Research supports the grim view that employees are spending up to two hours a week at work managing their fantasy football affairs, thereby draining an estimated $13.4 billion from corporate coffers in lost productivity. It also suggests little can be done to banish fantasy football from the office entirely. So, what’s an employer to do?

This situation was previewed earlier this year when the World Cup took place, diverting eyes from spreadsheets to scoresheets. Many then counseled patience with their workplace fanatics, because attempting to squelch the workplace soccer enthusiasm would only lead to unhappy workers and actually accomplish little of direct benefit to the business.

The same advice is being handed out by the law firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas, which has gotten a lot of coverage for its estimates of what it costs employers and what can be done to a) manage the damage or b) turn it into an advantage.

In a release, Challenger Gray says 31 million will be playing fantasy football on company time for about two hours a week. Based on about $25 an hour that the labor costs, and spread over the 15 weeks of the season, the firm estimates $13.4 billion is washed away in lost productivity.

But, in considering Challenger Gray as a resource for information, one also must take into account that the law firm has radically increased its estimate of time spent on and cost to business of fantasy football.

Just two years ago, the law firm produced a report estimating that fantasy football cost businesses $6.5 billion. This was based on 22 million spending an hour a week at work playing the game.

This year, the law firm upped its estimated to “more than $14 billion,” which apparently includes the $13.4 billion in direct costs and some others added in.

It estimated the number of players had increased, to 31 million, and doubled the number of hours it thought people were playing on company time, from one hour a week to two. That latter factor sent the cost estimate skyrocketing in its latest report.

Nevertheless, there’s clearly a cost paid to allow people to play fantasy football at work.

The law firm says legally there isn't much one can do about, nor should bosses try to rein in the playing. (However, others have noted that permitting gambling at work can create a potential liability for an employer, so you might want to have HR send out one of those memos.)

“We are not trying to demonize fantasy football. It is important to understand that there are more distractions than ever in today’s workplace. If it’s not fantasy football, it’s the latest Hollywood gossip, shopping on Amazon, or checking Facebook,” said John Challenger, chief executive officer of Challenger, Gray & Christmas. “It used to be that only those with computers at their desk were at risk of internet-related distractions. Now, access to the internet through our smartphones and tablets, means that anyone can go online from anywhere. Yet, despite the growing number of distractions, the economy has not fallen to pieces. Productivity continues to improve, along with GDP and job creation.”

But should we really care about the lost $13.4 billion? Challenger Gray advises us to consider the big (fiscal) picture.

“Now, what does that actually mean to the economy? Probably nothing. If there is a measureable dip in GDP or productivity in the third and fourth quarter, it definitely will not be due to fantasy football. The $13.4 billion figure, in fact, represents less than 1 percent of the $1.5 trillion in wages that will be paid out to workers on private-sector payrolls during that same 15-week period,” noted Challenger.

Thus banning it based upon the small, and fairly equal, price each employer must pay to the gods of fantasy football would be foolish and probably do more harm than good.

“An across-the-board ban on all fantasy football or sports websites is likely to backfire and cause a drop in morale, loyalty and, ironically, productivity. The end result could be far worse than any loss of productivity caused by an hour or two of team management each week,” Challenger said.

Instead, he suggests management embrace fantasy football. Others offer the same advice — although one must again consider the source of this counsel.

The Fantasy Sports Trade Association strongly endorses the “embracing” strategy. Its surveys show that 54 percent of players at work this it increases their camaraderie with their peers, and 16 percent claim it “helps with valuable business contact.” Forty percent called it a positive influence at work.

In the end, even if the sources of data may be a bit bullish, why fight it? Americans love football, much more than they love their jobs. So perhaps by welcoming football into the corporate locker room, even if less work gets done, people will feel kindlier toward their employer.

“Companies that not only allow workers to enjoy fantasy football, but actually encourage it by organizing a company leagues are likely to see significant benefits in morale, which, in turn leads to an overall boost in productivity as well as employee retention,” Challenger said.