WareandTerr Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 do you guys think these trades are fair? roddy white for anquan boldin straight up and chris johnson for desean jackson straight up im thinking no..and no.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LosGatosEnFuegos Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 Hard to say without knowledge of starting requirements, rosters (and bye weeks), and scoring. White for Boldin is iffy with no other information. If the team getting Boldin has bye week issues in week 8, it's debatable. CJ for Desean is fine with no other information. I'm assuming team getting CJ needs RB help. Team getting Desean needs WR help. Desean has been underperforming compared to past performance. So has CJ, but you can't blame an owner who sells low for anything but that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Outshined Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 These are good trades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bostonsoxandy Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 The CJ trade seems fine but I don't understand the Boldin/White trade. You can't really veto it because you don't have an iota of proof of collusion, but it still doesn't make sense. White is a top-5 WR, Boldin is borderling top-20. They both play the same position....I would look for a new league if trades like this happen, just idiotic owners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 you can't really tell someone what to do with their money unless it's absolutely absurd....and even then it is tough... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
untateve Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 do you guys think these trades are fair? roddy white for anquan boldin straight up and chris johnson for desean jackson straight up im thinking no..and no.. why do you suspect collusion with these trades? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delfamdelfam Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 it's not about collusion, it's about making the league fair. If someone is just stupid and makes a bad trade it's not collusion cause he doesn't know any better, but you still have to veto it because it makes the league uneven. Even if it's not collusion by allowing one team to gain White could make his team so much better it's not fair to the other teams in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duchess Jack Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 call them out for cheaters or move on. do you also feel like you should have a say on somebody lineups or waiver pickups if you do not 100% agree with them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duchess Jack Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 it's not about collusion, it's about making the league fair. If someone is just stupid and makes a bad trade it's not collusion cause he doesn't know any better, but you still have to veto it because it makes the league uneven. Even if it's not collusion by allowing one team to gain White could make his team so much better it's not fair to the other teams in the league. this is the commish' fault. A commish must either 1) pick the right people 2) if he has newbs - put something in place to prevent this. Is an owner taking advantage of a newb? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delfamdelfam Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 this is the commish' fault. A commish must either 1) pick the right people 2) if he has newbs - put something in place to prevent this. Is an owner taking advantage of a newb? it's not fair for the rest of the league. They all payed their money. If one newb is making stupid trades and making one team that much better than all the other teams, it's not collusion but should be vetoed to keep the league fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duchess Jack Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 it's not fair for the rest of the league. They all payed their money. If one newb is making stupid trades and making one team that much better than all the other teams, it's not collusion but should be vetoed to keep the league fair. but do you have rules covering this? I mean, we're not talking Vjax for Hartline here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 (edited) Sorry, just sounds like sour grapes to me. Edited September 29, 2011 by rajncajn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLAYER Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 1 question. If you had Boldin and someone offered you Roddy straight up woild you have taken it or refused because it's unfair to the other teams? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditkaless Wonders Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 Any trade which does not involve me is unfair. I mean certainly I could have worked something out with the guy who gave up the player I covet. Stupid other owners acting like they have the right to run their teams and to deal with persons who are not me. I hate that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 (edited) it's not about collusion, it's about making the league fair. If someone is just stupid and makes a bad trade it's not collusion cause he doesn't know any better, but you still have to veto it because it makes the league uneven. Even if it's not collusion by allowing one team to gain White could make his team so much better it's not fair to the other teams in the league. What if you veto the trade and Boldin outscores White for the remainder of the season ? Who are you to tell someone how to run there team ? How do you know how the trade will turn out ? The only reason to ever veto a trade is if collusion is involved. Edited September 29, 2011 by Menudo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 Do you have some kind of proof that White will finish with better FF numbers than Boldin? Or perhaps you have documented evidence of CJ suddenly putting up greater FF numbers than Jackson? White is hurt and has been playing hurt all season. Combine that with possible bye week issues, that Flacco is outplaying Ryan, and that while White has 34 targets that Boldin has 28 so far this year, and I have no problem seeing why an owner might want to make a trade. As far as Johnson vs Jackson, Johnson's slow start is well documented. If one team needs a RB and sees postential of Johnosn picking up his performance, and trades with another team who needs a WR and sees the same potential in Jackson, exactly who are you to say they are wrong and the trade is unfair? Stop managing other owners' teams and start managing your own. Maybe you ought to be floating some trade offers, especially since you already know who is going to perform like a stud in FF all season this year, and get yourself a championship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 What if you veto the trade and Boldin outscores White for the remainder of the season ? Who are you to tell someone how to run there team ? How do you know how the trade will turn out ? The only reason to ever veto a trade is if collusion is involved. Well, he'd be happy to refund the guy's money - as should all other owners who would veto this kind of trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 it's not fair for the rest of the league. They all payed their money. If one newb is making stupid trades and making one team that much better than all the other teams, it's not collusion but should be vetoed to keep the league fair. Fair? Seriously? And who exactly is the arbiter of what "fair" is? You? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rattsass Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 You can't fix stupid. Why do so many commishes think they can? Or should? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditkaless Wonders Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 (edited) Fair? Seriously? And who exactly is the arbiter of what "fair" is? You? That would be me. It's a dirty job, but the perks are nice. Edited September 29, 2011 by Ditkaless Wonders Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michigan13 Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 The NFL should have veto'ed Jerry Jone's trade with the Lions for Roy Williams. Everyone in the NFL (except Jones) knew he wasn't worth a 1st+3rd+5th. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 it's not about collusion, it's about making the league fair. If someone is just stupid and makes a bad trade it's not collusion cause he doesn't know any better, but you still have to veto it because it makes the league uneven. Even if it's not collusion by allowing one team to gain White could make his team so much better it's not fair to the other teams in the league. Yes it is. It should always be about collusion. End of story. No proof of collusion, then move on. If your league has dumbasses in it who are willing to make bad trades, then jump on board and see what you can get out of them. Either that or move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorningMud Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 it's not about collusion, it's about making the league fair. If someone is just stupid and makes a bad trade it's not collusion cause he doesn't know any better, but you still have to veto it because it makes the league uneven. Even if it's not collusion by allowing one team to gain White could make his team so much better it's not fair to the other teams in the league. If two teams agree on the trade, then its "fair" to them. As a commish myself, when I get new owners, I warn them to be careful with their trades and offer them resources to check a trade offer out if they arent sure if its fair. After that, its up to them. NFL teams don't make trades based on whats "fair" to all the teams, they do it because they think it benefits THEIR teams. Same thing applies in the FF. If you don't like it, go make trades that benefit your team so you can compete again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTSuper7 Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 Yes it is. It should always be about collusion. End of story. No proof of collusion, then move on. If your league has dumbasses in it who are willing to make bad trades, then jump on board and see what you can get out of them. Either that or move on. This. It seems like most of the time when I hear people whining about a trade, it's because they say "I would have given you _________ for that guy." I say stop complaining and start throwing offers out there and fleece the morons of any value on their rosters. At the very least, your aggressive beatdown of these people might create enough of a stir to have the commish (or maybe the majority of owners) decide to create rules to help keep people from destroying their own teams through ignorance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooby's Hubby Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 The NFL should have veto'ed Jerry Jone's trade with the Lions for Roy Williams. Everyone in the NFL (except Jones) knew he wasn't worth a 1st+3rd+5th. don't remind me ... that one set us back a little. I cannot stand these type of owners and/or commissioners that want every trade to be voted on. There is no dumping of players here. The integrity of your league is not being tarnished. Only if a trade violates the integrity of the league does a vote become necessary. Boo on the guy who wants all trades to be voted on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts