How to Prove Collusion? (1 Viewer)

[Sarnoff]

I could poop a better collusion than this.

 

[fantasycurse42]

OP, please edit the title to say "How to prove collusion where none exists." TIA

Ignoratio, what about some of the really lopsided trades mentioned in the thread? If both owners denied collusion, would that be enough for you? That nothing should be done until the season was over because the owners had paid their $ and it's not the league's business to legislate their trades?

In my dynasty league, collusion is not the only justification for overturning a trade. We also allow for a trade to be vetoed if it upsets the competitive balance of the league. This allows for a review of any deal which may seem questionable, without having to either accuse or prove wrongdoing by either or both of the participants. While I have generally been reluctant to overturn any deal, I believe such a rule can be very beneficial. With such a rule in place, even if both owners deny collusion, a trade could be vetoed and some semblance of peace maintained.

Of course, I 100% agree with you, Socrates. However, my experience in these threads is that we are in the minority. There are many guys who maintain that if collusion can't be proven, then the trade has to stand and that it's not the league's business to interfere with a team's business (even if it screws over all the rest of the owners in the league). Whenever I ask about how to prove collusion I usually only get silence or insults from that side.So, once again, is there a way to prove collusion if neither side of the deal admits to it?

It's impossible - if you saw the rosters of each team involved, the team that picked up two ####ty RBs has Charles & Murray & no WRs - it makes no sense for him & his defense on the message board is even more baffling.Regardless of what anyone on this thread says, if 8 out of 10 teams in any league suspect something isn't right, then there is probably an issue.

IF 8 teams in your league think THIS trade is collusion you should all quit playing FFIf you spent as much time/energy on your team as you have in this thread your team would be much better off ...

You're right, the only time collusion happens is when it is Megatron for legatron...It's always blatantly obvious!

Yes, yes, you're absolutely right!! What were we possibly thinking?

You are the winner!

You have uncovered the secret, subtle collusion!!!!

Collusion so devious that it doesn't even look like collusion!

Well done, sir!! Why are you even wasting your time in this forum fishing for our silly opinions?

You should be out using your extraordinary sleuthing abilities for the benefit of mankind. Find out which members of your league are actually drug traffickers or jaywalkers and report back please.

While some sarcastic comments in this thread brought a good laugh, you have just failed - the excessive use of punctuation marks brings you from failing to epic failure.Go ahead, please try again.

Actual recipe for epic failure:

1) Start a hilariously awful "Hurr Durrr Collusion Amirite?" thread.

2) Start that thread AGAIN, in another sub-forum, so as many people as possible can mock you.

3) When the inevitable "Wtf are you talking about? Where does an intelligent person see collusion here?" responses come raining down, do not acknowledge that you could be wrong. Stomp your feet and get defensive instead!

4) When all else fails, start "insulting" excessive exclamation points. Remember, you have no shame!

5) Go back to eating Silly Putty and solving crimes. Your work is done here!

A) I didn't attack anyone, my sarcastic response was in defense of an insult hurled at meB) Apparently majority doesn't think collusion, although I think some may be overvaluing Ridley

C) Stop even trying to insult me - you're not the least bit humorous. If you can't succeed at drawing laughs on an anonymous football forum, I can imagine the crickets when you're around the water cooler.

 

[jdkapow]

Been in one league with the same group of guys for 5 season... Two teams, one good & one real ####ty:

The two teams (who happen to be cousins) made an interesting trade this morning - Bad team got Pierre Thomas, good team got Alshon Jeffrey... I didn't say anything and neither did anyone else. Then, about an hour ago the ####ty team gave the good team Steven Jackson and received Steven Ridley in return. After the second deal, I'm convinced this is collusion - apparently I'm not the only one as someone else posted their dismay with this trade.

What would your course of action be as a GM be here?

I just pulled up Football Outsiders' in-season KUBIAK fantasy projections update from 9/27. For standard leagues (don't know your scoring), they have:

Jeffery: 72nd overall

Jackson: 87th overall

Ridley: 35th overall

Thomas: 93rd overall

Now, let's be clear: I'm not arguing that these rankings are right or wrong. I'm pointing out that they're independent and objective and one could reasonably base trade decisions on them. According to these, the bad team won the trades.

You would need a lot more than this to suggest, much less prove, collusion.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

FWIW, here are the values of the players involved, from FBG's Top 200 Forward rankings (FBG Standard Scoring):

Bad team gets:

Pierre Thomas (4.6) and Stevan Ridley (7.9)

Good team gets:

Alshon Jeffery (3.7) and Steven Jackson (7.5)

Not only is this trade not lopsided at all, Footballguys would give the slight edge to the bad team getting Thomas and Ridley.

