Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

How to handle this?


RowdyRoos
 Share

Recommended Posts

12 team 1/2 PPR league

 

There has been a trade accepted and the league is complaining that "offering" trades like this shouldn't even be allowed and me as commissioner should veto it because it doesn't make the league fun.

 

1 team approached the Gronk owner and asked if he'd be open to trade talks to send Gronk in exchange for his TE and added RB depth. (a screenshot has been provided and whole conversation is legit.  Gronk owner said yes send me an offer.

 

Gronk owner has the following at RB: Bell, Alfred Morris, Chris Thompson.  That's all.  League starts 2 RB, 2WR, 1TE, 1 Flex.

 

Offer was George Kittle and Peyton Barber for Gronk and was accepted.

 

League is claiming it should be vetoed on the basis that its not even a legit offer.  Gronk owner stated he doesn't feel taken advantage of and wanted a RB that is going to be lead back for respective NFL team.

 

How do you respond to the league?  There is a built-in vote where if 6 votes against it is veto.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm confused. Does your league not vote? One of ours doesn't and we elect 5 team owners at the start of the season to do the vetoing. We found people would complain but not vote like they were supposed to, hence the board of trades (or whatever you would call thats). I would look at both teams, take a tough guess at how they will do for the year and see who wins. Could be the Gronk owner feels like he will get hurt and wants to pawn him off. Considering Kittle isn't close to Gronk and Barber will probably not be the lead back by mid season....It is a poor trade. I can't see the conversation but if there is no collusion, which you can't prove 100%, I say you let it go. If your teams do vote and no one voted....tell them tough luck. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Ootter said:

That's not a lot of evidence lol. But I guess it's not like they discussed some dastardly plan. 

 

Perhaps true.  The owner receiving Barber stated his position was just that he had no RB options really available to him.  Here are the RB available to have been picked up.

Screen Shot 2018-09-07 at 10.01.44 AM.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the gronk owner just wants to keep bell. He is risking a lower scoring te to keep a s tier rb. I think he is thinking clearly. He knows that bell and kittle will outscore gronk on most occasions. He is beating bell returns earlier rather than later. I actually think he is playing it smart. Does the other guy have solid rbs, wrs, something that makes the addition of gronk overwhelmingly strong?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there's a voting process, there's a voting process.  Let the process you agreed upon before the season happen.  Is it a stupid trade?  Sure.  Is it so stupid you think you should vote against it?  That's what the "no" button is for, folks.

 

In the future, don't allow votes on trades.  Trade vetoes should be for clear collusion and if you veto a trade it should mean the people get kicked out of your league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, MeniscusIssues said:

If there's a voting process, there's a voting process.  Let the process you agreed upon before the season happen.  Is it a stupid trade?  Sure.  Is it so stupid you think you should vote against it?  That's what the "no" button is for, folks.

 

In the future, don't allow votes on trades.  Trade vetoes should be for clear collusion and if you veto a trade it should mean the people get kicked out of your league.

 

Agreed.  Last year it was no-vote and they all got pissed when an owner traded away David Johnson before week 1 for Sammy Watkins and DeMarco Murray (when Murray was projected as a decent RB for the Titans).  So this year a vote was added and now they're saying it should just be vetoed.  I think they just get upset that a trade is happening and they didn't get Gronk or DJ last year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information