T O P
  • By - lust3

uh-oh_spaghetti-oh

Although creative, you've hit the nail on the head when you bring up the collusion issues. I don't see how a system like this could ever be honest enough to not lead to collusion scandals that destroy leagues.


lust3

I think a reasonably early deadline would solve the majority of these issues. Am I really going to rent a player out in week 9 just to spite someone I don't like?


uh-oh_spaghetti-oh

Would you allow an owner to own multiple teams in the same league. When it comes to these repo rules, that's effectively what you're doing. You're expanding your roster. Would you do this to screw someone else? Why the hell not? Especially if it ment you'd have a better chance to win. Think about the game show Survivor. Often times, the clan would carry a very weak player to the final selections, knowing that they can be easily defeated in an immunity challenge. Its common place to elimiate stronger players early. Now of course, Survivor is a game designed around collusion. But if there is an opportunity for an owner to control someone else's destiny, and it was legal, why wouldn't it occur. Given these contexts, it's impossible to regular a rule like this in good faith.


lust3

If the trade is inherently collusion, it would be banned. This is the case with every trade. Any team that pays buy-in is going to try to win until it's obvious they can't. As long as there's a deadline that occurs prior to the point of non-viability for a team, your desire to win should exceed your desire to hurt another team.


uh-oh_spaghetti-oh

Any trade where a player is traded, then traded back for the same assets except a few FAAB bucks added, is collusion. I would never play in a league like this because I would never trust it. And that's the point, who the hell would trust this rule?


xeric

What if it’s not just out of spite but to make sure you get a 1st-round bye by pushing out the team above you? It could still be strategic


TheMadKingKomo

This post is the exact example of 'collusion'


lust3

Can you explain why you think it is?


TheMadKingKomo

'Collusion: secret cooperation, especially to cheat/deceive others'. 'Example: Hey I see you have a tough matchup this week. I'll lend you Jamar Chase in exchange for Tim Patrick & $15 FAAB. Oh and we switch players back next week.' That's cheating & deception... "Ever wish you could get something for the guy you picked up on waivers but don't need this week" yeah, it's called trading or don't spend your waiver priority on him. Good luck to you on if that's how you wanna approach your fantasy league, but you can't police a 2-10 team trading Superstar X to 9-3 playoff team for his Bench player & $XX faab dollars. I think end of the season you'll just have all of your leaguemates pissed off cuz they're all gonna feel slighted in one way or another.


lust3

1. If it's not against the rules, I'm not sure why it's cheating or deception? I'm just not sure how this hurts any team. The example you give would help both teams. 2. I agree that late in the season, there could be collusion with this, but also isn't that the case with any trade? A deadline should solve that issue.


TheMadKingKomo

"If it's not against the rules, I'm not sure why it's cheating or deception? The example you give would help both teams." How does trading away a top 5 WR for a WR3 on his own team HELP both teams??? You're putting wayyyy too much value on FAAB. And just cuz it's not against the rules doesnt' mean that its not absolutely dirty to do. I'm not sure what to tell ya. Everyone seems to be on same wavelength except for you. All I can tell you is good luck to if that's the route you want to take your league. I, along with most of the others in this thread, would be opting-out of such league.


didpetercall

And who it hurts especially is the team now facing off against chase plus whatever studs the team already had. Obviously renting studs from other teams to win a matchup would be considered collusion/dirty. No way in hell I would want to play in a league like that… The only way I could see wanting to do something like this is to have a normal league with friends then have an extra “play dirty” league where everybody knows the entire point is to try and play dirty, collude, etc. and there are more rules that lend to that. I wouldn’t personally even want to do that but that would be the only way I think it works. For it to be known upfront this is a play dirty league where anything goes.


casadeparadise

In what universe are two teams optimizing their lineups using two rosters not collusion? It's bench sharing. Collusion.


