Fantasy Football Implications from MNF Game (1 Viewer)

[JohnnyU]

Sleeper called Team B the winner by default and they ended up splitting the pot 50/50 and everyone in the league chat are basically celebrating that the game ended early, and that team B is the "true champion"

It's fine that team B conceded but Sleeper was not wrong either.

I mean this is simple. You get points based on players stats. The players team B has in his lineup got the stats to score the most points. He won.

I think you're in the vast minority here if you think that everyone should just accept that all bills/bengals get 0's and the title should be handed out like that.

A-men brother Bill.

 

[menobrown]

Sleeper called Team B the winner by default and they ended up splitting the pot 50/50 and everyone in the league chat are basically celebrating that the game ended early, and that team B is the "true champion"

It's fine that team B conceded but Sleeper was not wrong either.

I mean this is simple. You get points based on players stats. The players team B has in his lineup got the stats to score the most points. He won.

I think you're in the vast minority here if you think that everyone should just accept that all bills/bengals get 0's and the title should be handed out like that.

I know and I'm comfortable arriving at my own conclusions.

ETA-I left a long post earlier in I think this thread explaining why I like hard rules. And also ETA a second time because math is math. His players scored more points. Anything else is changing the rules. See edit 1A.

 

[Deamon]

Sleeper called Team B the winner by default and they ended up splitting the pot 50/50 and everyone in the league chat are basically celebrating that the game ended early, and that team B is the "true champion"

It's fine that team B conceded but Sleeper was not wrong either.

I mean this is simple. You get points based on players stats. The players team B has in his lineup got the stats to score the most points. He won.

I think you're in the vast minority here if you think that everyone should just accept that all bills/bengals get 0's and the title should be handed out like that.

I know and I'm comfortable arriving at my own conclusions.

ETA-I left a long post earlier in I think this thread explaining why I like hard rules. And also ETA a second time because math is math. His players scored more points. Anything else is changing the rules. See edit 1A.

I think this is where people need to take a deep breath and realize what this situation is. This is unprecedented, and we need to be able to adjust on the fly to situations that come up. We are not lawyers, not every league constitution has been signed by all and framed. It's great to have league rules, but I'm sure a lot of leagues don't have it in writing that "dropping all your star players mid season isn't allowed". Yet common sense should prevail there, and doing that shouldn't be allowed.

Common sense should prevail here. A man almost lost his life and we want to use the fact that players were so emotionally damaged and unable to play, in order to hand out a fantasy trophy? Fantasy leagues are for the most part, groups of friends who love the competition, but it's a great way to stay in touch with friends and stay connected. Throwing the "too bad, you were obviously going to win but sorry I'm not going to allow that" is just so ****ty.

They fought all year with these players, they DIDN'T get injured, they didn't have a bad game. Let those players earn the points, or use some common sense to allow for some solution that works for everyone. It's just insane and awful how a tragedy like this has brought out the absolute WORST in people who sit at home on their computer.

 

[NE_REVIVAL]

Sleeper called Team B the winner by default and they ended up splitting the pot 50/50 and everyone in the league chat are basically celebrating that the game ended early, and that team B is the "true champion"

It's fine that team B conceded but Sleeper was not wrong either.

I mean this is simple. You get points based on players stats. The players team B has in his lineup got the stats to score the most points. He won.

I think you're in the vast minority here if you think that everyone should just accept that all bills/bengals get 0's and the title should be handed out like that.

Reasonable minds may disagree.

Tend to agree with Meno, it is a sucky situation, but technically team "B" is the champ. Imho, the right thing to do is to split the pot and make them co-champions, but the online site is going to follow the rules, most recorded points win. Many of us don't agree, but bottom line it is technically correct and there is no way around that.

 

[-OZ-]

I'm stepping down as commish of Fantasy Legends II after this season. I've been doing it for 17 years in that league. For the Bengals game that I was in the title game, behind by 6 with 3 to play (Allen, Mixon, Davis) and my opponent has none and won't concede and rejects my solution. So I will split the money ($300) if the game is cancelled, but will apply week 18 stats for those players to week 17 to determine the champion. Obviously If the game isn't cancelled I will apply the stats from the make-up game to week 17 and winner takes the full prize $300. Either someone will take over or the league will fold. I'll stay on as an owner. The way this has gone down with the guy I'm playing I wouldn't feel right staying on as commish of that league any longer. It has left a bitter taste in my mouth.

Why is this person making the decision for the league? Are they the commissioner? It's you, right? Why aren't you making this decision? Not trying to be harsh, but isn't that your job? Would you allow this if it was two other teams and one wouldn't concede?

As the commish he’s in the worst position. As making any decision other than having those 3 get zero means he wins. Maybe let the assistant commish decide if there is one?
As commish I’d have no problem making any other decision. But Johnny is in a ****ty spot.

I think it's a really easy spot. If there's no league rule that covers the situation, the commissioner must recuse himself. If there's an assistant, it falls on that person. Otherwise, probably a league vote to make a one-time decision (with the two parties involved not voting). In the off-season, the commissioner can use whatever process to institute new rules for these situations in the future.

The burden of doing the difficult but correct thing falls on his opponent: he should gracefully concede the championship and not force everyone else into an uncomfortable spot.

My point with him being in the bad spot is just having to recuse himself, which isn’t ideal for a commish but it should happen here.
And that his opponent should do the right thing. But his opponent clearly sees it differently.

 

[menobrown]

Sleeper called Team B the winner by default and they ended up splitting the pot 50/50 and everyone in the league chat are basically celebrating that the game ended early, and that team B is the "true champion"

It's fine that team B conceded but Sleeper was not wrong either.

I mean this is simple. You get points based on players stats. The players team B has in his lineup got the stats to score the most points. He won.

I think you're in the vast minority here if you think that everyone should just accept that all bills/bengals get 0's and the title should be handed out like that.

Reasonable minds may disagree.

Tend to agree with Meno, it is a sucky situation, but technically team "B" is the champ. Imho, the right thing to do is to split the pot and make them co-champions, but the online site is going to follow the rules, most recorded points win. Many of us don't agree, but bottom line it is technically correct and there is no way around that.

Well said.

I think in these situations were it seems pretty clear someone else would have won if the game had not been stopped that the right thing to do is to split the pot. I would split the pot if I won like that, but the question I was responding to was not asking what I'd do.

Where I probably disagree with a lot of people and lord knows with Johnny is that the team scored the most points and tecnhnically, based on the rules of the league, scored the most points and won should be forced to split the pot. Again I think it's the right thing to do, it's what I'd do, but I'd not be in favoring of forcing it.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

My opponent was also the commish. I was losing but "projected" to win. We agreed that if it was cancelled we would split the pot and each get half a trophy.

On the way now to the hardware store to get the appropriate saw to cut a trophy in half.

 

[ghostguy123]

The more I think about, the only legit options are either use the points accumulated in that Monday night game and end there......or use week 18 stats for those players.
Every other option to me seems silly.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Taking that less than a QTR of play as final is just lazy.

Can you stop with this nonsense? There's nothing lazy about making that decision - no other solution requires any extra effort.

 

[Deamon]

Reasonable minds may disagree.

