Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

tj_drum

Ethics Question??

Recommended Posts

It's not unethical because your team has put you in the position where you can do it, so you have won that luxury.

TitaniumMan is falsely comparing this to another team retroactively removing a negative performance after the fact but that is a bad comparison since you aren't removing the team knowing it was negative, you are hedging your bets by taking away an opportunity to score more points, which can hurt you in the long run.

Hedging your bets by playing less players/position than your opponent only because the game your player/position plays in happens to be after all the other games?

Right.

All teams should play on a level field with the same units. There is nothing false about that statement.

But I am reading an awful lot of rationalizations and justifications coming from people who feel that playing fields should not be level.

I give up. You win.

Unless you're in one of my leagues. You'd get a ZERO because you fielded an illegal line-up.

That'd be cuz it's, well, kinda' unfair to hve one set of rules for one team than another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gee- I don't know: Are there suddenly less than 11 players on the field? Have you suddenly changed the roster restrictions? Did the team play all night without a Defense, go one light on Offense, without a QB in order to avoid any Interceptions?

C'mon. Use your head. The main point is that TJ would be altering the make-up of his ROSTER with knowledge only attainable AFTER THE FACT.

No football team walks out onto the field and says "Well, I guess we don't need a Defense tonight." C'mon.

And EOM Someone recently posted something akin to "Cheating helps you win? Wow- That's great, let's all do it!"

LOOK- Let me flip this around.

All of you who feel that this is ethical, you have to explain to me....

How is allowing roster restrictions to differ from team to team fair?

How is that ethical?

Should not every team have to play, be required to play with the same complete complement of players?

And if not, why?

Why no standard required*?

Variances are allowed team-to-team because of what day of the week it is?

If your answer is "Because it might interfere with your ability to win" that is the wrong answer.

TJ and apparently the great bulk of you can play with less than the full complement of a full roster and stay within your league's rules. It is still not fair for the reasons I have tried to explain, in vain, judging from all the hypothetical analogies that don't apply with which I have been met.

I am not trying to be a fascist. I am trying to keep a little something in the world of gaming that seems to be slipping away more and more each year as popularity grows.

*Again, that's why most leagues- outside of Yahoo! apparently- have rules regarding what constitutes a legal active line-up.

Use your head Titanium. Teams don't finish games out and kneel on the ball with less than 11 players because they'd get penalized for not enough men on the field, and the game would never end. Not because it's unethical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Use your head Titanium. Teams don't finish games out and kneel on the ball with less than 11 players because they'd get penalized for not enough men on the field, and the game would never end. Not because it's unethical.

*sigh*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Use your head Titanium. Teams don't finish games out and kneel on the ball with less than 11 players because they'd get penalized for not enough men on the field, and the game would never end. Not because it's unethical.

Tell me: Why should active rosters in your Fantasy League be allowed to vary Gamer to Gamer?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Then we disagree.

It is an exploit any time you can seal a victory by fielding an incomplete roster or find a way to play more than the allowed amount of players.

And I have played Fantasy Sports at least as long, Kerr, and at a pretty high level with some of the best in the business. (And, yes- I never won. But as long as I outfinished Brad my season was a success.)

Your analogies make no sense. No team goes up 20 points in a game and then rests their entire Defense, Kerr. That's ridiculous. This isn't even a "tanking" or dumping situation we're talking about: It's mid-game roster altering.

If you're talking FF then yes, no team goes up 20 points and then rests their defense. There'd be no reason to.

If you're talking NFL then I can tell you i've seen it many times in person with the Philadelphia Eagles in 2001. I saw them do it twice against the Cowboys and once against the Vikings in 2001.

Furthermore, the games are not stretched over a 2 day period. All teams must submit and play their rosters at one time, not piecemeal

We aren't playing a whole team in FF, are we? Monday teams have until monday evening to declare their active roster. The same courtesy is extended to FF owners in most leagues.

Also- We don't need to keep our players healthy for the playoffs. How absolutely lunatic is that particular analogy? That makes no conceivable sense at all.

It's not a stretch by any means. If we went by your standard of ethics then every team, FFG or NFL, should field their best team possible at all times. It doesn't happen in the NFL in the situations I stated. I can't help you draw the lines.

You have to submit a valid or legal line-up and removing anyone would mean a big fat ZERO. That is how all the expert leagues I was ever in played out and I won't play in any league where people think submitting less than a full line-up is ethical. You CAN dump games still, but you'd have to put in BYE week or INJURED players prior to Deadline. And then you'd get caught dumping and have to find a new league to play in next year.

Sorry, didn't know we were only talking about "expert" leagues. You've gone off on a tangent about "dumping games". The thread is actually about winning games.

The positions are there for a reason. They complete the Line-Up. They are not suggestions.

Because YOU want to treat them as suggestions because there is no safeguard to such wanton roster manipulation does not make it ethical within the intent of gaming.

Sorry but you're wrong. If you are allowed to start players in a bye week then yes, they are a "suggestion".

So your DEFAULT settings allow you to change your active roster before all games. Now, are you really trying to suggest that player substitution is the same as benching a player/position to preserve a win?

I'm saying all the leagues I'm in allow that. They are the base default provided by the service. These aren't settings i've had anything to do with. I'm not a commissioner nor do I suggest the settings in any league. And yes, benching or subbing a player is done for the same reason as benching a defense: to win the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's not a stretch by any means. If we went by your standard of ethics then every team, FFG or NFL, should field their best team possible at all times. It doesn't happen in the NFL in the situations I stated. I can't help you draw the lines.

Wrong.

I'm saying you have to field a full roster to play fair. Not necessarily your best. But we aren't discussing "dumping games" and resting players doesn't enter the equation.

By selectively dropping a piece of that roster you are giving yourself an advantage presented only by the passage of time that your opponent didn't have. Period.

In talking about this I get intense because there is a slow leaking of ethics from, well, everything. But in Fantasy Sports especially there is an increase in people who feel that winning is the only object.

Fair play matters. At least it matters to me.

TJ and those in his position would be using an advantage that the other teams didn't have. No matter how many ways you slice it, no matter how many of you think that's great, no matter how lonely the island I am on is, I am right in saying that it is unethical to start less positions/players than your opponent.

Contrary to what you all seem to think, you didn't earn the right to alter the inherent fairness of roster balance simply by holding a lead going into MNF.

That's it. You shouldn't get to cop out of playing with all your parts due to the game being played one day later.

So while it is within THE LEAGUE'S RULES, it is a breach of ethics. It is a breach of fair play. It's just not nice.

BTW- I have never played in a league at CBS.Sportsline that allowed illegal line-ups. I have played in a lot of leagues at Sportsline. I didn't realize that we were establishing that setting. Thought that was standard. If you tried to bench a player on MNF you'd be fragged. And no one I league with is going to do that anyway.

But I guess we're just a dying breed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just visiting here, but a reminder to keep the arguments on-topic, and not towards the people posting them, as per the Code of Conduct.

Before anyone asks, the posts and portions in question are no longer visible - if people want the debate to continue, then please stick to the points, avoid personal attacks, and treat each other with respect, as the Code of Conduct calls for.

Carry on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Before anyone asks, the posts and portions in question are no longer visible - if people want the debate to continue, then please stick to the points, avoid personal attacks, and treat each other with respect, as the Code of Conduct calls for.

Carry on.

Which is why my Star Rating is so low and why so many other posters who might share my opinion don't post.

But I've had my say. It's made no difference. I'm done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TJ and those in his position would be using an advantage that the other teams didn't have. No matter how many ways you slice it, no matter how many of you think that's great, no matter how lonely the island I am on is, I am right in saying that it is unethical to start less positions/players than your opponent.

You telling me you've never beaten a team that didn't have a full roster? You telling me you've never beaten a team with a a player that was an undoubted "out" starting? Did you find it unethical to win those games or protest them? If so, and if you've played as long as you say you have it is, then you've been the recipient of some tainted wins in your book.

As I, and others, have said: I cannot stand cheating in the leagues I play in. I also play by the book. I have never been uninvited back to a league and have no problems finding FF "action". You can claim purity and I can live with that but please don't cast a shadow over the rest of us that find this to be ethical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is it wrong if you are winning close going into MNF and your opponent doesnt have any players left playing to bench a player to avoid a negative effort?

