Steven Jackson Inactive (Commish Question)

[justforbeer 39]

Issue here.

 

Team had S. Jackson in and wanted to switch him out after the game started with someone playing Monday Night.

 

Their argument was that since he was inactive, and he never played then he should be able to put in a different player.

 

Feedback?

[Frank M 181]

I'm the commish of my league and I'm taking the hit. I played him, didn't get the word until it was too late, now I gotta eat it.

 

Sucks, but that's life.

[FlaHawker 24]

Issue here.

 

Team had S. Jackson in and wanted to switch him out after the game started with someone playing Monday Night.

 

Their argument was that since he was inactive, and he never played then he should be able to put in a different player.

 

Feedback?

Ummm no.

[robertd52 0]

No way man....guy in our championship got burned by it too, he noticed 10 minutes after kick off, but tahts to bad, you gotta manage your team.

[mzf5c5 0]

Unless you have a rule stating he can do it. It should not be allowed and the league is a joke if it is.

[mikecass7 0]

in a word - NO

 

However, consider for next year having "Backups" in one of my league we name a backup at each skill position. QB, WR, RB. That way if one of your guys does not play you get the named backups points. Player must be inactive in order for it to kick in. Its a big help for guys that have kids, wives, etc that cant be sitting at the computer at kickoff. However, since you dont have that rule in place and the game started this guys has to take a ZERO.

[RLLD 3,486]

Tough call.

 

It will set a precedent if you do it once.

 

It might depend on when the change was made, or the request for the change. If it happened at say, 4:06PM....that is one thing. The two teams MUST agree. If they cannot agree to a modification to an application of the rule, it must be followed.

[Eagles Green 34]

Kidding right?

 

that's focking bush league.......I knew he was out hours before kick-off and I don't even own him. lazy owner needs to learn

[justforbeer 39]

No way man....guy in our championship got burned by it too

 

Your statement states the issue......got burned.

 

If the team was unable to access the change could be a reason.

 

But that is beside th point.

 

A player that does not play and is inactive is the issue. Inactive means not on the starting roster for the game. Please keep that in mind when responding.

[Berner 0]

Its the manager's job to set his lineup. Inactive, injured, tardy, suspended, or dead (sorry Chris Henry) ... it really doesn't matter why they're not playing.

 

OP: I think you are trying to go out of your way to help the aggrieved party here. This really isn't a close question.

[redtodd 7]

Nope

[justforbeer 39]

Thanks for the feedback....

[edjr 5,618]

People have lives, they can't be expected to sit around all sunday morning waiting for news of their player.

[Berner 0]

People have lives, they can't be expected to sit around all sunday morning waiting for news of their player.

 

Which is why, as commissioner, I have a rule that any phone call, voicemail or email received before kickoff requesting a roster change will be honored.

 

But c'mon man ... changing a lineup after the game starts? You just can't do it. The slope is too slippery once you go down that path.

[Mello 0]

People have lives, they can't be expected to sit around all sunday morning waiting for news of their player.

 

This wasn't even Sunday morning news. I wasn't in the championship, but 3rd place money and decided to check before the 4PM kickoffs just in case and learned of it. Had to quickly drop someone for Felix Jones. Would have been screwed in one of those leagues that locks down waivers. In the OPs question, if this is a H2H league, I'd leave it between the two players. If his opponent is OK with him using someone playing tonight, I see no reason why not. If he disagrees or this is a total points league and the rules lock down players after kickoff, even if inactive, then he can't play someone from tonight.

 

What this situation highlights to me is, why do most leagues lock down lineups at the team's kickoff time? I know in my local Yahoo league it does this. If the player is on bye, you can remove him but if the player is inactive, you can't after his team kicks off. To me, it seems like the best setup would be to allow players to be removed from the starting line up up to 5 mins before their team's kickoff if they are active, or anytime if they are inactive. Obviously you can only place another player in your lineup that hasn't played yet. Seems like it would be fairer and more forgiving to someone that might have just been enjoying a 1PM game and didn't hear the news until too late.

[Mello 0]

Which is why, as commissioner, I have a rule that any phone call, voicemail or email received before kickoff requesting a roster change will be honored.

