tshuggz wrote:First post here,
Listen I created a family league last year, sounds friendly right??? Did not end that way! I did a basic PPR 10 person league (online draft, trading 3 votes to veto, waiver wire, free agency ext.) It was a really serious pool for a hefty chunk of change so it got real serious real fast. My family is probably far more competition than most so loop holes that existed were executed immediately, after the first two trades of the season took place the remaining 30 attempts were veto'd; a lot were legit trades which was not fair and a lot were people clearly making unfair trades to help one another. Then it even went as far to player dropping on the waiver wire to assist teams who climbed to the #1 waiver spot. As commissioner it was extremely hard to punish teams because i was also a competitor and people would think I was taking sides to help teams and what not. Basically every scum bag move that could occur was attempted or did happen and it was nasty.
PEOPLE LOVED IT THOUGH and as did I so this year I would like to set the league up to eliminate possible COLLUSION.
The clear obvious option is to draft a team and eliminate trading but thats no fun.
I use yahoo and I was wondering if having yahoo commission the league ends up being a fair option or if loopholes can still occur.. Ex. one team drafts multiple qbs another RBs and the other WRs and then they trade back n fourth to make a power house team. Or will a Yahoo commissioner recognize collusion? If so, I would like to keep trades as a part of the game.
I also would like to set up a bidding system on the waiver wire rather than have the revolving list. (Ex. Start w/ 100 bidding dollars and when you use your 100 you are all done) If anyone has done this i would like to know how it worked?
i Really want to keep this as competitive as possible but i want to eliminate possibilities of collusion because its going to happen if it can. Suggestions would be great!
Lastly, what do you think about having less bench players to keep a talented players pool?
I appreciate your feedback in advance and if you need me to elaborate on anything just ask.. THANKS!
Welcome to the Cafe! This place has a lot of great info, so hopefully you'll stick around.
You are definitely in a very tough situation. Thankfully, you already know that collusion is against the rules, but it's very hard to prove (unfortunately). You'll see plenty of posts here that say the only reason a trade should ever be vetoed is because of collusion. But when you allow owners to vote on trades, a lot of owners will veto for the wrong reasons. So the 1st thing that I'd do is get rid of that voting system. All my leagues allow the commish or commishes to decide pass/veto on trades. I'm lucky because I play with owners who would never collude, so I've never vetoed a trade in any of my leagues that I commish. Same goes for all my leagues where I'm not the commish. Since collusion is not an option, all trades always get passed...even if they look lopsided on paper. Since it sounds like most of your owners don't care that collusion is wrong/illegal, this is probably going to be hard for you to police, and I can see it getting ugly. So that not every trade lands on your shoulders, I'd appoint a co-commish. This way you have 2 people deciding if collusion is going on (again, the only reason a trade should be vetoed). Then I'd appoint 2 other people as co-commishes ONLY for trades that might involve yourself and/or the co-commish. This system works when all owners are honest and on the same page, but since that isn't the case in your league...the system might not work. But I think that's a step in the right direction. I'd also spell it out to every owner that collusion is against the rules, and that any trades where collusion is suspected will get vetoed. Again, this might not solve your problem if all owners don't get on board, but it's the right thing to do IMO. If you end up having owners still causing problems, I just wouldn't invite them back into the league. I don't think that yahoo or any other provider can recognize collusion. Having less bench players might help because owners might not feel the need to trade if there are good players on the waiver wire.
Personally, I don't really like the blind bid system for waivers (just a personal preference), but it works great. It's more fair than a rolling priority system because every owner has a chance to pick up any free agent...as long as have enough $$ left. In your situation, I would highly recommend you switching to the blind bid system for waivers. This would prevent owners from dropping players to help the guy with the #1 priority, which is also against the rules because it's another form of collusion.
Another good idea that might help is for you to make a league constitution that spells out all these rules. That way, all the rules will be known by all the owners, and they'll know that breaking the rules might get them kicked out of the league. Bottom line is that all these rules & changes will do nothing unless every owner in your league gets on board with the changes and decides not to collude/cheat/find loopholes (in other words, they need to grow some integrity).
Hope that helps a little, and good luck!