Commish Dealing with Owners Angry Over Vetoed Trade (1 Viewer)

[charule530]

Hi All,

I am a 7th year Commissioner of my 12 team 0.5pt PPR 1QB/2RB/2WR/1RB-WR Flex/2DL/2DB/2LB/6Bench redraft league. For IDP's we score 1pt/Tack Solo, 0.5pt/Tack Assist, 3pts/Sack, 4pts/Int, 2pts/FF, 4pts/FR, 6pts/Def TD.

As the Commish, I reserved the rights to veto trades, due to prior lack of owner response in voting against unbalanced trades. Two owners in my league are up in arms that I vetoed the following trade: Michael Turner for Reggie Bush and James Harrison.

I personally think this is a ridiculous trade on the grounds that an James Harrison (currently 20th overall in points amongst LB's) does not even remotely makeup for the drop off between Michael Turner and Reggie Bush.

I am asking you guys to lay down the law, and give the final word as a third party to settle this dispute.

Thanks!

Charles

 

[healthpellets]

Did you pay to manage these respective teams? kthanksbye.

 

[DoubleG]

Alright, I'm going to post this once here - then probably end up copying and pasting it about 372 times in the next few weeks:

The answer to the following question is the same as the answer to Veto:

"DO YOU STRONGLY SUSPECT COLLUSION?"

If the answer is "no" then you have your answer on the veto.

No one, not even a commissioner, needs to or should run people's teams for them. I would quit any league (actually, I've never joined one that did) that would veto a trade for any reason OTHER than collusion.

I've got an idea! Why don't you just trade for the other teams for them?!? That way it will be just the way you think it should be!

 

[shadyridr]

Awesome as the commish you get to run everyones team for them? Cool! Terrible job vetoing

 

[Disc Shark]

Allow the trade, Charles.

 

[solorca]

I don't usually say anything more than the standard "If it ain't collusion, no veto" refrain in these threads. But...I can certainly understand why you would veto this trade. I am pretty sure that if you put it up for a league vote it would get vetoed too.For the life of me I can't find a single argument either for Reggie upside or, without specific knowledge of a Jahvid Best injury, Harrison's or Michael Turner's downside (again without specific knowledge of injury) that makes this a reasonable trade.That being said, it might not be collusion. The guy giving up Turner might just not know much about football or be a ridiculous USC fan. So, w hile Turner might be a solid back he's not what he was, does it really unbalance the league so much that you need to start calling people cheaters?

James Harrison, not Jerome. Trade is fine, nothing unfair about it.

 

[Chaka]

James Harrison, not Jerome. Trade is fine, nothing unfair about it.

Wow. Swing and a miss by me. I don't play in an IDP. My bad. Nothing to see here.ETA: Post deleted.

 

[Hoosier16]

I don't usually say anything more than the standard "If it ain't collusion, no veto" refrain in these threads. But...I can certainly understand why you would veto this trade. I am pretty sure that if you put it up for a league vote it would get vetoed too.For the life of me I can't find a single argument either for Reggie upside or, without specific knowledge of a Jahvid Best injury, Harrison's or Michael Turner's downside (again without specific knowledge of injury) that makes this a reasonable trade.That being said, it might not be collusion. The guy giving up Turner might just not know much about football or be a ridiculous USC fan. So, while Turner might be a solid back he's not what he was, does it really unbalance the league so much that you need to start calling people cheaters?

It's James, not Jerome.

 

[Air Stich]

Bad trade for sure. I wouldn't veto, though.

Have there been any other fishy trades between these two teams? I could understand a veto if they had made another similarly lopsided trade already. The solution to bad managers giving away their players for junk is to find better managers. You can't veto every trade that you THINK is lopsided.

I have a friend who plays in a new league that allows league vote to veto. After week 1 the league vetoed a trade of Reggie Wayne for Fred Jackson because you don't trade a stud receiver for some has been RB. Now that trade would probably be vetoed the other way. I've seen WAY too many trades where I thought one guy was fleecing another manager and the fantasy points ended up going the other way.

If this trade was for Rice, Peterson, or McFadden instead of Turner, I could see MAYBE vetoing, but all you did was stop one team from making a good trade.

