Not everyone would like to play for money

[CambiBulungo]

I am the commish in my 12 man league. We draft later on today. The problem is that not everyone would like to play for money. Is there a way where those who would like to play for money, can do so without affecting those who do not as well as the league overall? With all the sites that are are out such as League Safe, it is unfortunate that people do not "trust" everyone.

[Banemorth]

The way all my "play for cash" leagues work is to pay it all to the commissioner before the start of the league. I wouldn't join a pay to play league that had me relying on a stranger's word of payment.

[CambiBulungo]

I understand what you are saying, but do you think it is feasible for some players to participate as paying managers, while others are not. For example, let's say only 8 of the managers are willing to pay, do you think it is possible to make it so that the payouts would be made just according to the rank of those managers? Ex: a paying manager wins all and comes in first place...a non paying manager comes in second place....a paying manager comes in 3rd, etc. I would make the 3rd place manager come in second place in order to get the 2nd place payout. Does this make sense to anyone? or should I just can the whole idea?

[Banemorth]

What you're saying would work if the whole league was in agreement to the idea.

[AHF]

You could run into issues with people who are playing for money getting ticked off because a team with nothing on the line makes a bad trade or stops actively managing their team (leaving an injured player in the lineup, etc.). It seems like it could get complicated unless everyone is an active owner. Maybe lowering the buy-in would let you get everyone on board.

[CambiBulungo]

I totally see how that would complicate things, and piss others off. The problem is not the buy-in price, but is a trust issue. Not everyone knows everyone, and some are skeptical because of the distance from one another. I suggested LeagueSafe.com, which I found out about on this forum, but some people are just stuck in their own ways.

[AHF]

The problem is not the buy-in price, but is a trust issue.

That doesn't bode well for your league if guys won't trust the commish with $20.

[CambiBulungo]

It's actually $40...I already put it out there. Whoever wants in, will be in, the others can play without paying, but can't get mad if they come in 1st or 2nd and see no parts of the pot. Next year, I'll just make paying mandatory.

[AHF]

Hopefully you can use the year to build up that trust with the owners and get them mentally ready for it next year.

Good luck!

(Please help with: viewtopic.php?t=494728).

[Hippo45]

You could have the owners that do want to bet money pay $2 each week (17 weeks = $34) The top three scoring teams that week get money back.

Say for example 8 players want in it would be $16 paid out each week.

1. $10
2. $4
3. $2

Instead of paying out each week just keep a running total and pay it out at the end of the year.

You could also have a running point total for the whole year. So the top 3 teams by points at the end of the year get a little bit bigger payout. For example people pay $6 (so it is an even $40) for the end of year total points. That way if someone always gets 4th every week could end up having the most points and would be able to get some money back.

*Obviously, the dollar amounts are just used as an example.