What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

How to handle owner turnover (1 Viewer)

Andrew74

Footballguy
I am the commish in a 12 team dynasty league that I run at work. We had an owner leave the league back in February/March. We had two people who wanted in that were equal in talent on paper, so I flipped a coin to pick the owner (prospect A).

Fast forward to today and the owner who took over is leaving the company. He tells me today that he is dropping out of the league. So I go back to the second guy (Prospect B) and he still wants in the league. Problem solved.

During the two months or so that Prospect A was in the league, I made a trade with him. I am one of the few that is an active trader. The trade involved me getting Jamaal Charles and he Andre Johnson. I have been working on trading Charles to another owner (Owner B) since then.

After I send an email to the league saying Prospect B is taking over, Owner B sends a reply to all that all trades Prospect A made should be voided; mine being the only trade he made. Then a second owner responds to that message saying at least Prospect B should be able to review the trade to accept or reject it. Prospect B responds that he would like that.

So what should happen here? The rules don't address this. There is a 24 hour period after a trade that owners can object; no one objected to this trade.

For disclosure, here was the trade.

Me (Commish) gave - AJ, 1.05, 2.11

Prospect A gave - JC, 1.03, 2.03

His team still has Mendenhall, McFadden, Spiller. His best WR after AJ is either Benn or MSW.

 
In dynasty, owners should have to pay for the league before any trades are accepted from that team. That is your problem. If team A paid for the league, and team B gets to run it for free with a chance at a payout, then he would accept the trade with no issues.

The problem here is that you let a guy make a trade without real ownership for the 2011 season.

 
I am the commish in a 12 team dynasty league that I run at work. We had an owner leave the league back in February/March. We had two people who wanted in that were equal in talent on paper, so I flipped a coin to pick the owner (prospect A).Fast forward to today and the owner who took over is leaving the company. He tells me today that he is dropping out of the league. So I go back to the second guy (Prospect B) and he still wants in the league. Problem solved. During the two months or so that Prospect A was in the league, I made a trade with him. I am one of the few that is an active trader. The trade involved me getting Jamaal Charles and he Andre Johnson. I have been working on trading Charles to another owner (Owner B) since then. After I send an email to the league saying Prospect B is taking over, Owner B sends a reply to all that all trades Prospect A made should be voided; mine being the only trade he made. Then a second owner responds to that message saying at least Prospect B should be able to review the trade to accept or reject it. Prospect B responds that he would like that. So what should happen here? The rules don't address this. There is a 24 hour period after a trade that owners can object; no one objected to this trade. For disclosure, here was the trade. Me (Commish) gave - AJ, 1.05, 2.11Prospect A gave - JC, 1.03, 2.03His team still has Mendenhall, McFadden, Spiller. His best WR after AJ is either Benn or MSW.
I don't think a hard fast rule can really cover this situation. With the circumstances presented, if I was you I would just reverse the trade and prentend Owner B took over originally. Owner A really ended up having no stake in the team and since Owner B was a contender for the spot in the first place, it could be argued (although not that strong of an argument) that he should get the team as it was. It's better for league harmony in the long run, if you as commish do the "right" thing (not saying you'd be wrong not to do it necessarily though).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dr. Octopus is right. You would not be doing the "wrong thing" by keeping the trade. However, if this is a work league, the bonus points at work for doing the "right thing" in other owners eyes is more than worth it.

Also, if you drafted the rules and are the commish, then this should be your penalty for not having a rule in place about payment before trades. :mellow:

 
Your league-mates are being ridiculous. You are offering the guy the team as it is. He doesn't get to go back and undo trades or draft picks. Why not start the league over, since the new owner didn't get the guy he wanted in the 3rd round of the startup.

Just tell the guy that you are offering him the team as is. If he doesn't want it, find someone else.

 
Your league-mates are being ridiculous. You are offering the guy the team as it is. He doesn't get to go back and undo trades or draft picks. Why not start the league over, since the new owner didn't get the guy he wanted in the 3rd round of the startup.Just tell the guy that you are offering him the team as is. If he doesn't want it, find someone else.
Exactly...he took the team "as is". If he were not happy about it, couldn't he have declined the team? No one was putting a gun to his head...and why did Owner B even bring this up? My guess is that he is after Charles and wants a crack at trading for him.As a side note...I do not play dynasty, but have been on the board for a while...typically the teams that people inherit are brutal, so this guy should be happy he has AJ, Mendenhall, McFadden and Spiller.
 
Kind of surprised that no one has mentioned the trade itself so far.

Charles > AJ

1.3 > 1.5

2.3 > 2.11

Not getting Prospect A's thinking at all. That said, I don't think you need to reverse the trade. It may be worth considering based on some of the reasoning presented in the thread, but it is also fine to let it stand IMO.

 
I don't even see why there should have to be a rule on this, it should go without saying once a trade is approved by the league it is final. You can't run a team right if you have to worry about previous trades being reversed.

 
Kind of surprised that no one has mentioned the trade itself so far.Charles > AJ1.3 > 1.52.3 > 2.11Not getting Prospect A's thinking at all. That said, I don't think you need to reverse the trade. It may be worth considering based on some of the reasoning presented in the thread, but it is also fine to let it stand IMO.
Depending on the starting lineup and scoring, i don't think Charles is necessarily ahead of AJ at all.
 
Kind of surprised that no one has mentioned the trade itself so far.Charles > AJ1.3 > 1.52.3 > 2.11Not getting Prospect A's thinking at all. That said, I don't think you need to reverse the trade. It may be worth considering based on some of the reasoning presented in the thread, but it is also fine to let it stand IMO.
Depending on the starting lineup and scoring, i don't think Charles is necessarily ahead of AJ at all.
OK, I guess Prospect A must have been in that camp. I am generally one who devalues RBs in dynasty due to longevity/injury/turnover issues, but I would still take 24 year old Charles over 30 year old AJ. Although I suppose I should mention that I play in zero PPR leagues, so maybe that's a factor.
 
You flipped a coin to decide which owner would get the team? What does "equal in talent" mean? You choose owners on how "good" they are at fantasy football, not how good of an owner they would be?

This is yet another case where the commissioner is expected to bend over backwards to accommodate every complainer, and not allowed to simply act like a regular owner. If it was two other owners involved in the trade, the remaining owner would laugh if you suggested they reverse their trade. And you probably wouldn't even ask them to do that. But because it's the commissioner you're expected to (and probably will) reverse the trade.

I almost think you should, since you flipped a coin to determine who gets the spot. But whatever you choose, you should be willing to say the same result would have occurred no matter who the trading owners were. I also agree that there's a problem with someone running a team with no financial investment in it, but if the guy acted in good faith, it should stand.

 
'adrenaline said:
I don't even see why there should have to be a rule on this, it should go without saying once a trade is approved by the league it is final. You can't run a team right if you have to worry about previous trades being reversed.
It should. No one is disputing that. The new league member never should have brought it up, and he may suck for it. Since he did, it is not worth the battle. Half the league will agree with you and half will not. It could be an issue at work later on. What if six guys at work do not like you for it? Do you enjoy awkward water cooler situations? Will it affect future promotions or raises? You want the workers in that office to respect you.This is a lesser of two evils situation for you. Prioritize your life before you make a decision. If you value your job more than your team, the solution seems to pop out.

 
If A paid and B is playing for free, the trade should stand. If A didn't pay and B now has to pay for what A did, the trade should be rescinded.

 
Sounds like Prospect B is not interested in taking the team. Next!

Should new unknown Prospect X come onboard, rather than Prospect B, would he ask for a reversal of trades of prior transactions? Don't think so. If the trade was more in B's favor, would he want it to stand? Would you push to have it over turned? What would B's reaction be, shoe on the other foot? I don't think creating a posteriori trade vetoing is a good thing, if the trade passed the transaction standard of the league at that time then it stands.

Prospect B is either interested in the team in it's current status or he is not. We don't turn back the league clock for lamenting.

 
Not a free league, but not ultra competitive. The new owner didn't ask about trades until 2 other owners blasted the league with "we should void all trades the temp owner made". Then the new owner wanted to know what the trades were.

The new owner and I met and discussed this and agreed to swap back the 2.03 and 2.11 picks. He seemed satisfied and I think it is a small price to pay to smooth things over.

Now to close the small window on dues being paid. Lesson learned.

 
The fact that this league is a work affair is all I needed to hear. Put FF aside and ask yourself if it's worth collectively pissing off a hoard of people that can make your "real life" miserable if they want to be petty about it. I'd just reverse it.

 
Not a free league, but not ultra competitive. The new owner didn't ask about trades until 2 other owners blasted the league with "we should void all trades the temp owner made". Then the new owner wanted to know what the trades were. The new owner and I met and discussed this and agreed to swap back the 2.03 and 2.11 picks. He seemed satisfied and I think it is a small price to pay to smooth things over.Now to close the small window on dues being paid. Lesson learned.
Glad you found an equitable solution. You paid a small price to keep the peace and gain some credibility with the league. Good for you.However, I don't think you were obligated to give anything back. You never had a "temp" owner. The deal was made, in good faith, by teams expecting to play the upcoming season.
 
