Duchess Jack Posted November 8, 2007 Author Share Posted November 8, 2007 +1 If he continues to be a d-bag, have your IT guys hack into his account, and fill his roster with Dolphins. but what if they'r owned by other tea..... oh yeah... they're the dolphins Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawks21 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 The blanket statement that the only reason trades should be vetoed if there is collusion involved is the most idiotic statement quoted time and time again on these boards. With experienced owners, I agree. As a blanket statement, I could not disagree more. Free leagues, who cares. I am not, however, going to pay a guy 1000 dollars simply because he talked his girlfriend into trading him LT for Deion Branch again, as I have done before. In leagues with horrible owners, there must be a safety net of some kind to keep them from ruining the league for everyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coloradocoz1 Posted November 9, 2007 Share Posted November 9, 2007 It's a tricky situation that you really have to look at each trade at a time. The trade for AP for a kicker is certainly wrong and I am very much against collusion. But there are times that lopsided trades on paper do make sense in the big picture. The reason I say this is I have been getting a lot of heat this week for a trade that I made. I traded Dunn@Mason(both would be 4th options on my roster and don't see ever starting them) for PIT DEF which fills a hole in my team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.