Tend to agree with Meno, it is a sucky situation, but technically team "B" is the champ. Imho, the right thing to do is to split the pot and make them co-champions, but the online site is going to follow the rules, most recorded points win. Many of us don't agree, but bottom line it is technically correct and there is no way around that.

Well said.

I think in these situations were it seems pretty clear someone else would have won if the game had not been stopped that the right thing to do is to split the pot. I would split the pot if I won like that, but the question I was responding to was not asking what I'd do.

Where I probably disagree with a lot of people and lord knows with Johnny is that the team scored the most points and tecnhnically, based on the rules of the league, scored the most points and won should be forced to split the pot. Again I think it's the right thing to do, it's what I'd do, but I'd not be in favoring of forcing it.

Maybe I was vague in my posting. I wasn't exactly disagreeing with what sleeper did, it was more so the fact that team B CONCEDED to team A, and said "you won, take the money" and the commish jumped in and said "nope, I'm awarding all the money and the title to team B because that's what our app is saying to do"

 

[JohnnyU]

Taking that less than a QTR of play as final is just lazy.

Can you stop with this nonsense? There's nothing lazy about making that decision - no other solution requires any extra effort.

That's where you are wrong. It does take extra effort to manually apply replayed game results to week 17 or week 18 results to week 17.

 

[menobrown]

Maybe I was vague in my posting. I wasn't exactly disagreeing with what sleeper did, it was more so the fact that team B CONCEDED to team A, and said "you won, take the money" and the commish jumped in and said "nope, I'm awarding all the money and the title to team B because that's what our app is saying to do"

I don't agree with the commissioner in a case where a team is conceding on their own will and volition, that seems like a hard headed commissioner(hope it's not you, lol) but if no tax repercussions exist can't they just work it out on their own?

 

[Rubi]

The more I think about, the only legit options are either use the points accumulated in that Monday night game and end there......or use week 18 stats for those players.
Every other option to me seems silly.

The only fly in the ointment with this might be if winning percentage is used to determine playoff seeding,and things seem to be trending thay way,I believe The Bengals would be locked into the #3 spot. How many starters rest in week 18? Or are they not locked into a spot? Just thinking silently to myself here

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

The more I think about, the only legit options are either use the points accumulated in that Monday night game and end there......or use week 18 stats for those players.
Every other option to me seems silly.

The solution I've heard that makes the most sense to me right now (and I read it here) is to use the team's playoff games as their stats for week 17. All Bills and Bengals will be going all out in that game, so no chance of resting players. It delays the results by a couple weeks, but who cares? It's a more-accurate representation of a team's lineup.

Star players doing their best with everything on the line, just like we have. Finally, our playoffs are their playoffs. I respect other opinions, but not using this obvious solution seems unnecessarily stubborn for the most important fantasy game of the year.

 

[Deamon]

Maybe I was vague in my posting. I wasn't exactly disagreeing with what sleeper did, it was more so the fact that team B CONCEDED to team A, and said "you won, take the money" and the commish jumped in and said "nope, I'm awarding all the money and the title to team B because that's what our app is saying to do"

I don't agree with the commissioner in a case where a team is conceding on their own will and volition, that seems like a hard headed commissioner(hope it's not you, lol) but if no tax repercussions exist can't they just work it out on their own?

I'm not in that league (actually, not just saying that haha) but ya the commish is hell bent on giving the trophy to team B and not allowing him to concede. And there's a few idiots in the league that are laughing at my friend for losing a game they should have easily won.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

Sleeper called Team B the winner by default and they ended up splitting the pot 50/50 and everyone in the league chat are basically celebrating that the game ended early, and that team B is the "true champion"

It's fine that team B conceded but Sleeper was not wrong either.

I mean this is simple. You get points based on players stats. The players team B has in his lineup got the stats to score the most points. He won.

I think you're in the vast minority here if you think that everyone should just accept that all bills/bengals get 0's and the title should be handed out like that.

I know and I'm comfortable arriving at my own conclusions.

ETA-I left a long post earlier in I think this thread explaining why I like hard rules. And also ETA a second time because math is math. His players scored more points. Anything else is changing the rules. See edit 1A.

I think this is where people need to take a deep breath and realize what this situation is. This is unprecedented, and we need to be able to adjust on the fly to situations that come up. We are not lawyers, not every league constitution has been signed by all and framed. It's great to have league rules, but I'm sure a lot of leagues don't have it in writing that "dropping all your star players mid season isn't allowed". Yet common sense should prevail there, and doing that shouldn't be allowed.

Common sense should prevail here. A man almost lost his life and we want to use the fact that players were so emotionally damaged and unable to play, in order to hand out a fantasy trophy? Fantasy leagues are for the most part, groups of friends who love the competition, but it's a great way to stay in touch with friends and stay connected. Throwing the "too bad, you were obviously going to win but sorry I'm not going to allow that" is just so ****ty.

They fought all year with these players, they DIDN'T get injured, they didn't have a bad game. Let those players earn the points, or use some common sense to allow for some solution that works for everyone. It's just insane and awful how a tragedy like this has brought out the absolute WORST in people who sit at home on their computer.

I agree, and I think part of it is a diluting of the commissioner role over the years. Weak commissioners who shrug their shoulders and leave it up to a website's code, or point to league bylaws as excuses for doing nothing are part of the problem. Leagues don't really need the commissioner to do anything, so when an issue comes up, they don't have a strong one. No offense to anyone reading this. I just see weakness as a poor excuse for neutering a full fantasy season when there are solutions that can determine a clear-cut winner with both teams getting results out of their lineups.
When those options are on the table, why choose anything else?

 

[togo]

So here’s my situation - me and the other co-commissioner ended up in the final. Going into Monday night I’m up by a single point (thank God Ekeler had his 72 yard TD which brought me right back in it), 155.5 to 154.5 (half point PPR). I still had Mixon to go, and he still had Singletary. At the time the game was called, Mixon had scored 1 to his 0. So if the games a scratch, I win by 1 - if we count what happened on the field I win by 2. He conceded as he feels it’s akin to both players going down with an injury early in the game and not being able to continue. So I think it’s settled, but the other league mates want us to play it out somehow. I’m fine calling it now, as it makes me champ - but does leave a bad taste in my mouth. Then again, I don’t know what could be done otherwise.

I have already posted my scenario on this site.
But in short:
Before the Buff/Cincy game:
Team A has 119.08
Team B has 122.32

Team B has no one left. No player in the Buff/Cincy game.
Stays at 122.32 points

Team A has Tyler Boyd left. Boyd scores the TD.
Gets 7.90 points
Goes to 126,98 points.

I am the Commish and I am Team A.
So....Waiting on the final decision on the week 17 Buff/Cincy Game.
But My guy scored on the field, my point total exceeded his. So I believe I won. Being the Commish I feel I just can't make that decision and decide that outright.
Waiting to see if Team B concedes.
For now.....

 

[Keith R]

I'm stepping down as commish of Fantasy Legends II after this season. I've been doing it for 17 years in that league. For the Bengals game that I was in the title game, behind by 6 with 3 to play (Allen, Mixon, Davis) and my opponent has none and won't concede and rejects my solution. So I will split the money ($300) if the game is cancelled, but will apply week 18 stats for those players to week 17 to determine the champion. Obviously If the game isn't cancelled I will apply the stats from the make-up game to week 17 and winner takes the full prize $300. Either someone will take over or the league will fold. I'll stay on as an owner. The way this has gone down with the guy I'm playing I wouldn't feel right staying on as commish of that league any longer. It has left a bitter taste in my mouth.

