Teams that aren't in the playoffs (1 Viewer)

[jb1020]

I'm sure this has been discussed extensively here, but I didn't see a thread....feel free to link one. I'm just curious in your opinions.

We're down to 4 teams left in our league. It's a redraft league and the teams that don't make the playoffs aren't playing for anything. Last week was the first round of the playoffs and the guys that didn't make it didn't even set their lineups...which is normal.

Our of the blue this morning the team in dead last decides to make some roster moves. Just to throw the scenario out he picked up Grant. Im desperate for a rb this week. Guy who picked up Grant is best friends with the guy I play this week.

I'm not making a huge stink with the league or anything, but I think that stuff is extremely bush league and it's the equivalent of colluding on a trade.

Thoughts? What would your reaction be?

 

[jonboltz]

I think its silly for those not in the playoffs to be making moves. However, I think this situation ends up as a positive as you won't be tempted to start Ryan Grant.

 

[belljr]

Not in playoffs, no moves.

We actually only allow moves if you cany field a position due to injury, have to play with what got you there

 

[bonesman]

I'm not making a huge stink with the league or anything,

You should.

 

[jb1020]

I think its silly for those not in the playoffs to be making moves. However, I think this situation ends up as a positive as you won't be tempted to start Ryan Grant.

I wouldn't have been set on starting Grant anyways (but I am desperate). I just wanted to throw out the scenario to help you understand the bush leagueness of the move.I've played in a lot of leagues over the years and while the teams that didn't make the playoffs aren't truly locked its one of those understood rules that the losers needed to stay out of the winners business. At least I thought.

 

[unckeyherb]

I'm sure this has been discussed extensively here, but I didn't see a thread....feel free to link one. I'm just curious in your opinions.We're down to 4 teams left in our league. It's a redraft league and the teams that don't make the playoffs aren't playing for anything. Last week was the first round of the playoffs and the guys that didn't make it didn't even set their lineups...which is normal.Our of the blue this morning the team in dead last decides to make some roster moves. Just to throw the scenario out he picked up Grant. Im desperate for a rb this week. Guy who picked up Grant is best friends with the guy I play this week. I'm not making a huge stink with the league or anything, but I think that stuff is extremely bush league and it's the equivalent of colluding on a trade. Thoughts? What would your reaction be?

I'd check your rules. In our league, I have it written very clearly that no moves are allowed in the playoffs, unless you are in the playoffs. I can't actually lock the rosters though,so technically someone could make a move if they were unaware of the rule. I check weekly to make sure and if they did, I undo it and point to the written rule. If no rule, I'd get the league to vote on one for next year.

 

[Short Corner]

All rosters should be locked for playoffs whether you are in or out.

 

[jb1020]

I'm not making a huge stink with the league or anything,

You should.

I could be talked into this.

 

[Joe Summer]

My league used to have similar issues. We compromised by banning non-playoff teams from the weekly waiver wire, but still allowing them to make free agent moves on Sunday mornings. That way, the playoff teams get to pick from the best players, and the non-playoff teams still get to field a competitive lineup.

 

[scrumptrulescent]

I think it's funny.

 

[ponchsox]

All rosters should be locked for playoffs whether you are in or out.

This.

 

[Chaka]

I think it's funny.

 

[stbugs]

I'm sure this has been discussed extensively here, but I didn't see a thread....feel free to link one. I'm just curious in your opinions.We're down to 4 teams left in our league. It's a redraft league and the teams that don't make the playoffs aren't playing for anything. Last week was the first round of the playoffs and the guys that didn't make it didn't even set their lineups...which is normal.Our of the blue this morning the team in dead last decides to make some roster moves. Just to throw the scenario out he picked up Grant. Im desperate for a rb this week. Guy who picked up Grant is best friends with the guy I play this week. I'm not making a huge stink with the league or anything, but I think that stuff is extremely bush league and it's the equivalent of colluding on a trade. Thoughts? What would your reaction be?