 

[MoveToSkypager]

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=693324

That's OP's AC thread of similar topic. He wants us to vote.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Not only is this trade not lopsided at all, Footballguys would give the slight edge to the bad team getting Thomas and Ridley.

Now, let's be clear: I'm not arguing that these rankings are right or wrong. I'm pointing out that they're independent and objective and one could reasonably base trade decisions on them. According to these, the bad team won the trades.

 

[Touchdown Syndrome]

Actual recipe for epic failure:

1) Start a hilariously awful "Hurr Durrr Collusion Amirite?" thread.

2) Start that thread AGAIN, in another sub-forum, so as many people as possible can mock you.

3) When the inevitable "Wtf are you talking about? Where does an intelligent person see collusion here?" responses come raining down, do not acknowledge that you could be wrong. Stomp your feet and get defensive instead!

4) When all else fails, start "insulting" excessive exclamation points. Remember, you have no shame!

5) Go back to eating Silly Putty and solving crimes. Your work is done here!

A) I didn't attack anyone, my sarcastic response was in defense of an insult hurled at meB) Apparently majority doesn't think collusion, although I think some may be overvaluing Ridley

C) Stop even trying to insult me - you're not the least bit humorous. If you can't succeed at drawing laughs on an anonymous football forum, I can imagine the crickets when you're around the water cooler.

I'm sure you can imagine those fancy water cooler crickets.

You've shown that you have a fantastic, vivid imagination.

 

[mquinnjr]

You really don't know what you are doing if you think you should accuse someone of cheating here. HTH

:IBTL:

 

[Soulfly3]

I would go to court over this bull#### trade

Unreal that you guys don't think this is collusion. NE is done with their cakewalk schedule and now they're going to start getting pasted by teams - Wilfork is out, so for sure they'll be scored on 35+pts a game.

Brady w his weapons wont be able to keep up, the run game will be null/void

Id walk from this league. Two injured running backs being traded is a load of crap. Next you're gonna tell me there was a swap of Julio Jones and Demariyus Thomas..

Like, hello!

 

[Long Ball Larry]

Jackson for Ridley is collusion??

Well, in standard scoring, one has 18.8 points and the other has 19. Pretty big disparity if you ask me. Also, one was being drafted 10/11 and the other 12/13.

Seriously, not sure what part of "Would anyone here honestly make that trade..." You guys don't understand. Ipso fatso.

 

[TakiToki]

My guess is that it is collusion, but they really suck at it and made the wrong team better.

 

[habsfan]

Stupidity is a lot easier to prove than collusion. It's why we have a rule for both.

 

[TakiToki]

I have always wanted to have a post next to yours. Thank you.

 

[Not Sleeping]

Been in one league with the same group of guys for 5 season... Two teams, one good & one real ####ty:

The two teams (who happen to be cousins) made an interesting trade this morning - Bad team got Pierre Thomas, good team got Alshon Jeffrey... I didn't say anything and neither did anyone else. Then, about an hour ago the ####ty team gave the good team Steven Jackson and received Steven Ridley in return. After the second deal, I'm convinced this is collusion - apparently I'm not the only one as someone else posted their dismay with this trade.

What would your course of action be as a GM be here?

I just pulled up Football Outsiders' in-season KUBIAK fantasy projections update from 9/27. For standard leagues (don't know your scoring), they have:

Jeffery: 72nd overall

Jackson: 87th overall

Ridley: 35th overall

Thomas: 93rd overall

Now, let's be clear: I'm not arguing that these rankings are right or wrong. I'm pointing out that they're independent and objective and one could reasonably base trade decisions on them. According to these, the bad team won the trades.

You would need a lot more than this to suggest, much less prove, collusion.

OP cracks me up. He's so sure. Yet two people have posted independent, outside ROS rankings that show he's out of his mind. Here's a third one:

http://fantasynews.cbssports.com/fantasyfootball/story/23946212/week-5-fantasy-trade-value-chart

CBS Trade Value Chart (not saying it's great, just saying here's another 3rd party objective source):

Trade 1:

Alshon Jeffrey: Not ranked

Pierre Thomas: Not ranked

Trade 2:

Stevan Ridley: 12

Steven Jackson: 12

In other words, the first trade involves players that don't even matter. The second trade is dead even.

Wait...it's just now dawning on me. The OP is just trolling isn't he? Otherwise it makes no sense to ##### about these trades.

 

[Craig_MiamiFL]

Not collusion. You're trying too hard to force collusion talk because they're cousins IMO>

I'd rather own Jackson. Ridley isn't getting the ball in the 4th with a lead (Blount), in catch up mode (Bolden) and not guaranteed GL work.

 

[Jewell]

You guys should buy a league polygraph machine.

 

[buck naked]

Every time I hear this word in regard to fantasy football, 100% of the time the owner is overreacting and wrong.

 

[Dizzy]

I think you're seeing what you WANT to see here, and hoping that others chime in and see it too. That way when you openly accuse a couple of guys of cooking the trade books you can point to this thread and say, "see, others think you're cheating too!"

Not cool. Nothing to see here.

Player values rise and fall weekly... no telling what's around the corner for any of the players mentioned.

 

[habsfan]

Player values rise and fall weekly... no telling what's around the corner for any of the players mentioned.

Exactly. I received a trade offer today and I couldn't hit "accept" fast enough. I'm sure he thinks he robbed me blind. Time will tell...

 

[Ace zero1]

Come back if they trade brandon marshall for senecca wallace. Thats collusion

 

[fantasycurse42]

I get it, nobody here thinks collusion.

Personally I wouldn't use my WW priority for Ridley, his value is zero IMO.

I also don't understand why an owner (who needs a WR) would roster Jeffrey since our draft & then trade him for PT after he starts performing. It just doesn't add up, but the consensus here disagrees so let's just drop it.

 

[Funkley]

 

[FootballGuy22]

How do you prove collusion?

I was in a league 2 years ago and a team in last that hadn't made a move all year traded:

Roddy White/Wes Welker and BGBE for Gaffney/Rackers and DeAngelo

Even with a league veto vote the trade went through

The crappy team later admitted he wanted to see his players do well on a winning team

Now that's collusion!!

 

[Insein]

I have always wanted to have a post next to yours. Thank you.

At least this thread accomplished something.

 

[Insein]

I get it, nobody here thinks collusion.

Personally I wouldn't use my WW priority for Ridley, his value is zero IMO.

I also don't understand why an owner (who needs a WR) would roster Jeffrey since our draft & then trade him for PT after he starts performing. It just doesn't add up, but the consensus here disagrees so let's just drop it.

Have you ever considered that some people aren't as "smart" as you?

 

[tarheel1unc]

I get it, nobody here thinks collusion.

Personally I wouldn't use my WW priority for Ridley, his value is zero IMO.

I also don't understand why an owner (who needs a WR) would roster Jeffrey since our draft & then trade him for PT after he starts performing. It just doesn't add up, but the consensus here disagrees so let's just drop it.

I see nothing wrong with these trades. I would also use my WW priority for Ridley. He has value.

 

[Not Sleeping]

I get it, nobody here thinks collusion.

Personally I wouldn't use my WW priority for Ridley, his value is zero IMO.

I also don't understand why an owner (who needs a WR) would roster Jeffrey since our draft & then trade him for PT after he starts performing. It just doesn't add up, but the consensus here disagrees so let's just drop it.

I see nothing wrong with these trades. I would also use my WW priority for Ridley. He has value.

My #11 WW priority would drop faster than panties on prom night.

 

[HughHoney]

If there's enough money on the line I'd contact a lawyer. This is what it came to in the $1000 dynasty league I run. He settled the collusion probably very quickly. Let your league mates know you're considering contacting a lawyer and don't hesitate to get one if they don't come clean.

 

[Possum]

Every time I hear this word in regard to fantasy football, 100% of the time the owner is overreacting and wrong.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

OP, please edit the title to say "How to prove collusion where none exists." TIA

Ignoratio, what about some of the really lopsided trades mentioned in the thread? If both owners denied collusion, would that be enough for you? That nothing should be done until the season was over because the owners had paid their $ and it's not the league's business to legislate their trades?

No, did I say that?

It was a question. Care to take a crack at it: How do you prove collusion if neither owner admits to it?

I don't know, that seems like a highly situation-specific question to give anything more than a vague, "You consider the evidence."

I like that. Thanks.

Looks like we've been in agreement for years:

Doesn't seem like collusion to me. At all. I hate it when people interject their own opinions on a trade.

I hate it when people make ridiculously lopsided trades that totally ruin the competitive balance of the league, effectively cheating the rest of the league.

Tough. Put your man pants on an go about business. If it isn't collusion then its none of your business.

