First of all, now that it's Sunday and a lot more traffic will likely be on the boards, if you just clicked your way into this thread via the "most recent" button,
I strongly suggest that that you go back to the beginning and read the entire thread, and maybe even the one that spawned this decision thread (
http://nffcforums.stats.com/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=11436).
This affects ALL NFFC customers, not just the ones in this [apparently unimportant] $150 Satellite league, as precedents are being set that may very well affect more expensive leagues in the future.
And the reason I continue to discuss this important issue is because even Greg has admitted that the simple thing, in hindsight, would've been to simply undo all 20 transactions. WHAT hindsight? Waivers don't run again until next Wed. night. So there's still time until then to reverse their original decision. How much evidence must be provided and how many TRUE "good customers" have to chime in before that occurs?
Max Factor wrote:The solution for me is easy. Banned for life from participating. Reverse the entire transaction and give control of starting lineup to administrator for the balance of the year.
Jeff
I agree with
the last 2/3 of this. As for the punishment, I don't think a lifetime ban is necessary. But a year off would seem to give him time to fully reflect upon his acts, as well as time to repent. Plus it shows some compassion for someone who evidently has always been a "good customer" (to date). So forgive and forget? After a year off, if he decides to never return to the NFFC, then so be it. Yes, I realize that this is Tom and Greg's livelihood. But they're not the only business to have ever thrown someone out and run the risk of losing a customer. Those are the tough decisions needed when you wish to maintain the integrity of your business and the enjoyment of the rest of your truly "good customers" - which this guy may eventually be [again], but let's not confuse him at this point with the hundreds of NFFC customers who haven't committed, nor will ever, commit such a disrespectful act against their brethren.
I also disagree with the cost of the league having anything to do with the punishment. Or the matter of "How much does it affect the remaining competition?". Yes, the teams HE faces are likely out of it. But the teams who will now pickup his dropped players are NOT. I've already detailed their potential value (
http://nffcforums.stats.com/viewtopic.p ... 41#p180537) and I'm almost certain we'll see some of them acquired. But it seems that the decision is to simply sweep it under the rug and hope that it doesn't ultimately affect the outcome of this league. If it does affect it, then I will be even unhappier (whether it affects ME or any of the remaining contenders); and then I'll be forced to decide if I return next year for my 15 NFFC leagues. But this is a risk Tom and Greg appear willing to take - weighing the value of their customers against each other.
What if this happens again and it's in a more expensive league or more directly affects remaining games? Will this
not be used as a precedent and a completely different ruling will be reached? If so, then why have the rules state ANY punishment, just say "If you do something we don't like, we will do something you won't like."? If someone in real life murders someone, should it matter how prominent that person is or how old they were (remaining life)? (Yeah, I know that with our wacky, greedy legal system, it often does, but
should it?)
As it stands right now though, a precedent is being set that if you are a "lucrative" NFFC customer, there is NO punishment for this, despite how many other truly good customers it affects (and honestly, whether it was him or his brother-in-law really shouldn't make a difference, plus anyone could come up with a story like that). Or would ANY customer (even just a single $150 Satellite one) have been let off free from this?
At the very least, the penalty written in the current rules that "sabotage = disqualification" is obvious useless. Who cares if they're DQ'ed from a league they're out of and tampering with? Either drop the rule altogether, or replace it with "We may or may not do something, based on how afraid we are of losing a lucrative customer (IOW, lesser customers are... "lesser")". Or actually come up with a punishment that fits the crime.
I suggest that the Code of Conduct rule be revised to something like:
"While we are not in the business of regularly making or overruling the roster or lineup decisions of any player who is legitimately still trying to compete, or even one who has obviously given up, when we conclude that a player has committed 'sabotage' against the league, the player will be disqualified from that league, as well as from all NFFC events the following year. Further, ALL of the sabotaging acts will reversed, and the player's team will be restored to its most recent lineup state, from which it will play out the remainder of the season without further intervention from us."
Note: Had there been any competing bids for the 20 dropped players in this case, then it would be necessary to rerun the last FAAB processing (at least for those affected players), using the exact same bids that everyone had already made (and therefore removing the issue of "already knowing the next highest bids"). But in this case, ALL transactions could easily have been reversed. And I'm still completely baffled as to why they'd ever want to open the can of worms they did by doing anything different?
Seriously, would ANY owners in this league have had a legitimate complaint had that been done?
BTW, I'm also still waiting for an explanation on how BenJarvus Green-Ellis and Heath Miller are undroppable, but Ronnie Brown (averaging more PPG this year than BJGE) is not??? If it's predraft status (i.e. Tom's always been a vocal fan of BJGE as an RB2), then how the heck is Miller undroppable, seeing he was the 24th TE drafted? If Miller is undroppable more because of his production THIS year, then why is Brown droppable when he's outproducing BJGE THIS year?
[You see what you stepped into by crossing this line instead of just undoing the entire transaction of 20 drops?
]