alchico Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 here are the rosters D Carr,D McNabb J Norwood,B Westbrook,M Morris,G Jones,C Benson,B Jacobs,L Maroney H Baskett,C Henry,R Moss,T Owens,B Edwards, T Heap J Kasay D Jaguars, D Ravens C Frye,M Hasselbeck M Jones-Drew,F Taylor,R Droughns,L White S Holmes,M Muhammad,R White,M Jenkins,M Jones,L Fitzgerald,T.J. Houshmandzadeh V Davis,K Winslow P Dawson D Browns,D Bears I have been reading this thread all morning and wanted to wait for the rosters to be posted before commenting. At first i agreed with the majority and believed that this trade should be allowed. Now that i see the rosters it confirms that decision. The team getting the vets is only aquiring depth, not differance makers for his team. McNabb and Hass are pretty even and if anything create a qb controversy for him that could have him second guessing himself all season long. He's never gonna start Taylor or Droughns over Westbrook and Benson if he gets the job. TJ definately takes a back seat to Owens and Moss and if Edwards gets healthy he will be a great #3 so now we have another WDIS problem. The guy getting all the Rookies is definately planning for the future and if just one of them breaks out this year it even gives him the opportunity to make some future moves later this season. Trade restrictions like you have in your rules almost caused me to quit my Local big money league($175) because like many have said it's my team and i pay the big bucks to run it based on my opinions, NOT the opinion of others! All this probably could have been avoided if the 1st team would have also thrown in Carr so the other team at least had 2 starting QB's but maybe you guys don't allow unbalnced trades. Regardless i agree with the Majority and this trade should be allowed to go through. Your integrity rules are in place for extremes like LT for Jerramy Stevens not the aforementioned deal. JMH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StormChasers Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 It's not a complete democracy, i am using our rules as voted on. I have the right to veto, which i did. The 2 owners have the right to challenge, which they did. Now the league has the right to vote on the trade which they are. Not a complicated situation at all. By the way the vote is 8 to 1 so far in favor of disallowing the trade, so i guess i made a perfect discission based on my league. To have a process where every trade is allowed at all times without any process is DUMB, imo. To not allow the league members to have a say in a very subjective decision is DUMB as well, imo. The problem is...are the owners voting for the betterment of the league or are they just thinking about themselves and vetoing based on their belief that one team is getting better this year. Horrible process and horrible rule! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StormChasers Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 (edited) theohiostate - I've got a question for you. What if the 2 owners that made the trade were Dorey and Whitney? 2 Professionals who know what they are doing. Would you say it's too one sided and veto the trade? Edited August 19, 2006 by StormChasers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 theohiostate - I've got a question for you. What if the 2 owners that made the trade were Dorey and Whitney? 2 Professionals who know what they are doing. Would you say it's too one sided and veto the trade? that is a very,very good question Chasers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 theohiostate - I've got a question for you. What if the 2 owners that made the trade were Dorey and Whitney? 2 Professionals who know what they are doing. Would you say it's too one sided and veto the trade? If it was a fair trade prove your point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 your using your judgement..........something your shunning me for doing as well. It's one thing to say my judgement was wrong, but to say it can be used in one instance and not in another is hypocritical. The question he posed was would I veto the trade...as a coach who was given a vote, I would. But as a Commish, I would never let it get that far, and I would never play in a league where one person is given god's freedom to decide whether a trade can be voted on or not. Everyone should vote on the trade, not just the commish. And the Commish shouldn't have the power to decide what deals get voted upon. Two different issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikesVikes Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 (edited) I know that you need much more liberal rules for a keeper league but I wouldn't want to cross the line of letting the league get out of control. For whatever the reason/motive that was a trade that should go through the process according to league rules. Commish vetoes or league vote. Oh and read my sigline. Edited August 19, 2006 by MikesVikes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theeohiostate Posted August 19, 2006 Author Share Posted August 19, 2006 theohiostate - I've got a question for you. What if the 2 owners that made the trade were Dorey and Whitney? 2 Professionals who know what they are doing. Would you say it's too one sided and veto the trade? I ask them for an explanation of how the trades benefits their teams, as i did to both owners in this case, i'd then use my judgement given to me by my league voted rules and more then likely veto the trade., and send to a league vote as i've done already in my instance. Big problem with this, is the owner getting the raw deal is a noob, and while i don't care if a poor trade is made, i do care that 10 other leagues members are upset and that the trade itself hurts the intregrity of the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 (edited) The question he posed was would I veto the trade...as a coach who was given a vote, I would. But as a Commish, I would never let it get that far, and I would never play in a league where one person is given god's freedom to decide whether a trade can be voted on or not. Everyone should vote on the trade, not just the commish. And the Commish shouldn't have the power to decide what deals get voted