I definitely say no to commissioner authority in ROTO... I also say no to commissioner authority in H2H (though not as whole heartedly as in ROTO).1)
I don't think this league (champions league) will have too much of an inactivity problem.2)
What would be the league authoritys parameters for stepping in? Would it be after 1 day of a manager not setting his lineup properly?... 2 days? ...3 days? It would certainly have to be the latter of those options, because who is to say that if a manager does not play certain players (or even all of his players) on a certain night/s that that's not the direct result of him trying to utilize a particular 'game plan' (IE attempt to win/lose certain cats or sure up the %'s and TO's). And while I realize it would be my duty as a the commissioner to recognize the possibility of the manager utilizing a particular 'game plan'... in many of those cases it would largely be a judgment call. I may play percentages/TO's differently then the manager (in question) of the team in the match up that I am trying to asses.
And even if we decided on a say... 3 days. That would be extremely difficult to enforce with a 100% success rate. Because we're all human here, it's completely feasible that both a league authority and an opposing manager would at some point in time not realize another teams inactivity for 3+ days. Thus leading us to...3)
The inevitable unfairness that this authority will bring. Example:
Billy, a regularly superb and active manager, goes inactive (unannounced) for much of a weekly H2H matchup. Now either 3 things can/will happen from there. 1*
, his opposition does the right thing and reports his absence. 2*
, his opposition does not report it, and the inactivity carries over a few days into the following week before being noticed by league authority. And finally 3*
(this being an unlikely example) the inactivity goes unnoticed and unreported for 2+ weeks before league authority is able to take care of it.
There's obviously a huge problem with all three of those scenarios but IMO mostly in the first. Because 1*
is the most likely to happen. Yes the opposing manager did the right thing by reporting the inactivity in due time, but that manager would also stand as the lone beneficiary of that absence. Thus giving him an irreversible 1 week advantage over the rest of the field. And since the prospect of this rule it to finitely manage a league, then that 1 week advantage then becomes immeasurably important to the integrity of this leagues results. In scenario 2*
,the result is similar to scenario 1's except now we have 1.5 teams with a decided advantage over the rest of the field. And finally in scenario 3*
, our prosthetic has failed completely. We are now at a point of no return. Once two+ teams have unfairly benefited from unannounced inactivity then one could even argue it would be unfair for the rest of the field not to have that same opportunity and/or 'bye week'. Scenario 3 is highly unlikely, but so are the curve balls that life throws at us all. Thus taking me into my next point.4)
While I think this idea is a valiant effort to ensure this league's ultra elite status... I do think it may be a bit too ambitious. For something like this to work it would take all 12 managers working as 1 and being highly active monitoring not only their own team, but their opposition as well. And that's not to say I dont think we couldn't possibly accomplish something like that... but I do think it would be difficult, if not impossible to execute it efficiently enough to avoid all
unfair advantages from taking place. And I do stress 'all'
because the second one unfair advantage slips by, becomes the second that the attempt to finitely manage this league has failed.
Inactivity is a part of fantasy basketball and fantasy sports in general. While it may be one of it's uglier components, it's still a component.5)
A more direct response to RB's comment,
I'm for daily changes instead of weekly changes, and it wouldn't really be a pain in the ass for me. It'll just take it from the hour or so I'll spend on my teams a day to an hour and 15 minutes
To me there's so much more to this than meets the eye. If my only available time slot in a 3 day period (lets say Fri -Sun) to check/maintain my leagues rosters is late Thursday night... Then I will literally have to set the entire leagues rosters for the next 3 days. Because we all know that many managers sometimes do not get around to setting their lineups until just prior to game times. This also creates a huge rift in the notion that all teams in this league will/have done exactly what they needed to do to be successful. Because no one can foretell the future, I might actually be doing a team more harm then good by setting pre-determined lineups. Which leads me to my next point... When is it ok to hold a fantasy managers real life happenings accountable? This may sound harsh, but it is reality. If I am going into 2008 with the knowledge that my job/school/family schedule will prohibit me from actively and consistently be able to check my fantasy teams/numbers... Then I am going into 2008 knowing full well that I am not going to be as competitive a fantasy manager as Id want to be. We all have lives outside of fantasy sports (shocker, i know). And like it or not those lives inevitably will always find a way to dictate/handicap our fun and games. I think this proposed rule is borderline trying to turn this league into a utopia of sorts. Yes we are protecting the active from the inactive, but we are also eliminating several factors of responsibility and dedication. In other words my fear is that we are lessening the actives accountability by creating a, 'meh, if i dont set my lineups tonight, Jay will'... kind of thing. We might as well just create a machine that will do all our dirty work for us and then all we gotta do is draft and make FA pickups... It just doesnt seem right to me.
Also, at this level of play I think it would be more then fair to assume we are all mature enough and responsible enough to inform our commissioners when/if we must take leaves of absences. Even if that absence is a direct result of lack of interest or lack of 'hope' for winning a league. A simple PM stating your intentions would take less then a minute to do. Whether the particular manager was to inform us that he would be gone for a week, month or the season would not matter. What is important there is that the commissioner could then safely assume full responsibility of that managers team until his return (or the rest of the season if need be).
Of course these are just my initial feelings. I have much more on my mind pertaining to this topic but I'll leave it at this for now. And as a commissioner of the league I will be more then happy to do whatever is instructed of me pending the results of these discussions (whether I like the result or not)