Our Decision On Owner Cutting Entire NFFC Team

[Greg Ambrosius]

On Wednesday night we had something happen in the NFFC that we've never had happen before: One owner cut all 20 players from his $150 Satellite League team. That's right: ALL 20 PLAYERS.

We were alerted to this move and immediately froze out 7 players that we felt would affect the integrity of this league. Those players included:
Peyton Manning
Ahmad Bradshaw
Benjarvis Green-Ellis
Andre Johnson
Julio Jones
Victor Cruz
Heath Miller

The players this owner picked up, all for $25 and without a competing bid for any of these players, were:
Mark Sanchez
Jason Snelling
John Kuhn
Kevin Walter
Jason Avant
Jacoby Jones
Rob Housler

This owner is 1-9 and 11th out of 12th in total points. We contacted him and received an email back with an explanation. We later found out that a co-manager sent this email through his account and that person also posted on the league message board last night. The stated owner later posted an apology on the league message boards and contacted us this morning with a more detailed explanation of his partners' moves. Nothing changes the fact that all 20 players were cut out of frustration, but at least we got a better explanation as to what happened to his one team. Again, this owner has multiple teams in the NFFC and has never caused a ripple of controversy through the years. But it might be time to find a new co-manager. Either way, the owner has stated that it's his responsibility for this team and he apologizes to us and the people in his league.

Now for our decision, which has received a lot of criticism. As many of you know, we do our very best to allow all of you to run your teams as you see fit. We don't have a No Cut List. We handle each situation individually and when needed we will pull out players from the free agent pool to keep the integrity of the league intact. We felt we were doing that yesterday when we immediately pulled out all 7 top free agents. In looking at the rest of his roster, we saw players who were dropped by this one owner who were allowed to be cut in many other 12-team leagues. In fact, look at the NFFC Drops lists we posted yesterday for all of our other NFFC leagues and you will see that we allowed all 13 of these same players to be cut in other leagues. Here are his cuts and the ranking ppg at each position:

Brandon Jacobs (3.3 total points this year)
Washington D (20th)
Alex Henery (27th)
Sebastian Janikowski (13th)
Pittsburg D (26th)
Jay Cutler (26th)
Michael Floyd (34th)
Robert Meacham (91st)
Kevin Olgetree (56th)
Jacob Tamme (28th)
Bernard Scott (114th)
Ronnie Brown (34th)
Mike Tolbert (61st)

Honestly, this owner should have been more pro-active earlier and cut these players long ago. He spent $25 per pickup on 20 different players and he now has $10 left in FAAB. Again, all of these players (with the possible exception of Janikowski) were cut this week or previous weeks not only in 12-team satellite leagues but in our national Online Championship contest. So the question is: Should we reverse all of these moves just because he cut these 13 cuttable players along with 7 No Cut players? Would that help this league, even though not a single owner in this league bid for ANY of these 20 free agents?

The easy decision would be to make an example of this owner who blew off this season and may have caused damage to this league. We could easily do that by reversing all 20 moves, even though we've allowed these same 13 players to be cut in other NFFC leagues. By doing that we'd be returning these 7 players into the free agent pool:

Mark Sanchez
Jason Snelling
John Kuhn
Kevin Walter
Jason Avant
Jacoby Jones
Rob Housler

We believe this owner only hurt his team and isn't hurting the league by having those 7 players on his roster. The 13 free agents that we are allowing to remain in this league's FAAB pool are free agents that are available in many other 12-team NFFC leagues. And the 7 players he picked up this week were affordable for anyone to have picked them up. This league has 7 less free agents available because of this owner's moves, but that's what happens when owners cut players we feel shouldn't be available in the free agent pool. So this owner's actions will stand and this league will move forward despite his actions.

We ruled this way before posting the standings yesterday, but fortunately his next three h2h matchups aren't against teams battling for the h2h crown. Not that this matters in our decision, but here are the standings in this league:

Team Win Loss Tie Pct Streak Points For Points Against
CAPTAIN NECKFAT 8 2 0 .800 W 5 1558.8 1057.9
Debutantes 8 2 0 .800 W 1 1491.9 925
Team rogers 8 2 0 .800 W 3 1367.05 1059.25
Sandman 7 3 0 .700 L 1 1475.05 1058.3
TEn Spot 7 3 0 .700 W 2 1230.9 936.9
Dallas Big Dawgs 6 4 0 .600 W 2 1369.9 1081.25
Team Footballsacks 4 6 0 .400 L 2 1362 1096
Bad Boys 4 6 0 .400 L 1 1353.8 1131.45
SteimetzET1 3 7 0 .300 L 2 1333.7 1111.95
HOT SEAT 3 7 0 .300 W 1 1272.25 1063.2
MrBurgundysMasiveErection 1 9 0 .100 L 8 1154.4 1117.6
Aaron from Stanima 1 9 0 .100 L 5 1148.1 1129.35

