SecondString
Footballguy
In an ESPN league, Julius Thomas was offered for Andre Ellington and Keenan Allen. Thomas owner also owns Gronk. Trade got vetoed (5 required votes) based on "imbalance".
Opinions?
Opinions?
Who populates this league?In an ESPN league, Julius Thomas was offered for Andre Ellington and Keenan Allen. Thomas owner also owns Gronk. Trade got vetoed (5 required votes) based on "imbalance".
Opinions?
Local 14-team league, $100 entry. Live draft.Who populates this league?In an ESPN league, Julius Thomas was offered for Andre Ellington and Keenan Allen. Thomas owner also owns Gronk. Trade got vetoed (5 required votes) based on "imbalance".
Opinions?
Is it just a random free public league? People you know? Private league for money/how were the managers assembled?
Vetoing that is stupid.
But if owners can veto other people's trades because they don't want other teams to improve, well, they just might do that
This is exactly right, this why you don't join leagues that have veto votes. Collusion is the only reason to vetoIt was vetoed by owners purely because of self-interest.
... and you'll likely see Snuffleupagus before you see that.This is exactly right, this why you don't join leagues that have veto votes. Collusion is the only reason to vetoIt was vetoed by owners purely because of self-interest.
I'll say, in my main league (local) we have a veto - but have no problem with it because no one's a #####. We've had some major trades that swung balances of power significantly without issue.This is exactly right, this why you don't join leagues that have veto votes. Collusion is the only reason to vetoIt was vetoed by owners purely because of self-interest.
BS quit league immediately or if already paid quit after season.... No reason trade should be banned.. or send a scrub player to even out 2-2 if that's what they mean by imbalance??In an ESPN league, Julius Thomas was offered for Andre Ellington and Keenan Allen. Thomas owner also owns Gronk. Trade got vetoed (5 required votes) based on "imbalance".
Opinions?
Quit not because of the dumb veto rule but because the league is full of petty whiners.BS quit league immediately or if already paid quit after season.... No reason trade should be banned.. or send a scrub player to even out 2-2 if that's what they mean by imbalance??In an ESPN league, Julius Thomas was offered for Andre Ellington and Keenan Allen. Thomas owner also owns Gronk. Trade got vetoed (5 required votes) based on "imbalance".
Opinions?
Yup, any league NOT like this consistently surprises me. Especially one where it is a $100 entry fee. That is even more astounding.Awful. We don't allow vetoes, all trades go through instantly and are only reviewed if there is is a serious outpouring of concern and reasonable evidence of collusion.
Leagues with trades are dumb.In an ESPN league, Julius Thomas was offered for Andre Ellington and Keenan Allen. Thomas owner also owns Gronk. Trade got vetoed (5 required votes) based on "imbalance".
Opinions?
I don't understand the imbalance. Staring requirement would be helpful.In an ESPN league, Julius Thomas was offered for Andre Ellington and Keenan Allen. Thomas owner also owns Gronk. Trade got vetoed (5 required votes) based on "imbalance".
Opinions?
I agree, it's a joke. There is no reason for a trade like that to get shot down. Get out of that league ASAPI would just resend the trade, and then post a message that it will keep being put through until someone puts forth a better offer or the original is not vetoed.
You are the reason my leagues are commish approval (have never not approved immediately) or no approval at all they just go immediately.You should NEVER allow other owners to vote on a trade.
But if you do I will ALWAYS vote in my team's best interest.
So if a trade makes a team stronger that threatens my playoff chances, I'm voting against it.
So you prefer where just the commissioner gets to veto trades? Odd stance considering you freely admit that you are only capable of acting in a selfish manner. What makes you think a commissioner would be any different?You should NEVER allow other owners to vote on a trade.
But if you do I will ALWAYS vote in my team's best interest.
So if a trade makes a team stronger that threatens my playoff chances, I'm voting against it.
I can get behind the no approval required leagues but having a commish doesn't seem like a viable solution considering everyone in here seems to be entirely selfish. What makes you think a commish wouldn't be equally self interested, or just stupid enough to think a trade like this was imbalanced and veto it?You are the reason my leagues are commish approval (have never not approved immediately) or no approval at all they just go immediately.You should NEVER allow other owners to vote on a trade.
But if you do I will ALWAYS vote in my team's best interest.
So if a trade makes a team stronger that threatens my playoff chances, I'm voting against it.
I really like this strategy a lot.I would just resend the trade, and then post a message that it will keep being put through until someone puts forth a better offer or the original is not vetoed.
Agreed. Neil's post is a valuable one in that I think that is how a lot of people think. Which is why I would never trust other owners to vote objectively on a trade. There should never be any vetoes, and the commissioner should only be looking at trades for possible collusion and that's it.You are the reason my leagues are commish approval (have never not approved immediately) or no approval at all they just go immediately.You should NEVER allow other owners to vote on a trade.
But if you do I will ALWAYS vote in my team's best interest.
So if a trade makes a team stronger that threatens my playoff chances, I'm voting against it.
If you don't trust people then you just can't have trades because allowing trades with no recourse whatsoever means obvious collusion cannot be handled. And even then you'd have to do FAAB and all dropped players go on waivers or else you could get collusion where the party receiving the player simply needs #1 waiver priority before they do it.I can get behind the no approval required leagues but having a commish doesn't seem like a viable solution considering everyone in here seems to be entirely selfish. What makes you think a commish wouldn't be equally self interested, or just stupid enough to think a trade like this was imbalanced and veto it?You are the reason my leagues are commish approval (have never not approved immediately) or no approval at all they just go immediately.You should NEVER allow other owners to vote on a trade.
But if you do I will ALWAYS vote in my team's best interest.
So if a trade makes a team stronger that threatens my playoff chances, I'm voting against it.
This is one of those ideas that almost sounds good at first, but is terrible in reality. I think the standard response would be to immediately quit any league where the other teams decided who I was going to trade for. Its even worse if its a new "rule" that wasn't in place when I paid my money.Maybe all the owners should get together and come up with their best proposals for Julius Thomas and then they can all vote on which offer is the best and that is the final deal. Kind of sucks though to be the Julius Thomas owner and not have any say in who you acquire for him.
Ahhh... the benevolent dictator.If you don't trust people then you just can't have trades because allowing trades with no recourse whatsoever means obvious collusion cannot be handled. And even then you'd have to do FAAB and all dropped players go on waivers or else you could get collusion where the party receiving the player simply needs #1 waiver priority before they do it.I can get behind the no approval required leagues but having a commish doesn't seem like a viable solution considering everyone in here seems to be entirely selfish. What makes you think a commish wouldn't be equally self interested, or just stupid enough to think a trade like this was imbalanced and veto it?You are the reason my leagues are commish approval (have never not approved immediately) or no approval at all they just go immediately.You should NEVER allow other owners to vote on a trade.
But if you do I will ALWAYS vote in my team's best interest.
So if a trade makes a team stronger that threatens my playoff chances, I'm voting against it.
You simply need a commish who will do the right thing (which is almost always to do nothing) and who isn't a complete moron. It's not difficult.
I've been commish of multiple leagues for years and mostly use commish approval for trades, or just wide open trades (since I can always use the magic wand to undo things), and haven't had any issues. I've also, long story short, corrected some things that came up mid season, half of the time which harmed me/my team, but I just did what needed to be done and it was all good. It's NOT hard, you just can't be a selfish #####
8 years running, multiple leagues nowAhhh... the benevolent dictator.If you don't trust people then you just can't have trades because allowing trades with no recourse whatsoever means obvious collusion cannot be handled. And even then you'd have to do FAAB and all dropped players go on waivers or else you could get collusion where the party receiving the player simply needs #1 waiver priority before they do it.I can get behind the no approval required leagues but having a commish doesn't seem like a viable solution considering everyone in here seems to be entirely selfish. What makes you think a commish wouldn't be equally self interested, or just stupid enough to think a trade like this was imbalanced and veto it?You are the reason my leagues are commish approval (have never not approved immediately) or no approval at all they just go immediately.You should NEVER allow other owners to vote on a trade.
But if you do I will ALWAYS vote in my team's best interest.
So if a trade makes a team stronger that threatens my playoff chances, I'm voting against it.
You simply need a commish who will do the right thing (which is almost always to do nothing) and who isn't a complete moron. It's not difficult.
I've been commish of multiple leagues for years and mostly use commish approval for trades, or just wide open trades (since I can always use the magic wand to undo things), and haven't had any issues. I've also, long story short, corrected some things that came up mid season, half of the time which harmed me/my team, but I just did what needed to be done and it was all good. It's NOT hard, you just can't be a selfish #####
Works for free and cares about the integrity of the league. It's definitely the best type of commissioner.
Forgive me. I wasn't being sarcastic.8 years running, multiple leagues nowAhhh... the benevolent dictator.If you don't trust people then you just can't have trades because allowing trades with no recourse whatsoever means obvious collusion cannot be handled. And even then you'd have to do FAAB and all dropped players go on waivers or else you could get collusion where the party receiving the player simply needs #1 waiver priority before they do it.I can get behind the no approval required leagues but having a commish doesn't seem like a viable solution considering everyone in here seems to be entirely selfish. What makes you think a commish wouldn't be equally self interested, or just stupid enough to think a trade like this was imbalanced and veto it?You are the reason my leagues are commish approval (have never not approved immediately) or no approval at all they just go immediately.You should NEVER allow other owners to vote on a trade.
