futfan37 Posted October 31, 2010 Share Posted October 31, 2010 (edited) Im the commish of a league,anyways heres the situation.A trade has come across and we play total pts through the superbowl! the trade is between 2 good buddies 1 is out of the contest with 435 pts the leader has 729 or so he is trading away Mark Sanchez to the other guy who is still in contention with 653pts for Marion Barber and Greg Olsen,heres the rub there are about 7 other (TEs) on free agency better than Olsen and Barber would be his third back behind Gore and Ronnie Brown plus there are about 4 or 5 backs on free agency better than Barber,not to mention the guy out of it passed up on guys like p.hillis,c.ivory,r.torain,l.blount on free agency leaves defenses and te's in on bye wks etc etc.THIS TRADE SMELLS FISHEY! please vote on this for me the guy in contention just lost Romo and he only has Favre now. Edited October 31, 2010 by futfan37 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarryTheRock Posted October 31, 2010 Share Posted October 31, 2010 I dunno...In most leagues there are likely a few better fantasy QBs on the waiver wire than Sanchez too. I understand as a commish that even though the deal is not ground breaking it can be insulting to the intelligence of the commish. It's a little late now, but I would consider writing something into the rules next year about an owner that leaves players on byes in. Not that this is a ground breaking deal, but it does sound odd that a move would be made by someone that isn't managing their team otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
historymike Posted October 31, 2010 Share Posted October 31, 2010 The trade is not one-sided enough IMHO to veto. I think it is a dumb trade, and this is probably as much evidence as to why the other owner is in last place than it is collusion. I have known more than a few owners you confuse quantity with quality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
futfan37 Posted October 31, 2010 Author Share Posted October 31, 2010 a trade is a trade who am i to say whats groundbreaking or not i just want both teams to improve and when you trade away a playoff qb for people you can get on waivers,just doesnt make sense and with your point of why make a trade when your not managing your team anyways looks like 2 guys combining a team for 1 payday Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
futfan37 Posted October 31, 2010 Author Share Posted October 31, 2010 please vote! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
futfan37 Posted October 31, 2010 Author Share Posted October 31, 2010 thank you for voting i can still use more votes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
futfan37 Posted October 31, 2010 Author Share Posted October 31, 2010 more votes please Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Favre4ever Posted October 31, 2010 Share Posted October 31, 2010 I think your over thinking things and need to let people manage their teams as they see fit... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slambo Posted October 31, 2010 Share Posted October 31, 2010 In my league trades got out of hand so I look at all trades before they can be accepted.Keeps the managers in line. Don't be like this shmuck. "I think your over thinking things and need to let people manage their teams as they see fit..." bingo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flemingd Posted October 31, 2010 Share Posted October 31, 2010 other (TEs) on free agency better 4 or 5 backs on free agency better than Barber What, your opinion counts but the other guys' don't? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Man Hoody Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 It's passable and most of those players are back ups anyway. This is why I use a protest feature in my league. If one guy protests I'll take a look, if 7 owners protest (majority of league) it's automatically stopped. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildbluefan Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 (edited) Hold on, so the guy loses Romo, is trying to trade to find a replacement, and the best he can do is Mark Sanchez, and you're trying to veto it? So what's the problem? The Jets put up zero points today. Personally, I think he's the one who got fleeced, giving anything for Sanchez if you're trying to compete... Obviously it improves his team, while Sanchez was doing nothing for that other team I'm sure, so anything for him would likely improve that team too. And none of this is too mention that it's none of your damn business. Who are you, the trade police? These threads get so damn old. NEVER have a seen a vetoable trade, and I doubt I ever will on these boards. You should be stripped of your commish duties immediately for trying to veto a guy when he's trying to land a mediocre QB to replace an injured one. Edited November 1, 2010 by delusions of granduer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lkirc Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 I think your over thinking things and need to let people manage their teams as they see fit... +1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawk Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 If you really wanted to get a fair response you shouldn't have wrote anything more then just the trade. Then see what people think. It's a fair trade. Have you seen Sanchez he's got Keller, Edwards, Holmes, LT and Shonn Greene and he can't even put up a TD at home versus GB. WOW he's put up points against BUF NE and MIAMI which all have poor pass defenses and aren't really good at rushing the passer. BAL, DEN, MIN and GB have decent Pass def but are good at rushing the passer. He has a combined 16 fantasy points against those four teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 If you really wanted to get a fair response you shouldn't have wrote anything more then just the trade. Then see what people think. It's a fair trade. Have you seen Sanchez he's got Keller, Edwards, Holmes, LT and Shonn Greene and he can't even put up a TD at home versus GB. WOW he's put up points against BUF NE and MIAMI which all have poor pass defenses and aren't really good at rushing the passer. BAL, DEN, MIN and GB have decent Pass def but are good at rushing the passer. He has a combined 16 fantasy points against those four teams. Respectfully disagree. The specific players involved don't matter nearly as much as whether it improved their teams... I could trade a couple scrubs for MJD, and it wouldn't improve my team at all if I already had AP and Gore. If anything, we would need to see both teams rosters to make that determination, but even then, I stand by it that it's none of our business... If both owners feel that it improves their teams, then it should stand... Also, it should not matter if one of the teams is out of the playoff race. He still has every right to try to win games; and it's not like we're talking about some blockbuster trade anyway.. If they're colluding, then they're not very good at it. 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.