Gourdeau Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 (edited) As commish how would you handle this. Got an owner who has been complaining about adding bench spots for a few seasons now. Last night he moves AJ Green to IR and puts an $87 faab claim on Gronk which beat out the next highest bid of $11. Our league rules are clear and have been clear for years ( 12th season) that IR spots are only for IR designated players. What I've done so far is texted the owner and posted on the league chat that he is to remove Green from the IR spot and drop someone else and that this is to be done by 9am ( 90 mins from the time of the text) or I'll reverse the transaction. Is this to light of an action for a clearly slimy move or is this on par with how I should handle it ? At the end of the day he still paid for the claim. If it was a case where it was a waiver priority system then that would be different in my mind and I'd award the claim to the next highest bidder. To add a little more slime to this, this owner is a Zeke / Pollard owner. Coincidentally the Zeke news intensified yesterday and has just been announced official. So he will likely just drop Pollard. Edited September 4, 2019 by Gourdeau Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaft Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 Give him 24 hours. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gourdeau Posted September 4, 2019 Author Share Posted September 4, 2019 (edited) 14 minutes ago, LordOpie said: 90 minutes? I'd give him 24 hours. Giving him 24 hours gives him a whole other day to decide, wait for injury news etc. That was my reasoning for the short window. There is no doubt in my mind he did this in hopes that the Zeke news would happen early today and then he'd just drop Pollard. Edited September 4, 2019 by Gourdeau Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XFlash Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 How was he able to move to IR? MFL as well as other sites show him as OUT (O) and he should not have been able to move him to the IR slot. The rule is there so the commish is in the clear to reverse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaft Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 23 minutes ago, Gourdeau said: Giving him 24 hours gives him a whole other day to decide, wait for injury news etc. That was my reasoning for the short window. There is no doubt in my mind he did this in hopes that the Zeke news would happen early today and then he'd just drop Pollard. You're probably right, but your job as commissioner is to be impartial, even with your own biases. Give him 24 hours or drop Green or Gronk yourself right now since he broke the rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gourdeau Posted September 4, 2019 Author Share Posted September 4, 2019 3 minutes ago, LordOpie said: i guess the real question is... how slimy is this owner? Does he do stuff like this often? Or was he attempting to be "clever"? Attempting to be clever I don't get the need to give him 24 hours ? He didn't have 24 hours last night when he made his claim. Giving him 24 hours gives him an unfair advantage. And he's very active on the chat ( when he's winning) and has been active all morning. Rare that anyone in our league doesnt chime in on the chat eveey few hours. Very active league. The other owner ( not me) who bid on Gronk did it the right away. Put a claim in and had a player to drop. I took it a step further. Until last night there was no official news on Zeke. He would not have dropped Pollard to claim Gronk. I ruled he had to drop someone else other than Pollard in order for the Gronk transaction to stick. He said (the really bad word) you you can't tell me who to drop. Since he had been active on the group chat this morning I knew he knew what my ruling was so I gave him an additional 30 minutes to make his changes. He didn't So I dropped Gronk and put Pollard back on his roster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gourdeau Posted September 4, 2019 Author Share Posted September 4, 2019 17 minutes ago, Shaft said: You're probably right, but your job as commissioner is to be impartial, even with your own biases. Give him 24 hours or drop Green or Gronk yourself right now since he broke the rules. no bias at all. Im very reasonable but our rule book is clear. I wanted to just reverse the transaction myself but felt it was generous to give him the option of dropping someone other than Pollard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gourdeau Posted September 4, 2019 Author Share Posted September 4, 2019 21 minutes ago, XFlash said: How was he able to move to IR? MFL as well as other sites show him as OUT (O) and he should not have been able to move him to the IR slot. The rule is there so the commish is in the clear to reverse. Known issue with Yahoo which is why when we implemented IR a few years ago, we all agreed in order to use it, the player had to actually he designated IR in the NFL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaft Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 3 minutes ago, Gourdeau said: no bias at all. Im very reasonable but our rule book is clear. I wanted to just reverse the transaction myself but felt it was generous to give him the option of dropping someone other than Pollard. There you have it, your azz is being too nice...remove one of the Gs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gourdeau Posted September 4, 2019 Author Share Posted September 4, 2019 4 minutes ago, Shaft said: There you have it, your azz is being too nice...remove one of the Gs. See I never even considered removing Green from his roster. Trying to be reasonable. What I did is one dropped Gronk and replaced Pollard and refunded his money. Now the other owner is raising the point that he should be awarded to the claim. I tend to agree with him but he's my brother ( another wrench) and would be seen as conflict. I may assign my assist commish to handle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaft Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 3 minutes ago, Gourdeau said: See I never even considered removing Green from his roster. Trying to be reasonable. What I did is one dropped Gronk and replaced Pollard and refunded his money. Now the other owner is raising the point that he should be awarded to the claim. I tend to agree with him but he's my brother ( another wrench) and would be seen as conflict. I may assign my assist commish to handle I think you're right and your brother should get Gronk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purplemonster Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 The biggest question to me is why are people bidding that much for Gronk 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaft Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 9 minutes ago, purplemonster said: The biggest question to me is why are people bidding that much for Gronk Someone drafted Gronk in a big money league I'm in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpkrufus Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 The next bid should get Gronk, don’t matter if it’s your brother. Gronk did a interview yesterday where he flirted with words like “unretiring” if this and that and this is only reason I can see people trying to get him. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gourdeau Posted September 4, 2019 Author Share Posted September 4, 2019 co-commish ruled next bidder gets gronk. Thanks for input. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purplemonster Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 49 minutes ago, bpkrufus said: Gronk did a interview yesterday where he flirted with words like “unretiring” if this and that and this is only reason I can see people trying to get him. Gronk also said it would take him at least a month to get ready if he wanted to return (which he doesn't) and wondered aloud if he could play without having to go to practice. Then plugged his CBD stuff and talked about slathering it on his skin. Let's just say I personally am not optimistic. I know you weren't arguing for a Gronk return in the least, I just think a deeper dive into those comments wasn't very optimistic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Brown Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 21 minutes ago, purplemonster said: Gronk also said it would take him at least a month to get ready if he wanted to return (which he doesn't) and wondered aloud if he could play without having to go to practice. Then plugged his CBD stuff and talked about slathering it on his skin. Let's just say I personally am not optimistic. I know you weren't arguing for a Gronk return in the least, I just think a deeper dive into those comments wasn't very optimistic This, he's physically a mini me of Gronk now. And he was a shell of his former self last year. That waiver transaction would have been better spent on Miami's kicker. You did the guy a favor. And when the description 'clever' was thrown out, I chuckled. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gourdeau Posted September 4, 2019 Author Share Posted September 4, 2019 47 minutes ago, purplemonster said: Gronk also said it would take him at least a month to get ready if he wanted to return (which he doesn't) and wondered aloud if he could play without having to go to practice. Then plugged his CBD stuff and talked about slathering it on his skin. Let's just say I personally am not optimistic. I know you weren't arguing for a Gronk return in the least, I just think a deeper dive into those comments wasn't very optimistic IMO all these Gronk interviews and innuendo about is he coming back, this is all being manufactured to keep him relevant for his business interest and to promote this CBD venture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tylcook13 Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 Any publicity is good publicity 🤑 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 5 hours ago, Gourdeau said: Known issue with Yahoo which is why when we implemented IR a few years ago, we all agreed in order to use it, the player had to actually he designated IR in the NFL Then this owner knowingly violated that rule, and made a waiver claim that was illegal since he didn't have an open roster spot. You are trying to handle it fairly, but maybe being a little too fair. Good to see you have an assistant commish, we have a two co-commish system that usually allows us to have one impartial guy make the decision. My counterpart is usually the nice guy, and I'm the bad cop. So he takes first attempt at most issues that need to be resolved, then asks for my input and I defer to him (he really started the league and asked me that first year to help, half the league were his friends the other half our co-workers). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrevorThinksHeKnowsFantasy Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 Okay but what about the new tool album 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seadogs Posted September 5, 2019 Share Posted September 5, 2019 If its a clearly stated or written rule that has been broken then I'd immediately reverse the transaction. No 24 hours or 90 minutes to "fix" the problem. It simply is a violation of the rules and thus it is invalid. If you start being soft on rules then people won't respect them. The fact is that it should never have been allowed. However, if it is not a known rule or clearly stated in a rule book somewhere then things are different. Just as owners are expected to follow the rules of the league I also believe it is the Commissioners job to make sure everyone knows the rules and they are clearly stated. If they are not then its not the owners fault. If it's a grey area then I'd probably make the league aware of the situation and explain why you are taking a particular course of action. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gourdeau Posted September 5, 2019 Author Share Posted September 5, 2019 4 hours ago, seadogs said: If its a clearly stated or written rule that has been broken then I'd immediately reverse the transaction. No 24 hours or 90 minutes to "fix" the problem. It simply is a violation of the rules and thus it is invalid. If you start being soft on rules then people won't respect them. The fact is that it should never have been allowed. However, if it is not a known rule or clearly stated in a rule book somewhere then things are different. Just as owners are expected to follow the rules of the league I also believe it is the Commissioners job to make sure everyone knows the rules and they are clearly stated. If they are not then its not the owners fault. If it's a grey area then I'd probably make the league aware of the situation and explain why you are taking a particular course of action. Clearly stated in rule book, even discussed the rule at length with this particular owner last year because he was a Darius Guice owner and wanted to know the rules about the IR spot. I had forgotten about that chat initially but my Co commish remembered and reminded me. This whole situation exploded yesterday and resulted in the owner complaining about how I run things, challenging my integrity because my brother was the other bidder. He wouldn't let it go. This guy has only been in the league 5 years out of 12. I said listen if you don't like the way it's run make some suggestions or there's the door. He then said to me " you know youre a (the really bad word)in bitch right? Kick me out yourself" So I did exactly that. Said bye Felicia and had a new owner that's been trying to get us to expand to 12 teams for a long time in less than 5 minutes. To add some context to my decision to boot him out. He was close to getting the boot last year. We had a vote and it was neutral before my vote. The guy is a total troll and overall just not a good guy. Has poked fun at a few other owners weight ( not in a playful banter type of way) one owners mentally challenged brother in law and a few other things. Last year he was warned and I gave him another chance and voted to keep him in. So when he planted the seed today after the way he acted, I called his bluff. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XFlash Posted September 5, 2019 Share Posted September 5, 2019 It's hard and impossible to please everyone. I had similar issues years ago where someone always liked to question everything. Then when I gave up the commish and he took over he got to witness the same issues I had to deal with and he gave up the commish spot the next season. Stay true to the rules as written. If there is major disagreement with how rules are phrased then clean up the language to make it simple as possible and/or put it to vote. Sometimes it is not worth trying to fight to keep troublemakers in the league if they are the only ones sounding off. They will be happier finding another league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Brown Posted September 5, 2019 Share Posted September 5, 2019 We allow fatty waiver claims in my league; but never slimy ones. 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.