But if you do I will ALWAYS vote in my team's best interest.
So if a trade makes a team stronger that threatens my playoff chances, I'm voting against it.
You simply need a commish who will do the right thing (which is almost always to do nothing) and who isn't a complete moron. It's not difficult.
I've been commish of multiple leagues for years and mostly use commish approval for trades, or just wide open trades (since I can always use the magic wand to undo things), and haven't had any issues. I've also, long story short, corrected some things that came up mid season, half of the time which harmed me/my team, but I just did what needed to be done and it was all good. It's NOT hard, you just can't be a selfish #####
Works for free and cares about the integrity of the league. It's definitely the best type of commissioner.
It's NOT hard.
I haven't had to veto/disallow a trade yet. Haven't even considered it actually. Nor has anybody complained about trades I was involved in.
Even if you don't believe you are capable of doing that, please don't project that onto others.
It's nice to be in leagues like that. I definitely wouldn't trust them with the awesome power of votes though. Wouldn't want to risk anarchy.Leonidas said:8 years running, multiple leagues nowAir Stich said:Ahhh... the benevolent dictator.Leonidas said:If you don't trust people then you just can't have trades because allowing trades with no recourse whatsoever means obvious collusion cannot be handled. And even then you'd have to do FAAB and all dropped players go on waivers or else you could get collusion where the party receiving the player simply needs #1 waiver priority before they do it.Chaka said:I can get behind the no approval required leagues but having a commish doesn't seem like a viable solution considering everyone in here seems to be entirely selfish. What makes you think a commish wouldn't be equally self interested, or just stupid enough to think a trade like this was imbalanced and veto it?Leonidas said:You are the reason my leagues are commish approval (have never not approved immediately) or no approval at all they just go immediately.Neil Beaufort Zod said:You should NEVER allow other owners to vote on a trade.
But if you do I will ALWAYS vote in my team's best interest.
So if a trade makes a team stronger that threatens my playoff chances, I'm voting against it.
You simply need a commish who will do the right thing (which is almost always to do nothing) and who isn't a complete moron. It's not difficult.
I've been commish of multiple leagues for years and mostly use commish approval for trades, or just wide open trades (since I can always use the magic wand to undo things), and haven't had any issues. I've also, long story short, corrected some things that came up mid season, half of the time which harmed me/my team, but I just did what needed to be done and it was all good. It's NOT hard, you just can't be a selfish #####
Works for free and cares about the integrity of the league. It's definitely the best type of commissioner.
It's NOT hard.
I haven't had to veto/disallow a trade yet. Haven't even considered it actually. Nor has anybody complained about trades I was involved in.
Even if you don't believe you are capable of doing that, please don't project that onto others.
Votes are far too slow. You have to give a couple days so everybody has a chance to see it/log in/possibly vote.It's nice to be in leagues like that. I definitely wouldn't trust them with the awesome power of votes though. Wouldn't want to risk anarchy.
Yeah, that is a legitimate issue/concern. But in my experience with 10-12 owners and only requiring a simple majority it is pretty easy to drum up the vote in a short time frame.Votes are far too slow. You have to give a couple days so everybody has a chance to see it/log in/possibly vote.It's nice to be in leagues like that. I definitely wouldn't trust them with the awesome power of votes though. Wouldn't want to risk anarchy.
I mean waiting a couple days for the trade to go through takes too long.Yeah, that is a legitimate issue/concern. But in my experience with 10-12 owners and only requiring a simple majority it is pretty easy to drum up the vote in a short time frame.Votes are far too slow. You have to give a couple days so everybody has a chance to see it/log in/possibly vote.It's nice to be in leagues like that. I definitely wouldn't trust them with the awesome power of votes though. Wouldn't want to risk anarchy.
Then again I only play in one league where most of the owners have been together for almost 20 years so things just go smoother in that circumstance. We had one of the worst trades that I have ever seen pass through last week (super-flex QB, non-ppr, 12 team, 16 man roster, 9 starters) Dez Bryant and Shane Vereen for Jake Locker and Trent Richardson. It's an awful trade even in a super-flex (dude lost RGIII and panicked) but we all know for a fact that there was no collusion and our owners generally believe that people should be allowed to make bad decisions even if it makes one team much stronger.
I think most of the owners primary complaint was that they didn't get to the guy willing to trade Dez for a bag of wet paper first. I would hate to play in a league where a majority of owners or the high and mighty commish overturned such a deal just because they felt it upset "competitive balance". People need to be allowed to trade Herschel Walker for 12 players/draft pics, even if it is a terrible decision.