Sorted by Points
Team Win Loss Tie Pct Streak Points For Points Against
CAPTAIN NECKFAT 8 2 0 .800 W 5 1558.8 1057.9
Debutantes 8 2 0 .800 W 1 1491.9 925
Sandman 7 3 0 .700 L 1 1475.05 1058.3
Dallas Big Dawgs 6 4 0 .600 W 2 1369.9 1081.25
Team rogers 8 2 0 .800 W 3 1367.05 1059.25
Team Footballsacks 4 6 0 .400 L 2 1362 1096
Bad Boys 4 6 0 .400 L 1 1353.8 1131.45
SteimetzET1 3 7 0 .300 L 2 1333.7 1111.95
HOT SEAT 3 7 0 .300 W 1 1272.25 1063.2
TEn Spot 7 3 0 .700 W 2 1230.9 936.9
MrBurgundysMasiveErection 1 9 0 .100 L 8 1154.4 1117.6
Aaron from Stanima 1 9 0 .100 L 5 1148.1 1129.35

Tom and I always try to get all of the facts in before making a final decision. Our first decision yesterday was to remove the top 7 free agents, per our rules. While this does look like "sabotage" and something we can act on per our rules, the bottom line is that the 13 players we allowed to be cut and remain in the FAAB pool are 13 players that were allowed to be cut in many other NFFC leagues. We can't say for certainty that his pickups are any worse than his cuts.

Yes, there are now 13 different free agents there than if we had reversed all of the moves. But those same 13 players are available in other 12-team NFFC leagues -- including national contests -- and we did not make exceptions to keep any of them out of their FAAB pools.

Going forward, do we need No Cut Lists? Do we need to change our rules to prevent multiple players from being cut at once? Has our system failed? Have Tom and I failed you by looking this over completely and still not putting the hammer down on these cuts and owners? Do we need to change all of this because of one owner cutting 20 players at once? I don't have the answers, but I know we are ruling consistently on these available free agents and taking out players to maintain the integrity and competitive nature of this league. This co-owner has only hurt himself.

Feel free to respond to our decision and we welcome all feedback. It isn't a win-win situation for anyone. Hopefully this better explains how we ruled and why we ruled the way we did. Right or wrong, we welcome your feedback.

[wiljiro]

Well done. You were in an impossible position and did what you guys thought was best -

One thought -

From everything I have read the "Co-Manager" was aware of his place in the standings. Made these moves because he KNEW he had no chance of winning, and the league winners would NOT be affected by his transgressions. (He did not take into account the FA ramifications of the move) - but those implications would be minor anyway -

What worries me going forward is an owner who is just as brazen and who's intentions are more sinister. I don't know what would have happened had his last three match ups were against contending teams. I don't even know if you can put a rule in place to safe guard that. I think the only thing you can do is what occurred here. Take it on a case by case basis, and make the best judgement call you can make under the circumstances.

This is another reason why I'm happy to be on THIS side of the FF fence. A participant. A customer. And not a "Founder" -

Good work guys.

Wiljiro

[Old School]

Greg

My two-cents would be that if the 20 player drop was fraudulent, the entire 20 players should be reinstated to his roster, not just some. It's difficult to determine or say that he is the only one hurt by this action. What if some of the other players dropped are picked up by other teams with a specific need and are helped? The whole event was bogus and
I would make it whole as it was before the event

This is a tough one and I wouldnt know how to legislate this type of thing . I've already seen funny stuff in leagues , but it happens every year to some extent

[Coach JP]

There's no correct way to handle this situation -- If they put all the players back in the roster and fix his roster, then why should they not go ahead and do this for everyone who left a bye week player in their starting lineup? Quitting subtlely (not logging in and changing your lineup) is no different than this, just one is more apparent. If they fix their lineup and their team, I as a paying customer, now have the right to bitch and ask them to fix every bye week mishap vs. my league opponents.

Let the guys who run the ship, run the ship. If you don't agree and it makes your blood boil, take your business elsewhere and use that as your way to tell Tom/Greg how you feel.

What happened happened, no money will be affected and the situation is over. Kudos to Greg/Tom for taking the time to actually assess the situation and come up with an answer, rather than just ignoring the public's feedback.

I'm confident if this happens in the future and it is impactful to actual money swapping hands, they will make the right decision.

[Sandman62]

Feel free to respond to our decision and we welcome all feedback.

It's NOT the same as quitting subtly, as you don't also downgrade your entire team on the way out the door or raid and flood the waiver wire when you subtly quit. If you simply stop setting a lineup, yeah, that's quitting and sucks for the league. But if you also then dump your whole team and raid the waiver pool for replacements, then THOSE acts constitute "sabotage", and according to NFFC rules require disqualification. Do you see the difference? The obvious question after that would be "What to do with a disqualified team?". I would've thought that, rather than subjectively tinker with certain players, they'd simply undo the entire sabotaging act.

And how the heck do you know that "no money will be affected "? Two years ago in my Classic, I had a 10-3 record and was 4th in points. I missed the playoffs by 7.8 points! Can't you see how being able to pick up some of these players could allow that to happen? And again, I understand that if this guy were continuing to manage his team, he easily could've dropped some of them. But he ISN'T! Instead, he purposely created league sabotage and should be disqualified - and his actions undone and his team frozen (leaving his lineup in its last valid state, just like a team who had quit).