If you do decide to undo the trade, I think you should let the league vote on it. It's absurd to undo it, but it's better to have the league in on something like this.

 
SO did ownder A pay or not? All my leauges have a rule that you have to pay for the upcoming year if you want to trade offeason...... If he did pay and back out thats good. If he didn't pay but the leauge didn't veto screw guy B. I'm sure he saw the team after the trade in the first place before accepting your offer to fill the spot.

 
I don't even see why there should have to be a rule on this, it should go without saying once a trade is approved by the league it is final.
This.How far back does this cat want to go, as far as "approving trades" goes? If it was clear he was picking up a team 'as is', which is what it appears to be, then unless someone held a gun to his head to take this team over he doesn't have a leg to stand on here.
 
SO did ownder A pay or not? All my leauges have a rule that you have to pay for the upcoming year if you want to trade offeason...... If he did pay and back out thats good. If he didn't pay but the leauge didn't veto screw guy B. I'm sure he saw the team after the trade in the first place before accepting your offer to fill the spot.
From his posts it doesn't look like owner A paid before bailing out. The OP also says that they flipped a coin to decide between Owner A and Owner B, it's entirely plausible that Owner B saw the team before Owner A made the trade.
 
Owner B and Prospect B are not the same person. Owner B is trying to trade for Charles, whom I acquired from Prospect A before he bailed. He's also in my division.

Prospect A did not pay. Fees are due Friday. Between the rareity of trades and the casualness of the league (and low turnover overall), we've never been anal about timing of paying/trading. We usually pay fees when MFL gets the new year up and going(although we are running late this year as my wife just had a kid). Obviuosly, this won't happen again.

Both prospects saw the roster originally, before Prospect A made the trade. But Prospect B accepted the team as is and hasn't paid yet.

I thought about telling them all to suck it, but decided to be a diplomat. There is some angst in the league because in the 5 years we've played, I've won it 3 times and came in 2nd twice.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Owner B and Prospect B are not the same person. Owner B is trying to trade for Charles, whom I acquired from Prospect A before he bailed. He's also in my division.Prospect A did not pay. Fees are due Friday. Between the rareity of trades and the casualness of the league (and low turnover overall), we've never been anal about timing of paying/trading. We usually pay fees when MFL gets the new year up and going(although we are running late this year as my wife just had a kid). Obviuosly, this won't happen again.Both prospects saw the roster originally, before Prospect A made the trade. But Prospect B accepted the team as is and hasn't paid yet. I thought about telling them all to suck it, but decided to be a diplomat. There is some angst in the league because in the 5 years we've played, I've won it 3 times and came in 2nd twice.
That's the problem with work leagues. The pool of available owners is small enough that you're likely to get some stinkers...and its much easier for one or two owners to stay on top of a league without top competition. And then everyone who ISN'T top competition gets pissy about it. They want work leagues to be "fair" regardless of what they do, and when they aren't, they're sore about it. They don't realize that the nature of fantasy football isn't to be "fair", but to win. And consciously killing that top competitive desire in the owners who ARE capable of dominating, for the sake of keeping it "fair" and not causing trouble at work, makes these leagues less than fun after a while.
 
Owner B and Prospect B are not the same person. Owner B is trying to trade for Charles, whom I acquired from Prospect A before he bailed. He's also in my division.Prospect A did not pay. Fees are due Friday. Between the rareity of trades and the casualness of the league (and low turnover overall), we've never been anal about timing of paying/trading. We usually pay fees when MFL gets the new year up and going(although we are running late this year as my wife just had a kid). Obviuosly, this won't happen again.Both prospects saw the roster originally, before Prospect A made the trade. But Prospect B accepted the team as is and hasn't paid yet. I thought about telling them all to suck it, but decided to be a diplomat. There is some angst in the league because in the 5 years we've played, I've won it 3 times and came in 2nd twice.
That's the problem with work leagues. The pool of available owners is small enough that you're likely to get some stinkers...and its much easier for one or two owners to stay on top of a league without top competition. And then everyone who ISN'T top competition gets pissy about it. They want work leagues to be "fair" regardless of what they do, and when they aren't, they're sore about it. They don't realize that the nature of fantasy football isn't to be "fair", but to win. And consciously killing that top competitive desire in the owners who ARE capable of dominating, for the sake of keeping it "fair" and not causing trouble at work, makes these leagues less than fun after a while.
That's why work leagues ought to be redraft :)
 
Absolutely agree with the point that work leagues should be redraft. But given that its a dynasty league, one team winning the championship 3 years and finishing 2nd twice probably just points out that the team was originally strong from the startup dynasty league draft. It could be coming up on the time for its cycle at the top to end.