Why didn't you pick up Grant already? He did it in the morning, so I am assuming you already had a waiver period and if not, what they heck are you doing? You are desperate for a RB this week and you didn't already grab him? Almost all my leagues either don't allow any changes during playoffs or only allow them to active playoff teams. The only league that goes against this had that in place, but allows it now because our total points $$$ prizes go through the end of the year, so a team out of the playoffs could still win money, so in that case it makes sense.

 

[jb1020]

I'm sure this has been discussed extensively here, but I didn't see a thread....feel free to link one. I'm just curious in your opinions.We're down to 4 teams left in our league. It's a redraft league and the teams that don't make the playoffs aren't playing for anything. Last week was the first round of the playoffs and the guys that didn't make it didn't even set their lineups...which is normal.Our of the blue this morning the team in dead last decides to make some roster moves. Just to throw the scenario out he picked up Grant. Im desperate for a rb this week. Guy who picked up Grant is best friends with the guy I play this week. I'm not making a huge stink with the league or anything, but I think that stuff is extremely bush league and it's the equivalent of colluding on a trade. Thoughts? What would your reaction be?

Why didn't you pick up Grant already? He did it in the morning, so I am assuming you already had a waiver period and if not, what they heck are you doing? You are desperate for a RB this week and you didn't already grab him? Almost all my leagues either don't allow any changes during playoffs or only allow them to active playoff teams. The only league that goes against this had that in place, but allows it now because our total points $$$ prizes go through the end of the year, so a team out of the playoffs could still win money, so in that case it makes sense.

He wasn't a free agent, al the waiver request went thru this morning. I had my request in on him, he had a higher priority and got him.I went back and read the "rules"

Keep in mind that players on teams that do not make the fantasy playoffs or are eliminated from the fantasy playoffs and are not released back to the Available Players pool.To support the ideas of fair play and sportsmanship, we encourage all managers to retain their players even after they have been eliminated from championship contention.

So the guy he dropped can't be picked back up, but that's no help.

 

[BigDave]

As commish, I reverse any adds/drops by non playoff teams.

They should know better than to screw it up for those that are left.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

t's pretty clearly collusive and you should raise it with the commish. If this guy doesn't normally pick up guys and he just does it this week to block you for his friend, then that's collusion. Why your rules even allow people to pick up guys when they are eliminated is baffling anyway.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

raise it with your commish and league. I imagine most people would have a problem with this, they just aren't paying attn cuz they are out.

 

[jbird]

On a related topic, I don't understand why so many league waivers in the playoffs continue to go worst to first. I understand during the regular season to allow the #### teams an opportunity to get competitive but not in the playoffs. I got that rule changed last year in one league to go first to worst so as to reward the better teams in the playoffs. The playoffs is not the time to allow the weaker teams a competitive advantage.

 

[Joe Summer]

t's pretty clearly collusive and you should raise it with the commish.

This is a surprising answer considering that you're (allegedly) a lawyer.There's no way to prove collusion since (by definition) only 1 team is involved.It's a jerk move, but it's not (necessarily) collusion.

 

[Instinctive]

Redraft: if you're eliminated and have nothing left to play for, it is not ok.

Dynasty: fair game

 

[BuffaloWings]

To play devil's advocate as this thread is kind of one sided....

Assuming that there is no prize for having the most points in the league, there could be a pride factor involved. Usually people play against somebody each week in a "consolation" bracket or something. And maybe the person making moves on the waiver wire wants to win that game, even if it doesn't technically mean anything with respect to prizes handed out in the league.

Just like in the NFL. Most teams out of the playoff hunt, still play for pride to win.

Now, if you can prove collusion, that is another story.

