Fantasy 2024 - Empire League - Discussion
- Thread starter Exe Gesis
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Dagless
Hall of Famer
I mean, can we just review the idea of a commish adding players to stop ‘tanking’ - it’s a bit ridiculous that GG is doing/undoing these adds at the tail end of the year for playoff teams….
fuey
Statistically Impossible
Well, you don't have to do it for me. I'm literally checking my teams at 11pm or later on a Thursday night. That hasn't changed, that will never change. I already knew what was going to happen, I knew that was what I was going to do when I picked up Taylor in the draft.
Sure, if I had a previous instance of not setting a lineup, by all means, but I don't think I've ever given the impression I wouldn't set a proper lineup, in any league...
Unnecessary meddling, pretty much on brand for you though...
Exe Gesis
Kylo was here
- Thread starter
- #555
Youre new so you dont understand why its happening. Its not me meddling or par for my course to meddle.Well, you don't have to do it for me. I'm literally checking my teams at 11pm or later on a Thursday night. That hasn't changed, that will never change. I already knew what was going to happen, I knew that was what I was going to do when I picked up Taylor in the draft.
Sure, if I had a previous instance of not setting a lineup, by all means, but I don't think I've ever given the impression I wouldn't set a proper lineup, in any league...
Unnecessary meddling, pretty much on brand for you though...
For a number of years people were going awol or not committed, causing tanking arguments or just unfair advantage to other teams getting easy wins.
So it was agreed....1) no bye starters, 2) no carrying forward lineups which still haf inactives, IRs and byes on them, and thus 3) commish to ensure thurs night all teams had an initial lineup set that covered for any people awol or not committed.
Dagless
Hall of Famer
just trying to save you time and effort brother. It doesn’t make sense to me why we do it tbh.
Any normal league trusts the players to actually play the game, and I don't think the money we are talking about here demands constant meddling.
Keep owners accountable (As far as I can tell we are all very active this year?) and worst case scenario its an actual problem, and then for the purposes of draft order IF someone is lazy, and the math works out that actually trying would change the score, you attribute them a W to weaken their draft position to combat 'tanking'. Which again, I don't think we've ever seen here. Appreciating this is 'extra work', you are doing more work throughout the year. At least its one and done in that scenario.
Next year remove All Play as a paying condition and replace it with top overall scorer or something so no money is attributed to easy wins, replace with top scorer if absolutely required.
Commish should just not be involved in any lineup decisions, especially if they are a team in the league, and ESPECIALLY if both parties are still in the playoff hunt.
Exe Gesis
Kylo was here
- Thread starter
- #558
Just dont appreciate the attack at me that im meddling or like to meddle. This 2024 method was what majority agreed to do for the sake of eliminating tanking or at least tanking allegations/arguments, and the easy wins that affect competition fairness.
Remember the ferocity of the arguments and people threatening to leave or actually did leave?
I would still like to at least come up with an alternative idea.....like.....say, no commish lineups but post-game, any empty lineup is given a losing score vs h2h opponent but given a median score...to go along with your idea of total pts determining draft order.
Thats just a quick idea. But something along those lines?
Dagless
Hall of Famer
Zero shade intended, was just generically using the term - apologies for insinuating you’ve specifically done something wrong. Agree, we made the choice, I just think it’s unnecessary
TheGreatBarryB
Hall of Famer
I’m on gg’s side, he’s just trying to keep it competitive and we should appreciate the effort.
Dagless
Hall of Famer
I don’t think it’s sides perse - I just don’t think GG should be managing other rosters, particularly playoff teams. That’s got nothing to do with the players picked or anything, just in general.
Happy to be corrected, but seems like most weeks teams are submitted GG?
TheGreatBarryB
Hall of Famer
Ah fair enough. If it’s playoff contenders then yeah should be just bad luck.
Exe Gesis
Kylo was here
- Thread starter
- #564
Every Thursday night half the league has a lineup set, and half the league doesn't. I will have to go back and check for sure, how many of those people who didnt have a lineup Thursday night ended up submitting their own one afterwards.
You can see by going SCORES >> STARTING LINEUPS in the menu and seeing who submitted last lineup change....commish or player.
There are a few people very less active. No waivers, IRs on active etc.
Its cool, work/life...just answering the question asked.
But have to think of ideas.