Another note. If you are in a league that has veto rules, don't get all emotional and angry if those rules are executed. If you are too feminine to handle a trade being vetoed, then only play in leagues that don't allow vetos. There's nothing more pathetic than listening to a grown man whine and threaten to quit over a trade veto when he signed up to play in a league that uses league vote to review trades.

 

[footballnerd]

basically Turner for Harrison

 

[Mr.Pack]

Did you pay to manage these respective teams? kthanksbye.

Awesome as the commish you get to run everyones team for them? Cool! Terrible job vetoing

Allow the trade, Charles.

 

[Joe Summer]

The only thing worse than voting for trades is giving a Commissioner solitary veto power.

 

[runner06]

Excluding your vote, it's now 32-3 in favor of not vetoing. I think you got your answer though probably not the one you wanted.

 

[BassNBrew]

Charles,

Years ago I commished a league where I had solo veto power. There was a trade that looked totally lopsided involing Moss in his prime. I didn't veto but most of the league was up in arms about the trade. I tracked the results for the rest of the year and the owner that appeared to be getting the short end of the stick actually made out significaqntly better over the course of the year.

You can't predict the future so you shouldn't try to in this situation. If you veto this trade and Bush/Harrison start putting up big games, you will have the egg on your face. Stay out of the way and let owners manage their own teams.

 

[DoubleG]

Or maybe the guy who wanted Bush just knew about tthis.

 

[footballnerd]

Or maybe the guy who wanted Bush just knew about tthis.

DG that is something you should post in the DT thread like immediately, not bury it in a veto thread. Thanks for the heads up tho.

 

[fsufan]

As the Commish, I reserved the rights to veto trades,

why would anyone play in a league that gives the commish this much power

 

[~OMM~]

As the Commish, I reserved the rights to veto trades,

why would anyone play in a league that gives the commish this much power

Perhaps they got pressured into it by a friend. Leagues with any kind of vetoes are not optimal, get a clue people....let coaches, coach their teams!

 

[eakfootball]

No don't veto it. In my dynasty league (which I dont comish) Kyle Orton and Michael Bush were traded for 3 first round picks. I started a topic on weather it should be vetoed and I think 65% said it shouldn't be vetoed.

 

[Ray_T]

As the Commish, I reserved the rights to veto trades,

why would anyone play in a league that gives the commish this much power

it's actually ok to play in a league where the commish has this much power so long as the commish isnt an idiot.our commish has veto'd one trade over the last 10 years and I feel it was a good one. nobody in the league disputed it.what you dont want is a commish who veto's everything.so long as the person getting the supposed short end of the stick can justify using any reasonable form of logic (whether you agree with it or not) the deal should go through.oh, and FYI, I agree. the deal is lopsided, but I would not veto this deal.keep in mind: you dont need to agree with the logic, all you need to do is understand the logic.

 

[The_Wolfman]

As the Commish, I reserved the rights to veto trades,

why would anyone play in a league that gives the commish this much power

it's actually ok to play in a league where the commish has this much power so long as the commish isnt an idiot.

 

[⚡DEADHEAD⚡]

As the Commish, I reserved the rights to veto trades,

why would anyone play in a league that gives the commish this much power

it's actually ok to play in a league where the commish has this much power so long as the commish isnt an idiot.

Two commissioners trying to feel better about how they run their leagues?

 

[⚡DEADHEAD⚡]

Ridiculous what a bad call this is. Trade should stand. Not even close to debatable.

 

[Ghost Rider]

No way should the trade be vetoed. Whether or not you think the trade is lopsided is irrelevant. Unless you strongly suspect collusion, it shouldn't be your job to tell other people how to run their teams.

 

[Road Warriors]

As the Commish, I reserved the rights to veto trades,

why would anyone play in a league that gives the commish this much power

it's actually ok to play in a league where the commish has this much power so long as the commish isnt an idiot.

Two commissioners trying to feel better about how they run their leagues?

I've run a league with veto power for several years. Total vetos to date... Zero.What I've always applied is to review each team roster and the players involved, and if I can make a case for why each side of the deal makes sense, approve instantly. If I can't see how one side improves, I ask the owner on that side. If he provides a reason ( regardless of whether I agree with his reason or not ), trade approved.