[deleted]

legalized collusion.


dontwantleague2C

Too many opportunities for collusion.


burghsportsfan

Re: collusion. Collusion is overblown as a concern here IF the rule is written well. I love the idea of rentals for bench players (not starters) or for mutually beneficial one week swaps. Need a viable TE this week but have a viable RB on the bench? Let’s swap our similarly valued RB & TE for a week. It isn’t collusion IMO because it’s fair trades that are out in the open AND within league rules.


lust3

I appreciate all the feedback here. It has emphasized the need for a reasonably early deadline, clear communication, and the standard nose-for-collusion that's imperative if you don't have a veto system. Numerous leaguemates have previously expressed interest in this idea, so I'll put it to a debate and ensure they remain interested. If we do decide to give it a go, I'll post a retrospective here and let you all know if it was a fun addition, or if it led to feuding and undesirable outcomes.


Money-Firefighter-73

Why come to this sub and ask our opinions if you arent going to listen to the feedback ? everyone is saying the same thing. Maybe listen


zinzangz

I've tried this with straight up trading players and agreeing to trade back in a week but it always gets called out as collusion


Ez21me

Bc it is!


lust3

I’ve always disagreed with that. If both teams are helping themself - how is it collusion?


Ballerstorm

Collusion is a phrase that describes a situation where two or more owners in the same league work together to get an advantage over other participants. Trading and trading back is textbook collision.


awesome-ekeler

Because you are helping each other at everyone else’s expense. It is 100% collusion. This isnt a repo league, its a rental and it doesnt work because people rent players from shit teams and the loaded teams never have to lend anyone out. It might be a cool idea if its a free league, but no one is gonna do this in a money league


lust3

Isn't any trade helping each other at everyone else's expense?


GOTaSMALL1

The trade isn't collusion. The agreement to trade back in the future is what makes it collusion. That's the difference... and it's an important one.


lust3

When you say colluding, what do you mean? I think collusion means two players combining to make one better at the expense of the other. If this trade is intended to make both player’s teams better, how is it collusion?


GOTaSMALL1

> I think collusion means two players combining to make one better at the expense of the other. And this is the problem. Your definition is too narrow. "Two teams cheating to make one team better" is only ONE type of collusion. Collusion is two (or more) teams working outside the rules and/or in secret to get an advantage over the other teams. "Hey man! Let me trade you my three best guys and then we'll split the prixe money." is collusion. "Hey man! You're already in. If you throw your game this week I'll give you a blowjob." is collusion. "Hey man! I have a bye this week and need a QB. Trade me your back up and then I'll trade him back to you for your guys bye in a couple weeks." is collusion.


lust3

The first two are obvious collusion and the second one is hilarious. But the third one is less obvious to me. If this system is inside the rules and public, I'm not sure why it's collusion. Like if the league allows for a repo, I'm not sure why it's unethical or should be opposed. Edit: I'll add that your example is different from what I've proposed in a crucial way. #3 proposes giving something up without requisite compensation, in exchange for equivalent treatment in the future. I'm proposing a system where the manager who gives up a player is compensated for that by receiving FAAB.


GOTaSMALL1

> I'm not sure why it's collusion. Like if the league allows for a repo, I'm not sure why it's unethical or should be opposed. For lack of a better way to say it... it's collusion because in most league it is. It fits the definition. That's how it works. That said... you wanna get a bunch of guys together to do this AND put it in your rules... then voila! It's not collusion since it's not secret or outside the rules. That said again... there is a reason most leagues don't allow this. Roster sharing (which is essentially what you're proposing) allows two (or more) teams to generate themselves 1 or 2 or 3 extra roster spots (which is a HUGE benefit) by sharing backups.


lust3

Yeah I would require the league's buy-in before the season and impose obvious collusion restrictions on trades. The whole league would be open to making these deals, and everyone in my league knows each other well enough to be comfortable dealing with everyone.


lust3

I think as long as you impose basic common sense collusion protections (as a commish should in any league) this shouldn't be an issue.