Commisioner Feedback Needed (1 Viewer)

[solorca]

I have a question that I am hoping some of you experts can assist with. This season, our commissioner decided that he wanted to be responsible for the veto process in our league. He didn't really question the league, but no one argued too much with him either, because we had a lot of issues with bad trades last year...and had a hard time getting enough people to vote. He advised that if a deal was questionable, he would ask three people in the league to vote. So far this season, there have been four trades. The trade in question is in bold below, but I have included the others that have went through for reference.

Trade 1 - He traded pick 1.01 for pick 1.06 to swap picks in the 2nd, 4th, 6th, and 8th rounds. He asked a few of us and we agreed it was fair.

Trade 2 - A team decided that they wanted to pick every 12 spots, so he traded 1.03, 3.03, 5.03, and 7.03 for the 10th pick in each of those rounds. I stated that I thought this was completely unfair, but he polled the league and 2/3 people said it was fair so the trade went through. I think it's stupid and hurts the league as a whole, but since the vote allowed it, I didn't say too much afterwards.

Trade 3 - I traded pick 2.06, 3.07, and 5.07 for 2.01, 3.12, and 5.12. He allowed the trade without issue.

Trade 4 - He blocked this trade without allowing a vote between me and another opponent. I gave up 2.01, 3.12, and 7.06 for 2.11, 3.02, and 5.02. He said that this was an unfair trade because the 2's and 3's cancel out and I'm moving up almost three rounds.

I am livid about this blocked trade, because not only do I think it's fair..but he set a precedence by allowing other trades to at least go through a voting process. I can't see any reason that a trade allowing people to basically swap higher picks for lower picks, with one team not improving at all to go through, while denying mine without even a vote.

After me getting really angry, he advised he would put it up for a vote between a few people...but he hasn't given me any info on the length of time for the vote, who he will ask, or any other information.

I am considering quitting the league over this, and am curious about the thoughts of the board, since I know many of you are commissioners.

 

[Chimp Magnet]

Do not like that at all. No trade should be vetoed unless there is clear collusion. Period. What's to stop him from swaying each vote by picking three guys that he knows how they vote?

I'd be demanding that he give up the power he has taken or I'd be looking to leave the league. It took him three trades to abuse the power that no one in your league gave him. Bad commish and bad sign of things to come.

 

[Gawain]

Trade 2 - A team decided that they wanted to pick every 12 spots, so he traded 1.03, 3.03, 5.03, and 7.03 for the 10th pick in each of those rounds. I stated that I thought this was completely unfair, but he polled the league and 2/3 people said it was fair so the trade went through. I think it's stupid and hurts the league as a whole, but since the vote allowed it, I didn't say too much afterwards.

I would have left after this one. Dumbest thing ever.

 

[Captain Hook]

The first error is having the commissioner have to deal with judging ANY trades. Have clear agreed upon trade rules and then if a trade is within the rules there is NO question

Second to resolve the current situation, ask him that all trades be treated the same - either he puts them all up for a vote, only the ones he thinks are questionable or None of them Unless someone in the league asks for a committee review

And calm yourself down - have a cold one - you are getting way too upset about something pretty minor - save that for later - if you don't like the way he is handling the commish duties then YOU should leave the league - NOW

 

[Sabertooth]

Do not like that at all. No trade should be vetoed unless there is clear collusion. Period. What's to stop him from swaying each vote by picking three guys that he knows how they vote? I'd be demanding that he give up the power he has taken or I'd be looking to leave the league. It took him three trades to abuse the power that no one in your league gave him. Bad commish and bad sign of things to come.

I agree. And to take it a step further. When there is collusion...both owners are refunded their money and their rosters are frozen. This should be spelling out in the bylaws. You don't want to play with cheaters.

 

[Dope]

I commish 4 leagues at work and have never had a complaint.

I think it's because I follow what is in our rule book.

That said, overturning a trade is one of the hardest decisions that can ever be made. It's so subjective that one man shouldn't hold power over whether a trade is fair or not.

On the surface, this is a trade that I, as commish, would look into a little. Why would the other guy trade down 3 rounds like that?

It's very simple. Talk to the other owner about why he would make that trade.

If the other owner gave me any sort of reasonable reason, I'd allow the trade. Most likely the other owner's draft list drops after 13-15 guys and he really wants that 2.01 pick.

Has the other owner gotten as upset as you? If not, that would make me curious.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

I would have left this league the very second the commish decided to expand his powers without the say-so of anyone else. Bad news. The rest of your examples just prove it.

 

[Anonymous Internet User]

Trade 2 - A team decided that they wanted to pick every 12 spots, so he traded 1.03, 3.03, 5.03, and 7.03 for the 10th pick in each of those rounds. I stated that I thought this was completely unfair, but he polled the league and 2/3 people said it was fair so the trade went through. I think it's stupid and hurts the league as a whole, but since the vote allowed it, I didn't say too much afterwards.

I would have left after this one. Dumbest thing ever.

agreed, this trade is tantamount to collusion since one owner received no benefit whatsoever

 

[solorca]

Trade 2 - A team decided that they wanted to pick every 12 spots, so he traded 1.03, 3.03, 5.03, and 7.03 for the 10th pick in each of those rounds. I stated that I thought this was completely unfair, but he polled the league and 2/3 people said it was fair so the trade went through. I think it's stupid and hurts the league as a whole, but since the vote allowed it, I didn't say too much afterwards.

I would have left after this one. Dumbest thing ever.

agreed, this trade is tantamount to collusion since one owner received no benefit whatsoever

The argument on this one was that the person who made the offer was the one who wanted it, so it was allowed. He is also our league champion and has historically made odd deals that generally seem to work out for him in the end. Regardless though, it puts one team at a significant advantage over the rest of the league and it is ridiculous.

 

[Anonymous Internet User]

Trade 2 - A team decided that they wanted to pick every 12 spots, so he traded 1.03, 3.03, 5.03, and 7.03 for the 10th pick in each of those rounds. I stated that I thought this was completely unfair, but he polled the league and 2/3 people said it was fair so the trade went through. I think it's stupid and hurts the league as a whole, but since the vote allowed it, I didn't say too much afterwards.

I would have left after this one. Dumbest thing ever.

agreed, this trade is tantamount to collusion since one owner received no benefit whatsoever

The argument on this one was that the person who made the offer was the one who wanted it, so it was allowed.

He is also our league champion and has historically made odd deals that generally seem to work out for him in the end. Regardless though, it puts one team at a significant advantage over the rest of the league and it is ridiculous.

this argument makes no sense if collusion is suspected. in this case, you can say DEFINITIVELY that no benefit is conferred to the person trading down in all draft spots, therefore it cannot be allowed. this contrasts to any trade involving players, since no one can have knowledge on the future performance of players (assuming they aren't on IR).

 

[Gawain]

Trade 2 - A team decided that they wanted to pick every 12 spots, so he traded 1.03, 3.03, 5.03, and 7.03 for the 10th pick in each of those rounds. I stated that I thought this was completely unfair, but he polled the league and 2/3 people said it was fair so the trade went through. I think it's stupid and hurts the league as a whole, but since the vote allowed it, I didn't say too much afterwards.

I would have left after this one. Dumbest thing ever.

agreed, this trade is tantamount to collusion since one owner received no benefit whatsoever

The argument on this one was that the person who made the offer was the one who wanted it, so it was allowed.

He is also our league champion and has historically made odd deals that generally seem to work out for him in the end. Regardless though, it puts one team at a significant advantage over the rest of the league and it is ridiculous.

this argument makes no sense if collusion is suspected. in this case, you can say DEFINITIVELY that no benefit is conferred to the person trading down in all draft spots, therefore it cannot be allowed. this contrasts to any trade involving players, since no one can have knowledge on the future performance of players (assuming they aren't on IR).

I don't care if Bill Belichick is trading with a really smart monkey, that's the dumbest deal ever.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Lots of people want to play fantasy football, but very few people have what it takes to be a fantasy football commissioner. Most of the people who think they have what it takes don't have what it takes.

I'd quit the league, but that depends on your options. If you love playing fantasy football and this is the only local league you can find, then maybe it's worth it to you to suck it up.

 

[Pnishthm]

I have a question that I am hoping some of you experts can assist with. This season, our commissioner decided that he wanted to be responsible for the veto process in our league. He didn't really question the league, but no one argued too much with him either, because we had a lot of issues with bad trades last year...and had a hard time getting enough people to vote. He advised that if a deal was questionable, he would ask three people in the league to vote. So far this season, there have been four trades. The trade in question is in bold below, but I have included the others that have went through for reference.

