of the doubt, asked them about those lineups. Most have apologized for the lineup problems and/or bowed out of the league for 2015.

However, there are 4 teams remaining that had 5-6 weeks of illegal lineups and (as you know) we have only played 11 weeks of the 12 week regular season.

Do those teams even deserve benefit of the doubt?

I think it might be unfair to allow them to continue playing when their future draft picks have been unfairly improved.

I am tempted to simply replace those owners as soon as playoffs begin with new owners and begin a dispersal draft asap so new league rules can be voted on.

what do you think

Agreed on all fronts, with it being so many it's not really going to affect the picks too much, but it is unacceptable. Put them on notice, shape up or ship out, which some have already done.