wpayers Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 A three way trade, which I am a part of, was completed last night and now several owners are calling for the trade to be disallowed due to collusion. Our league rules state that the commissioner can veto a deal or put it to a league vote – the commish has punted and set up a voting poll. We are a standard scoring 12 team league and already the vote is 6 in favor of veto and 2 against (myself and one of the trading partners, the third hasn’t voted yet). I suspect it will go 9 to 3 to veto. Apparently, the opposing owners feel that one of the trading teams (see Team C below) was being overly accommodating and doing the others a “flavor” by making the trade. Knowing the facts I feel this is ludicrous but I am eager to hear the collective wisdom of the Forum on this matter. Sorry if this appears complicated. Here are the facts presented chronologically: Teams prior to trade: Team A (4-0) - RBs (AP, PT, LT, TJones, Hillis, MBush)/ WRs (AJ, Maclin, SMoss, Wallace). Team B – (2-2) RBs (Gore, Greene, McFadden, McCoy, Blount)/ WRs (Marshall, Collie, Austin, Williams (TB), Lloyd) Team C – (0-4) RBs (Rice, Best, Hightower, Forte, LawFirm)/ WRs (RMoss, White, Smith (CAR), Ward, Royal) Team A which was well stocked at RB sought to update his WRs by offering LT and MBush to Team B for Austin. Team B was mostly interested in MBush as handcuff to McFadden but declined and countered back to Team A with Collie for LT and MBush. Team A turned down the counteroffer. Team B contacted Team C and proposed to “pass along” LT combined with Greene for White. Team C agreed. Team A agreed to take White instead of Austin. Actual trade sequence as it appears on the league transaction report: Team A trades LT and MBush to Team C for White Team C trades MBush to Team B for Greene Teams after trade: Team A (4-0) - RBs (AP, PT, TJones, Hillis)/ WRs (AJ, White, Maclin, SMoss, Wallace). Team B – (2-2) RBs (Gore, McFadden, MBush, McCoy, Blount)/ WRs (Marshall, Collie, Austin, Williams (TB), Lloyd) Team C – (0-4) RBs (Rice, LT, Greene, Best, Hightower, Forte, LawFirm)/ WRs (RMoss, Smith (CAR), Ward, Royal). Was this collusion? Or if the league votes to veto does it matter? For what it’s worth I am Team A. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kcmast Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 I see no problems with that trade. Multitple team (3+) really has nothing to do with it based on your post. Owners don't think LT/Green = White. I wouldn't make that trade, but I think it is legit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theeohiostate Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 seems like you were all colluding to make your teams better I guess that's colluding, your league mates are jealous. Seems like all the teams improved themselves, gave up some depth for some needs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Country Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Definitely not collusion. Break it down like this Team A got White and gave LT and Bush Team B got Bush and gave Greene Team C got LT and Greene and gave White Definitely not collusion. Team B's part is nothing more than a handcuff swap. Team C got a RB tandem that they can use and gave up WR, where they are deep. Team A gets WR help and gives up decent RB pieces they can afford. Seems like a typical win-win trade for all involved, even though admittedly I thnk you did get White at a good price, but if LT continues flourishing, and given Team C's strength at WR, it;s not that bad a deal for anyone involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MustOfBeenDrunk Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 (edited) Definitely not collusion. Break it down like this Team A got White and gave LT and Bush Team B got Bush and gave Greene Team C got LT and Greene and gave White Definitely not collusion. Team B's part is nothing more than a handcuff swap. Team C got a RB tandem that they can use and gave up WR, where they are deep. Team A gets WR help and gives up decent RB pieces they can afford. Seems like a typical win-win trade for all involved, even though admittedly I thnk you did get White at a good price, but if LT continues flourishing, and given Team C's strength at WR, it;s not that bad a deal for anyone involved. This ,,, couldn't of said it any better Edited October 6, 2010 by MustOfBeenDrunk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Jeez. Tell the girls in your league to grow up. And buy the commish some man pants. What a bunch of crap. How do people play in leagues like this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimm74 Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Wow....this trade is fine. Im so glad I do not play in a leg where guys get their panties in a wad so easily. Let us know how the vote goes down. If it is voted down id leave the league tonight. No threats before hand. Id just wait and see how they vote. That way u know who u r dealing with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatteras Jack Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 I certainly cant see how anyone could consider that collusion, but I do have a question. After reading all the names on those 3 teams what I want to know is just how bad are the remaining 9 teams. Instead of bitchin and moanin after the fact, it appears the other members need to spend a little more time preparing for their drafts. Sounds like sours grapes from a bunch of losers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
