How does your league handle backup players? (1 Viewer)

[matttyl]

Situation came up in our league last week, kinda an exploit of our current rule structure.

We use MFL, which has lot of options which we love. One is backup players. Rules states that you list your backup players, and if your starter is "out", you can plug that backup in the starters place. Seems easy enough.

Here's what happened: This past week, team A had Eli Manning as his QB backup, and Brees listed as the starter. Eli played on Thursday and had a pretty good game. Brees was later deemed out for his Sunday game. The catch is that this team also had Andy Dalton on his roster, and the system allowed for him to have simply swapped Brees (the starter) out and put Dalton in his place right up until game time Sunday. The issue is that the team is making that call with the knowledge of what Eli has already scored.

So lets say Eli blew up on Thursday for like 400 yards. Nothing in the rules prevents owner from requesting he be used instead of Brees (once Brees was deemed out). Alternatively, if Eli had a duck, nothing in the system prevents the team from swapping Brees with Dalton with the thought that Dalton would do better than Eli's duck (which he did).

Any thoughts?

 

[Johnny Blood]

You can't retroactively start players so Eli is not an option.

 

[matttyl]

You can't retroactively start players so Eli is not an option.

So then you don't have backups?

 

[Hoot McGoot]

The backup rule is the issue. You might as well do best ball and avoid the potential headache. A backup I'm assuming isn't considered a roster position so you can interchange as you please unless they've played already.

 

[TDorBust]

Sounds like the rules work fine and there will be a time or two where this issue will come up. There is nothing you can do about it because the coach should not be forced to make Dalton his backup simply because Eli plays on Thursday.

I guess what is the point of backups in general though? If you know a guy is not going to start why not just bench him to begin with? This same case could be made if Eli played at 12pm on Sunday and Dalton/Brees had games at 3PM or later....

 

[matttyl]

The backup rule is the issue. You might as well do best ball and avoid the potential headache. A backup I'm assuming isn't considered a roster position so you can interchange as you please unless they've played already.

It's not a "starting" roster position. Eli is still one of the 31 roster spots on the team's roster.

The rule says that the backup can be used in place of the starter if the starter is deemed "out" due to injury - which Brees later was. The issue is that Brees could have been swapped out for Dalton in this case - with the knowledge of how many Eli has already scored, right up until their games on Sunday.

 

[matttyl]

Sounds like the rules work fine and there will be a time or two where this issue will come up. There is nothing you can do about it because the coach should not be forced to make Dalton his backup simply because Eli plays on Thursday.

I guess what is the point of backups in general though? If you know a guy is not going to start why not just bench him to begin with? This same case could be made if Eli played at 12pm on Sunday and Dalton/Brees had games at 3PM or later....

Eli played Thursday. That was the issue. Brees wasn't deemed "out" till Saturday or Sunday I think. Lots of guys are "game time decisions" these days - and with more Thursday games, and this Sunday a game at 9:30 EST (the London game) these issues came come up more and more.

The owner would have been dumb to not list Eli as the backup not knowing what the situation was going to be with Brees, yet.

 

[[icon]]

Dumb rule... reap what you sow.

 

[VaTerp]

With TNF this seems to me to be a potential issue every week. If a someone deems a player as a backup that plays on TNF and they have a good game, then an owner could just not fill the roster spot if their starter is ruled out on Sunday.

Does your league have a rule stating that the spot must be filled? If so then doesnt that take care of it? If not then it seems this issue could come up anytime the deemed backup plays on TNF.

My leagues don't use backup rules and I'm not in favor of it b/c of situations like this where it seems to create more problems than it solves. Just my personal preference though.

 

[TDorBust]

The backup rule is the issue. You might as well do best ball and avoid the potential headache. A backup I'm assuming isn't considered a roster position so you can interchange as you please unless they've played already.

It's not a "starting" roster position. Eli is still one of the 31 roster spots on the team's roster.