Situation:

I am winning by .4 of a point and have the Arizona D playing MNF and he is out of players. Is it wrong for me to bench my D to avoid a negative out come or is it just good "coaching"??

hmm - i hate these ethics threads, but this one caught my eye. Up by .4 is too little a lead to not put a defense in (scoring adjustments midweek). If the rules allowed you to have an empty spot, then yes...with say a 5 point lead - i would reserve my defense. Though to have your league configured that way (no minimum roster requirements) is bad..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You telling me you've never beaten a team that didn't have a full roster? You telling me you've never beaten a team with a a player that was an undoubted "out" starting? Did you find it unethical to win those games or protest them? If so, and if you've played as long as you say you have it is, then you've been the recipient of some tainted wins in your book.

As I, and others, have said: I cannot stand cheating in the leagues I play in. I also play by the book. I have never been uninvited back to a league and have no problems finding FF "action". You can claim purity and I can live with that but please don't cast a shadow over the rest of us that find this to be ethical.

I wasn't going to post, but WTH.

I've never beaten a team by playing LESS than a full roster EDIT: in an HTH matchup. That is my point, not the opposite.

I am sorry you feel that I am trying to express a purity that you do not have. My point is a legitimate one. It was made 6 posts ago. It has been lost or purposely ditched. Most times others revisit my point it is unrecognizable, so twisted and contorted it has become. And this is after I tweaked him myself attempting to get others to understand him, see him perhaps in a different light all to no avail in utter futility.

"Point- What has happened to you?" I want to say to him.

But he's understandably bitter at me for getting him into this and will not even look me in the eye.

My point is a correct one. It's a good one. It's an honorable one, even if you will not abide it.

It is also a simple one and I have yet to hear an argument from anyone who says that roster restrictions and requirements should vary from team to team, not that a cohesive one can be made.

BTW- I have received PMs from those that agree with me but would rather not get into this mess. Like Point's current bad attitude towards me, I can't say that I blame them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, we're going around in circles here.

Why don't we summarize:

1. The roster move suggested isn't against most league rules.

2. The point TM is making is that Team A is taking advantage of the MNF schedule to place an unbalanced roster, in this case, one less DST to ensure victory. It is because of the unique MNF advantage that this move is taking place, as it wouldn't take place on Sunday at 1 PM.

3. This has no doubt happened before, since MNF is a regular FFB occurrence.

As an outside party with nothing vested in this (other than to prevent CoC violations, of course), I can only say that *BOTH* points are valid IMO - it is *precisely* because of the different schedule that this strategy is being considered. It would never be considered if this was Sunday, 12 PM EST for a 1 PM game. So, let's concede that point to TM.

On the flip side, as Commish of 2 of the 3 FFB leagues I'm in (2 of 'em H2H, 1 points), let me just say that 2 out of 3 leagues would allow this move (partly because in Dynasty, losing 1 week isn't necessarily as important when you're stashing the next big things on a tight reserve roster). Obviously, in a points format that would be silly to do, so no one does it. It should be recognized that in 1 of the 2 Dynasty H2H leagues I'm in, the 1st tiebreaker to decide playoff seeding after overall records isn't the H2H record in-division, or heads-up record, but total points - and in that, it was specifically done to try & reward the teams that total the most points. And in the other H2H league, well, it's in its 1st year, so who knows what our changes will be next year. But this year, it *can't* be done.

In the end, it would be silly to argue that Team A isn't using an advantage that the other team doesn't have at their disposal. Under the strict definition of ethics, TM's point holds. The fact that this might happen in other weeks, and therefore is OK for the league, is one that doesn't change what's happening *on that week*. But, before anyone thinks I'm against the move, I actually don't have a problem with the strategy, *IF* the rules allow for it - but more importantly, if your league *as a whole has considered this and still allows for it* as well, then that's the bottom line. So long as the whole league understands that this strategy is possible, then I believe it's OK in your league, even if it doesn't fly in others - but the key is that *everyone* has equal understanding of the implications* (and in my 10+ year league, I believe it holds true - not so sure it holds true in stranger leagues). I would also submit that if some teams have a problem with it (and not just the teams affected by that particular situation), then it shows the ambiguous nature of the issue at hand.