Trade 1 - He traded pick 1.01 for pick 1.06 to swap picks in the 2nd, 4th, 6th, and 8th rounds. He asked a few of us and we agreed it was fair.

Trade 2 - A team decided that they wanted to pick every 12 spots, so he traded 1.03, 3.03, 5.03, and 7.03 for the 10th pick in each of those rounds. I stated that I thought this was completely unfair, but he polled the league and 2/3 people said it was fair so the trade went through. I think it's stupid and hurts the league as a whole, but since the vote allowed it, I didn't say too much afterwards.

Trade 3 - I traded pick 2.06, 3.07, and 5.07 for 2.01, 3.12, and 5.12. He allowed the trade without issue.

Trade 4 - He blocked this trade without allowing a vote between me and another opponent. I gave up 2.01, 3.12, and 7.06 for 2.11, 3.02, and 5.02. He said that this was an unfair trade because the 2's and 3's cancel out and I'm moving up almost three rounds.

I am livid about this blocked trade, because not only do I think it's fair..but he set a precedence by allowing other trades to at least go through a voting process. I can't see any reason that a trade allowing people to basically swap higher picks for lower picks, with one team not improving at all to go through, while denying mine without even a vote.

After me getting really angry, he advised he would put it up for a vote between a few people...but he hasn't given me any info on the length of time for the vote, who he will ask, or any other information.

I am considering quitting the league over this, and am curious about the thoughts of the board, since I know many of you are commissioners.

This crap already?

 

[Mr. Mojo]

Originally I was the final veto on any trade.

I only vetoed 2 trades in more than a dozen years.

One was totally the right call but I think I blew it on the 2nd one, therefore I changed the rule to all vote on trades.

 

[theplayer11]

according to pick value calculator, that trade improved your team slightly, just 5%. Trade should have went through.

Show your idiot commish this tool.

http://footballguys.com/pickvalue.htm

 

[Anonymous Internet User]

according to pick value calculator, that trade improved your team slightly, just 5%. Trade should have went through.Show your idiot commish this tool.http://footballguys.com/pickvalue.htm

they need to update this for the math disinclined for inputs of round/pick instead of overall pick. for example, 7.08 in a 12-teamer is 6*12 + 8 = 80. i'd much rather input "12-team" and "7.08" than have to calculate pick 80 overall.

 

[Picklepete]

Do not like that at all. No trade should be vetoed unless there is clear collusion. Period. What's to stop him from swaying each vote by picking three guys that he knows how they vote? I'd be demanding that he give up the power he has taken or I'd be looking to leave the league. It took him three trades to abuse the power that no one in your league gave him. Bad commish and bad sign of things to come.

I agree. And to take it a step further. When there is collusion...both owners are refunded their money and their rosters are frozen. This should be spelling out in the bylaws. You don't want to play with cheaters.

No way.. They get kicked out and DONT get a refund !They cheat..lose thier $$

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Originally I was the final veto on any trade.I only vetoed 2 trades in more than a dozen years.One was totally the right call but I think I blew it on the 2nd one, therefore I changed the rule to all vote on trades.

Voting on trades is never a good solution.The commissioner should be the only one who can veto a trade, and he should typically only do so when collusion has been discovered. Just because you think you might have blown one call in 12+ years doesn't mean you should change to a far inferior system like voting on trades.

 

[ddarroch4]

You didn't say anything when you had a chance after he said he would veto trades because you guys had a lot of problems last season. Your trade being vetoed is not a big deal and you should get over it. He's doing what he thinks is in the best interest of the league. You need to bring up the fact that a different system for trades need to be in place for next season, then remind him as soon as the season is over. Withhold your entry fee until there is a new system in place next season.

 

[RandyDB]

Trade 2 - A team decided that they wanted to pick every 12 spots, so he traded 1.03, 3.03, 5.03, and 7.03 for the 10th pick in each of those rounds. I stated that I thought this was completely unfair, but he polled the league and 2/3 people said it was fair so the trade went through. I think it's stupid and hurts the league as a whole, but since the vote allowed it, I didn't say too much afterwards.