There needs to be some controls in place to correct collusion. Better to be a little-used power in one trusted seat than up for vote by all.

 

[⚡DEADHEAD⚡]

As the Commish, I reserved the rights to veto trades,

why would anyone play in a league that gives the commish this much power

it's actually ok to play in a league where the commish has this much power so long as the commish isnt an idiot.

Two commissioners trying to feel better about how they run their leagues?

I've run a league with veto power for several years. Total vetos to date... Zero.What I've always applied is to review each team roster and the players involved, and if I can make a case for why each side of the deal makes sense, approve instantly. If I can't see how one side improves, I ask the owner on that side. If he provides a reason ( regardless of whether I agree with his reason or not ), trade approved.

There needs to be some controls in place to correct collusion. Better to be a little-used power in one trusted seat than up for vote by all.

This isn't evidence that the rule is necessary. Collusion can and should be stopped by a commissioner even in the absence of a veto rule. You don't need veto power to protect the league.

 

[Road Warriors]

As the Commish, I reserved the rights to veto trades,

why would anyone play in a league that gives the commish this much power

it's actually ok to play in a league where the commish has this much power so long as the commish isnt an idiot.

Two commissioners trying to feel better about how they run their leagues?

I've run a league with veto power for several years. Total vetos to date... Zero.What I've always applied is to review each team roster and the players involved, and if I can make a case for why each side of the deal makes sense, approve instantly. If I can't see how one side improves, I ask the owner on that side. If he provides a reason ( regardless of whether I agree with his reason or not ), trade approved.

There needs to be some controls in place to correct collusion. Better to be a little-used power in one trusted seat than up for vote by all.

This isn't evidence that the rule is necessary. Collusion can and should be stopped by a commissioner even in the absence of a veto rule. You don't need veto power to protect the league.

In theory, true. But in practice, it's much easier to have rules in place that grant the commissioner the power to overturn a trade. Clear, written rules help to keep the peace when something like this falls in the commissioner's lap.

 

[LargeMouthBass]

Obviously this isn't a money league or else why would any idiot trade Bush and Harrison for Turner?

 

[yellowdog]

I am asking you guys to lay down the law, and give the final word as a third party to settle this dispute.

Thanks!

Charles

Michael Turner for Reggie Bush and James Harrison

Allow (101 votes [90.99%] - View)

Veto (10 votes [9.01%] - View)

Done.

 

[DoubleG]

No way should the trade be vetoed. Whether or not you think the trade is lopsided is irrelevant. Unless you strongly suspect collusion, it shouldn't be your job to tell other people how to run their teams.

+47538734875638578458736583453648753

 

[shadyridr]

As the Commish, I reserved the rights to veto trades,

why would anyone play in a league that gives the commish this much power

it's actually ok to play in a league where the commish has this much power so long as the commish isnt an idiot.

Two commissioners trying to feel better about how they run their leagues?

I've run a league with veto power for several years. Total vetos to date... Zero.What I've always applied is to review each team roster and the players involved, and if I can make a case for why each side of the deal makes sense, approve instantly. If I can't see how one side improves, I ask the owner on that side. If he provides a reason ( regardless of whether I agree with his reason or not ), trade approved.

There needs to be some controls in place to correct collusion. Better to be a little-used power in one trusted seat than up for vote by all.

And who questions you if you make a lopsided trade?

 

[Sweet Love]

Allow the trade, Charles.

That answer just struck me as funny...

 

[jon_mx]

It is possible Bush outperforms Turner the rest of the year. Not likely, but still possible. And Harrison could step up and be one of the better scoring LB's.

 

[griff321]

Put it through Chuck.

 

[RUSF18]

As the Commish, I reserved the rights to veto trades, due to prior lack of owner response in voting against unbalanced trades.

So you mean that owners didn't agree with your opinion that other trades were unbalanced? Sorry, but you're the problem Chaz.

 

[mr roboto]

As the Commish, I reserved the rights to veto trades, due to prior lack of owner response in voting against unbalanced trades.

So you mean that owners didn't agree with your opinion that other trades were unbalanced? Sorry, but you're the problem Chaz.

