Ethics Question

[zevon]

He did pay for the moves, so I see no issues.
My strategy would be to refuse any/all trade requests from him that didn't involve McNair or Palmer...
Byes are done next week, he'll have a lot of dead weight on the bench.

[arod77]

As long as the rules allow each owner to have an equal shot at acquiring these free agents, then what he is doing is perfectly fair and perfectly legal.

Owners who whine about this practice need to spend less time whining and more time working their waiver wire themselves.

The intent is to improve your roster. If picking up 2 or 3 backup QB's and then trading one, or having more insurance for injuries improves your team, then why does anyone have a problem with that?

This would be similar to a GM in the NFL whining to the league office that a player who cleared NFL waivers was acquired by a division opponent. The league office wouldn't care.

This is exactly right. The owner is taking up all the QB's but I bet he's hurting in depth somewhere else. In no way is this unethical. He is taking a risk.

I knew an owner who had 4 QB's last year (Peyton was one of them) and he didn't make the playoffs.

I always carry as many RB's as possible and people say stuff to me but they are vunerable and I feel that I need much depth in that position.

What the guy in your league is doing is the same as Shanahan and Billichek always saying that there players are probable, when they are really out or vice versa.

It's like Marino getting up to the line and pretending to spike the ball but throwing a TD instead.

It's like faking a field goal to go for the first down.

They are within the rules and they are things that are done to win.

[eaglesrule]

the yahoo rule is pretty vague...

I mean me trying to win each week "hampers" the play of my opponent, in that I am trying to stop him from accomplishing its goal.

I don't think this rule would be a)wise, b)enforceable. Its not abusing the PROCESS of the waivers to hamper opponents, you are sacrificing an advantage for another advantage. Usually when people churn the roster, they only have one roster spot that they use to do this. On the other hand, this guy is sacrificing a significant portion of his roster.

Although, he is pretty nuts if he thinks people will pay a lot for a qb. the affected teams could collude of sorts and just roll with whatever, since everyone is in the same boat. Reminds me of a fbb players who hoard saves. If everyone is smart, no one will trade with him, because the investment to do well in that phase of the game is much less. (Although I realize this isn't EXACTLY like that.)

[TexDawg45]

Totaly ethical and a good idea! Plus, I am sure some of the other teams have 2+ qb's on their benches. With the bye weeks you need that; not to mention injury risk....

I have Eli, Grossman, and Romo in one league and we only start one. We even take averages for byes!