Sad stuff. Seems like this situation has brought out the best and worst in people.

Yes, I resorted to name calling also. Another reason why I'll step down. I never thought anyone could make me that mad, but it happened. I'm embarrassed by it.

Don't be embarrassed. If it were me I'd put this dude on blast. Send an email to the entire league, you don't have to call him out necessarily, but post what your final solution would be. All league members deserve to know what's going on. Maybe there will be enough pressure from other league members to get this guy to do the right thing. The passive aggressive approach lol. As a 51 year old my leagues are a group of friends since high school, some even earlier, and we'd be ruthless mocking anyone who wouldn't concede in this situation. Good luck sucks he's doing this to you.

I don't want to be too contrarian here, but a team that is still leading in a game should feel under no pressure to concede. Sure, the other team would have won had there not been this tragedy, but it did happen and the score still shows him ahead. Many leagues are taking the view that this was force majeure and are accepting the outcome as is.

In one league, at the time of the stoppage I was down 1 with Diggs, Bass and the Bills D playing. She conceded on Tuesday night

 

[-OZ-]

The more I think about, the only legit options are either use the points accumulated in that Monday night game and end there......or use week 18 stats for those players.
Every other option to me seems silly.

99% of the time I agree.

Maybe I was vague in my posting. I wasn't exactly disagreeing with what sleeper did, it was more so the fact that team B CONCEDED to team A, and said "you won, take the money" and the commish jumped in and said "nope, I'm awarding all the money and the title to team B because that's what our app is saying to do"

I don't agree with the commissioner in a case where a team is conceding on their own will and volition, that seems like a hard headed commissioner(hope it's not you, lol) but if no tax repercussions exist can't they just work it out on their own?

I'm not in that league (actually, not just saying that haha) but ya the commish is hell bent on giving the trophy to team B and not allowing him to concede. And there's a few idiots in the league that are laughing at my friend for losing a game they should have easily won.

Why not just let team B be the “ official champ” while they split the pot?

 

[ghostguy123]

The more I think about, the only legit options are either use the points accumulated in that Monday night game and end there......or use week 18 stats for those players.
Every other option to me seems silly.

The solution I've heard that makes the most sense to me right now (and I read it here) is to use the team's playoff games as their stats for week 17. All Bills and Bengals will be going all out in that game, so no chance of resting players. It delays the results by a couple weeks, but who cares? It's a more-accurate representation of a team's lineup.

Star players doing their best with everything on the line, just like we have. Finally, our playoffs are their playoffs. I respect other opinions, but not using this obvious solution seems unnecessarily stubborn for the most important fantasy game of the year.

And when one of them suffers an injury week 18?

 

[Rubi]

SBNATION reporting The Monday Night game will be declared a "no contest". Playoff seeding will be determined by winning percentage and The Bengals are division winners getting at least one home game.

 

[yellowdog]

Question: If Buffalo loses to NE, and the Bengals win vs. Baltimore, both team will be 12-4. Who is the #2 seed?

 

[Rubi]

Question: If Buffalo loses to NE, and the Bengals win vs. Baltimore, both team will be 12-4. Who is the #2 seed?

Guess it would go to the next tiebreaker. Possibly conference record?

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

I'm stepping down as commish of Fantasy Legends II after this season. I've been doing it for 17 years in that league. For the Bengals game that I was in the title game, behind by 6 with 3 to play (Allen, Mixon, Davis) and my opponent has none and won't concede and rejects my solution. So I will split the money ($300) if the game is cancelled, but will apply week 18 stats for those players to week 17 to determine the champion. Obviously If the game isn't cancelled I will apply the stats from the make-up game to week 17 and winner takes the full prize $300. Either someone will take over or the league will fold. I'll stay on as an owner. The way this has gone down with the guy I'm playing I wouldn't feel right staying on as commish of that league any longer. It has left a bitter taste in my mouth.

Why is this person making the decision for the league? Are they the commissioner? It's you, right? Why aren't you making this decision? Not trying to be harsh, but isn't that your job? Would you allow this if it was two other teams and one wouldn't concede?

As the commish he’s in the worst position. As making any decision other than having those 3 get zero means he wins. Maybe let the assistant commish decide if there is one?
As commish I’d have no problem making any other decision. But Johnny is in a ****ty spot.

I think it's a really easy spot. If there's no league rule that covers the situation, the commissioner must recuse himself. If there's an assistant, it falls on that person. Otherwise, probably a league vote to make a one-time decision (with the two parties involved not voting). In the off-season, the commissioner can use whatever process to institute new rules for these situations in the future.

The burden of doing the difficult but correct thing falls on his opponent: he should gracefully concede the championship and not force everyone else into an uncomfortable spot.

Couldn't disagree more. If two other teams were in this situation, what would the Commissioner do? Whatever that is, that's what he should do. Being fair doesn't mean hurting your own team so you "appear fair." It means being fair and treating all teams the same, including your own.

The opponent shouldn't make the decision because the commissioner doesn't feel empowered to do his job. Should we make the opponent the commissioner because they're better at making tough decisions? There shouldn't be a league vote because the league already has a commissioner. If they can't handle the job, they shouldn't be there.
If he would grant a different team with three players the winner, he should do the same for himself. I think any objective person would agree. If they refuse to use scores from week 18 or the playoffs (a better choice imo), then make a decision. Don't be held hostage by an opponent who senses weakness.

I truly don't mean any disrespect to the original poster. I get that it's a tough call. But commissioners sometimes have to do tough things to be fair to the league. I understand he said he doesn't want to be commissioner anymore. I think that might be a good idea. If you're going to let an opponent dictate what you decide, maybe it's not the right job for you.

 

[Dez]

The more I think about, the only legit options are either use the points accumulated in that Monday night game and end there......or use week 18 stats for those players.
Every other option to me seems silly.

The only fly in the ointment with this might be if winning percentage is used to determine playoff seeding,and things seem to be trending thay way,I believe The Bengals would be locked into the #3 spot. How many starters rest in week 18? Or are they not locked into a spot? Just thinking silently to myself here

Pretty sure Cincy can still get the #2 seed if they win and Buffalo loses and they play at the same time. If could result in Cincy pulling players early if Buffalo is winning huge vs NE.
Baltimore is the biggest concern I have they no longer can win the division they are currently #6 seed they could get to #5 seed is if they win and LAC lose and LAC play after them.
You may ask why do we care about Baltimore ? Well if they are playing backups Cincy players will likely score more easily.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

The more I think about, the only legit options are either use the points accumulated in that Monday night game and end there......or use week 18 stats for those players.
Every other option to me seems silly.

The solution I've heard that makes the most sense to me right now (and I read it here) is to use the team's playoff games as their stats for week 17. All Bills and Bengals will be going all out in that game, so no chance of resting players. It delays the results by a couple weeks, but who cares? It's a more-accurate representation of a team's lineup.

