Collusion?

[detlef]

Obviously that's meant to be an extreme example, and yes, if it's okay with everyone, then go for it... But it's clear in this case that an owner in the league feels slighted by the move..

 

As BC said in the beginning, there doesn't have to be any malicious intent whatsoever, and people can very easily not see why this is wrong... But nevertheless, it does allow for exploitation/circumevention of a normal "fair" trade, and it is not in the spirit of the rules to do "give-backsies" so both teams can use the player at different times in the year and not be bound to a trade... We're bringing up intent to show what this can allow for by opening up the can of worms, not that there necessarily has to be any ill-intent for it to not stand.

 

So your solution is just not to play in leagues where someone would make moves like that? That is obviously not a solution that works when you're in the middle of a season with money on the line.

 

Again, it's not about the intent as much as not allowing owners to untilize eachother's players for the times when they need them most, and give them back for when they need him most for next to nothing... If you have a need to be addressed, then you make a trade and give something of equal value up, and even hope you can flip him later... But you're not going to get me to agree that it's okay to do a multi-pronged deal that enables you both to get what you want for a particular week while ultimately giving up next to nothing (if anything) in the long-run to utilize the player...

 

Seahawks examples showed how this can lead to collusive behavior, but collusion is not needed to see why sharing players is a terribly bad practice that shouldn't be allowed. Plain and simple, a "trade" is a primitive form of acquiring, buying, owning something at it's going rate. "Renting" on the other hand is something completely different than a trade, where the primary thing being sold is not something tangible, but the idea "that you'll get him back for the weeks you need him". That is most definitely not just offering the value of the pieces in the trade, it's selling them on the incentive that they can get them back when they need the player. Completely different and should be treated as such.

Like I said, if I were in a high dollar league with a bunch of strangers, perhaps I'd feel otherwise, but I play for fun. Enough money to make it interesting, but I play for fun. As a result, were I in some league that allowed trade backs, with the understanding that the rule is there to deal with bye weeks and short benches, etc, and two dudes decided to "get over" on everyone by truly pooling their rosters, I would expect the league to stand up and call BS. The same way that if some guy start clocking people in a game of touch football, everyone else would tell the guy to effing chill.

 

I'm bound by enough rules and regulations and I've signed my name on the bottom of more contracts than I'd like to remember. I don't need yet another and would simply prefer to enjoy myself.

 

Honestly, that's usually my first thought when someone comes here asking for advice on some d-bag in his league pulling some crap. Really? Some a-hole did that? To win a freaking FF league? Again, I guess if you're complete strangers with everyone and never had to face them again, and are a total d-bag to boot. But the $50-$100 I put into these leagues is not worth it for me to get into that sort of crap. I'd rather just find another league the next year.

 

That is not to say that I would insist upon playing in a league where trade backs are allowed. I've never done them and can see why people think it's crappy. It's just that I don't agree with the logic.

[stevegrab]

Like I said, if I were in a high dollar league with a bunch of strangers, perhaps I'd feel otherwise, but I play for fun. Enough money to make it interesting, but I play for fun. As a result, were I in some league that allowed trade backs, with the understanding that the rule is there to deal with bye weeks and short benches, etc, and two dudes decided to "get over" on everyone by truly pooling their rosters, I would expect the league to stand up and call BS. The same way that if some guy start clocking people in a game of touch football, everyone else would tell the guy to effing chill.

 

I'm bound by enough rules and regulations and I've signed my name on the bottom of more contracts than I'd like to remember. I don't need yet another and would simply prefer to enjoy myself.

 

Honestly, that's usually my first thought when someone comes here asking for advice on some d-bag in his league pulling some crap. Really? Some a-hole did that? To win a freaking FF league? Again, I guess if you're complete strangers with everyone and never had to face them again, and are a total d-bag to boot. But the $50-$100 I put into these leagues is not worth it for me to get into that sort of crap. I'd rather just find another league the next year.

 

That is not to say that I would insist upon playing in a league where trade backs are allowed. I've never done them and can see why people think it's crappy. It's just that I don't agree with the logic.