upon. Two different issues. Didn't TOS say the two trading can appeal for a vote? How is that a dictatorship? They can ask for a vote. I think they should. Edited August 19, 2006 by Randall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theeohiostate Posted August 19, 2006 Author Share Posted August 19, 2006 The question he posed was would I veto the trade...as a coach who was given a vote, I would. But as a Commish, I would never let it get that far, and I would never play in a league where one person is given god's freedom to decide whether a trade can be voted on or not. Everyone should vote on the trade, not just the commish. And the Commish shouldn't have the power to decide what deals get voted upon. Two different issues. good points, however this isn't a "what if" this is an "is" our rules call for this process, so regardless of the "what ifs" i keep hearing from everyone, i am only following the rules of the commish as given to me when i acccepted the commish job this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theeohiostate Posted August 19, 2006 Author Share Posted August 19, 2006 (edited) Didn't TOS say the two trading can appeal for a vote? How is that a dictatorship? They can ask for a vote. I think they should. This is the point that many are not getting. They just chime in with a scenario or two that our rules don't have in place. Our rules are VERY clear on this matter, if i veto for any reason the owners can ask for a vote and the league decides. This process in underway now. I do not have the final say, but i do have the power to question a trade as the majority of FF leagues give their commishes, and i have used that power to veto and send it to another process. In fact, i play in 6 BOTH leagues and in all , the commish has the power to approve and veto trades. I am only assuming they do so with their judgement..............unless there's a book on the subject None have a voting process and none have an auto trade. All are reviewed and judged, and those that say they wouldn't play in a league where the commish has the power to veto or send to a vote are f'ing clueless. Edited August 19, 2006 by theeohiostate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 Do you veto a draft pick if an owner wants to draft Jake Plummer in the first round, or do you let the owner be dumb and make his own pick? Not the same thing. A poor draft pick benefits the rest of the league. A lopsided trade (or worse) benefits one team only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBoog Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 I ask them for an explanation of how the trades benefits their teams, as i did to both owners in this case, i'd then use my judgement given to me by my league voted rules and more then likely veto the trade., and send to a league vote as i've done already in my instance. Big problem with this, is the owner getting the raw deal is a noob, and while i don't care if a poor trade is made, i do care that 10 other leagues members are upset and that the trade itself hurts the intregrity of the league. Here is my problem. Hopefully you can clear it up and I think others have kind of asked the same thing. Based on this year alone, no argument, bad trade. But looking at nextyear and years to come, what process did you go through to evaluate this as a "Bad Trade". This whole thread has inspired a potential, new sig line quote for me. "I don't get it!?!?" (Tom Hanks from "BIG") Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 If you want to give everyone a vote (as liberal a league as it is), why not do yourself a favor and remove yourself from the process? or at least make yourself the final part of the process? Our rules: Once a trade is made, it is posted to our website for 12 hours. If four or more coaches post a dissenting vote, it goes to the Commish's office for review/decision. Let the league sort itself out on its own, and only call you into the picture if there IS a controversy. I bet this trade would not have had as many dissenting votes if you hadn't already let everyone know your thoughts on it by sending it to a vote in the first place! By sending it to a vote, you are already insinuating that the deal is lop-sided before anyone else can even make their own opinion. No way you (or anyone) should have the power to decide what is voted on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StormChasers Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 If it was a fair trade prove your point. I've stated it in a previous post but here is the point. As an owner with this team below: C Frye,M Hasselbeck M Jones-Drew,F Taylor,R Droughns,L White S Holmes,M Muhammad,R White,M Jenkins,M Jones,L Fitzgerald,T.J. Houshmandzadeh V Davis,K Winslow P Dawson D Browns,D Bears I would absolutely make the balsy trade and get Maroney who I love for the future. Now would I have also asked for Carr in return? Yes I would have asked for a QB in return as well. But still to go after youthful RB's I would do that in a minute. I know I am not winning with that team above. Why not try to make my team better for the future. An experienced Dynasty league owner/keeper league owner would think about this trade. Half will have the balls to do it and half won't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBoog Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 I've stated it in a previous post but here is the point. As an owner with this team below: C Frye,M Hasselbeck M Jones-Drew,F Taylor,R Droughns,L White S Holmes,M Muhammad,R White,M Jenkins,M Jones,L Fitzgerald,T.J. Houshmandzadeh V Davis,K Winslow P Dawson D Browns,D Bears I would absolutely make the balsy trade and get Maroney who I love for the future. Now would I have also asked for Carr in return? Yes I would have asked for a QB in return as well. But still to go after youthful RB's I would do that in a minute. I know I am not winning with that team above. Why not try to make my team better for the future. An experienced Dynasty league owner/keeper league owner would think about this trade. Half will have the balls to do it and half won't. +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theeohiostate Posted August 19, 2006 Author Share Posted August 19, 2006 If you