Commishes

[AtomicCEO]

Not going to, i've put it to a league vote which our rules allow for. I am not the end all here nor want to be. I also do not want to put a trade through without a league vote that assurdly will cause 10 owners to be outraged when they know they have the right to vote on a trade if i allow it.

 

I will allow our rules to dictate the matter. If the league disagrees with me, then the trade is processed no ploblems. But like many here are saying i have no right to veto this deal, then why do they suggest i have the rigtht to allow it no questions asked?

 

Seems like a very hypocritical stance to take, to say i have no power to veto, yet all the power to approve.

 

League votes suck too, because lots of people will vote for whatever suits them best... not what they actually think is fair for the league. If I want to offer more for Hasselbeck... I'll vote against the trade. If I don't want the team to get better because I play against him... I'll vote against the trade. If I just don't like either of the guys... I'll vote against the trade.

 

Your job to veto trades should be based only on obvious collusion... which is almost exclusively defined as someone selling their team which is already eliminated from the playoffs for nothing to a buddy that he wants to see win.

[Hardrocker]

I agree that trades should be processed

BUT

 

our rules have laid out a system for such an instance as i've noted above.

 

If i do not see the trade as beneficial to both teams for whatever reason i see fit, i must veto it and if challenged by either owner it can be put to a vote where a majority would decide, while i wouldn't vote.

Seems a perfectly grand way to deal with this. So i have done so, by using my permission to veto and sending both owners a copy of the article in the rules that deal with this and asking if either would like to challenge it and have a vote. That's about as fair and simple as it can be.

 

 

 

Im getting in late, but this is wrong. Your rules lay out a system for you to decide what is fair. This appears to be an unbalanced trade today based on PAPER. If you veto this trade, you are stepping into a pile of mess that will hurt you and the league.

 

First princiapal of being a commish is that it is NOT your job to decide who is being smarter in a deal. If the owner you think is getting hosed can explain to you a rationale to his trade, you owe him to let it go even if you think he is nuts.

 

He could after all be right....

 

Good luck

 

Hardrocker

[Grits and Shins]

I believe this is the SECOND time I've made a note to myself to never be in a league with theeohiostate.

[Hardrocker]

I vetoed the trade, then sent notice to the league that a trade had been vetoed, i sent a copy of our rules that govern this process and i sent a copy of the trade. I was then bombarded with emails stating it's a good thing i vetoed as the trade was BS etc. I then got an emial from one of the parties involved in the trade asking for a league vote, which our constitution allows after i veto. I posted the vote on the trade and that is where it stands. I am following the rules word for word, it allows for my opinon and i used it. Like i said, i don't make the rules, i just interpret them and follow to best of my ability, while many on here do not like the veto, it is a part of our system and will be used if needed.

 

 

 

First, I want to commend you for binging this to the forum to air out. That takes guts and I do think highly of you for it. This is the second time you have brought an issue here though and in both cases, in my opinion, you have overstepped.

 

You have argued that one team is tanking at least two games to another team. My goodness, its AUGUST. At this point we are merely speculating on who will do what...(of course some will certainly speculate better than others but that is another arguement)

 

I dont know that I would do this trade, but if I was to do it and you vetoed it I would play out the year and send you a note that until you stop using the Commish power to determine what you want, Im out.

 

Also as others have posted here...I think putting to a vote is horrible. Teams will vote based on what is best for them. The role of Commish is to be above that, and sometimes that means supporting things that you dont like or things that dont help you.

 

I think the right thing for you to do is to notify the league that you have reconsidered and approve the trade.

 

If I read this correctly it is a keeper league, and the whole point of keeper leagues is to be able to build for the future, therefore keeping teams engaged throughout the year. If your veto stands you have used your power to thwart one owner from doing just that...

 

Again...its August. If you really think someone is tanking at this point....and you really want to use your Commish powers...go to the guys house and shoot him.

 

I am not trying to rant on you...I do commend you for coming here and I mean my comments to be constructive...well, except for saying you should shoot somebody....that would of course also be wrong

[BigMikeinNY]

Ohio, I wouldnt allow that trade at all. That is such an uneven trade it's ridiculous

[theeohiostate]

The problem with this situation is our rules leave this sort of issue up for interpretation and asks for my opinons on how i feel about trades. I took the rule we had in place and read it to myself, i asked the simple question in which our rules has me ask "do i think this trade benefits both teams" Now i could do one of two things, i could allow the trade and completely lie to myself and fail to do the duty i was appointed by not answering the question honesty OR i could veto and put it to a league vote. I have no other choices other then these. For those suggesting that i allow the trade...........just because trades shouldn't be vetoed in any circumstances, i say to you, that is not how our rules are written. I had to be honest with my thoughts about the trade, i'll stand by my decision to veto it. If the rules stay in place after this instance and i'm faced with a similar situation i will veto the trade again without hesitation.