Star players doing their best with everything on the line, just like we have. Finally, our playoffs are their playoffs. I respect other opinions, but not using this obvious solution seems unnecessarily stubborn for the most important fantasy game of the year.

And when one of them suffers an injury week 18?

Burn that bridge when you get to it.
What if nobody gets injured and the solution is staring everyone in the face?

 

[Dez]

It is super complicated but it is laid out right here for how Cincy can get #2 seed with a win and a Buffalo loss.

Bills vs. Bengals Postponed: NFL Playoff Scenarios Impacted for Week 18

With uncertainty remaining over the Buffalo Bills vs. Cincinnati Bengals game, let's examine the playoff implications of the different situations.

www.profootballnetwork.com

Let’s assume the Chiefs win on Saturday and lock up the top seed in the AFC. In that scenario, the Bills would secure the second seed in the AFC with a win on Sunday. But if the Bills lose and the Bengals win, then things get complicated. Both teams would be 12-4, meaning we must look to the playoff tiebreakers for help.

The head-to-head aspect would not apply with the game being canceled, so we look to their conference record. The Bills and Bengals have 11 games in the conference. For both teams to get to 12-4, the Bengals would have to beat the Ravens, while the Bills lose to the Patriots. That would leave both teams at 8-3 in the conference.

The next tiebreaker is common opponents, but those 11 games in the conference also double as the common opponents. The two divisions played each other, and as both finished first in their respective divisions last year, they had the same opponents. That means we are once again tied at 8-3.

That moves us on to the strength of victory (SOV). Entering Week 18, the opponents the Bills have beaten combine for 92 wins. Meanwhile, the opponents that the Bengals have defeated have combined for 85 wins. With the assumption that the Bills lose to the Patriots and the Bengals beat the Ravens, that puts it 95-92 in favor of the Bengals.

When you compare their opponents, we can cancel out the eight victories against common opponents (Steelers, Patriots, Jets, Dolphins, Ravens, Browns, Titans, and Chiefs). That leaves each team with four victories to count. The Bills have the Packers, Lions, Bears, and Rams, while the Bengals have the Saints, Falcons, Panthers, and Buccaneers.

So, the Bills need to gain three wins in SOV over the Bengals this week to take it a stage further in the tiebreaker formula. With the Packers and Lions playing each other, the best the Bills can do is gain three wins. Meanwhile, the Bengals have the entire NFC South, so they should go at least 2-2. Both NFC South games ending in a tie would complicate matters, but the chances of two ties in games with no playoff implications seem extremely unlikely.

Therefore, what this all means is that if the Bills vs. Bengals game is canceled, the following can play out:

• The Chiefs will lock up the one seed with a win Saturday.
• If the Chiefs win, the Bills can secure the two seed with a win on Sunday.
• If the Chiefs lose, the Bills can get the one seed with a win Sunday.
• The Bengals are guaranteed to win the AFC North but cannot get to the one seed.
• The Bengals can finish as the two seed if they win and the Bills lose, but this would come down to the strength of victory tie-breaker.

 

[top dog]

I'm the commish in our work league. Team B has conceded to Team A

Here is the score of the matchup when the game was suspended: Team A 118.38 - Team B 57.62.

Team A still had Burrow, Boyd, Bills D and Bass going. Team B had Allen, Singletary and McPherson.

Because the owner of Team A is a bit of a braggard, I've let him know this Championship comes with an asterisk.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Taking that less than a QTR of play as final is just lazy.

Can you stop with this nonsense? There's nothing lazy about making that decision - no other solution requires any extra effort.

That's where you are wrong. It does take extra effort to manually apply replayed game results to week 17 or week 18 results to week 17.

So less than five minutes of “work”?

Where you’re wrong is thinking that a commissioner is making the decision based on laziness - instead of maybe just thinking differently than you do. The reasons for doing it that way have been well stated in here. There’s a logic to it - but you don’t agree with it so it’s “stupid”.

Trust me laziness has nothing to do with decisions I make and your implications that I chose a lazy path are insulting.

 

[ghostguy123]

The more I think about, the only legit options are either use the points accumulated in that Monday night game and end there......or use week 18 stats for those players.
Every other option to me seems silly.

The solution I've heard that makes the most sense to me right now (and I read it here) is to use the team's playoff games as their stats for week 17. All Bills and Bengals will be going all out in that game, so no chance of resting players. It delays the results by a couple weeks, but who cares? It's a more-accurate representation of a team's lineup.

Star players doing their best with everything on the line, just like we have. Finally, our playoffs are their playoffs. I respect other opinions, but not using this obvious solution seems unnecessarily stubborn for the most important fantasy game of the year.

And when one of them suffers an injury week 18?

Burn that bridge when you get to it.
What if nobody gets injured and the solution is staring everyone in the face?

The best solution, and it still sucks, is probably to do what the FFPC did. They went with the stats accumulated from the game and ended the fantasy season.
However, every league is different. The money is different. The setups are different. There is no one size fits all here.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

The more I think about, the only legit options are either use the points accumulated in that Monday night game and end there......or use week 18 stats for those players.
Every other option to me seems silly.

The solution I've heard that makes the most sense to me right now (and I read it here) is to use the team's playoff games as their stats for week 17. All Bills and Bengals will be going all out in that game, so no chance of resting players. It delays the results by a couple weeks, but who cares? It's a more-accurate representation of a team's lineup.

Star players doing their best with everything on the line, just like we have. Finally, our playoffs are their playoffs. I respect other opinions, but not using this obvious solution seems unnecessarily stubborn for the most important fantasy game of the year.

And when one of them suffers an injury week 18?

Burn that bridge when you get to it.
What if nobody gets injured and the solution is staring everyone in the face?

The best solution, and it still sucks, is probably to do what the FFPC did. They went with the stats accumulated from the game and ended the fantasy season.
However, every league is different. The money is different. The setups are different. There is no one size fits all here.

I agree that every league is different, but I think they chose the very worst option. Those stats didn't count. The NFL doesn't count them if the game isn't resumed. They don't count with regard to contract bonuses. It's like the game never happened, or there was a stat correction and those stats were wiped out. But the FFPC decided those stats count in their universe, and ended the season? I read somewhere here that they did it to not keep people in limbo, and get some of that money spent on their playoff games.

Maybe they have a financial interest in concluding the fantasy season ASAP, but we don't. We have a responsibility to get it right. And using stats that the NFL doesn't count isn't right. Using a full game's stats so every started player gets a chance to score for their team is the right decision. Anything else seems short-sighted and lazy. Just my opinion. I'm wrong a lot.

 

[ghostguy123]

The more I think about, the only legit options are either use the points accumulated in that Monday night game and end there......or use week 18 stats for those players.
Every other option to me seems silly.

The solution I've heard that makes the most sense to me right now (and I read it here) is to use the team's playoff games as their stats for week 17. All Bills and Bengals will be going all out in that game, so no chance of resting players. It delays the results by a couple weeks, but who cares? It's a more-accurate representation of a team's lineup.

Star players doing their best with everything on the line, just like we have. Finally, our playoffs are their playoffs. I respect other opinions, but not using this obvious solution seems unnecessarily stubborn for the most important fantasy game of the year.

And when one of them suffers an injury week 18?

Burn that bridge when you get to it.
What if nobody gets injured and the solution is staring everyone in the face?

The best solution, and it still sucks, is probably to do what the FFPC did. They went with the stats accumulated from the game and ended the fantasy season.
However, every league is different. The money is different. The setups are different. There is no one size fits all here.

I agree that every league is different, but I think they chose the very worst option. Those stats didn't count. The NFL doesn't count them if the game isn't resumed. They don't count with regard to contract bonuses. It's like the game never happened, or there was a stat correction and those stats were wiped out. But the FFPC decided those stats count in their universe, and ended the season? I read somewhere here that they did it to not keep people in limbo, and get some of that money spent on their playoff games.

Maybe they have a financial interest in concluding the fantasy season ASAP, but we don't. We have a responsibility to get it right. And using stats that the NFL doesn't count isn't right. Using a full game's stats so every started player gets a chance to score for their team is the right decision. Anything else seems short-sighted and lazy. Just my opinion. I'm wrong a lot.

I honestly don't think it matters if the NFL counts the stats or not.
I also think their decision was very ballzy, and quite the opposite of lazy.
Any decision was going to anger a lot of people. I think they felt this decision was best for their business going forward, and probably also avoided a ton of headache with software issues for scoring.
It's completely different than regular local league setups.

 

[wakelawyer]

My constitutions have provisions that MFL scoring is final but also include best-interests of the league provisions. While some would say my approach is lazy, I would argue that I put in a place an objective resolution to this issue more than 30 years ago, when we were struggling with the fact that the USA Today's Monday/Tuesday editions did not coincide with the stats service used by our desktop software. I question whether @JohnnyU 's by-laws address this issue.

We then modified the rules during COVID to address potentially canceled games. Again, not lazy but, rather, proactively addressing this situation. So I was prepared with a set of Rules to handle this.

The key on this point is that this is all so random. I've been playing this game for 40 years now and this is the first time (other than the COVID season) that this has happened. And, while certain owners may suffer, it is truly randomized, just as is the case with injuries and other issues outside of our control (such as Antonio Brown leaving the field of play). The key for me is that it provides a solution that does not require me to manufacture or create stats or to count scores from games other than those contemplated by the owners when they submit their lineups. Is it perfect? Not at all. But it excludes all subjective bias and addresses the situation. And I will note that no solutions are perfect. How does one justify last weeks' scores over next week's over playoff week 1 over average? How do you handle week 18 scores if someone doesn't play or gets injured? There's a lot of questions, each of which introduce the possibility of commissioner bias.

With that being said, I have the best-interests clause to address truly inequitable outcomes. And, if my owners had not resolved all of the disputes between themselves, I may have resorted to that for a league or two. But I let the owners know that this provision was to be used sparingly and that they should assume that MFL scoring would control.

You call it lazy, I call it being prepared and being consistent. Whereas your approach cannot be guaranteed to be replicated in the future, mine can. This game is full of bad beats. Justin Jefferson going 1/15 was one of those. But I don't see people asking the commish for a mulligan.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

Taking that less than a QTR of play as final is just lazy.

Can you stop with this nonsense? There's nothing lazy about making that decision - no other solution requires any extra effort.

That's where you are wrong. It does take extra effort to manually apply replayed game results to week 17 or week 18 results to week 17.

So less than five minutes of “work”?

Where you’re wrong is thinking that a commissioner is making the decision based on laziness - instead of maybe just thinking differently than you do. The reasons for doing it that way have been well stated in here. There’s a logic to it - but you don’t agree with it so it’s “stupid”.

Trust me laziness has nothing to do with decisions I make and your implications that I chose a lazy path are insulting.

I think the laziness angle isn't how much work it actually takes, but the reasoning behind making the decision. "I see stats, so I'm counting those stats, even if the NFL doesn't because my website does" can be seen as lazy.
"I don't want to wait until week 18 or the playoffs are played, even though it would be a better representation of what the teams were trying to do with their roster when they played in the title game. I just want to go with the stats I see and end it now" could be seen as lazy.
"I see that team A has more points than Team B. I don't want to know about any other circumstances or hear about any other solution. I see this number is bigger than that number. Game's ovah!" could be seen as lazy.

I'm sure he doesn't mean that you're a lazy human being. I'm sure he doesn't know you. I think he means that type of thinking sure seems like lazy thinking. I think it does, and I haven't seen any rationale to make me think differently. There should be more effort required to match the intent of the parties playing in the final. That might take a little more creativity if the opponent disagrees.

But if a fantasy league plays an entire season and there's a championship game, the commissioner has a responsibility to give both teams a chance to see their players play it out on the imaginary field. Forget the website, forget yahoo, forget ESPN or any other organization. Part of one quarter doesn't cut it.

My thinking would be, what do I have to do to preserve the integrity of this contest, even if it means scoring a game played two weeks from now, or taking heat if one side doesn't like it?

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

The more I think about, the only legit options are either use the points accumulated in that Monday night game and end there......or use week 18 stats for those players.
Every other option to me seems silly.

The solution I've heard that makes the most sense to me right now (and I read it here) is to use the team's playoff games as their stats for week 17. All Bills and Bengals will be going all out in that game, so no chance of resting players. It delays the results by a couple weeks, but who cares? It's a more-accurate representation of a team's lineup.

Star players doing their best with everything on the line, just like we have. Finally, our playoffs are their playoffs. I respect other opinions, but not using this obvious solution seems unnecessarily stubborn for the most important fantasy game of the year.

And when one of them suffers an injury week 18?

Burn that bridge when you get to it.
What if nobody gets injured and the solution is staring everyone in the face?

The best solution, and it still sucks, is probably to do what the FFPC did. They went with the stats accumulated from the game and ended the fantasy season.
However, every league is different. The money is different. The setups are different. There is no one size fits all here.

I agree that every league is different, but I think they chose the very worst option. Those stats didn't count. The NFL doesn't count them if the game isn't resumed. They don't count with regard to contract bonuses. It's like the game never happened, or there was a stat correction and those stats were wiped out. But the FFPC decided those stats count in their universe, and ended the season? I read somewhere here that they did it to not keep people in limbo, and get some of that money spent on their playoff games.

Maybe they have a financial interest in concluding the fantasy season ASAP, but we don't. We have a responsibility to get it right. And using stats that the NFL doesn't count isn't right. Using a full game's stats so every started player gets a chance to score for their team is the right decision. Anything else seems short-sighted and lazy. Just my opinion. I'm wrong a lot.

I honestly don't think it matters if the NFL counts the stats or not.
I also think their decision was very ballzy, and quite the opposite of lazy.
Any decision was going to anger a lot of people. I think they felt this decision was best for their business going forward, and probably also avoided a ton of headache with software issues for scoring.
It's completely different than regular local league setups.

This is why I don't think what they did was the best solution. For them, maybe. Not for their customers, or anyone running a league looking for viable options.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Taking that less than a QTR of play as final is just lazy.

Can you stop with this nonsense? There's nothing lazy about making that decision - no other solution requires any extra effort.

That's where you are wrong. It does take extra effort to manually apply replayed game results to week 17 or week 18 results to week 17.

So less than five minutes of “work”?

Where you’re wrong is thinking that a commissioner is making the decision based on laziness - instead of maybe just thinking differently than you do. The reasons for doing it that way have been well stated in here. There’s a logic to it - but you don’t agree with it so it’s “stupid”.

Trust me laziness has nothing to do with decisions I make and your implications that I chose a lazy path are insulting.

I think the laziness angle isn't how much work it actually takes, but the reasoning behind making the decision. "I see stats, so I'm counting those stats, even if the NFL doesn't because my website does" can be seen as lazy.
"I don't want to wait until week 18 or the playoffs are played, even though it would be a better representation of what the teams were trying to do with their roster when they played in the title game. I just want to go with the stats I see and end it now" could be seen as lazy.
"I see that team A has more points than Team B. I don't want to know about any other circumstances or hear about any other solution. I see this number is bigger than that number. Game's ovah!" could be seen as lazy.

I'm sure he doesn't mean that you're a lazy human being. I'm sure he doesn't know you. I think he means that type of thinking sure seems like lazy thinking. I think it does, and I haven't seen any rationale to make me think differently. There should be more effort required to match the intent of the parties playing in the final. That might take a little more creativity if the opponent disagrees.

But if a fantasy league plays an entire season and there's a championship game, the commissioner has a responsibility to give both teams a chance to see their players play it out on the imaginary field. Forget the website, forget yahoo, forget ESPN or any other organization. Part of one quarter doesn't cut it.

My thinking would be, what do I have to do to preserve the integrity of this contest, even if it means scoring a game played two weeks from now, or taking heat if one side doesn't like it?

Ok, my reasoning is lazy. Got it.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

Taking that less than a QTR of play as final is just lazy.

Can you stop with this nonsense? There's nothing lazy about making that decision - no other solution requires any extra effort.

That's where you are wrong. It does take extra effort to manually apply replayed game results to week 17 or week 18 results to week 17.

So less than five minutes of “work”?

Where you’re wrong is thinking that a commissioner is making the decision based on laziness - instead of maybe just thinking differently than you do. The reasons for doing it that way have been well stated in here. There’s a logic to it - but you don’t agree with it so it’s “stupid”.

Trust me laziness has nothing to do with decisions I make and your implications that I chose a lazy path are insulting.

I think the laziness angle isn't how much work it actually takes, but the reasoning behind making the decision. "I see stats, so I'm counting those stats, even if the NFL doesn't because my website does" can be seen as lazy.
"I don't want to wait until week 18 or the playoffs are played, even though it would be a better representation of what the teams were trying to do with their roster when they played in the title game. I just want to go with the stats I see and end it now" could be seen as lazy.
"I see that team A has more points than Team B. I don't want to know about any other circumstances or hear about any other solution. I see this number is bigger than that number. Game's ovah!" could be seen as lazy.

I'm sure he doesn't mean that you're a lazy human being. I'm sure he doesn't know you. I think he means that type of thinking sure seems like lazy thinking. I think it does, and I haven't seen any rationale to make me think differently. There should be more effort required to match the intent of the parties playing in the final. That might take a little more creativity if the opponent disagrees.

But if a fantasy league plays an entire season and there's a championship game, the commissioner has a responsibility to give both teams a chance to see their players play it out on the imaginary field. Forget the website, forget yahoo, forget ESPN or any other organization. Part of one quarter doesn't cut it.

My thinking would be, what do I have to do to preserve the integrity of this contest, even if it means scoring a game played two weeks from now, or taking heat if one side doesn't like it?

Ok, my reasoning is lazy. Got it.

Only if one of the above thought processes I used was your thinking in making your decision. If you had a different process, then maybe it doesn't apply to you. Not that my opinion matters. You have to run your league and make your members happy.

 

[menobrown]

I agree that every league is different, but I think they chose the very worst option. Those stats didn't count

I am in total agreement with you.

 

[Pigskin Fanatic]

I find it odd that [anyone] would argue [any] one solution is the correct one.

 

[ghostguy123]

The more I think about, the only legit options are either use the points accumulated in that Monday night game and end there......or use week 18 stats for those players.
Every other option to me seems silly.

The solution I've heard that makes the most sense to me right now (and I read it here) is to use the team's playoff games as their stats for week 17. All Bills and Bengals will be going all out in that game, so no chance of resting players. It delays the results by a couple weeks, but who cares? It's a more-accurate representation of a team's lineup.

Star players doing their best with everything on the line, just like we have. Finally, our playoffs are their playoffs. I respect other opinions, but not using this obvious solution seems unnecessarily stubborn for the most important fantasy game of the year.

And when one of them suffers an injury week 18?

Burn that bridge when you get to it.
What if nobody gets injured and the solution is staring everyone in the face?

The best solution, and it still sucks, is probably to do what the FFPC did. They went with the stats accumulated from the game and ended the fantasy season.
However, every league is different. The money is different. The setups are different. There is no one size fits all here.

I agree that every league is different, but I think they chose the very worst option. Those stats didn't count. The NFL doesn't count them if the game isn't resumed. They don't count with regard to contract bonuses. It's like the game never happened, or there was a stat correction and those stats were wiped out. But the FFPC decided those stats count in their universe, and ended the season? I read somewhere here that they did it to not keep people in limbo, and get some of that money spent on their playoff games.

Maybe they have a financial interest in concluding the fantasy season ASAP, but we don't. We have a responsibility to get it right. And using stats that the NFL doesn't count isn't right. Using a full game's stats so every started player gets a chance to score for their team is the right decision. Anything else seems short-sighted and lazy. Just my opinion. I'm wrong a lot.

I honestly don't think it matters if the NFL counts the stats or not.
I also think their decision was very ballzy, and quite the opposite of lazy.
Any decision was going to anger a lot of people. I think they felt this decision was best for their business going forward, and probably also avoided a ton of headache with software issues for scoring.
It's completely different than regular local league setups.

This is why I don't think what they did was the best solution. For them, maybe. Not for their customers, or anyone running a league looking for viable options.

If it's the best solution for THEM in the short term and also long term, then it's the best solution. Period.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Taking that less than a QTR of play as final is just lazy.

Can you stop with this nonsense? There's nothing lazy about making that decision - no other solution requires any extra effort.

That's where you are wrong. It does take extra effort to manually apply replayed game results to week 17 or week 18 results to week 17.

So less than five minutes of “work”?

Where you’re wrong is thinking that a commissioner is making the decision based on laziness - instead of maybe just thinking differently than you do. The reasons for doing it that way have been well stated in here. There’s a logic to it - but you don’t agree with it so it’s “stupid”.

Trust me laziness has nothing to do with decisions I make and your implications that I chose a lazy path are insulting.

I think the laziness angle isn't how much work it actually takes, but the reasoning behind making the decision. "I see stats, so I'm counting those stats, even if the NFL doesn't because my website does" can be seen as lazy.
"I don't want to wait until week 18 or the playoffs are played, even though it would be a better representation of what the teams were trying to do with their roster when they played in the title game. I just want to go with the stats I see and end it now" could be seen as lazy.
"I see that team A has more points than Team B. I don't want to know about any other circumstances or hear about any other solution. I see this number is bigger than that number. Game's ovah!" could be seen as lazy.

