RLochridge Posted September 25, 2015 Author Share Posted September 25, 2015 It's a horrendous trade giving up TY, Ryan and Olsen for Kelce and Sproles????? This looks like you had one thing in mind the whole time. Get support of your opinion and slam the door on that trade. Pretty cut and dry what your angle here was an I wrong? I was agreeing with returntosender about the trade being horrendous never agreed that it should be vetoed... I was asking two questions in this post: What people thought about the trade? and Should I veto it? Not meant to be combined. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RLochridge Posted September 25, 2015 Author Share Posted September 25, 2015 I stand corrected, you did indeed say friends outside the league considered it unfair. I originally read that as friends in the league (other owners). In any case, I am not offended, not sure why anything you do or say should offend me. Nonetheless ... it is still quite clear that you consider your opinion on how to value players to be superior to those owners in your league and to many here ... thus your disbelief that we aren't all flocking to jump on board your "this trade is unbalanced and unfair" band wagon. So while you didn't veto this trade you state clearly that you have vetoed trades in the past ... to keep the league "fair and balanced". If you are playing in a league worth playing in, all the owners are striving for a competitive advantage. Nobody is passing on a highly sought after free agent in order to keep the league fair and balanced, nobody is trying to set a less than optimum lineup to keep the league fair and balanced. No, we all try to improve our teams so that they are the best team in the league and take us to the championship. Last year in my local I drafted ODB in the last round and hung on to him and then rode him to the championship (him and Antonio Brown). Using your logic it probably wasn't "fair" of me to get such a good player with the last pick, so perhaps the commissioner should have cut ODB from my roster and made him available for general waivers. Despite what you say ... when you veto a trade you ARE managing other people's teams for them. You never answered my question, if you veto a trade and it turns out you were wrong ... do you offer financial restitution to the owners for presuming that your opinion was right and enforcing it? In your tireless efforts to keep the league fair and balanced do you also verify everybody's starting lineups each week and change them to what you consider to be the optimum starting lineups? I don't veto to try and stop people from improving their teams in the league I referred to last season there were about 15 or so trades and I only voted to veto a trade ONCE out of all of the trades because obviously it was collusion. You are going far beyond the point with the ODB reference I never talked about rejecting waivers. I am all for people trying to better their teams I want to keep the league competitive. And no I don't control or set peoples lineups, I don't know where you got that from this post? What a joke. And if someone in the league felt I was trying to wrongfully veto a trade just because I don't want them to improve their team I would refund their money. Right after the trade went down two days ago the guy that received Ryan, TY and Olsen had a huge grin on his face when he first saw me at work and the first words out of his mouth were "Are you going to veto that trade?" So it was just suspicious to me which is why I started this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 (edited) I don't veto to try and stop people from improving their teams in the league I referred to last season there were about 15 or so trades and I only voted to veto a trade ONCE out of all of the trades because obviously it was collusion. You are going far beyond the point with the ODB reference I never talked about rejecting waivers. I am all for people trying to better their teams I want to keep the league competitive. And no I don't control or set peoples lineups, I don't know where you got that from this post? What a joke. And if someone in the league felt I was trying to wrongfully veto a trade just because I don't want them to improve their team I would refund their money. Right after the trade went down two days ago the guy that received Ryan, TY and Olsen had a huge grin on his face when he first saw me at work and the first words out of his mouth were "Are you going to veto that trade?" So it was just suspicious to me which is why I started this thread. Well I figured if used your superior knowledge of player values to manage other teams by vetoing their trades in the spirit of keeping the league fair and balanced then it was only obvious that you would also use your superior knowledge of player values to manage other teams by ensuring everybody starts their optimum lineup to keep the league fair and balanced. After all it isn't fair if a team loses when he didn't start his best lineup. BTW ... it isn't "obvious collusion" when a trade occurs that you believe is unbalanced or not fair. The standard of collusion isn't met when a stupid trade is made, the standard of collusion is met when 2 or more owners conspire to improve one team at the expense of the other. This is a very difficult standard to prove and usually it is not sufficient to look at what you consider the relative merits of the trade to determine if collusion is occurring. Edited September 26, 2015 by Grits and Shins Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BA Baracus Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 IT'S NOT A BAD TRADE...KELCE IS THE MOST VALUABLE PLAYER IN THE TRADE!!! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 IT'S NOT A BAD TRADE...KELCE IS THE MOST VALUABLE PLAYER IN THE TRADE!!! Hush, RLochridge has declared the trade unbalanced and unfair and he is the supreme authority on how to value players ... just ask him he will tell you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BA Baracus Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 It isn't your job as commissioner to decide if it's a dumb trade or not. It's your job to decide if someone is cheating. There is a big difference and you will know it when you see it. This Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