I would have left after this one. Dumbest thing ever.

agreed, this trade is tantamount to collusion since one owner received no benefit whatsoever

How is a trade such as this unfair or hurt the league as a whole? I think both owners can see a benefit to this trade.The benefit being that neither owner has to wait forever (18 or 19 picks) between picks. This puts both of the owners more on par with the 6 or 7 slots.

 

[Anonymous Internet User]

Trade 2 - A team decided that they wanted to pick every 12 spots, so he traded 1.03, 3.03, 5.03, and 7.03 for the 10th pick in each of those rounds. I stated that I thought this was completely unfair, but he polled the league and 2/3 people said it was fair so the trade went through. I think it's stupid and hurts the league as a whole, but since the vote allowed it, I didn't say too much afterwards.

I would have left after this one. Dumbest thing ever.

agreed, this trade is tantamount to collusion since one owner received no benefit whatsoever

How is a trade such as this unfair or hurt the league as a whole? I think both owners can see a benefit to this trade.The benefit being that neither owner has to wait forever (18 or 19 picks) between picks. This puts both of the owners more on par with the 6 or 7 slots.

no, it doesn't. 1.10 instead of 1.03 is a downgrade. 3.10 instead of 3.03 is a downgrade. 5.10 instead of 5.03 is a downgrade. any player you want at the 10 spot would have been there at the 3 spot. waiting an extra 7 picks in these rounds can confer no benefit.

 

[Sudoku_in_the_Bathtub]

Your commissioner is a moron.

 

[Darrinll40]

No need to start a new thread.Well, I just got screwed in a trade. I took over a dynasty team that had both Brady and manning this year. I was shopping Manning and finally found an owner willing to give me Felix Jones and we executed the trade on Thursday, and it only awaited commissioner approval. 4 days later, and bad news about Manning the commish cancels the trade. His reasoning.

Sorry I was out of the office on Sunday. I received an email from the team who originally wanted to trade for Manning on Sunday afternoon saying that he wanted to cancel the trade. Because of this I am canceling the trade as it was not approved and I received the email notifying me of the wish to cancel the trade before the trade was approved.

So he cancels a trade while only talking to one owner involved. There was no collusion involved in the trade so he should not have done anything but approve it.Needless to say that I am a bit pissed off.

 

[[scooter]]

No need to start a new thread.Well, I just got screwed in a trade. I took over a dynasty team that had both Brady and manning this year. I was shopping Manning and finally found an owner willing to give me Felix Jones and we executed the trade on Thursday, and it only awaited commissioner approval. 4 days later, and bad news about Manning the commish cancels the trade. His reasoning.

Sorry I was out of the office on Sunday. I received an email from the team who originally wanted to trade for Manning on Sunday afternoon saying that he wanted to cancel the trade. Because of this I am canceling the trade as it was not approved and I received the email notifying me of the wish to cancel the trade before the trade was approved.

So he cancels a trade while only talking to one owner involved. There was no collusion involved in the trade so he should not have done anything but approve it.Needless to say that I am a bit pissed off.

I'm sure there are other leagues where you can take advantage of people who don't subscribe to wire reports.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

Do not like that at all. No trade should be vetoed unless there is clear collusion. Period. What's to stop him from swaying each vote by picking three guys that he knows how they vote? I'd be demanding that he give up the power he has taken or I'd be looking to leave the league. It took him three trades to abuse the power that no one in your league gave him. Bad commish and bad sign of things to come.

what's the point of working on a tarde for hours if all the other lazy owners are going to veto a trade b/c they don't want to see anyone improve. leagues like this suck ###.

 

[solorca]

For the record, the commish in my league put it up for a vote and I won, so the trade went through...

 

[Darrinll40]

No need to start a new thread.Well, I just got screwed in a trade. I took over a dynasty team that had both Brady and manning this year. I was shopping Manning and finally found an owner willing to give me Felix Jones and we executed the trade on Thursday, and it only awaited commissioner approval. 4 days later, and bad news about Manning the commish cancels the trade. His reasoning.

Sorry I was out of the office on Sunday. I received an email from the team who originally wanted to trade for Manning on Sunday afternoon saying that he wanted to cancel the trade. Because of this I am canceling the trade as it was not approved and I received the email notifying me of the wish to cancel the trade before the trade was approved.

So he cancels a trade while only talking to one owner involved. There was no collusion involved in the trade so he should not have done anything but approve it.Needless to say that I am a bit pissed off.