untateve Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 I didn't read the responses nor did I look at the various trades. You were part of the trade. Did you engage in collusion to the detriment of your league? If not, you will have reasons for making the trade--you should be able to state how this trade improves your team. So should all the league participants. Others may not agree with your reasoning but they don't have to. There are very few scenarios that would cause me to walk away from a league mid-season. Being accused of cheating by the majority of league owners is one--I don't care how much money is involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jrick35 Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Collusion = the most mis-understood, mis-interpeted and just plain mis-used word in all of Fantasy Football. If the number of owners accused of collusion each year was reduced to 1/1000th of the current number of accusationa leveled each year in Fantasy Football, the number of accusations would still be 1000 times higher than the number of owners actually guilty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muck Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 There are very few scenarios that would cause me to walk away from a league mid-season. Being accused of cheating by the majority of league owners is one--I don't care how much money is involved. +1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajh2 Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 The only reason they are whinning is you are 4-0 and fixing your only potenial weak spot at WR. LT and MBush (who is starting in Oak it appears) for White is more than fair. LT is a #1RB right now and Bush is starting this week with a very good match-up. In a 12 team league, a good #1RB is going to be hard to trade for. LT for White would almost be an equal trade and by adding MBush makes this trade in favor of Team C. As for the exchange of Greene for MBush, this is an even trade. Reserve RB for a Reserve RB. These guys don't deserve the your skills and competion aka they are the losers here. The commiss here has his panties in a bind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustDoIt Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 Question along these lines... If you knew that one owner had the number one waiver slot, and you really liked someone on the waivers, would you consider it collusion to ask the number one waiver spot to pick him up and if you do, you would trade him a need of his? Collusion? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stethant Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 I don't see any good reason to veto that trade. Three-way collusion is really difficult to pull off, unless there's extenuating circumstances (like husband, wife and other family member or something). I wouldn't veto the trade and would be mighty angry at anyone who did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zooty Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 sounds like sour grapes but hardly collusion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimm74 Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 Question along these lines... If you knew that one owner had the number one waiver slot, and you really liked someone on the waivers, would you consider it collusion to ask the number one waiver spot to pick him up and if you do, you would trade him a need of his? Collusion? I make this offer(s) yearly. Collusion is cheating plain and simple...example... You offer to split the winnings with this owner since he is obviously done for the year picking first on the waiver wire. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wpayers Posted October 7, 2010 Author Share Posted October 7, 2010 Update on the vote. The poll ended up 6-6 with the Commish voting in favor of the trade. So it stands. BUT this took a significant amount of lobbying to straighten out. What really changed minds were the comments posted here on the Huddle Forum. I copied this thread into a doc and sent it to the league board (without Huddle usernames). So thank you to all that offered up support and clarity. However, untateve said it best, "There are very few scenarios that would cause me to walk away from a league mid-season. Being accused of cheating by the majority of league owners is one--I don't care how much money is involved". This incident has poisoned the league. There are several owners that are extremely upset - on both sides of the issue. I've been in the league for 4 years and work with 3 of the guys that claimed collusion. Despite being 4-0 and in first place I am seriously considering dropping out. I saw some pathetic behavior tonight. Will sleep on it and decide. Again thanks for your advice and support. There's no better group than the Huddlers! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfer Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 hey wpayers I've got a good story for you. 2 weeks ago in my work league we have a trade: Matt Ryan for Brett Favre straight up. Well the league starts crying foul because Ryan was lighting it up, Favre's a bum, blah blah blah. I was the voice of reason, saying that you never know how trades will turn out, and you never veto unless you can prove collusion. I'm thinking the new Favre owner is smiling tonight! The 6 owners who rejected your deal are just bitter because they didn't have good enough rosters to pull off a trade like that. It's a fair trade, not one I'd make but I know what it's like to lose multiple RBs and sometimes the only way to get any kind of depth is to part with a stud....so be it. good luck the rest of the way bro. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Country Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 Question along these lines... If you knew that one owner had the number one waiver slot, and you really liked someone on the waivers, would you consider it collusion to ask the number one waiver spot to pick him up and if you do, you would trade him a need of his? Collusion? Far from colusion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 Collusion = the most mis-understood, mis-interpeted and just plain mis-used word in all of Fantasy Football. It is. After 8 or 9 years of posting in collusion threads, none of which ever contained any real evidence of collusion, I gave up. 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.