Easy wins is also a problem....like say someone in a division is awol, the three other teams in that division benefit with six wins against them, while the other division in that conf only gets to play them once, so playoff spots for that conference affected in a money league. We had this exact same argument last year and the year before....its not just draft position/tanking but that competitive disadvantage too
I Like the idea of me not interfering by adding players and lineups.....just have to come up with a serviceable alternative "punishment" post-game for empty lineups and such.
You can see by going SCORES >> STARTING LINEUPS in the menu and seeing who submitted last lineup change....commish or player.
There are a few people very less active. No waivers, IRs on active etc.
Its cool, work/life...just answering the question asked.
But have to think of ideas.
Easy wins is also a problem....like say someone in a division is awol, the three other teams in that division benefit with six wins against them, while the other division in that conf only gets to play them once, so playoff spots for that conference affected in a money league. We had this exact same argument last year and the year before....its not just draft position/tanking but that competitive disadvantage too
I Like the idea of me not interfering by adding players and lineups.....just have to come up with a serviceable alternative "punishment" post-game for empty lineups and such.
00Stinger
100 - 7
And to think I was going to let Lamar go for two 1sts
Sent from my SM-S928B using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-S928B using Tapatalk
TheGreatBarryB
Hall of Famer
GG with an active roster of just 20 players and cap space of just $1.3m. $56m in salary adjustments!!! Oh Momma!
A11dAtP0w3R
Dumpster Fire Diver
- Oct 18, 2013
- 96,347
- 142,019
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Carolina Panthers
Same as every year only It's working this year, top of the division.
Exe Gesis
Kylo was here
- Thread starter
- #568
EMPIRE PROPOSAL 2025
There are two components to vote for.
Bullet Points 1-9 are Part One
Bullet Point 10 is Part Two
Vote a Y/N for part one and Y/N for part two
====Part One====
1) Still can't start bye players and no lineups carried forward
2) No commish lineup submission but owners can always ask commish to submit for them if work/life impedes
3) A team with an empty lineup will receive the loss, and will be given a manual score 10 points less than their h2h opponent (see analysis)
4) Draft order for non-playoff teams ordered by worst Points For (see analysis)
5) Draft order for playoff teams ordered by elimination point then worse WL then worst Points For (see analysis)
6) Weekly waivers ordered by worst Points For
7) Division standings still seeded by WL - Div Rec then Conf Rec then most Points For
8) Playoff spots still seeded by WL - Conf Rec (common games) then most Points For
9) No more All-Play prize. Just League Champion and Runner-Up
====Part Two====
10) Increase RWT position starters to 6 and decrease IDP starters to 7...therefore a starting balance ... Offense-7 (1 QB, 6 RWT), Special Teams-2 (1 K, 1 P), Defense-7 (2 LB, 1 DT, 1 DE, 1 CB, 1 S, 1 non-LB-Flex)....Or...keep as is.
====Analysis====
As draft order is no longer determined by WL but by Points For, then there's no incentive in losing, and consider that the h2h opponent that week could score 200, so the empty team getting 190 can be much higher than many other teams who submitted their lineups and only scored 100 pts that week...genuinely worse teams deserving a higher draft order, especially if the empty team is actually a better roster that usually scores more than them. No incentive for an owner to tank or even consider tanking, no accusations of tanking either, because tanking actually worsens your draft position.
Only downside, this can't prevent a division from benefiting from an inactive owner never submitting their lineup....as their opponents will always get a win. But at least there'll be no draft order benefit for them.
-- Example of a draft order --
1. Team A, 5-9, 1,150.45
2. Team B, 2-12 1,165.79
3. Team C, 4-10, 1,331.63
4. Team D, 5-9, 1,469.12
5. Team E, 1-13, 1,520.35
6. Team F, 3-11, 1,567.49
7. Team G, 5-9, 1,756,65
8. Team H, 4-10, 1,899.14
9. Team I, 6-8, 2,003.73
10. Team J, 6-8, 2010.91
---playoff teams---
11. Team K, 7-7, 1,764.62 (elim week 15)
12. Team L, 9-5, 2,567.80 (elim week 15)
13. Team M, 10-4, 2,359.50 (elim week 16)
14. Team N, 10-4, 2,404.76 (elim week 16)
15. Team O, 7-7, 1,999.99 (runner-up)
16. Team P, 13-1, 2,876.26 (champion)
There are two components to vote for.