I'm sure there are other leagues where you can take advantage of people who don't subscribe to wire reports.

So it is my fault. On Thursday when the trade was accepted, he knew that Manning had surgery. The trade should have been approved on Friday, Saturday at the latest. It is only after Sundays news. which was all over sports news not just wire reports, that the other owner wanted to cancel. AT the least I should have been contacted as part of the transaction before the decision was made to cancel the trade. To leave me out seems a lot like collusion on the part of the commissioner and the other owner.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

Trade 2 - A team decided that they wanted to pick every 12 spots, so he traded 1.03, 3.03, 5.03, and 7.03 for the 10th pick in each of those rounds. I stated that I thought this was completely unfair, but he polled the league and 2/3 people said it was fair so the trade went through. I think it's stupid and hurts the league as a whole, but since the vote allowed it, I didn't say too much afterwards.

I would have left after this one. Dumbest thing ever.

agreed, this trade is tantamount to collusion since one owner received no benefit whatsoever

agreed. so one owner just gets to jump 7 spots in 4 rounds without giving up anything? Sounds like backdoor collusion, or you are playing with absolute imbeciles. Either way looks like this league is a joke on many levels. strap in... Something tells me that one of the owners might be getting something under the table here...

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

No need to start a new thread.Well, I just got screwed in a trade. I took over a dynasty team that had both Brady and manning this year. I was shopping Manning and finally found an owner willing to give me Felix Jones and we executed the trade on Thursday, and it only awaited commissioner approval. 4 days later, and bad news about Manning the commish cancels the trade. His reasoning.

Sorry I was out of the office on Sunday. I received an email from the team who originally wanted to trade for Manning on Sunday afternoon saying that he wanted to cancel the trade. Because of this I am canceling the trade as it was not approved and I received the email notifying me of the wish to cancel the trade before the trade was approved.

So he cancels a trade while only talking to one owner involved. There was no collusion involved in the trade so he should not have done anything but approve it.Needless to say that I am a bit pissed off.

that is horse####. you don't get a 96 hour right of cancellation.... wtf is wrong with people?

 

[Darrinll40]

I emailed everyone in the league and told them that if the trade wasn't redone and approved I wanted out with a full refund. If they agree I will probably only play the one year now. I was looking to join a good league and play for years.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

No need to start a new thread.Well, I just got screwed in a trade. I took over a dynasty team that had both Brady and manning this year. I was shopping Manning and finally found an owner willing to give me Felix Jones and we executed the trade on Thursday, and it only awaited commissioner approval. 4 days later, and bad news about Manning the commish cancels the trade. His reasoning.

Sorry I was out of the office on Sunday. I received an email from the team who originally wanted to trade for Manning on Sunday afternoon saying that he wanted to cancel the trade. Because of this I am canceling the trade as it was not approved and I received the email notifying me of the wish to cancel the trade before the trade was approved.

So he cancels a trade while only talking to one owner involved. There was no collusion involved in the trade so he should not have done anything but approve it.Needless to say that I am a bit pissed off.

I'm sure there are other leagues where you can take advantage of people who don't subscribe to wire reports.

So it is my fault. On Thursday when the trade was accepted, he knew that Manning had surgery. The trade should have been approved on Friday, Saturday at the latest. It is only after Sundays news. which was all over sports news not just wire reports, that the other owner wanted to cancel. AT the least I should have been contacted as part of the transaction before the decision was made to cancel the trade. To leave me out seems a lot like collusion on the part of the commissioner and the other owner.

I'd raise this with the league. You traded when things were iffy. If the reports had come out saying "manning fine to start, feels great, there is no way the owner reneges. Horrible abuse of commish acting as dad (and likely not wanting to see your team improve/is buds with other guy'Any of the above idiot commishes, send em here. we'll tell em what unethical dip####s they are!

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

I emailed everyone in the league and told them that if the trade wasn't redone and approved I wanted out with a full refund. If they agree I will probably only play the one year now. I was looking to join a good league and play for years.

if this is what happens in preseason Year one, odds are you'll be better off leaving.

 

[Mr. Know-It-All]

No need to start a new thread.Well, I just got screwed in a trade. I took over a dynasty team that had both Brady and manning this year. I was shopping Manning and finally found an owner willing to give me Felix Jones and we executed the trade on Thursday, and it only awaited commissioner approval. 4 days later, and bad news about Manning the commish cancels the trade. His reasoning.