 

But c'mon man ... changing a lineup after the game starts? You just can't do it. The slope is too slippery once you go down that path.

 

I don't see how it's slippery if he's inactive and being swapped with someone with a later kickoff. I'd agree with you if this was an injury or anything else that could happen when he was active, but being inactive, he might as well been on a bye week.

[Berner 0]

I don't see how it's slippery if he's inactive and being swapped with someone with a later kickoff. I'd agree with you if this was an injury or anything else that could happen when he was active, but being inactive, he might as well been on a bye week.

 

The only difference between being "injured and active" and "injured and inactive" is some sheet of paper submitted by the team to the league office some time before kickoff. That's very different than a player being on a bye week.

[Jaxie 0]

You're going to open yourself up for a world of problems if you allow this. Agreed that people have lives, but especially if you're in the championship you make a little extra effort to make sure your guys are playing. You manage your own team. End of story.

[DamageIncVacc 6]

If there is no rule then NO. My league has a rule if a guy is inactive then if you have a player at a later time you can then switch it say you had Jackson at 1 and had Jamal Charles and Jerome Harrison at 4pm then you can make the move BUT you need to do it by 4pm. once 4pm comes around your done.

[mobb_deep 919]

People have lives, they can't be expected to sit around all sunday morning waiting for news of their player.

 

Totally agree. If it was a couple minutes in and he wanted to swap for a player that hadn't played I'd have no issues with it. By the same token, if I called my commish a couple minutes into a game and asked for the same, I'd expect him to do it. If it was several hours after, or switching for another player currently playing I'd be against it. Other than that, no harm no foul.

 

Some of you guys take this WAY too seriously. Money or not, when all is said and done... this is about having fun with your friends.

[gszaszko 0]

Issue here.

 

Team had S. Jackson in and wanted to switch him out after the game started with someone playing Monday Night.

 

Their argument was that since he was inactive, and he never played then he should be able to put in a different player.

 

Feedback?

 

I'm an SJax owner in the Championship game for a decent amount of dough. I haven't trusted his status for 3 weeks. I picked up a couple of guys whose games started in the late slot this last Sunday and was watching this board and nfl.com and other sites like a hawk to avoid this exact situation and swapped him out well ahead of his game's start time.

 

Eff that... you plan or you lose. As someone else mentioned, you do it once and you start a precedent, just don't.

[Law 220]

Your statement states the issue......got burned.

 

If the team was unable to access the change could be a reason.

 

But that is beside th point.

 

A player that does not play and is inactive is the issue. Inactive means not on the starting roster for the game. Please keep that in mind when responding.

 

 

That he was inactive or not is irrelevant. That his TEAM's game had started is all that matters in FF. Once that happens, that player is frozen, either in or out of the lineup.

 

And I lost a championship with SJax too as he "promised" he'd play. I could've gone with Pierre and I didn't. My choice. My loss.

[RedzoneMonster 102]

People have lives, they can't be expected to sit around all sunday morning waiting for news of their player.

 

My answer - then don't play FF, and if you do get burned then accept it an move on. You CANNOT EVER change players after the games start. Next thing you know you will start getting owners saying "I meant to start Matt Ryan and not VY this week", etc.. Don't let it happen.

[Eagles Green 34]

People have lives, they can't be expected to sit around all sunday morning waiting for news of their player.

I agree.

 

Maybe he was setting up Geek brackets or putting together a Survivor TV show fantasy league. Or even resting form an insane water pong tourney the night before.

 

People do have lives

[justforbeer 39]

Truly in my opinion,

 

The player did not play and you should be able to replace him with another player that has not played yet. Inactive means he does not play this week.

 

If anyone thinks that the team should be stuck with an inactive player then so be it, but that is not how I would want to win if I played against that team. To me that is unfair.

 

Secondly Fantasy football is not life....and we all do this for fun/entertainment etc. Nobody should be expected to be plugged into a computer at all hours to keep dibs on the players....that is ridiculous.