Wait, I thought his name was Charles?

 

[RUSF18]

As the Commish, I reserved the rights to veto trades, due to prior lack of owner response in voting against unbalanced trades.

So you mean that owners didn't agree with your opinion that other trades were unbalanced? Sorry, but you're the problem Chaz.

Wait, I thought his name was Charles?

No, it's Cha Rule.

 

[Short Corner]

As the Commish, I reserved the rights to veto trades,

why would anyone play in a league that gives the commish this much power

it's actually ok to play in a league where the commish has this much power so long as the commish isnt an idiot.

Two commissioners trying to feel better about how they run their leagues?

More like a bunch of idiots piling on because every league isn't run like their league. Par for the course here really.

 

[Road Warriors]

As the Commish, I reserved the rights to veto trades,

why would anyone play in a league that gives the commish this much power

it's actually ok to play in a league where the commish has this much power so long as the commish isnt an idiot.

Two commissioners trying to feel better about how they run their leagues?

I've run a league with veto power for several years. Total vetos to date... Zero.What I've always applied is to review each team roster and the players involved, and if I can make a case for why each side of the deal makes sense, approve instantly. If I can't see how one side improves, I ask the owner on that side. If he provides a reason ( regardless of whether I agree with his reason or not ), trade approved.

There needs to be some controls in place to correct collusion. Better to be a little-used power in one trusted seat than up for vote by all.

And who questions you if you make a lopsided trade?

An asst. commissioner is in place to review any commissioner transactions.

 

[Apple Jack]

If the league agrees that trades percieved by the commissioner to be unbalanced should be vetoed, then there's nothing wrong with this inquiry. I would never get involved in a league like that, but it doesn't mean they don't exist and thus that such an inquiry is rational. I'm not down with communism, but some people are cool with it. The answer is still get out of the way, Charles.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Hi All,I am a 7th year Commissioner of my 12 team 0.5pt PPR 1QB/2RB/2WR/1RB-WR Flex/2DL/2DB/2LB/6Bench redraft league. For IDP's we score 1pt/Tack Solo, 0.5pt/Tack Assist, 3pts/Sack, 4pts/Int, 2pts/FF, 4pts/FR, 6pts/Def TD.As the Commish, I reserved the rights to veto trades, due to prior lack of owner response in voting against unbalanced trades. Two owners in my league are up in arms that I vetoed the following trade: Michael Turner for Reggie Bush and James Harrison.I personally think this is a ridiculous trade on the grounds that an James Harrison (currently 20th overall in points amongst LB's) does not even remotely makeup for the drop off between Michael Turner and Reggie Bush.I am asking you guys to lay down the law, and give the final word as a third party to settle this dispute.Thanks!Charles

You over-stepped your bounds. It doesn't matter what YOU think is good for the other player's team, it matters what HE thinks.

 

[runner06]

As the Commish, I reserved the rights to veto trades,

why would anyone play in a league that gives the commish this much power

it's actually ok to play in a league where the commish has this much power so long as the commish isnt an idiot.

Two commissioners trying to feel better about how they run their leagues?

More like a bunch of idiots piling on because every league isn't run like their league. Par for the course here really.

Eh, he shouldn't be asking for feedback on a message board then. People are entitled to their opinions. He got what he asked for (he's also entitled to his opinion whatever it ends up being).

 

[Short Corner]

Hi All,I am a 7th year Commissioner of my 12 team 0.5pt PPR 1QB/2RB/2WR/1RB-WR Flex/2DL/2DB/2LB/6Bench redraft league. For IDP's we score 1pt/Tack Solo, 0.5pt/Tack Assist, 3pts/Sack, 4pts/Int, 2pts/FF, 4pts/FR, 6pts/Def TD.As the Commish, I reserved the rights to veto trades, due to prior lack of owner response in voting against unbalanced trades. Two owners in my league are up in arms that I vetoed the following trade: Michael Turner for Reggie Bush and James Harrison.I personally think this is a ridiculous trade on the grounds that an James Harrison (currently 20th overall in points amongst LB's) does not even remotely makeup for the drop off between Michael Turner and Reggie Bush.I am asking you guys to lay down the law, and give the final word as a third party to settle this dispute.Thanks!Charles

You over-stepped your bounds. It doesn't matter what YOU think is good for the other player's team, it matters what HE thinks.