 
Not a free league, but not ultra competitive. The new owner didn't ask about trades until 2 other owners blasted the league with "we should void all trades the temp owner made". Then the new owner wanted to know what the trades were.

The new owner and I met and discussed this and agreed to swap back the 2.03 and 2.11 picks. He seemed satisfied and I think it is a small price to pay to smooth things over.

Now to close the small window on dues being paid. Lesson learned.
Glad you found an equitable solution. You paid a small price to keep the peace and gain some credibility with the league. Good for you.However, I don't think you were obligated to give anything back. You never had a "temp" owner. The deal was made, in good faith, by teams expecting to play the upcoming season.
I'm also glad it was resolved, but make no mistake: The commish LOST credibility. I'm sure he's a great guy and a fine owner...but he's a weak commissioner. People complain so he buckles because he's the one who "benefits" from the trade. What he taught the other owners is "If I whine enough or it looks like he might benefit, we can get him to hurt his own team and try to appease us."You can expect to revisit other issues in the future, because you caved in a way that shows you're willing to reverse valid, legal trades in order to "keep the peace." Now you've set a precedent.

I'm not advocating an Iron Curtain commish system, of course. But if a valid trade was made, you gained no credibility by going back and changing it. Your new trade (2.03 for 2.11 or whatever) is technically illegal because you're not getting anything in return for dropping down a few slots. You're just "helping out the new guy" by giving him an better pick and getting nothing in return. If any other teams tried that, you'd probably veto it.

Again, none of our opinions mean anything because its your league and you're happy with the result. But it actually makes you a less-effective commish and I think you'll see that you lost credibility as time goes by. Next time owners will be quicker to complain and more demanding because you can be pushed around. :2cents:

 
Owner B and Prospect B are not the same person. Owner B is trying to trade for Charles, whom I acquired from Prospect A before he bailed. He's also in my division.

Prospect A did not pay. Fees are due Friday. Between the rareity of trades and the casualness of the league (and low turnover overall), we've never been anal about timing of paying/trading. We usually pay fees when MFL gets the new year up and going(although we are running late this year as my wife just had a kid). Obviuosly, this won't happen again.

Both prospects saw the roster originally, before Prospect A made the trade. But Prospect B accepted the team as is and hasn't paid yet.

I thought about telling them all to suck it, but decided to be a diplomat. There is some angst in the league because in the 5 years we've played, I've won it 3 times and came in 2nd twice.
you sure about that? Once they get the fever its hard to keep 'em quiet about having another 1. :hophead:

seriously though as a commish it is a good idea to close that "loophole"... I'm gonna go close mine right now

 
Absolutely agree with the point that work leagues should be redraft. But given that its a dynasty league, one team winning the championship 3 years and finishing 2nd twice probably just points out that the team was originally strong from the startup dynasty league draft. It could be coming up on the time for its cycle at the top to end.
Actually the first 4 years were 4 man keeper format, so drafting each year didn't help them much. ;)
 
I am the commish in a 12 team dynasty league that I run at work. We had an owner leave the league back in February/March. We had two people who wanted in that were equal in talent on paper, so I flipped a coin to pick the owner (prospect A).Fast forward to today and the owner who took over is leaving the company. He tells me today that he is dropping out of the league. So I go back to the second guy (Prospect B) and he still wants in the league. Problem solved. During the two months or so that Prospect A was in the league, I made a trade with him. I am one of the few that is an active trader. The trade involved me getting Jamaal Charles and he Andre Johnson. I have been working on trading Charles to another owner (Owner B) since then. After I send an email to the league saying Prospect B is taking over, Owner B sends a reply to all that all trades Prospect A made should be voided; mine being the only trade he made. Then a second owner responds to that message saying at least Prospect B should be able to review the trade to accept or reject it. Prospect B responds that he would like that. So what should happen here? The rules don't address this. There is a 24 hour period after a trade that owners can object; no one objected to this trade. For disclosure, here was the trade. Me (Commish) gave - AJ, 1.05, 2.11Prospect A gave - JC, 1.03, 2.03His team still has Mendenhall, McFadden, Spiller. His best WR after AJ is either Benn or MSW.
You need to create a competition committee. The last 3 champions in my league are automatically on the competition committee and decide on any tough issues that the commissioner can't decide on their own. This situation would qualify. Works great for anything involving the commissioner or if any owners ask for a favor you forward it to the competition committee and your not the bad guy if it's voted down.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top