I'm sure he doesn't mean that you're a lazy human being. I'm sure he doesn't know you. I think he means that type of thinking sure seems like lazy thinking. I think it does, and I haven't seen any rationale to make me think differently. There should be more effort required to match the intent of the parties playing in the final. That might take a little more creativity if the opponent disagrees.

But if a fantasy league plays an entire season and there's a championship game, the commissioner has a responsibility to give both teams a chance to see their players play it out on the imaginary field. Forget the website, forget yahoo, forget ESPN or any other organization. Part of one quarter doesn't cut it.

My thinking would be, what do I have to do to preserve the integrity of this contest, even if it means scoring a game played two weeks from now, or taking heat if one side doesn't like it?

Ok, my reasoning is lazy. Got it.

Only if one of the above thought processes I used was your thinking in making your decision. If you had a different process, then maybe it doesn't apply to you. Not that my opinion matters. You have to run your league and make your members happy.

Yeah, my reasoning is laid out throughout this thread and a lot of others have given thoughtful reasons as to why they chose that path. There’s solid logic in doing so, if you want to see it.
— but you jumped in on the “lazy train”instead. Some people can’t see it.

And for the record I can see both sides. I don’t think there’s a right or wrong answer, really.

 

[jdkapow]

I'm stepping down as commish of Fantasy Legends II after this season. I've been doing it for 17 years in that league. For the Bengals game that I was in the title game, behind by 6 with 3 to play (Allen, Mixon, Davis) and my opponent has none and won't concede and rejects my solution. So I will split the money ($300) if the game is cancelled, but will apply week 18 stats for those players to week 17 to determine the champion. Obviously If the game isn't cancelled I will apply the stats from the make-up game to week 17 and winner takes the full prize $300. Either someone will take over or the league will fold. I'll stay on as an owner. The way this has gone down with the guy I'm playing I wouldn't feel right staying on as commish of that league any longer. It has left a bitter taste in my mouth.

Why is this person making the decision for the league? Are they the commissioner? It's you, right? Why aren't you making this decision? Not trying to be harsh, but isn't that your job? Would you allow this if it was two other teams and one wouldn't concede?

As the commish he’s in the worst position. As making any decision other than having those 3 get zero means he wins. Maybe let the assistant commish decide if there is one?
As commish I’d have no problem making any other decision. But Johnny is in a ****ty spot.

I think it's a really easy spot. If there's no league rule that covers the situation, the commissioner must recuse himself. If there's an assistant, it falls on that person. Otherwise, probably a league vote to make a one-time decision (with the two parties involved not voting). In the off-season, the commissioner can use whatever process to institute new rules for these situations in the future.

The burden of doing the difficult but correct thing falls on his opponent: he should gracefully concede the championship and not force everyone else into an uncomfortable spot.

Couldn't disagree more. If two other teams were in this situation, what would the Commissioner do? Whatever that is, that's what he should do. Being fair doesn't mean hurting your own team so you "appear fair." It means being fair and treating all teams the same, including your own.

The opponent shouldn't make the decision because the commissioner doesn't feel empowered to do his job. Should we make the opponent the commissioner because they're better at making tough decisions? There shouldn't be a league vote because the league already has a commissioner. If they can't handle the job, they shouldn't be there.
If he would grant a different team with three players the winner, he should do the same for himself. I think any objective person would agree. If they refuse to use scores from week 18 or the playoffs (a better choice imo), then make a decision. Don't be held hostage by an opponent who senses weakness.

I truly don't mean any disrespect to the original poster. I get that it's a tough call. But commissioners sometimes have to do tough things to be fair to the league. I understand he said he doesn't want to be commissioner anymore. I think that might be a good idea. If you're going to let an opponent dictate what you decide, maybe it's not the right job for you.

Couldn't disagree more. Two other teams aren't in this situation. The commissioner's team is. The only appropriate way forward (assuming no league rules that resolve the issue) is for the commissioner to recuse.

Appearing fair is a huge part of being fair. You've never heard the phrase "even the appearance of impropriety?" The commissioner has to hold himself to that standard.

A big part of this is that the commissioner cannot himself be certain that he's making the same decision he would if he didn't have a personal interest, even if he's trying his best to be fair. The conflict of interest cannot help but color his judgment.

I don't know why you think that I'm saying the opponent should make the decision. Obviously he shouldn't (he needs to be recused from the decision as well). The league should make the decision. The only thing the opponent can (and should) do to resolve it is to concede, but you can't make him do that. Of course, the league could decide to kick him out afterwards because they don't want to play with him anymore, that's a possibility.

This sort of thing happens all the time in other organizations, most notably the legal profession. If a judge has a conflict of interest in a case, he/she recuses. It's standard procedure.

 

[theplayer11]

I have a problem with people thinking that because they are only xxx points down and xxx players left, their opponent should hand them the championship.
Points are not in the bank until the player makes them. Injuries happen, WRs have put up goose eggs before.

 

[Deamon]

I have a problem with people thinking that because they are only xxx points down and xxx players left, their opponent should hand them the championship.
Points are not in the bank until the player makes them. Injuries happen, WRs have put up goose eggs before.

This wasn't an injury. This wasn't a player sucking and putting up a goose egg.

 

[Statorama]

The NFL, if nothing else, keeps statistics. This game of ours is just a representation of those statistics.

If I were commissioner (TG I'm not) I'd base it on what the NFL decides. I'm assuming the NFL is going to call the game as finished with a 7-3 score and all accumulated stats count. If they decide that counts as a full game and finalizes stats, it is what it is.

IRL I oversee documents that are structured with contingencies, so if I were commissioner I probably would already have a "what if a meteor hits the stadium during a game" provision - which would have outlined that what the NFL considers official, we consider official.

 

[bryhamm]

The NFL, if nothing else, keeps statistics. This game of ours is just a representation of those statistics.

If I were commissioner (TG I'm not) I'd base it on what the NFL decides. I'm assuming the NFL is going to call the game as finished with a 7-3 score and all accumulated stats count. If they decide that counts as a full game and finalizes stats, it is what it is.

IRL I oversee documents that are structured with contingencies, so if I were commissioner I probably would already have a "what if a meteor hits the stadium during a game" provision - which would have outlined that what the NFL considers official, we consider official.

Why would you assume this? And you might want to check ANY sports news. The game is cancelled and will NOT be made up.

 

[Ahmad Rashad]

The more I think about, the only legit options are either use the points accumulated in that Monday night game and end there......or use week 18 stats for those players.
Every other option to me seems silly.

The solution I've heard that makes the most sense to me right now (and I read it here) is to use the team's playoff games as their stats for week 17. All Bills and Bengals will be going all out in that game, so no chance of resting players. It delays the results by a couple weeks, but who cares? It's a more-accurate representation of a team's lineup.

Star players doing their best with everything on the line, just like we have. Finally, our playoffs are their playoffs. I respect other opinions, but not using this obvious solution seems unnecessarily stubborn for the most important fantasy game of the year.

I've proposed 2 possible solutions to my opponent for our championship: This one and splitting the pot with each of us getting 2nd place money, with the rest going to the Damar Hamlin foundation -- he would be declared the champion since he was ahead (I had Allen, Mixon, and Buf D going, with about 40% odds if winning on ESPN at that time). He likes both solutions and is discussing with our commish.