(And FWIW, having agreed 90 percent of the time with TM in many ethical FBB issues, but also disagreed on some key issues in the past, I can say with all honesty that even when we disagree, TM is using the *same* standards to make his point <as am I, I hope>. I'd point out that even though I'd probably be OK with this move, the opinion he's posting isn't based on some theoretical tenet, or just to be argumentative - he's posting it as he sees it, and how he plays it. The fact that there's disagreement, well, that's life on a Fantasy Forum - it's what you get out of the ensuing discussion, and what you learn <even if it's just seeing a different perspective> that matters more than who's right, as there is seldom 100 percent right or wrong in any argument.)

Food for thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guys, we're going around in circles here.

Why don't we summarize:

1. The roster move suggested isn't against most league rules.

2. The point TM is making is that Team A is taking advantage of the MNF schedule to place an unbalanced roster, in this case, one less DST to ensure victory. It is because of the unique MNF advantage that this move is taking place, as it wouldn't take place on Sunday at 1 PM.

3. This has no doubt happened before, since MNF is a regular FFB occurrence.

As an outside party with nothing vested in this (other than to prevent CoC violations, of course), I can only say that *BOTH* points are valid IMO - it is *precisely* because of the different schedule that this strategy is being considered. It would never be considered if this was Sunday, 12 PM EST for a 1 PM game. So, let's concede that point to TM.

On the flip side, as Commish of 2 of the 3 FFB leagues I'm in (2 of 'em H2H, 1 points), let me just say that all 3 leagues would allow this move (partly because in Dynasty, losing 1 week isn't necessarily as important when you're stashing the next big things on a tight reserve roster). Obviously, in a points format that would be silly to do, so no one does it. It should be recognized that in 1 of the 2 Dynasty H2H leagues I'm in, the 1st tiebreaker to decide playoff seeding after overall records isn't the H2H record in-division, or heads-up record, but total points - and in that, it was specifically done to try & reward the teams that total the most points. And in the other H2H league, well, it's in its 1st year, so who knows what our changes will be next year. But this year, it *can't* be done.

In the end, it would be silly to argue that Team A isn't using an advantage that the other team doesn't have at their disposal. Under the strict definition of ethics, TM's point holds. The fact that this might happen in other weeks, and therefore is OK for the league, is one that doesn't change what's happening *on that week*. But, before anyone thinks I'm against the move, I actually don't have a problem with the strategy, *IF* the rules allow for it - but more importantly, if your league *as a whole has considered this and still allows for it* as well, then that's the bottom line. So long as the whole league understands that this strategy is possible, then I believe it's OK in your league, even if it doesn't fly in others - but the key is that *everyone* has equal understanding of the implications* (and in my 10+ year league, I believe it holds true - not so sure it holds true in stranger leagues). I would also submit that if some teams have a problem with it (and not just the teams affected by that particular situation), then it shows the ambiguous nature of the issue at hand.

(And FWIW, having agreed 90 percent of the time with TM in many ethical FBB issues, but also disagreed on some key issues in the past, I can say with all honesty that even when we disagree, TM is using the *same* standards to make his point <as am I, I hope>. I'd point out that even though I'd probably be OK with this move, the opinion he's posting isn't based on some theoretical tenet, or just to be argumentative - he's posting it as he sees it, and how he plays it. The fact that there's disagreement, well, that's life on a Fantasy Forum - it's what you get out of the ensuing discussion, and what you learn <even if it's just seeing a different perspective> that matters more than who's right, as there is seldom 100 percent right or wrong in any argument.)

Food for thought.

You mean two people can be equally right about the same issue, even while having entirely contrary opinions? Very interesting.... B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You mean two people can be equally right about the same issue, even while having entirely contrary opinions? Very interesting.... B)

*Equally* right? That's very Solomon-esque, but hardly realistic. :) But the most heated arguments fail to recognize that there's usually some truth to the others' position.

(Unless you're married of course, then you know who's *always* wrong....but I digress).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was the original poster and have placed Arizona D/ST back in my line up. I guess all in all I agree with TM.

If I didnt think it wasnt slightly unethical I probably wouldnt have started the thread.

Plus If my opponent wouldnt have started the Eagles D/ST the score actually would be tied right now (they got -.4). That kinda swayed me a little since he wasnt afforded that luxury guess its my soft side LOL.

Go CARDS!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You mean two people can be equally right about the same issue, even while having entirely contrary opinions? Very interesting.... B)

That'd be nice if it were the case here. I'm all for anyone playing anyway they want to within the rules. May the best team win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I disagree with you. It's not a "loophole". In my ten years of FF i've never heard it described as unethical. I bitch about everything. I spent a season writing to Yahoo about how screwed up it was that Colston was listed as a TE (the eventual champ started him in the TE slot every week, hey Tim...).

I just happened to play the game particularly well that year, I guess.....and I didn't start him at TE every week, I had Alge there for about 9-10 weeks. I also used Bo Scaife a couple times.

This is never gonna go away, is it? LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Use your head Titanium. Teams don't finish games out and kneel on the ball with less than 11 players because they'd get penalized for not enough men on the field, and the game would never end. Not because it's unethical.

No they wouldn't. Rule 5, section 1, article 1 says that there is no penalty for fewer than 11 men.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is it wrong if you are winning close going into MNF and your opponent doesnt have any players left playing to bench a player to avoid a negative effort?

Situation:

I am winning by .4 of a point and have the Arizona D playing MNF and he is out of players. Is it wrong for me to bench my D to avoid a negative out come or is it just good "coaching"??

Go over the math and make SURE you aren't going to be hurt by a stat correction. If so, sit the D. No sense taking a risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has any defense gotten negative points this year? I can honestly tell you every week I play kicker/defense off waiver wire based on matchup and it has worked well. I assume you do as well or else you would probaly own someone other than AZ.

Risk: losing game

Reward: i guess total points in the end could be a deciding factor on a playoff spot.

What would AZ have to do to get a negative score?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I just happened to play the game particularly well that year, I guess.....and I didn't start him at TE every week, I had Alge there for about 9-10 weeks. I also used Bo Scaife a couple times.

This is never gonna go away, is it? LOL

*******************

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hidden
Hedging your bets by playing less players/position than your opponent only because the game your player/position plays in happens to be after all the other games?

Right.

All teams should play on a level field with the same units. There is nothing false about that statement.

But I am reading an awful lot of rationalizations and justifications coming from people who feel that playing fields should not be level.

I give up. You win.

Unless you're in one of my leagues. You'd get a ZERO because you fielded an illegal line-up.

That'd be cuz it's, well, kinda' unfair to hve one set of rules for one team than another.

Everyone is free to pick up later game players each week. Everyone will have players at later points. It all evens out. The difference is strategy. There's a reason why there is no explicit rule stating that you have to field a complete lineup each week. As long as you are trying to win, benching players is as legit, ethical and widely used as any strategy in Fantasy Football or Baseball. Thank god I'm not in one of your leagues. The problem with your rationale is that you assume everyone is operating under the assumption that the purpose of fantasy is to only get the best players and field the best team. This is not the nature of all leagues, and it's not the nature of mine. The added element of strategy for me and my friends offers an extra dimension that we enjoy. Just as you may lock down ERA and WHIP early and bench your starters, if you're lucky enough to bench a defense, then your team has put you in that position whether by luck or design (i.e. picking a defense or player with late games). Not to mention that in benching a defense or player you are likely sacrificing what could be crucial playoff-seeding points in order to secure a win. It's no loophole and it's no easy decision.

And on a separate note, would you please stop playing the victim everytime people disagree with you? Not everyone has to reach the same logical conclusions as you with regards to ethics and when a lot of people do disagree with you it's probably a sign that you may not be right in your ethical philosophy. This "I give up," "This is why I have a 3 star rating" woe-is-me attitude is getting old and quite frankly, frigging annoying. I have a 1 star rating, and I could give a crap, it's the internet. I like a lot of what you offer on this site, but the nature of any forum is that not everyone is going to agree with you 100% of the time, so when you find yourself in the minority, just man up and make your point and stop bitching about everyone disagreeing with you, especially when you're offering an unpopular opinion that subscribes to a very broad set of ethics and over-arching philosophy.

Share this post


Link to post

For the record I had a 6 point lead going into tonight's game with Boldin left to play. I never had any intention of benching him to secure a win. I'm in an arms race with Timmah and need all the scratch I can get.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.