 

This is a friendly league we are looking at and among friends. I will be leaving it to the 2 teams in question and if they are both in agreement, then I will allow it. I would also remember the team that allows it as admirable, and more about gamesmanship than a few bucks. Next year there will be a rule adapting the "inactive" issue.

 

Thanks

[Eagles Green 34]

Truly in my opinion,

 

The player did not play and you should be able to replace him with another player that has not played yet. Inactive means he does not play this week.

 

If anyone thinks that the team should be stuck with an inactive player then so be it, but that is not how I would want to win if I played against that team. To me that is unfair.

 

Secondly Fantasy football is not life....and we all do this for fun/entertainment etc. Nobody should be expected to be plugged into a computer at all hours to keep dibs on the players....that is ridiculous.

 

This is a friendly league we are looking at and among friends. I will be leaving it to the 2 teams in question and if they are both in agreement, then I will allow it. I would also remember the team that allows it as admirable, and more about gamesmanship than a few bucks. Next year there will be a rule adapting the "inactive" issue.

 

Thanks

Gay

[justforbeer 39]

Gay

 

You are a stand up guy....thanks for your worthless input and tasteless humor.

[Stewburtx8 67]

Truly in my opinion,

 

The player did not play and you should be able to replace him with another player that has not played yet. Inactive means he does not play this week.

 

If anyone thinks that the team should be stuck with an inactive player then so be it, but that is not how I would want to win if I played against that team. To me that is unfair.

 

Secondly Fantasy football is not life....and we all do this for fun/entertainment etc. Nobody should be expected to be plugged into a computer at all hours to keep dibs on the players....that is ridiculous.

 

This is a friendly league we are looking at and among friends. I will be leaving it to the 2 teams in question and if they are both in agreement, then I will allow it. I would also remember the team that allows it as admirable, and more about gamesmanship than a few bucks. Next year there will be a rule adapting the "inactive" issue.

 

Thanks

 

 

Agree with this decision. It's not a decision for the commish to make. The league site you chose locks players in the starting lineup once their teams game have begun. This is the rule and everyone should know it. Now if his opponent agrees to let him make the switch, then so be it. This is completely up to the person he is playing against in my opinion. It would be a stand up move.

 

But it is the responsibility of the owner to make sure his players are active. If he is busy on Sunday or unable to check the status, he should make arrangements to have someone check it for him. If he doesn't have any friends, then he should call the commish and his opponent and say "If Steven Jackson is inactive then I will replace him with Chester Taylor." This should be perfectly fine in any league and doesn't take much effort on the owners part. If he chooses to ignore the fact that Jackson is questionable and roll the dice with him, then that was his choice, but he shouldn't be given a free pass now unless his opponent agrees to it.

[idiotec 31]

Man, the fact that this question is even asked is sad. When did men turn into such pussies? Bad focking luck maybe, but focking live with it. Crying about it like a damn ######! Can’t men be men again?

[Evil Genius 0]

I am Commish of two leagues.

 

We have a Rule: Retro-Active substitution

 

It reads something like:

 

If a player is left on a starting roster and that player is declared inactive, he shall be replaced with the lowest scoring player of identical position, on the Owner's bench, should one be available.

 

 

It was originally devised more as an anti-collusion rule, to prevent guys from tanking at the end of the year. Only once has it decided a match-up (this year, in Week 13, when Carney was deactivated, the Owner had a spare kicker on his bench - NYJ K, and it meant a 17 point swing - cost the other guy a playoff spot. It was controversial, I should add).

 

But the rule ensures you get something as opposed to nothing, should an an Inactive guy get accidently left starting.

 

We also allow for contigency posts: "if so and so doesn't start I will play whomoever". Time-stamped phone messages also are allowed.

 

As a result of the controversy this year, the rule will come up for debate at our Playoff draft/Post-season meeting.

[Evil Genius 0]

Man, the fact that this question is even asked is sad. When did men turn into such pussies? Bad focking luck maybe, but focking live with it. Crying about it like a damn ######! Can’t men be men again?

 

This is ridiculous bullsh!t. There is nothing 'tough' about Fantasy Football.

 

It's a fan-boy quasi-intellectual gambling game, not a gunslinging duel.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

Truly in my opinion,

 

The player did not play and you should be able to replace him with another player that has not played yet. Inactive means he does not play this week.

