In my opinion, tanking doesn't happen very often in an active manner. What I mean is that we rarely see instances where owners puposely lose games in ways that can be reported. More often, however, we have teams that don't expand their rosters when they can or bench some of their better players. Tanking in these instances is hard to prove and to be honest, I'm guilty of leaving decent players on the bench of a couple of my teams that are out of contention and have been so for awhile. I have been devoting the bulk of my attention to the possible playoff bound teams and have neglected to keep two of my weaker teams as competitive as they should be. Am I tanking? Absolutely not, but looking back, there are a couple of guys I could have called up when rosters expanded that I didn't because I just wasn't spending much time thinking about those teams.

My point is that instead of policing this whole issue, I believe it could be removed altogether as an issue by adopting the following plan. (I've thrown this out a couple of times but it hasn't stuck yet)

Tanking or neglect is an issue with only non-playoff-bound teams because there is a reward system in place where the worse your record is, the better your draft picks will be. If this reward is removed, the reason for tanking will disappear. What I propose is as follows:

In a 20-team league, 8 teams make the playoffs and 12 do not. The 12 teams that do not make the playoffs should be put into a lottery for rookie picks with each of the 12 having an equal chance at the better picks. By doing this, there would be absolutely no benefit to having a worse record. You either make the playoffs or you are in the lottery. End of story.