Purposely leaving empty roster spots

[mattonium 4]

Have a little debate going on in our league. As a strategy, one of the top teams is purposely leaving two empty roster spots this week due to his 4 bye players. He doesn't want to lose any of his players and is "throwing" the game.

 

I think that's fine, until someone is edged out of the playoffs because someone got an easy and unwarranted win.

 

Others disagree.

 

Any thoughts on the matter here?

 

M

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

If he's done well drafting and with WW pickups and is fielding a solid team, there should be no problem.

 

If he wanted to get the majority of his players' bye week out of the way in one week, so be it.

[boilerddd 62]

I think ultimately he has the right to manage his team the way he sees fit. Who knows anyway, he may win the game despite his move. I have more of a problem when some dim-whit leaves an injured player in their line-up.

[ralphster 274]

The sportsman like take is that you have to have a legal lineup every week of the year. Easy to set exactly that setting in MFL. That stuff kinda goes out the window when you're in a short bench keeper league - especially if you're doing well enough that you can afford to consider 'throwing' the game. I'm all for everyone does as they want - but - I don't condone or tolerate absentee owners in any league. If you're playing well and posting and choosing to sit people due to byes then I can dig on that. If you're doing to in order to guarantee an earlier pick next year or to try and help a division mate into the playoffs, well...

 

front door/face/punch/wife/kids

[mattonium 4]

Yeah, something about it just bothers me. You're losing on purpose and affecting the standings.

 

In the NFL you can't just suit up 10 players on offense one week because you don't want to make a roster move.

 

Appreciate all the insight and see both sides.

[WhiteWonder 2,171]

Is he losing on purpose or simply punting the week because he doesn't want to drop any of his good bye week players?

 

Cant.blame the guy for not fielding a team if it simply worked out that way

[mattonium 4]

Is he losing on purpose or simply punting the week because he doesn't want to drop any of his good bye week players?

 

Cant.blame the guy for not fielding a team if it simply worked out that way

 

Well, for some reason he doesn't have a kicker. He's "punting" I guess, but isn't managing bye weeks part of the game? If everyone did that it would be a pretty uncompetitive league. Bye weeks don't just happen, you have to be aware of them for most of the season.

[mattonium 4]

anyway, seems like I'm the only one with an issue on this, so I'll probably let it go . . . after I drop Rodgers and Lacy because my season is over and I can manage my team any way I want. I want to see what I can do with an even worse team the rest of the way. lol

[DontPushMe 5]

Don't see why its a problem. I currently have no backup tight end to jordan reed. I probably will start him next week as I value even the last guy on my bench higher than the 2-4 points I may get from asj ebron or amaro.

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

anyway, seems like I'm the only one with an issue on this, so I'll probably let it go . . . after I drop Rodgers and Lacy because my season is over and I can manage my team any way I want. I want to see what I can do with an even worse team the rest of the way. lol

 

You say he's a top team with several guys on a bye week at the same time. That's a strategy; instead of playing weak over several games he plays weak in one.

 

There's a difference between being a top team and not wanting to drop good players to cover one week and being a turd burglar by dropping players if you're out of contention.

 

That would definitely get your a$$ booted out of my league.

[Serpent 51]

I haven't bothered replacing my K, DST or TE as their byes or injuries came in multiple leagues. There just isn't a point.

 

Even if you play everyone, there is no guarantee they don't put up goose eggs, or go negative, getting injured very early on after a turnover or what not.

 

I really don't think it matters. FF is all luck anyway. Probably Mr. Top Team understands that, hence why he's able to get to the top when things go well. My teams are all competitive again this year, but that's also more because I'm in weaker leagues this year too. And by competitive all I really mean is .500 or better.

[weepaws 2,459]

Have a little debate going on in our league. As a strategy, one of the top teams is purposely leaving two empty roster spots this week due to his 4 bye players. He doesn't want to lose any of his players and is "throwing" the game.

 

I think that's fine, until someone is edged out of the playoffs because someone got an easy and unwarranted win.

 

Others disagree.

 

Any thoughts on the matter here?

 

M

It's his team he drafted that team he wants to take a pass on losing some players . No problem

[PackYourNut 47]

Is there a rule against starting players on a bye?

 

If the answer is no, then there is no issue. period!

[Voltaire 4,558]

It's probably fine. In my dynasty league one year, I cut a player to make room for a bye week filler D or K and he was promptly scooped up by somebody else. I knew it was a risk, since then, if I feel my roster is loaded, sometimes I have deliberately eaten a zero.

 

(It was Jared Cook and thankfully he never lived up to his early career hype/potential, but I didn't know that at the time).

[GameDay Guru 1]

If you don't want it to be an issue, then you may need more roster spots. My league has short benches and this happens at least once a year with the IDP's.

[SNZ11 5]

I don't like it because you are giving someone a potential win. We require you to have a starting lineup with all slots filled. Part of the game is being able to manage your team, making trades, or through the waiver wire or whatever, but I will say that we do have enough bench spots to accomplish that.

[Frozenbeernuts 1,652]

He should have a player in every roster spot. If that player happens to be on bye then thats his choice.

[steelers2101 7]

People really will complain about anything, won't they.

 

I'm strongly thinking of leaving a WR spot empty this week and a TE spot empty next week to avoid dropping even just Juwan Thompson, my 5th RB, in a 14 team league.

 

People can manage their teams as they wish. As long as they are doing it for their benefit and not to help out a specific opponent, it is fine.

 

And also assuming that they are throwing the game due to a couple empty spots is silly. Anything can happen. People win all the time despite a couple bad roster spots in a week.

 

Tell your league to stop whining.

[mattonium 4]

Ha, the league isn't whining, I'm the 2nd commish and I'm the one with a problem:) I still think it's cheap because it's giving someone else an easy win.

 

We have 6 bench spots, btw . . . plenty to work around byes as everyone else in the league has done.

[PackYourNut 47]

Ha, the league isn't whining, I'm the 2nd commish and I'm the one with a problem:) I still think it's cheap because it's giving someone else an easy win.

 

We have 6 bench spots, btw . . . plenty to work around byes as everyone else in the league has done.

 

If it's not in the rules, then who the hell are you to make a fuss about it? Commish, 2nd commish or just a regular slep, it doesn't matter.

 

If you don't like it, change the rules next year.

[roroco 75]

I'm leaving my DST space blank this week for the same reason. I am not dropping Josh Gordon or any of my starters or handcuffs for 1-10 points this week. But, I am in a strong second place in the league and even if I loose, it shouldn't effect my playoff hopes. While the strategy may not always work, it is the manager's choice to use it if they want.

 

If you look at the real NFL, this happens all the time. Look at week 16 and 17 when stars are sitting even if they are playing a bubble team.

 

 

What is more deplorable is when one team plays against that one team that always forgets to set their lineup.

[SaintsInDome2006 128]

I think it's ok as strategy, as opposed to an owner who is just not paying attention. I could see how a roster is so strong you would not want to drop anyone.

[SaintsInDome2006 128]

Ha, the league isn't whining, I'm the 2nd commish and I'm the one with a problem:) I still think it's cheap because it's giving someone else an easy win.

 

We have 6 bench spots, btw . . . plenty to work around byes as everyone else in the league has done.

 

It might help to know the owner's roster so we can see if what he says is true.

[Truebluey 3]

6 bench spots is actually a short bench.

7 is considered regular and I prefer 8 with an IR slot.

[BobSanders_33 127]

Yeah, something about it just bothers me. You're losing on purpose and affecting the standings.

 

In the NFL you can't just suit up 10 players on offense one week because you don't want to make a roster move.

 

Appreciate all the insight and see both sides.

 

In the NFL you don't have to drop one of your best players and they immediately go to another team the next week.