 

If anyone thinks that the team should be stuck with an inactive player then so be it, but that is not how I would want to win if I played against that team. To me that is unfair.

 

Secondly Fantasy football is not life....and we all do this for fun/entertainment etc. Nobody should be expected to be plugged into a computer at all hours to keep dibs on the players....that is ridiculous.

 

This is a friendly league we are looking at and among friends. I will be leaving it to the 2 teams in question and if they are both in agreement, then I will allow it. I would also remember the team that allows it as admirable, and more about gamesmanship than a few bucks. Next year there will be a rule adapting the "inactive" issue.

 

Thanks

 

Let me guess. You are not the commish and you are the person who had Jackson.

 

Unless you play in some strange league, once the player's team has started their game (with or without the player playing), then the player's status (active or bench) is locked. No gray area there. Most leagues have it so that it actually happens 5 minutes before the game starts to prevent any confusion whatsoever.

 

This is not even a difficult question and I have no idea why you would even think that this is a reasonable request.

[idiotec 31]

This is ridiculous bullsh!t. There is nothing 'tough' about Fantasy Football.

 

It's a fan-boy quasi-intellectual gambling game, not a gunslinging duel.

I am not talking about fantasy football. I am talking about dealing with ###### in life without focking crying about it. Trust me, the same type of guy that cries about this type of ###### also makes excused and cries in all facets of life. It is a ###### ass character flaw.

[De Novo 0]

No.

[PackYourNut 47]

Tough sh!t!

 

Quit coddling these fu<ktards is my answer. Only in America do we reward the lazy and penalize the hard workers. Only in America do people who cause millions of dollars worth of damages and thousands of jobs receive million dollar buy outs. Only in America can you suck at your job and be rewarded. You stupid ass democrats kill me!

 

If you can't take responsibility for your own actions, whether for fun or in real life, you suck! And you shouldn't be granted a God damn thing!

 

Survival of the fittest! Assmunchers!

[ZeroTolerance 582]

Issue here.

 

Team had S. Jackson in and wanted to switch him out after the game started with someone playing Monday Night.

 

Their argument was that since he was inactive, and he never played then he should be able to put in a different player.

 

Feedback?

I took it royally in the arse on that decision with Stewart and Harrison both in action when Jackson pulled this stunt, but I don't think the rules should be changed for such a reason. Does it suck to have a league title decided this way? Sure, but not any more than it would suck to lose your league title game due to a key injury during a game, or any other possible scenario of that sort.

[Evil Genius 0]

I am not talking about fantasy football. I am talking about dealing with ###### in life without focking crying about it. Trust me, the same type of guy that cries about this type of ###### also makes excused and cries in all facets of life. It is a ###### ass character flaw.

 

Nonsense.

 

You are talking about Fantasy Football.

 

On a Fantasy Football site. With Fantasy Football topics.

 

You can pretend you weren't though, if it makes you feel better, tough guy.

[wild_and_crazy_guy 5]

The S. Jackson owner in our league checked player status before the game, then started someone else in his place. It CAN be done! It is the owner's responsibility (not the commish's) to manage his team, and make sure he has contingency plans.

[gszaszko 0]

The S. Jackson owner in our league checked player status before the game, then started someone else in his place. It CAN be done! It is the owner's responsibility (not the commish's) to manage his team, and make sure he has contingency plans.

 

Precisely. He gambled having SJax in his lineup and lost, it's as simple as that. There was a decent chance he was going to have a terrible game anyways what with the lingering injury, demoralization and general breakdown over being leaned on so much this season. Are we giving mulligans now when somebody starts and has a crap game or starts and when the injury flares up gets pulled out?

 

If SJax had not been listed as inactive and just hadn't played (as happened with me with Corey Dillon and NE some years ago - still stings) we'd all be "tough noogies, suck it up, it happens." Why this situation is in question when it's even MORE the team manager's fault is completely baffling to me.

[listen2me 23 1,558]

People have lives, they can't be expected to sit around all sunday morning waiting for news of their player.

 

Then don't start him if he's questionable.