As for the specific players and their perceived value, I only have $36 left in this league, and my team is strong enough that I didn't mind that - until now, when there will now be a fire sale on players who normally wouldn't be expected to be available this late in the season.

Sebastian Janikowski (13th) - There are 6 other kickers averaging less than him who are all still rostered in this league, making him a viable upgrade for some. After a slow start his first 4 games, he's averaged 11.36 his last 5 games, which would put him 4th among kickers this year. With all good-weather games during the fantasy playoffs, he could definitely be an upgrade for some teams.

Jay Cutler (26th) - The 1st place team's QBs are the underperforming Flacco and the injured Roethlisberger and Alex Smith. Now he has access to an upgrade after this week that he probably wouldn't have had. One of the other teams that are tied for best H2H record has Fitzpatrick and Vick; maybe he upgrades now. The team that's tied for the 2nd best H2H record has Newton and Weeden; maybe he upgrades too.

Michael Floyd (34th) - Five catches each of the last two games, his targets have been increasing and his coach talking up more reps for him. (BTW, I think Malcolm Floyd is 34th and Michael much lower.)

Ronnie Brown (34th) - There are 38 other RBs averaging less than him who are all still rostered in this league, making him a viable upgrade. Double digit points (eclipsing 17 one week even) 3 of last 5 games. Mathews missed practice Wed. and Thurs.

I remain extremely disappointed in the decision that was made here and strongly suspect that many others, were they in this league, would feel the same. And I assume the specific clauses regarding "sabotage" and "disqualification" will be removed from the Rules? Because if THIS isn't sabotage, I don't know what the heck ever would be.

[kjduke]

No cut lists don't work well because player values can change too quickly - commisioner judgement works better. In this case because the drops were based entirely on something other than player evaluation, I think reversing the whole thing would have been more appropriate, regardless of which players are available elsewhere. That gives the owner a chance next week to make legitimate decisions which will play out more fairly for the league. Probably doesn't matter much for this league, but next time it might.

I'm more concerned about disruptive players, past and present, that are allowed to come back and given the opportunity to do more damage. Also, BWaz should not in any way be lumped in with the guy from last season who made relentless offensive posts in the Diamond League against your best customers and the NFFC. Billy (among others) got sucked into a no-win argument with him and nothing else, and I doubt anyone here has a shred of contempt for him which is as opposite as can be from youknowwho.

[Old School]

There's no correct way to handle this situation -- If they put all the players back in the roster and fix his roster, then why should they not go ahead and do this for everyone who left a bye week player in their starting lineup? Quitting subtlely (not logging in and changing your lineup) is no different than this, just one is more apparent. If they fix their lineup and their team, I as a paying customer, now have the right to bitch and ask them to fix every bye week mishap vs. my league opponents.

There is a difference here Coach. this was admitted and intentional fraud. Bye week issues are different. It is not managing everyone's teams. It's undoing the fraud

Let the guys who run the ship, run the ship. If you don't agree and it makes your blood boil, take your business elsewhere and use that as your way to tell Tom/Greg how you feel.

What happened happened, no money will be affected and the situation is over. Kudos to Greg/Tom for taking the time to actually assess the situation and come up with an answer, rather than just ignoring the public's feedback.

I'm confident if this happens in the future and it is impactful to actual money swapping hands, they will make the right decision.

[mattjb]

Couple of points...

I know it doesn't apply to this league but the NFFC need to do a better job of letting people know about the consolation play-offs in the national contest. I don't think people are particularly aware that they exist from my personal experience.

I know you gave pretty good reasons against it last time the subject was raised but I will say again all-play at the end is a much better way of negating teams that quit and give an unfair edge to teams that play them late in the year.

[Coltsfan]

I think you got this one wrong guys. There is no question the team owner was not acting as a fantasy football contestant. He was intentionally trying to disrupt a league. That should never be allowed and I think you are setting a very dangerous precedent here. I really thought you were going to reverse your initial thoughts from last night. This really surprises me.

If or when this happens again and you follow this precedent, I could see it getting very ugly. It could even change the winner of this league. I would hope that the rules are really looked at this off season and clarified. I'm guessing you aren't looking at this as sabotage so that probably needs clarified.


Wayne

[JETS SB]

Couple of points...

I know it doesn't apply to this league but the NFFC need to do a better job of letting people know about the consolation play-offs in the national contest. I don't think people are particularly aware that they exist from my personal experience.

I know you gave pretty good reasons against it last time the subject was raised but I will say again all-play at the end is a much better way of negating teams that quit and give an unfair edge to teams that play them late in the year.

I agree with this. "All Play" makes much more sense at the end of the season, with many owners disregarding their teams at the end of the season, giving teams an advantage of having a weak schedule at the end of the season. Although in NFFC leagues, its all about points, a team going for top H2H, winning one of their last games 87-34, is definitely frustrating. Obviously, this was a once in a lifetime incident (hopefully) and this specfic situation doesnt effect the standings, but at a smaller level, the teams that leave hurt players in their lineup and haven't managed their team for weeks, it does more sense to have all play at the end of the season, rather than the beginning.