by bomp helium » Tue Sep 19, 2006 6:43 am
The offense of having an ineligible player on your roster for half a season is a big one...it would piss me off too if a player with 2000+ points left an ineligible player on his roster for half a season..."I didn't know" or "I didn't have time" is not a valid defense...it takes a matter of minutes to click on your 24 players and see what ML team they played for...
THE PENALTY: All games with the ineligible player are forfeited. Period, no exceptions. I believe this is how the NCAA (for one) handles such matters. This strategy will certainly encourage managers to spend the three minutes it takes to check the players on their roster.
The offense of dropping all your players is, although rude, not an offense. The rules state that you can drop a player up until game 142 and pick up another. That's all it says. There is nothing mentioned about trading in your whole team. Rude. Annoying. But apparently legal.
Major league teams "tank" all the time...every september to be precise, when they haul up a dozen $.50 minor leaguers and sit their $10m aging veterans...I think when the TSN rules refer to "tanking", they are referring to collusion with other managers, not the value of players dropped versus the value of players picked up...
THE PENALTY: Rosters should never be allowed to dip below 50% of the maximum value. Thus, in an $80 million league, the maximum roster value would be $80m and the MINIMUM would be $40m. I believe this would solve that problem and minimize the effects of any protests, tantrums or drunken self-destructs.
Such a solution could probably be easily added so that the software itself would not allow rosters to dip below a reasonable level...
PBTR is right. The rules need to be clearly defined, and the penalties need to be harsh and evenly enforced. The harsher the penalties, the less trouble to be had in the future.