StormChasers Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 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? As a commish I would absolutely be alright with this. His team is likely losing 6 in his division anyways and dropping Droughns/Hass might help him win 1 game more then without. As a player, I would absolutely not be ok with this particularly if I were not in his division. That's the big thing. As a commish I have to separate the 2 and make the choice as commish. Again as I said before, I would be one who would make this trade too if I were in the noobs position and I applaud him for having the balls to play for the future as a good owner in a keeper league should do until it is time to play for the hear and now. Honestly the guy making the trade for Droughns and Hass is the one that is a Noob IMHO. His team isn't good enough to push for the championship IMO and trading away the youth was a bad decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghengis_chan Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 (edited) The bottom line is that this is a keeper league where each owner has the right to decide their own future. As stated many times in this thread that one team is playing for the present season and the other wants to build his team for the future. In keeper league it is virtually impossible for someone not directly involved in that trade to put a value on a players worth based on what they might do next year. The only person who can place that value on a specific player is the owners making the deal and speculating on the players present and future achievements and career. After seeing the rosters it is evident that there is NO collusion therefore there should be no veto. I agree your rules were written for extreme cases and have a place in your leagues management. I also agree that you as Commish AND as an Owner have a right to question trades that are obviously one-sided and give the impression of collusion. But this trade Does benefit both owners, with one getting depth for this season and the other getting possibly a much stronger team next year. Again THAT is the only reason we play in keeper and dynasty leagues...to manage a team over a extended period of time in an attempt to DOMINATE the League...... You felt the Noob was getting the raw end of this deal and wanted to step in ....perhaps the Noob wanted to WIN this year!!!!! In any case the exact wording of your rules states " Commissioner will approve all trades that appear to benefit both teams" How can you prove that this trade will not benefit both teams? Edited August 19, 2006 by ghengis_chan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph Furley Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 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. I have been reading this thread throughout the day, but I'm confused if the other league members actually voted on the trade or not. 10 other league members were upset by the trade? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donutrun Jellies Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 I can't believe this is still percolating 6 pages into it ... the deal DOES benefit both teams, one now and one next year -- and since this is a keeper league, it's a mindless approval. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theeohiostate Posted August 19, 2006 Author Share Posted August 19, 2006 In any case the exact wording of your rules states " Commissioner will approve all trades that appear to benefit both teams" How can you prove that this trade will not benefit both teams? I'm failing to see anywhere, that i have to prove my opinon of what i "feel" benefits each team. IMO the trade does not benefit both teams, THEREFORE i veto it and send to league vote. Is that clear enough for you to understand, i'd like to write an essay on my feelings but my rules don't say it's needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theeohiostate Posted August 19, 2006 Author Share Posted August 19, 2006 I have been reading this thread throughout the day, but I'm confused if the other league members actually voted on the trade or not. 10 other league members were upset by the trade? 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StormChasers Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 I'm failing to see anywhere, that i have to prove my opinon of what i "feel" benefits each team. IMO the trade does not benefit both teams, THEREFORE i veto it and send to league vote. Is that clear enough for you to understand, Yep it's very clear....you're a good commish for a re-draft league but not a good commish for a keeper/dynasty league IMHO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghengis_chan Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 Go get em Commish...No sense debating this any further. Your League , Your bad intepretation and meaning of your league rules and of course your Opinion!!!!! Have fun with it and keep in mind that you no longer have a true keeper league if your owners are unable to speculate or control their own futures. Good Luck Dude...... And by the way I owe you a few of these!!!!!....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cliaz Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 SCREW THAT CRAP I would have a serious problem with that trade and I as a commish would bring a vote league wide on it. It is your Responsibility to watch out for and stop this crap. The guy that says he wont be able to compete isn't thinking right and pretty much handing over $150 league dues knowing he isn' going to win. I smell collusion. Call a vote out. Don't let that trade stand. Too much money at stake for this crap. To let this goes is stupid. IMHO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 SCREW THAT CRAP I would have a serious problem with that trade and I as a commish would bring a vote league wide on it. It is your Responsibility to watch out for and stop this crap. The guy that says he wont be able to compete isn't thinking right and pretty much handing over $150 league dues knowing he isn' going to win. I smell collusion. Call a vote out. Don't let that trade stand. Too much money at stake for this crap. To let this goes is stupid. IMHO Cliaz,did you see the guys roster?He ain't winnin' candied yams this year anyway.He was trying to make a trade to improve his team for NEXT YEAR.It's a KEEPER