want to give everyone a vote (as liberal a league as it is), why not do yourself a favor and remove yourself from the process? or at least make yourself the final part of the process? Our rules: Once a trade is made, it is posted to our website for 12 hours. If four or more coaches post a dissenting vote, it goes to the Commish's office for review/decision. Let the league sort itself out on its own, and only call you into the picture if there IS a controversy. I bet this trade would not have had as many dissenting votes if you hadn't already let everyone know your thoughts on it by sending it to a vote in the first place! By sending it to a vote, you are already insinuating that the deal is lop-sided before anyone else can even make their own opinion. No way you (or anyone) should have the power to decide what is voted on. I will not be voting in the process sent to the league for review. The rest of you comments are nice, but not in our rule book , therefore no use to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StormChasers Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 I ask them for an explanation of how the trades benefits their teams, as i did to both owners in this case, i'd then use my judgement given to me by my league voted rules and more then likely veto the trade., and send to a league vote as i've done already in my instance. Big problem with this, is the owner getting the raw deal is a noob, and while i don't care if a poor trade is made, i do care that 10 other leagues members are upset and that the trade itself hurts the intregrity of the league. My point is if Whitney said "I am making the trade because I know I can't win this year and I am going after keepers for the future" You, like all of us experienced commishes and owners, would say that you have no problem with the trade after the explanation. If you are honest about the answer to this question then you look back at the trade regardless of whether the person is a Noob or not (this shouldn't come into the equation once you answer the question of whether this same trade would go through if 2 FF professionals made the deal) then you must allow this trade and not veto. That is my point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 Big problem with this, is the owner getting the raw deal is a noob, Again, this is your problem..you think someone is getting "the raw end of the deal", but as many here have posted, the noob looks to me like the winner here. Its too objective to give just you the power to decide. Had I been commish of your league, I wouldn't have blinked twice at this trade coming accross my screen. Which just goes to show you how arbitrary your system is. You should really think about changin it next year...maybe you guys can vote on it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PantherDave Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 Seems lopsided on one side, but not illegal as long as no collusion is going on-questionable though?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theeohiostate Posted August 19, 2006 Author Share Posted August 19, 2006 I've stated it in a previous post but here is the point. As an owner with this team below: C Frye,M Hasselbeck M Jones-Drew,F Taylor,R Droughns,L White S Holmes,M Muhammad,R White,M Jenkins,M Jones,L Fitzgerald,T.J. Houshmandzadeh V Davis,K Winslow P Dawson D Browns,D Bears I would absolutely make the balsy trade and get Maroney who I love for the future. Now would I have also asked for Carr in return? Yes I would have asked for a QB in return as well. But still to go after youthful RB's I would do that in a minute. I know I am not winning with that team above. Why not try to make my team better for the future. An experienced Dynasty league owner/keeper league owner would think about this trade. Half will have the balls to do it and half won't. Good points. But as commish, would you be alright with a team bailing out and giving away 2 wins to divisional opponents while 8 other teams aren't afforded the same opportunity to play him twice and thereby and unfair situation arises for 8 teams while a clear advantage is made for the 3 in his division? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theeohiostate Posted August 19, 2006 Author Share Posted August 19, 2006 Seems lopsided on one side, but not illegal as long as no collusion is going on-questionable though?? i have no doubt there's no collusion. But i do have the power to question and send to a vote. I have no idea why everyone has a problem with me following the simple rules put into place by my league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 Perhaps we should get back to your original question: would I allow this trade? The answer is yes, because it appears the deal is basically even, considering what one team's goals are, and what the other team's goals are. Two potential stud RBs for a solid QB, 2 marginal RBs, and a solid #2 WR. Why would you disallow it? Becaue one team gets stronger this year, and one team gets stronger next year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theeohiostate Posted August 19, 2006 Author Share Posted August 19, 2006 Perhaps we should get back to your original question: would I allow this trade? The answer is yes, because it appears the deal is basically even, considering what one team's goals are, and what the other team's goals are. Two potential stud RBs for a solid QB, 2 marginal RBs, and a solid #2 WR. Why would you disallow it? Becaue one team gets stronger this year, and one team gets stronger next year? i would not allow it because i see nothing but a trade based on POTENTIAL value, nothing of certaintly or substance here, not one shred of value, not one iota of fairness. That why i vetoed it. If your as correct as you say you are about the fairness as you see it, then i'm confident that the other 10 owners will approve it, but since the vote is 8-1 so far against it, i fear your completely wrong about the fairness of the deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raider.Nation Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 Is anyone else as excited about the new Obie Trice CD as I am?!? It's fantastic... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts