BA Baracus Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 (edited) I have been on a bit of a rant in the "Advice" forum this week as there have been a number of threads where guys are having their trades vetoed. I play in three leagues, one of which I am the commissioner of. I have never seen a trade denied or vetoed in any of them. I have talked with the other two guys, and we are all of the mindset that unless there is collusion, then it is a free market economy. These are all grown men who can make their own decisions. Any activity that would actually get a trade denied would really be grounds for getting kicked out of the league. I say that, outside of conspiracy, it is up to every manager to do what they think is best for their team and everyone who isn't part of the deal can just mind their own business. What do you guys think? Edited October 29, 2011 by BA Baracus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 Not sure ... we've never discussed it here before Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BA Baracus Posted October 29, 2011 Author Share Posted October 29, 2011 Then I guess it's a good thing that I brought it up... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonsoxandy Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 I PRAY that Grits is sarcastic....because we have had atleast a solid dozen debates about vetoing before.....EVERYONE here agrees that vetoing = only for collusion, /close thread Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 I PRAY that Grits is sarcastic....because we have had atleast a solid dozen debates about vetoing before.....EVERYONE here agrees that vetoing = only for collusion, /close thread Correct, and he is being sarcastic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loaf Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 Grits is just pissed the Rangers are getting Spanked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 Grits is just pissed the Rangers are getting Spanked I figured after Cruz didn't catch the ball in that roller coaster of a game last night that the Rangers were done Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turf Smurf Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 Correct, and he is being sarcastic. In a free league, agreed. In a $500 league, pin the fat boy to the ground and beat him senseless. Don't let up until at least the playoffs. You can always say sorry after you have the championship stuff in hand. Win baby Win!!! I would never be involved in colusion, however, if you are say the number 1 or 2 team, and I can stiffle you with a veto, I'll do it all day long. It has to do with strategery or sumpin... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunday Couch Potatoe Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 I have been on a bit of a rant in the "Advice" forum this week as there have been a number of threads where guys are having their trades vetoed. I play in three leagues, one of which I am the commissioner of. I have never seen a trade denied or vetoed in any of them. I have talked with the other two guys, and we are all of the mindset that unless there is collusion, then it is a free market economy. These are all grown men who can make their own decisions. Any activity that would actually get a trade denied would really be grounds for getting kicked out of the league. I say that, outside of conspiracy, it is up to every manager to do what they think is best for their team and everyone who isn't part of the deal can just mind their own business. What do you guys think? I think it's like groundhogs day and you are playing the role of Bill Murray there Mr.T!! Over and over and over and over... Discussed more than anyone wants to hear anymore. New material pleeeaaassseeeee!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cunning Runt Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 I PRAY that Grits is sarcastic....because we have had atleast a solid dozen debates about vetoing before.....EVERYONE here agrees that vetoing = only for collusion, /close thread Definitely not true that EVERYONE here agrees or it wouldn't come up so much. There are certainly a number of people that believe that collusion is pretty much impossible to prove and therefore must rely on viewing trades while maintaining the competitive integrity of the league. I do not advocate overturning trades, but our league has overturned I think two in its 15yrs of existence. It's certainly not an optimal thing, but I do think there are instances, absent the ability to prove collusion, where a trade should be reversed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaFreak Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 I imagine it had to be very lobsided in order. For him to bring it up... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duchess Jack Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 I pitty the fool! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 I PRAY that Grits is sarcastic....because we have had atleast a solid dozen debates about vetoing before.....EVERYONE here agrees that vetoing = only for collusion, /close thread Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cunning Runt Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 How lobsided were they? I honestly don't recall. I think the last time it happened was like 5yrs ago, but it was pretty bad. If memory serves, one team was doing poorly and appeared to be throwing in the towel. He basically traded away the couple players on his team that were really good for next to nothing, but it wasn't with someone anyone thought he would have colluded with. Genuinely do not recall the names involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooby's Hubby Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 I pitty the fool! "I pity the fool that makes a trade with someone other than me" this is usually why people veto trades in the first place, isn't it? B/c they are haters? It seems to me that if a trade is a conspiracy, then it will be obvious and the commissioner will do what is right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditkaless Wonders Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 Definitely not true that EVERYONE here agrees or it wouldn't come up so much. There are certainly a number of people that believe that collusion is pretty much impossible to prove and therefore must rely on viewing trades while maintaining the competitive integrity of the league. I do not advocate overturning trades, but our league has overturned I think two in its 15yrs of existence. It's certainly not an optimal thing, but I do think there are instances, absent the ability to prove collusion, where a trade should be reversed. So, in a backhanded way you are accusing the owners of these vetoed trades of colluding, or being so taco assed stupid that they cannot make their own decisions. In the first instance you have accused them of being unethical cheaters and you should therefore not continue associating with them. In the second instance your opinion of them is so insulting that they ought to stomp a mud hole in you and then leave the league to disassociate themselves from your existance. Did either of these happen? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CowboysDiehard Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 I have been on a bit of a rant in the "Advice" forum this week as there have been a number of threads where guys are having their trades vetoed. I play in three leagues, one of which I am the commissioner of. I have never seen a trade denied or vetoed in any of them. I have talked with the other two guys, and we are all of the mindset that unless there is collusion, then it is a free market economy. These are all grown men who can make their own decisions. Any activity that would actually get a trade denied would really be grounds for getting kicked out of the league. I say that, outside of conspiracy, it is up to every manager to do what they think is best for their team and everyone who isn't part of the deal can just mind their own business. What do you guys think? I say you PITY THE FOOLS!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CowboysDiehard Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 Not sure ... we've never discussed it here before OK that cracked me up! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CowboysDiehard Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 (edited) I pitty the fool! :shakes tiny fist: Edited October 29, 2011 by CowboysDiehard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanTheMan_5 Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 Not sure ... we've never discussed it here before Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flemingd Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 As long as it's not something abusive like Roddy White for Boldin it should be allowed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 So, in a backhanded way you are accusing the owners of these vetoed trades of colluding, or being so taco assed stupid that they cannot make their own decisions. In the first instance you have accused them of being unethical cheaters and you should therefore not continue associating with them. In the second instance your opinion of them is so insulting that they ought to stomp a mud hole in you and then leave the league to disassociate themselves from your existance. Did either of these happen? I don't find collusion and stupidity to be mutually exclusive. That presents a 3rd option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cunning Runt Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 So, in a backhanded way you are accusing the owners of these vetoed trades of colluding, or being so taco assed stupid that they cannot make their own decisions. In the first instance you have accused them of being unethical cheaters and you should therefore not continue associating with them. In the second instance your opinion of them is so insulting that they ought to stomp a mud hole in you and then leave the league to disassociate themselves from your existance. Did either of these happen? Ya, they stomped a mud hole in me. What an idiot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 Ya, they stomped a mud hole in me. What an idiot. That "idiot" is probably one of the, if not the, most intelligent person I've had the pleasure to know - and that's saying quite a bit. His scenario of your either calling out leaguemates as being cheaters or too stupid to manage thier own teams is spot on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cunning Runt Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 (edited) That "idiot" is probably one of the, if not the, most intelligent person I've had the pleasure to know - and that's saying quite a bit. His scenario of your either calling out leaguemates as being cheaters or too stupid to manage thier own teams is spot on. Birds of a feather I guess then huh? And the thing that makes you and he so idiotic is that neither of you appear to be able to read well or at least you choose not to. In any event, I do not feel the need to defend what happened to a trade in my league several years ago. Just rest assured that your small minded opinion and way of doing things is not the only one that exists. The need to say things like the guys in my league "ought to stomp a mud hole in you (me) and then leave the league to disassociate themselves from your (my) existance" just comes across as ignorant and small. Edited October 30, 2011 by Cunning Runt 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.