LEAGUE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 I haven't read any of the responses ... but unless there is collusion the commissioner has no business trying to manage the other teams in his league. This is especially true in a keeper format where owners may be making decisions with a longer view in mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 (edited) 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" Edited August 19, 2006 by Grits and Shins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cliaz Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 Cliaz,did you see the guys roster?He ain't winnin' candied yams this year anyway.He was trying to make a trade to improve his team for NEXT YEAR.It's a KEEPER LEAGUE. Doesn't matter, anyone can be get players that bring it. That's a crap logic and obvious collusion. If it were a Dynasty league there would be a difference but a keeper league. Phooey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 Another comment: I'm 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" If the teams feel this they have a chance to change the rules. As I read this TOS was following the league rules as they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donutrun Jellies Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 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. That's the ticket!! Let the other owners, who also actually see how it benefits both teams but just don't want to let either team get better -- short term, or long term -- join you in your own collusion to keep either of them from getting better. Maybe there's something to be said for free leagues, after all ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theeohiostate Posted August 19, 2006 Author Share Posted August 19, 2006 That's the ticket!! Let the other owners, who also actually see how it benefits both teams but just don't want to let either team get better -- short term, or long term -- join you in your own collusion to keep either of them from getting better. Maybe there's something to be said for free leagues, after all ... Blah Blah I made the call, no one else. I put it to a vote. Blah Blah go back nawing Ben's jock, sorry for bothering you with this anyhow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 Blah Blah I made the call, no one else. I put it to a vote. Blah Blah go back nawing Ben's jock, sorry for bothering you with this anyhow. Next time I think they'll have a brand new commissioner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGrunt Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 (edited) I'm failing to see anywhere, that i have to prove my opinon of what i "feel" benefits each team. IMO the trade does not benefit both teams, THEREFORE i veto it and send to league vote. Is that clear enough for you to understand, i'd like to write an essay on my feelings but my rules don't say it's needed. Get over yourself. I think the one aspect about the trade that doesn't make clear sense to me is giving up Hasselbeck. But he is also gaining so much potential and youthful talant in return. You remind me of some stubborn comminish who is playing by "the rules" of which are very open ended, and from the looks of it they are faulty too. You need to have more checks and balances in your league other than your ruling fist of veto power. If this trade didn't go through, for either team, I'd definitely ask for my money back and go elsewhere. This is a fair trade in more ways than one. (However, I'd possibly try and work out some sort of counterclaim where the trade takes out Hasselbeck from the table. That IS the one aspect I don't like, but still not enough to put a complete halt to the trade) Edited August 19, 2006 by TheGrunt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bring Back Pat!!! Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 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. This is the problem. What if the guy getting Hass is in your division? "My closest opponent is going to be better than me" is NOT grounds for the challenge of a trade. IMO a Commish should NEVER have the authority to challenge something for "any reason". 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... I am too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theeohiostate Posted August 19, 2006 Author Share Posted August 19, 2006 This is the problem. What if the guy getting Hass is in your division? "My closest opponent is going to be better than me" is NOT grounds for the challenge of a trade. IMO a Commish should NEVER have the authority to challenge something for "any reason". Good luck finding a league then pal'. I've been playing FF for 9 seasons and haven't found a league where the commish doesn't have to power to veto a trade. All the Huddle leagues i've played in allow the commish to use their judgement to allow or disallow trades, i've no idea where your getting the notion that the commish should NEVER have ANY authority to do ANYTHING for ANY reason. I'm guessing your leagues don't have commishes then and if they do, what exactly do they do, just have a title or something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theeohiostate Posted August 19, 2006 Author Share Posted August 19, 2006 (However, I'd possibly try and work out some sort of counterclaim where the trade takes out Hasselbeck from the table. That IS the one aspect I don't like, but still not enough to put a complete halt to the trade) Both owners are working on another deal now, and should get something done that on the surface and in the future accomplishes their goals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonorator 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? of course it would be veto'd. someone has to protect DMD ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGrunt Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 Both owners are working on another deal now, and should get something done that on the surface and in the future accomplishes their goals. If it's as debatable of a trade DO share! This was definitely one of the better and more interesting debates about whether or not a trade is fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetsfan Posted August 20, 2006 Share Posted August 20, 2006 I would've let this trade go through. Drones and fragile fred are pitiful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts