I have a FF ethical question.

[Goatwhacker]

No, we can do something about it. The league manager can go in and override my points scored - he can essentially give me as many points as I would have had if I had played McNabb.

This is what he should do, then. I agree with the general feeling on this thread that intentionally fielding an invalid lineup to effect your playoff seeding is ethically wrong, and lets down the fellow owners in your league.

[tman570]

I think it was the wrong thing to do. Intentionally blowing a game is wrong no matter how you look at it.

[bgnh1]

I did the same thing a few years ago; I didn't bump anyone out of the playoffs, but I did tank a game to get a favorable match-up in the first round. That still didn't go over too well, so we changed the rules next season. Now, who ever is in first place gets to choose which of the other 3 teams they want to play in round one. (I recommend this to anybody-- no reason to throw a game then...)

Personally, you shouldn't feel TOO bad about it, if nobody had a problem with it beforehand... but now it's a big can of worms, because if you do get your points for McNabb, the other guy is going to get bumped from the playoffs, so someone is going to have a bitch, either way...

[bacchuspupff]

Tell me about it. The guy who got bumped doesn't just want the points added back - he wants me disqualified from the league. Regardless of whether you think it's an unsportsmanlike move or not, I don't see how I was supposed to know you're not supposed to to it - this is my first FF season. And the guy who would get bumped if we add the points back in is the manager of our league!

[Arlo]

Ugh. That's an awful situation to try and resolve.

If it were my league (and I realize that what may work for one league might not serve another equally well), I'd hold a vote with the following options:

A) Deliberately losing is a legitimate tactic, McNabb sits, game counts as originally scored.

B) Games cannot be thrown, McNabb's points count, new score counts.

C) Compromise solution since the rules weren't clear: Playoffs pushed back to weeks 16-17, with a wild-card game held in week 15 between the two teams who would finish fourth with the two different scores.

If the move was announced beforehand, I don't really see a reason to penalize the team that benched McNabb, even if I don't agree with the tactic.

Good luck!

[PK9]

My opinion:

First of all I completely disagree with the point that it would be okay if you had played someone else in McNabb's place. It's either okay to field a weaker team or it's not. Deliberately playing a weaker player is no different that competely benching your starter.

Now, on to the issue of whether it's okay. I would say if it's not specifically banned in the rules, it should be allowed to stand. This clearly is not a case of collusion, your ultimate goal is to win the championship, and it was a stategic decision toward that goal. Real teams make the same decision when they rest their starters in the final games in preparation for a playoff run. Sometimes that decision affects playoff races. Tough luck for whoever gets affected.

Not that I strongly believe this, but it can also be suggested that sacrificing your chances next week in order to help the guy with Peyton Manning into the playoffs may be unethical.

[matmat]

i like the idea of the #1 seed deciding who to play in the first round.

[squiggles]

I think it is wrong as well

off topic:

my dad did this in a way except hes in dead last and he was playing the #1 seed guy who was 11-1 and already clinched first place and my dad started all his bench to have some fun...he would of won if he started his normal starters....is this wrong or is this ok?

[Mercer Boy]

i like the idea of the #1 seed deciding who to play in the first round.

That is a very neat idea! The team that ends up in 4th doesn't always have the weakest of the four teams at the end of the year due to player changes and streaks. I think that's why there are always so many upsets in the fantasy playoffs.

The only contention some might have is that the NFL doesn't allow teams to choose who they play. But, if everyone is in agreement with it, it would give the winner of the regular season a slight advantage in picking someone who has bad matchups for the first week. It would also give everyone incentive to go for that top spot and never throw a game.

[The Guru]

Benching McNabb was the smartest strategic thing to do. Its basically impossible to beat Peyton this year.

It didn't allow the Peyton Manning owner into the playoffs which increases your team's chances of winning the championship.

This is just like picking up someone on waivers to block your opponant from getting them.

------------------
To anyone that said, You should want to beat the best team in order to earn the championship'.

In my league the Peyton Manning owner has the most total points (by alot) but just missed making the playoffs by losing this week. He by far has the best team; every team in the playoffs is glad he didn't make the playoffs.

According to some of you that feel what I wrote above; my league should allow the Peyton Manning owner into the playoffs just because he has the best team.

That's retarded. He didn't make the playoffs so he shouldn't be there. It doesn't matter if he has teh best team.

Every year there is atleast 1 team that doesn't belong in the playoffs but they had a lucky year and are there. That's just the way things go sometimes.