The rule says that the backup can be used in place of the starter if the starter is deemed "out" due to injury - which Brees later was. The issue is that Brees could have been swapped out for Dalton in this case - with the knowledge of how many Eli has already scored, right up until their games on Sunday.

Back to my point though what is the difference between Eli being on Thursday or Sunday morning? What about at RB/WR though? Couldn't Lamar Miller be the backup and play a noon game and the team decide to put someone else in from Monday night instead then when Lamar Miller has a suck game and Lynch is ruled out?

 

[TDorBust]

With TNF this seems to me to be a potential issue every week. If a someone deems a player as a backup that plays on TNF and they have a good game, then an owner could just not fill the roster spot if their starter is ruled out on Sunday.

Does your league have a rule stating that the spot must be filled? If so then doesnt that take care of it? If not then it seems this issue could come up anytime the deemed backup plays on TNF.

My leagues don't use backup rules and I'm not in favor of it b/c of situations like this where it seems to create more problems than it solves. Just my personal preference though.

Its more than TNF that this causes an issue with as there is 5 different start times normally and 6 different start times this week. Any time you have multiple players at a later time you could over rule your backup plan by just subbing someone new in.

 

[VaTerp]

With TNF this seems to me to be a potential issue every week. If a someone deems a player as a backup that plays on TNF and they have a good game, then an owner could just not fill the roster spot if their starter is ruled out on Sunday.

Does your league have a rule stating that the spot must be filled? If so then doesnt that take care of it? If not then it seems this issue could come up anytime the deemed backup plays on TNF.

My leagues don't use backup rules and I'm not in favor of it b/c of situations like this where it seems to create more problems than it solves. Just my personal preference though.

Its more than TNF that this causes an issue with as there is 5 different start times normally and 6 different start times this week. Any time you have multiple players at a later time you could over rule your backup plan by just subbing someone new in.

Good point.

How was this not thought of when this rule was put in place?

 

[whiskey7]

Sounds like the rules work fine and there will be a time or two where this issue will come up. There is nothing you can do about it because the coach should not be forced to make Dalton his backup simply because Eli plays on Thursday.

I guess what is the point of backups in general though? If you know a guy is not going to start why not just bench him to begin with? This same case could be made if Eli played at 12pm on Sunday and Dalton/Brees had games at 3PM or later....

This is what I was curious about as well. Is the purpose of the rule simply to protect an owner against a zero in the case of a very late scratch? Otherwise, yeah, I don't see why its not on the individual owner to remove a player deemed "out" from his starting lineup.

 

[TDorBust]

With TNF this seems to me to be a potential issue every week. If a someone deems a player as a backup that plays on TNF and they have a good game, then an owner could just not fill the roster spot if their starter is ruled out on Sunday.

Does your league have a rule stating that the spot must be filled? If so then doesnt that take care of it? If not then it seems this issue could come up anytime the deemed backup plays on TNF.

My leagues don't use backup rules and I'm not in favor of it b/c of situations like this where it seems to create more problems than it solves. Just my personal preference though.

Its more than TNF that this causes an issue with as there is 5 different start times normally and 6 different start times this week. Any time you have multiple players at a later time you could over rule your backup plan by just subbing someone new in.

Good point.

How was this not thought of when this rule was put in place?

Have no clue, at the same point I think the OP just has to roll with it as its a loop hole that realistically can not be closed unless you have a Thursday night roster lock for all players which obviously would ruin the league with all the changes that happen during the week.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

The catch is that this team also had Andy Dalton on his roster, and the system allowed for him to have simply swapped Brees (the starter) out and put Dalton in his place right up until game time Sunday.

You are making an issue where none exists. The guy didn't rely on the "backup rule" he switched out Brees as his starter for Dalton BEFORE each had played (or not played). I guess he also had the option to leave Brees in and go with Eli per the "backup rule" if he wanted to, but chose not to.

I don't see any issue here at all. Think about it.

 

[VaTerp]

The catch is that this team also had Andy Dalton on his roster, and the system allowed for him to have simply swapped Brees (the starter) out and put Dalton in his place right up until game time Sunday.

You are making an issue where none exists. The guy didn't rely on the "backup rule" he switched out Brees as his starter for Dalton BEFORE each had played (or not played). I guess he also had the option to leave Brees in and go with Eli per the "backup rule" if he wanted to, but chose not to.

I don't see any issue here at all. Think about it.

Yeah. (1) Seems like a pointless rule to me in the first place and (2) I don't see the issue with this situation.

 

[Johnny Blood]

It's not really a red herring because this rule creates a big loophole. It's about the principle not the specific case.

If Eli scored -1 then you use that information to put in Dalton. If Eli scores 50 you leave him and roll the dice with Brees---or INTENTIONALLY start brees knowing he's going to be a scratch!

It's like a fantasy time machine...

I don't know why you'd have backups anyway but I think their kickoff must not be earlier than your starter's!

 

[Dr. Octopus]

So lets say Eli blew up on Thursday for like 400 yards. Nothing in the rules prevents owner from requesting he be used instead of Brees (once Brees was deemed out). Alternatively, if Eli had a duck, nothing in the system prevents the team from swapping Brees with Dalton with the thought that Dalton would do better than Eli's duck (which he did).

Any thoughts?

But this rule is put in place to protect the owner from starting a player that was out if he was otherwise pre-occupied and missed the news. I get that he had the ability to make the Eli v. Dalton decision with hindsight on Eli at least, but that's what's going to happen when you have a rule like this. It could have been a 1:00 v. a 4:15 start as well. The bottom line is he's still taking a chance either way since Dalton could have had a poor game.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

It's not really a red herring because this rule creates a big loophole. It's about the principle not the specific case.

If Eli scored -1 then you use that information to put in Dalton. If Eli scores 50 you leave him and roll the dice with Brees---or INTENTIONALLY start brees knowing he's going to be a scratch!

It's like a fantasy time machine...

I don't know why you'd have backups anyway but I think their kickoff must not be earlier than your starter's!

Yeah I saw that when I read on more, and I guess it's a semi-flawed rule in that respect - but that's what the rule is. The guys didn't do anything wrong really.

 

[shadyridr]

Backups are stupid but how do you expect a perfect scenario to play out? Only allow backups at the same time or later? Well then why use backups? Only allow backups if the team has 2 qbs? Well that seems hard to enforce. It's a dumb real but seems to be working as expected.

 

[shadyridr]

Another thing i dont understand is he started Dalton not brees. And eli was Daltons backup. Just because he had a 3rd qb why should he be punished. If Dalton was scratched them he gets eli points. Brees is completely out of the equation at that point

 

[Johnny Blood]

Backups are stupid but how do you expect a perfect scenario to play out? Only allow backups at the same time or later? Well then why use backups?

Presumably for the same reason you have them in the NFL? In that case you also can't use someone who played last Thursday as your backup, yet there's still a point to having backups...

I mean, I don't know, the rule is dumb to me but saying your backup couldn't have played 4 days ago doesn't raise any question about why you'd use backups. If you want to run that combo make Eli the starter and Brees the backup.

 

[Hankmoody]

There's no issue. Once Eli played he was locked in as the backup. Good, bad, whatever, he was locked. There's no advantage here.

 

[Johnny Blood]

There's no issue. Once Eli played he was locked in as the backup. Good, bad, whatever, he was locked. There's no advantage here.

Locked in as Brees' backup. The advantage is you know what Eli scored so you have illegitimate advantage in determining Brees vs. Dalton. The starter is not locked!

So if I know Brees is a scratch, and I know Eli scored 50... am I starting Dalton?

I'd like such info for all my sit/start decisions.

 

[spider321]

Dumb option.