 

[pantagrapher]

If this is a dynasty league, that could change things a bit. It doesn't seem fair that only playoff teams have access to waivers down the stretch if those players end up being keeper eligible. That said, I'm (usually) a playoff team and I get annoyed when non-playoff teams are scouring the wire during the playoffs. I like the freezing rosters option, but what if a strong team has been using a committee defense or QB all season? It seems unfair to penalize them for that strategy by locking it down during the playoffs. As I sit here typing this, I'm thinking that only playoff teams should be allowed to make moves, but that no player picked up during the playoffs is keeper eligible. That sound good?

 

[Hairy Snowman]

t's pretty clearly collusive and you should raise it with the commish. If this guy doesn't normally pick up guys and he just does it this week to block you for his friend, then that's collusion. Why your rules even allow people to pick up guys when they are eliminated is baffling anyway.

This. It is clearly collusion. If the guy is out of contention, there is no other possible reason for him to pick up a player other than to collude with someone who is.

 

[Hairy Snowman]

t's pretty clearly collusive and you should raise it with the commish.

This is a surprising answer considering that you're (allegedly) a lawyer.There's no way to prove collusion since (by definition) only 1 team is involved.It's a jerk move, but it's not (necessarily) collusion.

As a lawyer I think I could definitely make a case here. What possible motivation does someone out of the playoffs have in making a move. There is no competitive reason. Only one motivated by helping another team.

 

[Stompin' Tom Connors]

All rosters should be locked for playoffs whether you are in or out.

This.

Really? Does this mean no roster moves for anyone?So if Michael Turner breaks a leg in the first series of Week 15, the GM can't make a move for Jacquizz Rogers for Week 16?In Yahoo custom leagues, taking our 14-team league as an example, the Top 6 go to playoffs, with the next 6 in the consolation bracket. There's no $ in finishing outside 4th, but there is a lot of "glory" left to play for in not being 6th in the playoff bracket, or winning the consol. So teams not advancing still play, and can still make roster moves.This has made it a very interesting league -- the pool of players is already shallow with 14 teams, and wire moves are very strategic. Also means that everyone has the same chances to be burned by an injury or be as proactive as they want to be in terms of rostering someone else's handcuff as a lottery ticket.

 

[glumpy]

I'm sure this has been discussed extensively here, but I didn't see a thread....feel free to link one. I'm just curious in your opinions.We're down to 4 teams left in our league. It's a redraft league and the teams that don't make the playoffs aren't playing for anything. Last week was the first round of the playoffs and the guys that didn't make it didn't even set their lineups...which is normal.Our of the blue this morning the team in dead last decides to make some roster moves. Just to throw the scenario out he picked up Grant. Im desperate for a rb this week. Guy who picked up Grant is best friends with the guy I play this week. I'm not making a huge stink with the league or anything, but I think that stuff is extremely bush league and it's the equivalent of colluding on a trade. Thoughts? What would your reaction be?

you need to be making a HUGE stink with the league.

 

[Chaka]

t's pretty clearly collusive and you should raise it with the commish. If this guy doesn't normally pick up guys and he just does it this week to block you for his friend, then that's collusion. Why your rules even allow people to pick up guys when they are eliminated is baffling anyway.

This. It is clearly collusion. If the guy is out of contention, there is no other possible reason for him to pick up a player other than to collude with someone who is.

It doesn't have to be collusion, perhaps he just hates jb1020.

 

[glumpy]

All rosters should be locked for playoffs whether you are in or out.

I disagree here, but only for the teams still playing. All depends on the league setup. In ours we pay for each move so they're not entirely indiscriminate and it all adds to the pot.

 

[Hairy Snowman]

t's pretty clearly collusive and you should raise it with the commish. If this guy doesn't normally pick up guys and he just does it this week to block you for his friend, then that's collusion. Why your rules even allow people to pick up guys when they are eliminated is baffling anyway.

This. It is clearly collusion. If the guy is out of contention, there is no other possible reason for him to pick up a player other than to collude with someone who is.

It doesn't have to be collusion, perhaps he just hates jb1020.

True. I do find him a little annoying.... j/k jb. Seriously, I just dont see it as ethical.