I also suggested a mix of the 2, with the champ determined by scoring from the first week of the playoffs and us each getting the 2nd place prize, with the rest going to the Hamlin foundation.

I like the idea of donating part of the pot to the Damar Hamlin foundation, as I really like how he wants to impact his community.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

I'm stepping down as commish of Fantasy Legends II after this season. I've been doing it for 17 years in that league. For the Bengals game that I was in the title game, behind by 6 with 3 to play (Allen, Mixon, Davis) and my opponent has none and won't concede and rejects my solution. So I will split the money ($300) if the game is cancelled, but will apply week 18 stats for those players to week 17 to determine the champion. Obviously If the game isn't cancelled I will apply the stats from the make-up game to week 17 and winner takes the full prize $300. Either someone will take over or the league will fold. I'll stay on as an owner. The way this has gone down with the guy I'm playing I wouldn't feel right staying on as commish of that league any longer. It has left a bitter taste in my mouth.

Why is this person making the decision for the league? Are they the commissioner? It's you, right? Why aren't you making this decision? Not trying to be harsh, but isn't that your job? Would you allow this if it was two other teams and one wouldn't concede?

As the commish he’s in the worst position. As making any decision other than having those 3 get zero means he wins. Maybe let the assistant commish decide if there is one?
As commish I’d have no problem making any other decision. But Johnny is in a ****ty spot.

I think it's a really easy spot. If there's no league rule that covers the situation, the commissioner must recuse himself. If there's an assistant, it falls on that person. Otherwise, probably a league vote to make a one-time decision (with the two parties involved not voting). In the off-season, the commissioner can use whatever process to institute new rules for these situations in the future.

The burden of doing the difficult but correct thing falls on his opponent: he should gracefully concede the championship and not force everyone else into an uncomfortable spot.

Couldn't disagree more. If two other teams were in this situation, what would the Commissioner do? Whatever that is, that's what he should do. Being fair doesn't mean hurting your own team so you "appear fair." It means being fair and treating all teams the same, including your own.

The opponent shouldn't make the decision because the commissioner doesn't feel empowered to do his job. Should we make the opponent the commissioner because they're better at making tough decisions? There shouldn't be a league vote because the league already has a commissioner. If they can't handle the job, they shouldn't be there.
If he would grant a different team with three players the winner, he should do the same for himself. I think any objective person would agree. If they refuse to use scores from week 18 or the playoffs (a better choice imo), then make a decision. Don't be held hostage by an opponent who senses weakness.

I truly don't mean any disrespect to the original poster. I get that it's a tough call. But commissioners sometimes have to do tough things to be fair to the league. I understand he said he doesn't want to be commissioner anymore. I think that might be a good idea. If you're going to let an opponent dictate what you decide, maybe it's not the right job for you.

Couldn't disagree more. Two other teams aren't in this situation. The commissioner's team is. The only appropriate way forward (assuming no league rules that resolve the issue) is for the commissioner to recuse.

Appearing fair is a huge part of being fair. You've never heard the phrase "even the appearance of impropriety?" The commissioner has to hold himself to that standard.

A big part of this is that the commissioner cannot himself be certain that he's making the same decision he would if he didn't have a personal interest, even if he's trying his best to be fair. The conflict of interest cannot help but color his judgment.

I don't know why you think that I'm saying the opponent should make the decision. Obviously he shouldn't (he needs to be recused from the decision as well). The league should make the decision. The only thing the opponent can (and should) do to resolve it is to concede, but you can't make him do that. Of course, the league could decide to kick him out afterwards because they don't want to play with him anymore, that's a possibility.

This sort of thing happens all the time in other organizations, most notably the legal profession. If a judge has a conflict of interest in a case, he/she recuses. It's standard procedure.

Looking fair is simply not the same as being fair. It just isn't. Holding 11 owners to one standard, and one to a different standard is not fair. You either trust the commissioner to be fair or you don't. It's really that simple to me. The idea that a commissioner has to punish themselves for the crime of being the commissioner seems absurd. Then again, I don't usually play with strangers, so maybe I have more faith than I would if it was a stranger. If it was someone I didn't know, I might feel the way you do. So I see that point.

The opponent apparently has veto power over what the commissioner wants to do, so he seems to hold the cards and makes the decisions. That's why I said that.
I admit I have the luxury of just of just considering it from an academic perspective, because it didn't affect our league at all. Somehow, neither team had any Bills or Bengals playing (I benched Bass for Maher in week 17). I also think it's silly when commissioners bend over backward to punish their own team so people will think they're being "fair." If they're not trusted, they shouldn't have the job. Court cases affect hundreds of millions of people in terms of precedent. A fantasy league game affects two managers. So I see it as different. I get that not everyone agrees.

 

[Statorama]

The NFL, if nothing else, keeps statistics. This game of ours is just a representation of those statistics.

If I were commissioner (TG I'm not) I'd base it on what the NFL decides. I'm assuming the NFL is going to call the game as finished with a 7-3 score and all accumulated stats count. If they decide that counts as a full game and finalizes stats, it is what it is.

IRL I oversee documents that are structured with contingencies, so if I were commissioner I probably would already have a "what if a meteor hits the stadium during a game" provision - which would have outlined that what the NFL considers official, we consider official.

Why would you assume this? And you might want to check ANY sports news. The game is cancelled and will NOT be made up.

Obviously I'm not in the championship, thanks for the update on the cancellation. I'm buried at work, but you're right, should have checked this before talking out of my keester.

My theory stands though, what the NFL says is true regarding statistics, so say we.

I took a look at all of the major sites, and I don't see anything official from the NFL on cancellation. I see a lot of "AP sources say" or "reportedly" - nothing official from the NFL.

ETA - Yeah, nothing official from the NFL on cancelling the game, but a lot of "sources say" stories.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

The more I think about, the only legit options are either use the points accumulated in that Monday night game and end there......or use week 18 stats for those players.
Every other option to me seems silly.

The solution I've heard that makes the most sense to me right now (and I read it here) is to use the team's playoff games as their stats for week 17. All Bills and Bengals will be going all out in that game, so no chance of resting players. It delays the results by a couple weeks, but who cares? It's a more-accurate representation of a team's lineup.

Star players doing their best with everything on the line, just like we have. Finally, our playoffs are their playoffs. I respect other opinions, but not using this obvious solution seems unnecessarily stubborn for the most important fantasy game of the year.

I've proposed 2 possible solutions to my opponent for our championship: This one and splitting the pot with each of us getting 2nd place money, with the rest going to the Damar Hamlin foundation -- he would be declared the champion since he was ahead (I had Allen, Mixon, and Buf D going, with about 40% odds if winning on ESPN at that time). He likes both solutions and is discussing with our commish.

I also suggested a mix of the 2, with the champ determined by scoring from the first week of the playoffs and us each getting the 2nd place prize, with the rest going to the Hamlin foundation.

I like the idea of donating part of the pot to the Damar Hamlin foundation, as I really like how he wants to impact his community.

Hey, if you both agree to it, it's the right move. Personally, I don't care as much about the money part (I don't play in any high-stakes leagues). I'd be more interested in the title. I'd want to see a champion determined with what happens in a game. Love the idea of donating a good chunk of the $. Is the foundation his GoFundMe thing that has $7+ million?