Sorry I was out of the office on Sunday. I received an email from the team who originally wanted to trade for Manning on Sunday afternoon saying that he wanted to cancel the trade. Because of this I am canceling the trade as it was not approved and I received the email notifying me of the wish to cancel the trade before the trade was approved.

So he cancels a trade while only talking to one owner involved. There was no collusion involved in the trade so he should not have done anything but approve it.Needless to say that I am a bit pissed off.

I'm sure there are other leagues where you can take advantage of people who don't subscribe to wire reports.

So it is my fault. On Thursday when the trade was accepted, he knew that Manning had surgery. The trade should have been approved on Friday, Saturday at the latest. It is only after Sundays news. which was all over sports news not just wire reports, that the other owner wanted to cancel. AT the least I should have been contacted as part of the transaction before the decision was made to cancel the trade. To leave me out seems a lot like collusion on the part of the commissioner and the other owner.

I'd raise this with the league. You traded when things were iffy. If the reports had come out saying "manning fine to start, feels great, there is no way the owner reneges. Horrible abuse of commish acting as dad (and likely not wanting to see your team improve/is buds with other guy'Any of the above idiot commishes, send em here. we'll tell em what unethical dip####s they are!

The problem is, though, that if you complete this trade you will look like a feminine hygiene product even though it isn't your fault that Manning now may be out for a good portion of the year. You are right that the trade should go through - but you gain more and look better by allowing it not to. If you are not playing with friends then this is not a factor - if you are playing with friends allow the trade to be reneged.

 

[Darrinll40]

No need to start a new thread.

Well, I just got screwed in a trade. I took over a dynasty team that had both Brady and manning this year. I was shopping Manning and finally found an owner willing to give me Felix Jones and we executed the trade on Thursday, and it only awaited commissioner approval. 4 days later, and bad news about Manning the commish cancels the trade. His reasoning.

Sorry I was out of the office on Sunday. I received an email from the team who originally wanted to trade for Manning on Sunday afternoon saying that he wanted to cancel the trade. Because of this I am canceling the trade as it was not approved and I received the email notifying me of the wish to cancel the trade before the trade was approved.

So he cancels a trade while only talking to one owner involved. There was no collusion involved in the trade so he should not have done anything but approve it.

Needless to say that I am a bit pissed off.

I'm sure there are other leagues where you can take advantage of people who don't subscribe to wire reports.

So it is my fault. On Thursday when the trade was accepted, he knew that Manning had surgery. The trade should have been approved on Friday, Saturday at the latest. It is only after Sundays news. which was all over sports news not just wire reports, that the other owner wanted to cancel. AT the least I should have been contacted as part of the transaction before the decision was made to cancel the trade. To leave me out seems a lot like collusion on the part of the commissioner and the other owner.

I'd raise this with the league. You traded when things were iffy. If the reports had come out saying "manning fine to start, feels great, there is no way the owner reneges. Horrible abuse of commish acting as dad (and likely not wanting to see your team improve/is buds with other guy'Any of the above idiot commishes, send em here. we'll tell em what unethical dip####s they are!

The problem is, though, that if you complete this trade you will look like a feminine hygiene product even though it isn't your fault that Manning now may be out for a good portion of the year. You are right that the trade should go through - but you gain more and look better by allowing it not to. If you are not playing with friends then this is not a factor - if you are playing with friends allow the trade to be reneged.

I am a fairly nice guy. IF I had been notified of the change of mind of the other owner before all of this happened I would probably have agreed to cancel it. But as I was the only one involved that wasn't consulted so I am going to be a complete **** about it. I am new to the league and actually know nobody in it. I did find this in the League Bylaws.

The commissioner has the power to reject a trade if it is deemed to be unfair or if collusion is suspected. If a trade is rejected an email will be sent to all of the owners in the league who are not part of the pending deal asking them to vote on the proposed trade. The two teams involved and the commissioner will not be eligible to vote. If at least 5 of owners vote for the trade to be approved, it will then be approved by the commissioner. This way, individuals who are unbiased since they are not a part of the league in question can decide deals.

Nice to know they are so important that they can be ignored whenever someone wants. I was not informed of any email sent out for a vote.