 

[Al Toon's Mole]

Redraft: if you're eliminated and have nothing left to play for, it is not ok.Dynasty: fair game

This

 

[PhantomJB]

To play devil's advocate as this thread is kind of one sided....Assuming that there is no prize for having the most points in the league, there could be a pride factor involved. Usually people play against somebody each week in a "consolation" bracket or something. And maybe the person making moves on the waiver wire wants to win that game, even if it doesn't technically mean anything with respect to prizes handed out in the league.Just like in the NFL. Most teams out of the playoff hunt, still play for pride to win.Now, if you can prove collusion, that is another story.

Agreed. This hobby is so addictive that in my league people just like to keep playing to keep Sundays interesting even when they're out of the playoffs. Sometimes teams that are out of it will have sidebets in a H2H matchup. The reasoning is people paid their money for the season and therefore they should have the right to play the entire season.Not saying in this case it isn't couldn't be collusion or other shenanigans. Or that banning WW moves for non-playoff teams is bad, just that there may be a legitimate reason for the guy to want to remaine competitive.

 

[NeverEnough]

They should not be locked in keeper & dynasty.

 

[Birdie048]

I'd check your rules. In our league, I have it written very clearly that no moves are allowed in the playoffs, unless you are in the playoffs. I can't actually lock the rosters though,so technically someone could make a move if they were unaware of the rule. I check weekly to make sure and if they did, I undo it and point to the written rule.

If no rule, I'd get the league to vote on one for next year.

As Commissioner of a MFL 12 Team 4 Player Keeper league, teams that are eliminated from the Playoffs (Championship & Toilet Bowl) are locked from making any WW moves. They can drop players & submit lineups just for fun, but they can not claim any players. We use a Blind Bid Waivers then a FCFS FA.

 

[Sea Duck]

I'd check your rules. In our league, I have it written very clearly that no moves are allowed in the playoffs, unless you are in the playoffs. I can't actually lock the rosters though,so technically someone could make a move if they were unaware of the rule. I check weekly to make sure and if they did, I undo it and point to the written rule.

If no rule, I'd get the league to vote on one for next year.

As Commissioner of a MFL 12 Team 4 Player Keeper league, teams that are eliminated from the Playoffs (Championship & Toilet Bowl) are locked from making any WW moves. They can drop players & submit lineups just for fun, but they can not claim any players.

If I was the #1 playoff seed, I would be pretty pissed about competing for waiver wire players with teams that are out of the money.

 

[bonesman]

I've got an even better one.

Commish in one league hosted on ESPN forces through a trade this morning despite the setting saying the deadline was: Wednesday, November 23, 12PM ET.

Of course I'm the only one that says any thing and he tells me, "what part of there was no trade deadline unofficially dont you understand? "

So I tell him I'm gonna trade some WRs to his opponent this week and guess what his response is.

 

[Boomer1]

Redraft league here but waivers open to everyone throughout the playoffs. Never been a problem.

Our draft order next year is determined by where you finish the season this year. Teams get to pick their draft position based on where they end up this year. Winner of the league has 1st choice of draft position, 2nd place has next option of draft position and so on. This keeps everyone involved throughout the season.

 

[kardplayer]

In my redraft leagues, if you don't have a game, then you can't pick up a player.

In my dynasty league, only playoff teams can pick up players BUT:

- any player picked up after the regular season ends is automatically dropped after the fantasy playoffs - there is no way to keep a player or trade them if they weren't on your roster by kickoff of Week 13

- you also don't get to keep the player you drop to make the pickup in the first place

thus... there is no impact to a non-playoff team of not being able to pickup players

 

[Sea Duck]

I've got an even better one.

Commish in one league hosted on ESPN forces through a trade this morning despite the setting saying the deadline was: Wednesday, November 23, 12PM ET.

Of course I'm the only one that says any thing and he tells me, "what part of there was no trade deadline unofficially dont you understand? "

"All of it, you grammar butcher."

 

[Jersey35]

Waivers should probably be locked for non-playoff teams, and whether you leave them open for playoff teams is debatable.

If your league is dead set on allowing waiver moves by teams that have nothing to play for but pride, then you might at least want to consider giving playoff teams priority. Perhaps with a playoff team exclusive weekly FA deadline, then opening FA up to everyone after that point.

Good luck!

 

[da_budman]

In our league waivers are still allowed by teams out of the playoffs. There is still money on the line for these teams because our weekly high score gets paid (with week 17 getting double even though the playoffs are over)

Id rather have people managing their teams to the very end (even out of the playoffs) I think it fosters the "not giving up" attitude when you are really unlikely to make the playoffs around weeks 11-12.

I understand the potential for collusion here but since they are still playing for something I dont have an issue with it.

 

[Apple Jack]

t's pretty clearly collusive and you should raise it with the commish.

This is a surprising answer considering that you're (allegedly) a lawyer.There's no way to prove collusion since (by definition) only 1 team is involved.It's a jerk move, but it's not (necessarily) collusion.

(This)

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

There's thet little section in all leagues called team rules; I just don't know why commishes don't use it more.

 

[shuke]

All rosters should be locked for playoffs whether you are in or out.

That's not what's being discussed here, but thanks.

 

[QuizGuy66]

I don't like making moves if my team's out and can't recall having done it.

That said, there is something to be said for structure - if there's a weekly prize for high score, those teams do have an incentive to play for something. Perhaps they should be compelled to start any players they happen to pick up. If it's a keeper league that may be a factor as well (though it'd have to be like a keep 4 or 5 before Grant even could realistically figure into someone's thinking).

One last proviso (though it involves work by a commish) would be to give playoff teams priority, perhaps by a day, for any potential FAs.

But if there's no meaningful keeper consideration and no monetary reward for high score, I say no they should not be allowed to make moves.

-QG

 

[placebo]

Why should it suddenly become easier for playoff teams to make pickups? The best leagues are the ones with every owner remaining competitive until the end. Waivers should be locked for everyone or no one.

 

[faulkfan]

Equally enjoyable...I had an owner in one league a couple years ago who wasn't in the playoffs but on the Wednesday leading to the 1st round dumped his entire roster except for those who couldn't be dropped. This led to a freakin bloodbath with the waiver system because a lot of those droppable players were good players. It was not fun.

 

[da_budman]

Equally enjoyable...I had an owner in one league a couple years ago who wasn't in the playoffs but on the Wednesday leading to the 1st round dumped his entire roster except for those who couldn't be dropped. This led to a freakin bloodbath with the waiver system because a lot of those droppable players were good players. It was not fun.

Thats what your commish is for. I would have put the players back on his team and locked it...... and looked for a new owner for next year.

 

[PIK95]

Do you get $$ for high year total points?

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

t's pretty clearly collusive and you should raise it with the commish.

This is a surprising answer considering that you're (allegedly) a lawyer.There's no way to prove collusion since (by definition) only 1 team is involved.It's a jerk move, but it's not (necessarily) collusion.

WTF are you talking about. The collusion is between two guys who are buddies, one of whom is playing the OP in the playoffs. Other player doesn't make moves or set his lineups like everyone else in the league for weeks. Then this week when his buddy is playing the OP he up and snags a RB whom the OP needs to play the owner in questions buddy? If it was the guy he was playing fine. But he obviously had worse waiver WW position than the OP. So he gets his buddy who isn't playing for anything at this point, to pick up a guy so that he has an easier playoff match-up. And you can't see how this is collusive?

 

[glumpy]

I really can't comprehend why there's even a debate here. Whether or not your league allows waiver moves for active teams during the playoffs is according to league setup and preferences. No problem. Once the league is into the playoff schedule, and a team is out of the playoffs--that team should be inactive. Don't care if it's redraft or dynasty, there should not be any moves made, either drop or add, by a team that is officially not playing. Why is this even a question???