Are you in his league?

 

[Short Corner]

As the Commish, I reserved the rights to veto trades,

why would anyone play in a league that gives the commish this much power

it's actually ok to play in a league where the commish has this much power so long as the commish isnt an idiot.

Two commissioners trying to feel better about how they run their leagues?

More like a bunch of idiots piling on because every league isn't run like their league. Par for the course here really.

Eh, he shouldn't be asking for feedback on a message board then. People are entitled to their opinions. He got what he asked for (he's also entitled to his opinion whatever it ends up being).

Some of us think any league that allows 3 RBs to start are stupid as well. You don't see us hijacking all of the threads asking about flex values. If you don't want to answer the question, don't enter the thread. It is pretty clear that some leagues don't mind this kind of oversight.

 

[runner06]

Hi All,I am a 7th year Commissioner of my 12 team 0.5pt PPR 1QB/2RB/2WR/1RB-WR Flex/2DL/2DB/2LB/6Bench redraft league. For IDP's we score 1pt/Tack Solo, 0.5pt/Tack Assist, 3pts/Sack, 4pts/Int, 2pts/FF, 4pts/FR, 6pts/Def TD.As the Commish, I reserved the rights to veto trades, due to prior lack of owner response in voting against unbalanced trades. Two owners in my league are up in arms that I vetoed the following trade: Michael Turner for Reggie Bush and James Harrison.I personally think this is a ridiculous trade on the grounds that an James Harrison (currently 20th overall in points amongst LB's) does not even remotely makeup for the drop off between Michael Turner and Reggie Bush.I am asking you guys to lay down the law, and give the final word as a third party to settle this dispute.Thanks!Charles

You over-stepped your bounds. It doesn't matter what YOU think is good for the other player's team, it matters what HE thinks.

Are you in his league?

Dude, you seriously need to chill. He invited us into his league's business by creating this thread. People are going to give their opinions when asked. It's now the original poster's decision how seriously to take others' opinions, whether or not to veto the trade, and also whether or not to veto similar trades in the future.For the record, I don't think a trade should ever be vetoed unless collusion is suspected. If it is, then the commissioner should talk to each owner to get a better idea on whether or not collusion likely occurred or not.

 

[dickey moe]

What kind of Thanksgiving dinner is this? Where's the turkey, Chuck? Don't you know anything about Thanksgiving dinners? Where's the mashed potatoes? Where's the cranberry sauce? Where's the pumpkin pie?

 

[Ray_T]

As the Commish, I reserved the rights to veto trades,

why would anyone play in a league that gives the commish this much power

it's actually ok to play in a league where the commish has this much power so long as the commish isnt an idiot.

Two commissioners trying to feel better about how they run their leagues?

I am not a commissioner. but I fully support the commish in my league thank you very much

 

[captbly]

looks like you have your answer... its not even close. Allow the trade.

 

[NE_REVIVAL]

Hi All,I am a 7th year Commissioner of my 12 team 0.5pt PPR 1QB/2RB/2WR/1RB-WR Flex/2DL/2DB/2LB/6Bench redraft league. For IDP's we score 1pt/Tack Solo, 0.5pt/Tack Assist, 3pts/Sack, 4pts/Int, 2pts/FF, 4pts/FR, 6pts/Def TD.As the Commish, I reserved the rights to veto trades, due to prior lack of owner response in voting against unbalanced trades. Two owners in my league are up in arms that I vetoed the following trade: Michael Turner for Reggie Bush and James Harrison.I personally think this is a ridiculous trade on the grounds that an James Harrison (currently 20th overall in points amongst LB's) does not even remotely makeup for the drop off between Michael Turner and Reggie Bush.I am asking you guys to lay down the law, and give the final word as a third party to settle this dispute.Thanks!Charles

The owners have a right to be angry, the commish had no business vetoing this trade unless he suspected collusion. If the owners were smart they would quit and find a different league where the commisioner doesn't foolishly believe that he and he alone can predict the future.