 

[kybudman40]

The backup rule is the issue. You might as well do best ball and avoid the potential headache. A backup I'm assuming isn't considered a roster position so you can interchange as you please unless they've played already.

It's not a "starting" roster position. Eli is still one of the 31 roster spots on the team's roster.

The rule says that the backup can be used in place of the starter if the starter is deemed "out" due to injury - which Brees later was. The issue is that Brees could have been swapped out for Dalton in this case - with the knowledge of how many Eli has already scored, right up until their games on Sunday.

It shouldnt be set up this way. Nothing wrong with backup players. Ive never been in a league that uses them but nothing wrong with them. Once the backup player plays you should be locked into Player A (the questionable player) or player B...the backup. And player A's score must be used if he plays...no exception. If somebody wants to change starters/backups before any of them play....fine and dandy but after a game is played its a free look and not allowed. I lost big ben this week. I will carry 3 quarterbacks now. I should not be allowed to play him as a starter every week.....designate 1 of the other 2 as a backup....wait till that backup plays...then substitute in the 3rd qb..... The fact that the backup played on thursday is not an issue so long as, in this case, Brees score would have been used if he even played 1 down. The key is once the backup plays both he and the starter must be locked.

 

[Long Ball Larry]

Shark move would have been to pick up Thad Lewis and start him.

Aside from something blatantly ridiculous like that, I don't think that it's that big of a deal, in the end.

I think that the weird thing is that MFL doesn't have an automatic mechanism for the backup player, and it requires manual intervention anyway to alter it. So you might want to put in a rule about the use of backup players (based on what you want it to be) and that backup players who played prior to the player who ended up being out cannot be used.

The intent of the rule is to keep people from getting totally ####ed if they can't be at their computers from 11-1 on Sunday. Last year was the first year I've ever played with that rule and I don't actually recall anyone enactin it.

 

[Long Ball Larry]

This is what MFL says about backup players.

. How is the Backup Player Accounted for in your Lineup?
Answer: Currently, backup players are specified for informational purposes only. Any backup player rules supported by leagues must be manually enforced (typically by having the commissioner manually replace starters with backup players in new starting lineups).

NOTE: If enabled, backup players are still optional as owners can leave the default backup player setting blank on the submit lineups screen.

 

[Shawn]

The back up option on mfl is a joke. This is the first time I have actually seen a league that uses it. If you can't check on your players before kickoffs on Sunday maybe you should just be in a best ball league...

 

[LittlePhatty]

We don't do backups, never will.

But if we did, I'd say that "locking in" your backup guy should also lock in your starter at the same time, i.e. before both of their games start. So if Eli is designated as the backup to Brees, then as soon as the Giants game starts then Brees is locked in with Eli as the backup.

 

[humpback]

We have a back-up rule in one of my leagues, we just make it so you're locked into the starter and back-up once either game has kicked off. I'm guessing the site can't enforce that, but the commissioner can.

 

[SlaX]

Never heard of the backup option. Sounds like something used for a league full of slackers. err, wait...

 

[Hankmoody]

There's no issue. Once Eli played he was locked in as the backup. Good, bad, whatever, he was locked. There's no advantage here.

Locked in as Brees' backup. The advantage is you know what Eli scored so you have illegitimate advantage in determining Brees vs. Dalton. The starter is not locked!

So if I know Brees is a scratch, and I know Eli scored 50... am I starting Dalton?

I'd like such info for all my sit/start decisions.

Yes, because why wouldn't you? You'd take a donut? Tell me what advantage you get here?

Whether you know Eli's score in advance or not, you're still choosing between Brees and Dalton. What about when Eli has a 1:00 game and Dalton and Brees both play at 4:15? How is this any different?

 

[pinequick]

I hate the Thursday games for what they have done with roster decisions, but this is pretty simple.