Bullet Points 1-9 are Part One
Bullet Point 10 is Part Two
Vote a Y/N for part one and Y/N for part two
====Part One====
1) Still can't start bye players and no lineups carried forward
2) No commish lineup submission but owners can always ask commish to submit for them if work/life impedes
3) A team with an empty lineup will receive the loss, and will be given a manual score 10 points less than their h2h opponent (see analysis)
4) Draft order for non-playoff teams ordered by worst Points For (see analysis)
5) Draft order for playoff teams ordered by elimination point then worse WL then worst Points For (see analysis)
6) Weekly waivers ordered by worst Points For
7) Division standings still seeded by WL - Div Rec then Conf Rec then most Points For
8) Playoff spots still seeded by WL - Conf Rec (common games) then most Points For
9) No more All-Play prize. Just League Champion and Runner-Up
====Part Two====
10) Increase RWT position starters to 6 and decrease IDP starters to 7...therefore a starting balance ... Offense-7 (1 QB, 6 RWT), Special Teams-2 (1 K, 1 P), Defense-7 (2 LB, 1 DT, 1 DE, 1 CB, 1 S, 1 non-LB-Flex)....Or...keep as is.
====Analysis====
As draft order is no longer determined by WL but by Points For, then there's no incentive in losing, and consider that the h2h opponent that week could score 200, so the empty team getting 190 can be much higher than many other teams who submitted their lineups and only scored 100 pts that week...genuinely worse teams deserving a higher draft order, especially if the empty team is actually a better roster that usually scores more than them. No incentive for an owner to tank or even consider tanking, no accusations of tanking either, because tanking actually worsens your draft position.
Only downside, this can't prevent a division from benefiting from an inactive owner never submitting their lineup....as their opponents will always get a win. But at least there'll be no draft order benefit for them.
-- Example of a draft order --
1. Team A, 5-9, 1,150.45
2. Team B, 2-12 1,165.79
3. Team C, 4-10, 1,331.63
4. Team D, 5-9, 1,469.12
5. Team E, 1-13, 1,520.35
6. Team F, 3-11, 1,567.49
7. Team G, 5-9, 1,756,65
8. Team H, 4-10, 1,899.14
9. Team I, 6-8, 2,003.73
10. Team J, 6-8, 2010.91
---playoff teams---
11. Team K, 7-7, 1,764.62 (elim week 15)
12. Team L, 9-5, 2,567.80 (elim week 15)
13. Team M, 10-4, 2,359.50 (elim week 16)
14. Team N, 10-4, 2,404.76 (elim week 16)
15. Team O, 7-7, 1,999.99 (runner-up)
16. Team P, 13-1, 2,876.26 (champion)
A11dAtP0w3R
Dumpster Fire Diver
- Oct 18, 2013
- 96,347
- 142,019
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Carolina Panthers
Fine with me on Part 1 if people dont want you setting lineups for those that havent by Thursday night (dont get why this is a problem by whatever)
Pass on Part 2. Keep as is for structure of lineups.
shiny_on_top
Club Legend
I’m a no and yes.
I vote for carry over teams from previous week. If on bye, sub in a new player (doesn’t need to be the Thursday night as currently, can wait till Sunday). I’d also prefer potential max PF for draft order rather than total PF or W-L. Removes tanking by lineup choices from equation.
I’d rather offence weighted more too hence yes for second.
I vote for carry over teams from previous week. If on bye, sub in a new player (doesn’t need to be the Thursday night as currently, can wait till Sunday). I’d also prefer potential max PF for draft order rather than total PF or W-L. Removes tanking by lineup choices from equation.
I’d rather offence weighted more too hence yes for second.
Exe Gesis
Kylo was here
- Thread starter
- #575
This was how we used to do it, but it caused problems as inactive or negligent to submit lineup owners often have multiple bye or IR/Out players starting and its harder to catch, and you still have the advantage of easy wins for teams. It's why we went for a new method altogether. Caused too much problems and arguments, and fostered laziness from some owners out of the playoff race to just not login and submit lineup anymore.
And if you carry fwd lineups with starters now on bye, the setting that bye players are not allowed wont work anymore as the lineup is carried fwd. The setting works best with an empty lineup as trying to submit a bye player wont work then.
Also, a completely empty lineup is easy to spot and the idea of 10 or 20 less than h2h opponent works well with total PF.
I know we can be lazy, but learning to submit a lineup every thurs night for 5 mins of your day isnt difficult. Knowing you will have an empty lineup kinda goads people to be active for that lineup submission at least.
