Bronco Steve_85 Posted October 24, 2018 Share Posted October 24, 2018 Do any of y’all feel like in anyway shape or form that the veto should/can be used as a tool to keep a team from improving because it is a part of “the game” of fantasy football? An example Last season in a league I was in the 1st place team attempted to trade Deshaun Watson (a week before his injury), TY Hilton and Duke Johnson to the 10th place team for AJ Green in a 12 team PPR league. The 1st place team already had Carson Wentz, Antonio Brown, Tyreek Hill, Kareem Hunt and Christian McCaffrey. But the trade would have given the 10th place team a significant upgrade at RB and QB and then just replaced AJ Green with TY. It was argued by the 10th place team that they needed this trade more than the 1st place team. But it was still seriously openly discussed on our message board by 2 members that the league needed to rally against the 1st place team and veto this trade. I didn’t take part in that rally just so y’all know where I stand on the issue lol What do y’all think about this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finn5033 Posted October 24, 2018 Share Posted October 24, 2018 That’s why I would never play in a league that allowed voting on trades. If you allow it people will vote against it for that very reason, they don’t want other teams getting better 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blaw23 Posted October 24, 2018 Share Posted October 24, 2018 I think that reasoning is crap. If the trade is a legit trade and there is no clear collusion going on then any trade should be allowed to go through. We unfortunately go through this same type of crap in my local league. Because of that it makes it extremely difficult to get any trade through. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slambo Posted October 24, 2018 Share Posted October 24, 2018 worst possible reason for a veto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soopanuts Posted October 24, 2018 Share Posted October 24, 2018 The 1st place team was arguably giving up more. Sacrificing depth to improve a starter. Looks fine to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Steve_85 Posted October 24, 2018 Author Share Posted October 24, 2018 1 minute ago, soopanuts said: The 1st place team was arguably giving up more. Sacrificing depth to improve a starter. Looks fine to me. Thats the thing. The trade was fine in every ones eyes on terms of fairness but they rallied against it and vetoed it just to stop the 1st place team from adding AJ Green to their roster. Their arguement was that vetoing is a part of fantasy football and that it’s a tool you have at your disposal to prevent teams from getting better... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XFlash Posted October 24, 2018 Share Posted October 24, 2018 3 hours ago, soopanuts said: The 1st place team was arguably giving up more. Sacrificing depth to improve a starter. Looks fine to me. this +100 Also, agree with Finn. I have seen owner veto because they did not think of it first or had any knowledge that said owner was shopping a player. Most times I just ask and if they don't say no outright, I get to work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 Totally agree with Finn, stupidest thing in fantasy football is allowing owners in a league to vote against another owner improving their team. We require commish approval, there are two of us, we have never denied a trade that I recall. Certainly wouldn't do something bush league like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dcat Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 (edited) We did away with group veto voting over a decade ago. Self-interest was the primary motivation for anyone vetoing someone else's trade. It had nothing to do with suspected collusion or completely unbalanced trading. We have a fair commish in these leagues (me) and the decision is mine alone after receiving the opinions and inputs from all others in the league before the decision. It has worked for over a decade with no problems. The only exception to the rule is that if 2 or more people object to a trade that the commissioner is involved in, then it goes to vote among the other 10 teams in the 12-team league. Need 6 veto votes from those 10 to overturn a commissioner-involved trade. In 12 years, there has never been one of those. Edited October 25, 2018 by Dcat 1 1 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.