 

Look at it this way, if i had approved the trade and had several league members ask me if i thought both teams benefited from it..........how am i to answer that. LIE! I think not!

[Ziachild007]

regardless of the view of the rule, it is in place and i must follow it by vetoing the deal that i see in no way will ever benefit the one team. The trade has been posted in the league site and is now up for vote.

 

 

Bad decision IMO. For instance.........last year in a league that I am commish of I made the following trade in week 6 (Passing/Rec TD = 7 points - Rushing TD = 10 points - Standard Yardage):

 

I gave

D. Jackson - 29 rec, 376 rush/rec yards, 2 TD

S. McDonald - 22 rec, 258 rush/rec yards, 0 TD

M. Shipp - 16 rec, 287 rush/rec yards, 0 TD

K. Jones - 5 rec, 243 rush/rec yards, 3 TD

K. Collins - 1383 passing yards, 10 rushing yards, 6 pass TDs

 

Total : 72 rec, 1164 total rush/rec yds, 5 rush/rec TDs - 1383 yards passing, 6 pass TDs

 

He gave:

M. Moore - 14 rec, 369 rush/rec yards, 0 TD

D. McAllister - 17 rec, 452 rush/rec, 3 TD - OUT FOR THE YEAR

L. Johnson - 2 rec, 264 rush/rec, 3 TD - NOT STARTING YET

A. Brooks - 1342 yards passing, 164 yards rushing, 5 TDs

L. Coles - 26 rec, 289 yards, 1 TD

 

Total : 59 rec, 1374 total rush/rec yds, 7 rush/rec TDs - 1342 yards passing, 5 pass TDs

Total w/o McAllister: 42 rec, 922 rush/rec yards, 4 rush/rec TDs - 1342 yards passing, 5 pass TDs

 

At the time I was nearly laughed out of the league for trading for a RB on IR, a backup RB, a struggling QB, struggling WR, and part time RB. Now going forward, I obviously got the better end of the deal. Just goes to show you cant really tell how things might turn out for each team.

[HowboutthemCowboys]

Bad decision IMO. For instance.........last year in a league that I am commish of I made the following trade in week 6 (Passing/Rec TD = 7 points - Rushing TD = 10 points - Standard Yardage):

 

I gave

D. Jackson - 29 rec, 376 rush/rec yards, 2 TD

S. McDonald - 22 rec, 258 rush/rec yards, 0 TD

M. Shipp - 16 rec, 287 rush/rec yards, 0 TD

K. Jones - 5 rec, 243 rush/rec yards, 3 TD

K. Collins - 1383 passing yards, 10 rushing yards, 6 pass TDs

 

Total : 72 rec, 1164 total rush/rec yds, 5 rush/rec TDs - 1383 yards passing, 6 pass TDs

 

He gave:

M. Moore - 14 rec, 369 rush/rec yards, 0 TD

D. McAllister - 17 rec, 452 rush/rec, 3 TD - OUT FOR THE YEAR

L. Johnson - 2 rec, 264 rush/rec, 3 TD - NOT STARTING YET

A. Brooks - 1342 yards passing, 164 yards rushing, 5 TDs

L. Coles - 26 rec, 289 yards, 1 TD

 

Total : 59 rec, 1374 total rush/rec yds, 7 rush/rec TDs - 1342 yards passing, 5 pass TDs

Total w/o McAllister: 42 rec, 922 rush/rec yards, 4 rush/rec TDs - 1342 yards passing, 5 pass TDs

 

At the time I was nearly laughed out of the league for trading for a RB on IR, a backup RB, a struggling QB, struggling WR, and part time RB. Now going forward, I obviously got the better end of the deal. Just goes to show you cant really tell how things might turn out for each team.

 

good post.

[YoungBob]

No but it could screw up the league. I would suggest a league vote.

 

+1

[theeohiostate]

Bad decision IMO. For instance.........last year in a league that I am commish of I made the following trade in week 6 (Passing/Rec TD = 7 points - Rushing TD = 10 points - Standard Yardage):

 

I gave

D. Jackson - 29 rec, 376 rush/rec yards, 2 TD

S. McDonald - 22 rec, 258 rush/rec yards, 0 TD

M. Shipp - 16 rec, 287 rush/rec yards, 0 TD

K. Jones - 5 rec, 243 rush/rec yards, 3 TD

K. Collins - 1383 passing yards, 10 rushing yards, 6 pass TDs

 

Total : 72 rec, 1164 total rush/rec yds, 5 rush/rec TDs - 1383 yards passing, 6 pass TDs

 

He gave:

M. Moore - 14 rec, 369 rush/rec yards, 0 TD

D. McAllister - 17 rec, 452 rush/rec, 3 TD - OUT FOR THE YEAR

L. Johnson - 2 rec, 264 rush/rec, 3 TD - NOT STARTING YET

A. Brooks - 1342 yards passing, 164 yards rushing, 5 TDs

L. Coles - 26 rec, 289 yards, 1 TD

 

Total : 59 rec, 1374 total rush/rec yds, 7 rush/rec TDs - 1342 yards passing, 5 pass TDs

Total w/o McAllister: 42 rec, 922 rush/rec yards, 4 rush/rec TDs - 1342 yards passing, 5 pass TDs

 

At the time I was nearly laughed out of the league for trading for a RB on IR, a backup RB, a struggling QB, struggling WR, and part time RB. Now going forward, I obviously got the better end of the deal. Just goes to show you cant really tell how things might turn out for each team.

 

 

 

You were the commish, you allowed yourself to get the lower end of the deal, why would you have vetoed this anyway? Had this been in another league it could have been up for review, this doesn't mean anything as you reviewed your own trade and admitedly got the short end, but i'm assuming you had Holmes or LJ was already sharing a great deal of time with him and in that instance it's not bad at all.

[theeohiostate]

good post.

 

 

 

 

 

He's the commish and he allowed his own poor trade, how is this relative to anything.

[Hardrocker]

The problem with this situation is our rules leave this sort of issue up for interpretation and asks for my opinons on how i feel about trades. I took the rule we had in place and read it to myself, i asked the simple question in which our rules has me ask "do i think this trade benefits both teams" Now i could do one of two things, i could allow the trade and completely lie to myself and fail to do the duty i was appointed by not answering the question honesty OR i could veto and put it to a league vote. I have no other choices other then these. For those suggesting that i allow the trade...........just because trades shouldn't be vetoed in any circumstances, i say to you, that is not how our rules are written. I had to be honest with my thoughts about the trade, i'll stand by my decision to veto it. If the rules stay in place after this instance and i'm faced with a similar situation i will veto the trade again without hesitation.

 

Look at it this way, if i had approved the trade and had several league members ask me if i thought both teams benefited from it..........how am i to answer that. LIE! I think not!

 

 

 

Your opinion as to both team benefiting is not relevant. If both teams think they are getting value, its not your place to decide. You are reading too much into your duty, in my opinion. Lets say that at this time last year I wanted to trade Jamal Lewis a starter and top ten candidate for Larry Johnson. In August, that would look pretty unfair.

 

However, in addition to being a pretty dang good trade for the future, it would have looked pretty good in December too!

Edited August 20, 2006 by Hardrocker

[CD6405]

He's the commish and he allowed his own poor trade, how is this relative to anything.

 

 

 

It's relative because it looked as if he was getting crap for that year, but now he has a solid team which is what the guy in your league was trying to do.

 

Fred Taylor is probably going to lose his job, Droughns is not on a very good team.

 

Hasselbeck and Housh are good, but he may be thinking of it like this. Alexander is almost at 30 where RB's decline, right? Well if he starts to decline, they will be watching the pass from Hasselbeck. I believe last year was the Seahawks peak, because the rest of the NFC will catch up.

 

Now look at the other half of the trade.

 

Tiki Barber won't be there too much longer, and Brandon Jacobs is the future of NY, same thing with Maroney in NE. TJ Duckett is trying to be shipped out, Warrick Dunn isn't getting younger; Norwood will play sooner than most of us think.

 

Chris Henry is a speedy WR and he MAY (make sure you read that, I'm not saying he will take it away from T.J. but there is always a chance of it) eventually take the job from TJ. He is a second year guy and if he can stay out of trouble can be a great player.

 

 

The guy getting the future talent could be stacked at RB in the coming years, maybe even NEXT year! The other guy is getting guys that are on the decline or on bad teams for the most part (except Housh).

 

One guy wants to win this year, the other guy wants to win for the next 3 to 4.

Edited August 20, 2006 by CD6405

[HowboutthemCowboys]

He's the commish and he allowed his own poor trade, how is this relative to anything.

 

it's relative because your "noob" paid $$$ to manage this team.It's his right to run it however he wants unless he is unfairly loading another team and giving up on his.That's not happening here.Even if he's giving up on his team for this season,the players involved in this trade are by no means loading the other roster.I don't mean to be rude but,what part don't you understand?

[Ziachild007]

You were the commish, you allowed yourself to get the lower end of the deal, why would you have vetoed this anyway? Had this been in another league it could have been up for review, this doesn't mean anything as you reviewed your own trade and admitedly got the short end, but i'm assuming you had Holmes or LJ was already sharing a great deal of time with him and in that instance it's not bad at all.

 

 

The reason I didnt review it was because to me as the commish, both owners knew what they were doing and were happy with it and there was no attempt by one or the other to unfairly load up the other team. As an owner it was still a good trade for me because I was looking forward to next year already. (I was 1-5 before the trade, finished at 7-6, winning my final 6) Not one of the 10 non-involved league members called for a vote (besides the fact I was heavily ridiculed), because they too knew that the odds were against me to make any noise last year.

 

And no, I didnt have Holmes, and this was right before Priest started splitting series with LJ. LJ had made a few brief appearances and looked like he had big potential to me.

 

He's the commish and he allowed his own poor trade, how is this relative to anything.

 

 

Its more or less to show that one mans trash can indeed turn into another mans treasure.

[slingblade]

First, I want to commend you for binging this to the forum to air out. That takes guts and I do think highly of you for it. This is the second time you have brought an issue here though and in both cases, in my opinion, you have overstepped.

 

the really sad part is that this is the same league.

[McBoog]

I believe this is the SECOND time I've made a note to myself to never be in a league with theeohiostate.

 

 

 

 

THAT WAS FUNNY!

 

 

 

Maybe not

[McBoog]

Another comment: I'm not particularily inclined to be in a league where the other owners can manage my team either ... you know by inserting their will and saying a trade I have made doesn't fit their idea of "fair"

 

 

+1

[StormChasers]

I believe this is the SECOND time I've made a note to myself to never be in a league with theeohiostate.

 

 

At least a keeper or dynasty league where he is the commish! I think he is right in this reguard for a redraft league but he is absolutely wrong in a keeper/dynasty league.

[theeohiostate]

I guess i'm the only person in here that plays in a league where the commishioner appoves the trades. I'm assuming you all have automatic trade reviewals and acceptance, because if you don't then your hypocrits in my opinon.

 

If you give your commish the power to accept a trade are you not giving him permission to view the trade and then decide to accept or are you just saying don't look at the trade, we just want you to push the accept button because we're not confindent we could find it ourselves

[StormChasers]

i asked the simple question in which our rules has me ask "do i think this trade benefits both teams"

 

Look at it this way, if i had approved the trade and had several league members ask me if i thought both teams benefited from it..........how am i to answer that. LIE! I think not!

 

 

and here lies the true issue and I don't mean to be offensive but as a commish of a re-draft league you would be absolutely right. However, as a commish of a keeper league this absolutely has the possibility of benefitting both teams (time will tell) and you have no right telling an owner otherwise.

 

I believe you would make a good commish in a re-draft league but you have no business being a commish in a keeper league if you don't understand the value of playing for the future.

 

 

I calls them as I sees them. If you were commish in my keeper or dynasty league...i'd be building the vote to move you out as commish.

[theeohiostate]

it's relative because your "noob" paid $$$ to manage this team.It's his right to run it however he wants unless he is unfairly loading another team and giving up on his.That's not happening here.Even if he's giving up on his team for this season,the players involved in this trade are by no means loading the other roster.I don't mean to be rude but,what part don't you understand?

 

 

 

I guess we disagree, if you would like to join a league where anything goes, teams can collude , teams can dump their teams and season, thats fine..........have a go and enjoy yourselve.

[CD6405]

I guess i'm the only person in here that plays in a league where the commishioner appoves the trades. I'm assuming you all have automatic trade reviewals and acceptance, because if you don't then your hypocrits in my opinon.

 

If you give your commish the power to accept a trade are you not giving him permission to view the trade and then decide to accept or are you just saying don't look at the trade, we just want you to push the accept button because we're not confindent we could find it ourselves

 

 

 

Um I'm the commish and the only time I've vetoed a trade in my league is when one division of the league of 14 teams tried to stack a team to beat the other division. All other trades went through even if the league had a problem with it because the two owners knew what they were doing.

[theeohiostate]

If you were commish in my keeper or dynasty league...i'd be building the vote to move you out as commish.

 

 

 

Funny how the majority of my league have emailed me thanking me for doing what i was intrusted with, while people on here not affiliated with my league like to judge a decision my rules state i'm entitled to do.

[theeohiostate]

Um I'm the commish and the only time I've vetoed a trade in my league is when one division of the league of 14 teams tried to stack a team to beat the other division. All other trades went through even if the league had a problem with it because the two owners knew what they were doing.

 

 

 

I'm gathering you had a videotape of the alleged collusion or did you just ASSUME it and make a judgement call.................hmmmmmm sounds familar to me. Funny how judgeing a trade by someone fits their needs but when judgeing someone else's decison it's not a good idea.