Lots of trades aren't the result of collusion and are still vetoable. It's certainly the league's "business" to make sure everything is run fairly and competitively. Just said this in another thread the other day, but people who claim collusion is the only way trades can be vetoed are just as bad as those that veto trades left and right just because they think they aren't fair. Every situation is different and when a trade comes up that might upset the balance too much, it's worth a discussion with the owners involved.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

C'mon, if this is the best they could cook up to collude, then I would not be too terribly concerned. This seems legitimate enough not to poison the league with accusations.

Ridley isn't even flex consideration... Would anyone here honestly make that trade... How does it improve your team to trade two unstartable guys for two players (one of which can be pretty big) that are def startable?

Its a 2 for 2 where one owner clearly got 2 much better player and one got two awful players - Very questionable IMO...

Would you make that trade? The answer is going to be no for everyone, so why wouldn't it raise a red flag...

Much? Ridley got off to a slow start thus far, but both RBs were second round picks this offseason - and it's not like Jackson has done anything thus far, except to get injured. Maybe the guy thinks a 30 year old RB could recover slowly from his injury and can't afford to wait.

As to the first trade - meh, in a redraft neither player is all that useful. Jeffrey is the better option, but RBs are tougher to find.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I get it, nobody here thinks collusion.

Personally I wouldn't use my WW priority for Ridley, his value is zero IMO.

I also don't understand why an owner (who needs a WR) would roster Jeffrey since our draft & then trade him for PT after he starts performing. It just doesn't add up, but the consensus here disagrees so let's just drop it.

You wouldn't use your waiver priority on a starting RB in a potentially high powered offense, who scored double digit rushing TDs last season? I just picked up Benny Cunningham on waivers.

Perhaps you're projecting your irrational stance onto this trade, and therefore see collusion.

Maybe the guy thinks he's buying low on Ridley? Maybe he thinks once Gronk comes back that this trade will lokk like a steal for him?

 

[fantasycurse42]

I get it, nobody here thinks collusion.

Personally I wouldn't use my WW priority for Ridley, his value is zero IMO.

I also don't understand why an owner (who needs a WR) would roster Jeffrey since our draft & then trade him for PT after he starts performing. It just doesn't add up, but the consensus here disagrees so let's just drop it.

You wouldn't use your waiver priority on a starting RB in a potentially high powered offense, who scored double digit rushing TDs last season? I just picked up Benny Cunningham on waivers.

Perhaps you're projecting your irrational stance onto this trade, and therefore see collusion.

Maybe the guy thinks he's buying low on Ridley? Maybe he thinks once Gronk comes back that this trade will lokk like a steal for him?

Understood, no collusion! Can this topic now be dropped? I was exaggerating, obviously I'd use a WW on Ridley, even though I still think he sucks this season.

 

[Giants4Life]

This really is such a waste of time. Your complaining about two fringe bench players being traded? Come on.

 

[Insein]

I get it, nobody here thinks collusion.

Personally I wouldn't use my WW priority for Ridley, his value is zero IMO.

I also don't understand why an owner (who needs a WR) would roster Jeffrey since our draft & then trade him for PT after he starts performing. It just doesn't add up, but the consensus here disagrees so let's just drop it.

You wouldn't use your waiver priority on a starting RB in a potentially high powered offense, who scored double digit rushing TDs last season? I just picked up Benny Cunningham on waivers.

Perhaps you're projecting your irrational stance onto this trade, and therefore see collusion.

Maybe the guy thinks he's buying low on Ridley? Maybe he thinks once Gronk comes back that this trade will lokk like a steal for him?

Understood, no collusion! Can this topic now be dropped? I was exaggerating, obviously I'd use a WW on Ridley, even though I still think he sucks this season.

What if the guy traded mjd or david wilson for Sjax. Still collusion?

 

[My Hope Street Alias]

Come back if they trade brandon marshall for senecca wallace. Thats collusion

Lots of guys commenting in this thread (esp. the jokesters, I'm guessing) would say that this trade would have to stand if collusion couldn't be proved.

 

[Insein]

Come back if they trade brandon marshall for senecca wallace. Thats collusion

Lots of guys commenting in this thread (esp. the jokesters, I'm guessing) would say that this trade would have to stand if collusion couldn't be proved.

Dude we get it. You like to veto trades and protect dumb owners from themselves. A bad trade does not equal collusion.

 

[mbuehner]

If there's enough money on the line I'd contact a lawyer. This is what it came to in the $1000 dynasty league I run. He settled the collusion probably very quickly. Let your league mates know you're considering contacting a lawyer and don't hesitate to get one if they don't come clean.