byroz Posted September 28, 2015 Share Posted September 28, 2015 If no one else vetoed it there's your answer. This isn't even that bad of a trade. Ive seen worse go through this year already Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawks21 Posted September 28, 2015 Share Posted September 28, 2015 If you let someone into your league, you let them manage their team as they see fit, period. If a trade of mine ever got vetoed, I would leave the league immediately, get my money back, and give somebody a black eye in the process, unless they could beat me up in which case they would get slashed tires or ex-lax in their drink. I'll be damned if any commissioner or league mates get to take my team that I paid money for and tell me how to run it. If you want to run all the teams, why don't you just pay for all 12 teams in the league and run them all yourself? Some f'n people. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squirrelmastr21 Posted September 28, 2015 Share Posted September 28, 2015 That throw in Sproles looked pretty good yesterday. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 Good trade. Only punks veto trades. Our league has been around for 20+ years, same two commissioners (I am one), and many of the same owners. While we have the right (according to our rules) to veto a trade we never have and have never even seriously considered it. We're not even sure what circumstances would exist where we'd decide to veto, certainly collusion, player sharing or dumping would count. League vote on trades is horrible as others state. But you need to have some ability to veto the absurd, to keep people on their toes. However it should be used only in rare cases. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 Allowing the rest of the owners the ability to block my trade because they don't like it is bull honda The owners playing in that league presumably agreed to those rules. If you didn't like that rule you wouldn't join the league. Stop being so melodramatic and acting like people are trying to force you into playing in leagues with rules you don't like. I wouldn't like a league where owners vote to approve trades, or have some kind of veto power, but that doesn't make those rules or leagues wrong anymore than IDP or PPR or redraft or keeper/dynasty or blind bid waivers or any of the league specific rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 1. Never told any owners in the league to veto the trade. 2. I was not trying to run anyone else's team or trying to abuse my power. 3. I never defended the idea of vetoing I was defending that idea that the trade looked unusually unbalanced to me. 4. I never once was seeking approval from anyone to veto the trade. 5. The trade was approved. 6. I was just asking for opinions on what y'all would do in the situation and if anyone thought there was collusion going on. 7. I have never vetoed a trade before I actually like being in a league that makes a decent amount of trades throughout the season it makes it more fun. The problem stems from the fact that you think the commissioner should consider vetoing a trade that is merely unbalanced. This is a sore topic here because it comes up every year, multiple times. Most here feel that without proof of collusion or when the trade is obviously lopsided (Rodgers for a kicker) all trades should be allowed. You've never vetoed a trade before, but seem to think you need to consider it and review the players involved to see if its fair or not. It should really jump out at you if its so unfair to consider not allowing it. PS Don't take all the posts too personally, some guys like Grits make a living out of abusing new posters, and getting idignant about what people do in their leagues as if every league needs to have rules that he approves of. So long as your owners are happy with the job you do as commissioner and have fun in the league, that is what really matters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 If you let someone into your league, you let them manage their team as they see fit, period. If a trade of mine ever got vetoed, I would leave the league immediately, get my money back, and give somebody a black eye in the process, unless they could beat me up in which case they would get slashed tires or ex-lax in their drink. I'll be damned if any commissioner or league mates get to take my team that I paid money for and tell me how to run it. If you want to run all the teams, why don't you just pay for all 12 teams in the league and run them all yourself? Some f'n people. If you (Grits and others) are so against vetoes why would you play in a league where the owner or even commish have ability to vote/veto trades? I don't like the idea of voting on trades, we don't do that and I wouldn't be in a league that did. But every league needs the commish (or league) to have some sort of power to veto trades, otherwise you allow everything including collusion is rarely so obvious that you can prove it. If you agree to play in a league where owners can vote to veto your trade, then you have NO RIGHT to be pissed when it happens, you've agreed to play in that system and should know it could be people just vetoing trades because they don't like you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 The owners playing in that league presumably agreed to those rules. If you didn't like that rule you wouldn't join the league. Stop being so melodramatic and acting like people are trying to force you into playing in leagues with rules you don't like. I wouldn't like a league where owners vote to approve trades, or have some kind of veto power, but that doesn't make those rules or leagues wrong anymore than IDP or PPR or redraft or keeper/dynasty or blind bid waivers or any of the league specific rules. I wouldn't play in a league that allows the owners to veto trades, for all the reasons I have already stated. When you allow the other owners in a league to manage my team for me then I am out. I simply do not understand why anybody is willing to play in a league where the other owners are allowed to collude against you and block your trade. Essentially if you allow owners to veto trades you might as well not allow trades. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 I wouldn't play in a league that allows the owners to veto trades, for all the reasons I have already stated. When you allow the other owners in a league to manage my team for me then I am out. I simply do not understand why anybody is willing to play in a league where the other owners are allowed to collude against you and block your trade. Essentially if you allow owners to veto trades you might as well not allow trades. You're simply repeating yourself. I'm not saying leagues should allow owners to veto trades, but it is the choice of each league and their owners and commissioners to decide. If you agree to play in a league that does it, then you know the risks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the outlaw Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 i think the two of you are in "violent" agreement! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReturnToSender Posted October 1, 2015 Share Posted October 1, 2015 Of course, as always, I find myself looking at my post, telling you of our veto policy, and now someone has started the Veto on me! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Country Posted October 1, 2015 Share Posted October 1, 2015 Of course, as always, I find myself looking at my post, telling you of our veto policy, and now someone has started the Veto on me! That's what you get for trying to improve your team. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReturnToSender Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 And I guess the system worked, the trade went through Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted October 3, 2015 Share Posted October 3, 2015 I am far more worried about 2 owners colluding with a trade than I am worried about 6 or 8 owners colluding with a veto. That sounds like a vote for leagues to allow voting on trades. I've not heard of owners colluding on a veto but the view that many will simply veto all trades since don't benefit them, or out of spite. 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.