Garth, from a previous post you said,

"If getting a bad team to play .500 is severely punished, where's the fun?"

Trust me, I can see your concern - and I agree in part. To me though, getting that team to play .500 would of been the fun. Additionally, I'd feel cocky enough that I'll make my mid-round picks good ones.

In the real world, there are incentives to winning and drawbacks to tanking - basically revenues. Is there any way to simulate this? Add attendance to the mix? If you lose, attendance and/or your market decreases, forcing you to work under a more confining PB cap the following season? I don't know, just brainstorming... When it comes down to it, to counteract deliberate tanking, the game would have to become much more sophisticated...