When it comes to illegal gambling, there's nothing the courts would rather do than sift through your arcane league rules and try to apply the law to them, particularly when i'm betting no one signed anything when they joined up. Keep that lawyers number on speed dial in case anyone screws you when you're buying weed too.

 

[BroadwayG]

Ah, good, the annual "two guys in my league made a trade that I believe is lopsided therefore collusion" thread.

MOre like daily than annual

 

[My Hope Street Alias]

Come back if they trade brandon marshall for senecca wallace. Thats collusion

Lots of guys commenting in this thread (esp. the jokesters, I'm guessing) would say that this trade would have to stand if collusion couldn't be proved.

Dude we get it. You like to veto trades and protect dumb owners from themselves. A bad trade does not equal collusion.

You don't get it, a really bad lopsided trade may or may not be collusion (doesn't matter) but it should be reviewable at the very least in order to keep one disgruntled, moronic, or whatever owner from screwing the other 8, 10, 12, etc. teams.

I've never been involved in any veto nor have I been in a league that allows vetoes. I'm just saying there are rare instances when an extremely lopsided trade, say Peterson for Henne, should be reviewed, at the very least. Do you think a lopsided trade, such as the one I mentioned, should stand?

 

[fantasycurse42]

I get it, nobody here thinks collusion.

Personally I wouldn't use my WW priority for Ridley, his value is zero IMO.

I also don't understand why an owner (who needs a WR) would roster Jeffrey since our draft & then trade him for PT after he starts performing. It just doesn't add up, but the consensus here disagrees so let's just drop it.

You wouldn't use your waiver priority on a starting RB in a potentially high powered offense, who scored double digit rushing TDs last season? I just picked up Benny Cunningham on waivers.

Perhaps you're projecting your irrational stance onto this trade, and therefore see collusion.

Maybe the guy thinks he's buying low on Ridley? Maybe he thinks once Gronk comes back that this trade will lokk like a steal for him?

Understood, no collusion! Can this topic now be dropped? I was exaggerating, obviously I'd use a WW on Ridley, even though I still think he sucks this season.

I was going to drop this, but it appears everyone would like to continue so I will be taking further action.

My first step (thanks to the sound advice here) is hiring Michael Fee - For those of you that don't know he is representing Aaron Hernandez in his civil suit. He would appear to be the right guy for a financial matter such as this that involves football. After I retained council, we have filed suit in civil court here in NYC. We are on the court docket for next Tuesday. Unfortunately the trade will ride through this weekend.

I will let all interested parties know what happens after Tuesday.

 

[Vector]

The only way to prove collusion is to waterboard the participants until they confess.

 

[djbolton]

C'mon, if this is the best they could cook up to collude, then I would not be too terribly concerned. This seems legitimate enough not to poison the league with accusations.

Ridley isn't even flex consideration... Would anyone here honestly make that trade... How does it improve your team to trade two unstartable guys for two players (one of which can be pretty big) that are def startable?

Its a 2 for 2 where one owner clearly got 2 much better player and one got two awful players - Very questionable IMO...

Would you make that trade? The answer is going to be no for everyone, so why wouldn't it raise a red flag...

Whether it's collusion or not, I don't see the big deal in these trades. I think plenty of people have argued Ridley is better than Jackson. I would give up SJax for Ridley in a heartbeat, so it's clearly just a differing of opinions.

Thomas and Jeffery... Jeffery is the better player, but neither guys are startable in majority of leagues. So who cares? And I'm not seeing who the bad team traded (Jeffery?) who is can def be pretty big. If it is Alshon, guy has had two games in 20 career games that have been good...... One just happened to be last week.

 

[Dizzy]

If there's enough money on the line I'd contact a lawyer. This is what it came to in the $1000 dynasty league I run. He settled the collusion probably very quickly. Let your league mates know you're considering contacting a lawyer and don't hesitate to get one if they don't come clean.

Wow, I assume that you're kidding here. Unless you have a signed contract (complete with agreed terms and conditions) there's no legal obligation for anyone to pay anything... it's gambling for god's sake... honor amongst thieves.

Should have gone with the "threatened to brake his legs" episode... way more believable. <_<

 

[Sarnoff]

By definition, ALL trades are collusion. Two teams have entered into an agreement that benefits them at the expense of other teams.

No trades should ever be allowed. If you want someone new, pick them up on waivers.

 

[iamkoza]

i think that somehow by questioning this trade you are colluding