Backup players in fantasy football emulate the NFL. It's not like the Saints said, "Oh, well Brees is out--guess we play with 10 on offense this week!" I think that's one of the sillier features of fantasy football--playing with an empty roster spot because a guy is hurt. That's not how it works in the NFL; quality depth matters. Hence, an actual working bench (so far as fantasy football will allow--if a guys plays 4 plays and gets hurt, that sucks).

In this instance, I don't see the issue. Apparently according to the league in question's rules, a team is free to make roster moves all the way up until a player's game starts. If the owner wants Eli's production, he hopes/prays Brees doesn't take a snap. If he wants to roll the dice with Dalton instead, he can do that. It's not really an advantage, unless he knows what Dalton will do... which he doesn't. Not sure what the problem is?

 

[Johnny Blood]

There's no issue. Once Eli played he was locked in as the backup. Good, bad, whatever, he was locked. There's no advantage here.

Locked in as Brees' backup. The advantage is you know what Eli scored so you have illegitimate advantage in determining Brees vs. Dalton. The starter is not locked!

So if I know Brees is a scratch, and I know Eli scored 50... am I starting Dalton?

I'd like such info for all my sit/start decisions.

Yes, because why wouldn't you? You'd take a donut? Tell me what advantage you get here?

Whether you know Eli's score in advance or not, you're still choosing between Brees and Dalton. What about when Eli has a 1:00 game and Dalton and Brees both play at 4:15? How is this any different?

What donut? I get 50 if I start Brees. One of us is obviously completely misreading the rule.

 

[pinequick]

Shark move would have been to pick up Thad Lewis and start him.

Aside from something blatantly ridiculous like that, I don't think that it's that big of a deal, in the end.

I think that the weird thing is that MFL doesn't have an automatic mechanism for the backup player, and it requires manual intervention anyway to alter it. So you might want to put in a rule about the use of backup players (based on what you want it to be) and that backup players who played prior to the player who ended up being out cannot be used.

The intent of the rule is to keep people from getting totally ####ed if they can't be at their computers from 11-1 on Sunday. Last year was the first year I've ever played with that rule and I don't actually recall anyone enactin it.

I'm pretty sure that every guy in our league would like to be glued to the couch (and the laptop) all day, every Sunday. Families, jobs, life doesn't always allow for that.

 

[houston]

Is it 1996? Craziest concept I've heard of in years of doing this. Pay attention on Sunday and set your lineup. That's how this game works. Doesn't everyone walk around with a pocket device these days?

 

[Johnny Blood]

In this instance, I don't see the issue. Apparently according to the league in question's rules, a team is free to make roster moves all the way up until a player's game starts. If the owner wants Eli's production, he hopes/prays Brees doesn't take a snap. If he wants to roll the dice with Dalton instead, he can do that. It's not really an advantage, unless he knows what Dalton will do... which he doesn't. Not sure what the problem is?

Would you play in a money pick'em qb game where you start 1 of 3 QBs per week, your opponent gets to know ahead of time one of his QB scores, and you don't get to know any of your QB scores ahead of time, and he gets to choose (highest of A/B) or C, and you choose D or E or F? Of course not. It's a rigged game. The information is an advantage. Not a big week to week thing for sure, but it's real.

 

[pinequick]

In this instance, I don't see the issue. Apparently according to the league in question's rules, a team is free to make roster moves all the way up until a player's game starts. If the owner wants Eli's production, he hopes/prays Brees doesn't take a snap. If he wants to roll the dice with Dalton instead, he can do that. It's not really an advantage, unless he knows what Dalton will do... which he doesn't. Not sure what the problem is?

Would you play in a money pick'em qb game where you start 1 of 3 QBs per week, your opponent gets to know ahead of time one of his QB scores, and you don't get to know any of your QB scores ahead of time, and he gets to choose (highest of A/B) or C, and you choose D or E of F? Of course not. It's a rigged game.

It is an advantage. Not a weekly thing but there's a huge loophole here.

This is a dopey analogy. You're presuming that you readily have on your roster

1) a QB who is always injured AND

2) an option to start a QB on Thursday night (or an early game) to "see how he'll do" AND

3) a late-start QB to throw in if the first guy disappoints.

Exactly how many QBs would you need to have rostered to play a strategy of actually taking advantage of this "rigged game"?? This is an anomaly, the advantage of which would cycle during a season. Sounds like fantasy whining to me...

 

[Manster]

I don't like the b/u rule....u put in a lineup and let it ride....avoid probs like that

 

[TakiToki]

My league has been doing back-ups like this since before the internet, and Thanksgiving/Saturday games have always had the opportunity for chicanery. But we've all known each other IRL for many years and are willing to live with that. We consider it an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty to attempt any tomfoolery, and a violator would be punished heavily by the commissioner, using his subjective judgment.

It's fine for us, and we've never had an issue, but in a more business-like or stranger league, it wouldn't really work. You could lock line-ups at 1pm Sunday kick-off and require an unchangeable declared starter above a Thursday back-up, but that's a big headache and limits flexibility to an undesired level. With today's smart phones and availability of news, it's really probably an antique that is no longer needed. Back in 1990, it had a lot more use.

 

[Dezbelief]

Backups pfft

My BIL is a CO, he told me that's how the punks in prison run their leagues.

 

[Dezbelief]

My league has been doing back-ups like this since before the internet, and Thanksgiving/Saturday games have always had the opportunity for chicanery. But we've all known each other IRL for many years and are willing to live with that. We consider it an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty to attempt any tomfoolery, and a violator would be punished heavily by the commissioner, using his subjective judgment.

It's fine for us, and we've never had an issue, but in a more business-like or stranger league, it wouldn't really work. You could lock line-ups at 1pm Sunday kick-off and require an unchangeable declared starter above a Thursday back-up, but that's a big headache and limits flexibility to an undesired level. With today's smart phones and availability of news, it's really probably an antique that is no longer needed. Back in 1990, it had a lot more use.

This is the only type of leagues that should have the backup rule, leagues over 25 years old.

 

[Hankmoody]

There's no issue. Once Eli played he was locked in as the backup. Good, bad, whatever, he was locked. There's no advantage here.

Locked in as Brees' backup. The advantage is you know what Eli scored so you have illegitimate advantage in determining Brees vs. Dalton. The starter is not locked!

So if I know Brees is a scratch, and I know Eli scored 50... am I starting Dalton?

I'd like such info for all my sit/start decisions.

Yes, because why wouldn't you? You'd take a donut? Tell me what advantage you get here?

Whether you know Eli's score in advance or not, you're still choosing between Brees and Dalton. What about when Eli has a 1:00 game and Dalton and Brees both play at 4:15? How is this any different?

What donut? I get 50 if I start Brees. One of us is obviously completely misreading the rule.

And you get 50 if you start Dalton. Again, Eli has no impact on the decision between Brees and Dalton. You're still going to start the one you think will score the most points between them, in this case to see if either can surpass the 50 Eli has already posted. If Eli got 4, you're STILL going to start the one you think will score the most points between Brees and Dalton.

 

[DepthCharts]

The catch is that this team also had Andy Dalton on his roster, and the system allowed for him to have simply swapped Brees (the starter) out and put Dalton in his place right up until game time Sunday.

You are making an issue where none exists. The guy didn't rely on the "backup rule" he switched out Brees as his starter for Dalton BEFORE each had played (or not played). I guess he also had the option to leave Brees in and go with Eli per the "backup rule" if he wanted to, but chose not to.

I don't see any issue here at all. Think about it.

THIS above is the answer... some are forgetting clear rules... once a player on your roster has begun a game he is IN your lineup.... whether that is as a starter or a backup player....therefore, as already stated, once eli game started if he was NOT taken out of lineup, OR not removed from message board (depending on how you use backup, most have to specify so board is used).....he IS the backup player IF and only IF Drew Brees is the starter in his lineup once Drew Brees game began. This really isnt that difficult

 

[TakiToki]

OP is not discussing having to make a ruling this week. He's talking about the obvious opportunity for angle-shooting that isn't in the spirit of the game.

 

[whiskey7]

There's no issue. Once Eli played he was locked in as the backup. Good, bad, whatever, he was locked. There's no advantage here.

Locked in as Brees' backup. The advantage is you know what Eli scored so you have illegitimate advantage in determining Brees vs. Dalton. The starter is not locked!So if I know Brees is a scratch, and I know Eli scored 50... am I starting Dalton?

I'd like such info for all my sit/start decisions.

Yes, because why wouldn't you? You'd take a donut? Tell me what advantage you get here?

Whether you know Eli's score in advance or not, you're still choosing between Brees and Dalton. What about when Eli has a 1:00 game and Dalton and Brees both play at 4:15? How is this any different?

What donut? I get 50 if I start Brees. One of us is obviously completely misreading the rule.

And you get 50 if you start Dalton. Again, Eli has no impact on the decision between Brees and Dalton. You're still going to start the one you think will score the most points between them, in this case to see if either can surpass the 50 Eli has already posted. If Eli got 4, you're STILL going to start the one you think will score the most points between Brees and Dalton.

No. If the owner starts Dalton and he plays, the owner gets whatever Dalton gets him. The backup points come into play only if the starter is out. Once Brees was ruled out, the owner could take Eli's points (by leaving Brees as starter) OR take his chances with Dalton. As JB said...if Eli puts up a huge game, his owner could exploit the loophole to get those points.

 

[DepthCharts]

OP is not discussing having to make a ruling this week. He's talking about the obvious opportunity for angle-shooting that isn't in the spirit of the game.

There is no angle with backup players! wow, this concept is not that difficult. The player must be OUT for a backup player to be used. This is not "I want the better of the two"

1. If Eli scores 50, you only get that IF you start brees AND he is OUT. If Eli gets 15 you only get that IF you start Brees AND he is OUT.

2. If Eli scores 50, and you start Brees and he breaks his head on first play and throws a pick 6, you get -1 for Brees!

 

[Hankmoody]

There's no issue. Once Eli played he was locked in as the backup. Good, bad, whatever, he was locked. There's no advantage here.

Locked in as Brees' backup. The advantage is you know what Eli scored so you have illegitimate advantage in determining Brees vs. Dalton. The starter is not locked!So if I know Brees is a scratch, and I know Eli scored 50... am I starting Dalton?

I'd like such info for all my sit/start decisions.

Yes, because why wouldn't you? You'd take a donut? Tell me what advantage you get here?

Whether you know Eli's score in advance or not, you're still choosing between Brees and Dalton. What about when Eli has a 1:00 game and Dalton and Brees both play at 4:15? How is this any different?

What donut? I get 50 if I start Brees. One of us is obviously completely misreading the rule.

And you get 50 if you start Dalton. Again, Eli has no impact on the decision between Brees and Dalton. You're still going to start the one you think will score the most points between them, in this case to see if either can surpass the 50 Eli has already posted. If Eli got 4, you're STILL going to start the one you think will score the most points between Brees and Dalton.

No. If the owner starts Dalton and he plays, the owner gets whatever Dalton gets him. The backup points come into play only if the starter is out. Once Brees was ruled out, the owner could take Eli's points (by leaving Brees as starter) OR take his chances with Dalton. As JB said...if Eli puts up a huge game, his owner could exploit the loophole to get those points.

Thanks, I didn't read that correctly the first time. Definite exploit that requires a manual rule stating "once either the backup or starter's game has commenced, both are locked into their respective slots".

 

[BobbyLayne]

Note to self: do not institute a backup provision in the league you commish.