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!

Is this collusion? (1 Viewer)

B

Bayhawks

Footballguy
This trade is being voted on in one of my leagues (I hate voting on trades), and several owners have claimed that it is collusion.

Team A (me) gives: Tony Romo, Eddie Lacey, Josh Gordon, Jared Cook

Team B gives: Jimmy Graham, Michael Bush

I'm is currently 8-1, and have P Manning, Matt Forte, K Moreno, Calvin, DJax, and L. Bell/Antonio Brown/K Allen as flex options. My TE has sucked all year (save week 1). I have the depth to make this move, which would greatly improve my starting lineup. Obviously, I'm giving up a lot to improve 1 position (and get a handcuff for my RB1).

Our trade deadline is this week, so it's not like I can "shop" my players around forever.

The catch is that Team B is one game out of the playoff spot & had Rodgers as his QB (Cutler was his backup), with Foster as his main RB, and Wayne has his main WR. So this weakens him at one starting spot, but bolsters him at 3 others.

He's also my brother, which is where the collusion claims are coming from.

I know I'm giving up a lot for Graham, but in my mind, it improves my starting lineup, and improves the other team as well. Isn't that the purpose of a trade?

 
brohan come on if you are not agreeing to split money with the other guy and you made the deal fair and square then it is not colusion these types of questions are just nuts if you or the other guy is a dum dum then you are but that does not make it colusion it just means one of you got jobbed and made a bad trade but jeez louis david freese stop with the is this crappy trade somehow colusion no it is just a crappy trade take that the jurrasic bank brohanisorus

 
I see nothing wrong with that, just a straight up quantity for quality trade. Your league mates are probably complaining that the trade is "one-sided" and that you don't HAVE TO give up so much just for Graham. The fact that it looks like you're helping your brother get into the playoffs doesn't help either.

 
Certainly not collusion. You gave up a lot more in value to obtain Jimmy Graham than many of the accepted Graham offers out there.

Also, passes the eyeball test in that you are a contender not robbing a bottomfeeder, but giving up a bigger haul. No one can say your brother just gave you Graham without it significantly hurting your depth. And with injuries, you might be regretting giving up depth for strength of your starting lineup. That's just another reason people should let others manage their own teams.

 
chinawildman said:
I see nothing wrong with that, just a straight up quantity for quality trade. Your league mates are probably complaining that the trade is "one-sided" and that you don't HAVE TO give up so much just for Graham. The fact that it looks like you're helping your brother get into the playoffs doesn't help either.
Click to expand...
But I did. I offered him Lacy for Graham (when Graham was on bye & iffy). He turned it down. I offered him DJax for Graham (after Wayne got hurt). He turned it down. I offered him a RB and WR (other than Forte & Calvin), he turned it down. After the Rodgers injury, it took the QB, RB, WR to get Graham. No one else in the league has Graham, so I did have to give up this much to get Graham.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
jeez here we go again even if one of them was getting screwed it would not be colusion it would just be a bad trade by a dum dum owner it is only colusion if the two guys are in it together trying to make one team better and splitting costs or doing it to harm the league or beat some guy they both do not like otherwise it is just a crappy trade lets just stop these kinds of threads forever because now we will have nine million posts about how the players future weeks opponents look and all that other mumjo jumbo jimmy jazz and i think it will bring the internet down specially if minestrone of paint comes in here that guy has like two hondo posts in the incogneato thread i am not even sure is a human maybe just a richie incogneato super computer take that to the bank brohans

 
Bayhawks said:
chinawildman said:
I see nothing wrong with that, just a straight up quantity for quality trade. Your league mates are probably complaining that the trade is "one-sided" and that you don't HAVE TO give up so much just for Graham. The fact that it looks like you're helping your brother get into the playoffs doesn't help either.
Click to expand...
But I did. I offered him Lacy for Graham (when Graham was on bye & iffy). He turned it down. I offered him DJax for Graham (after Wayne got hurt). He turned it down. I offered him a RB and WR (other than Forte & Calvin), he turned it down. After the Rodgers injury, it took the QB, RB, WR to get Graham. No one else in the league has Graham, so I did have to give up this much to get Graham.
Click to expand...
So it was Graham or nothing else? Perhaps the Gronk or VD owners were wondering why you hadn't struck any talks with them. Again, while you may have shown deferential treatment towards your blood, it is not collusion. Just because a move in a league is frowned upon doesn't make it collusion.

 
chinawildman said:
Bayhawks said:
chinawildman said:
I see nothing wrong with that, just a straight up quantity for quality trade. Your league mates are probably complaining that the trade is "one-sided" and that you don't HAVE TO give up so much just for Graham. The fact that it looks like you're helping your brother get into the playoffs doesn't help either.
Click to expand...
But I did. I offered him Lacy for Graham (when Graham was on bye & iffy). He turned it down. I offered him DJax for Graham (after Wayne got hurt). He turned it down. I offered him a RB and WR (other than Forte & Calvin), he turned it down. After the Rodgers injury, it took the QB, RB, WR to get Graham. No one else in the league has Graham, so I did have to give up this much to get Graham.
Click to expand...
So it was Graham or nothing else? Perhaps the Gronk or VD owners were wondering why you hadn't struck any talks with them. Again, while you may have shown deferential treatment towards your blood, it is not collusion. Just because a move in a league is frowned upon doesn't make it collusion.
Click to expand...
For me, yes. I have a feeling that Graham is going to be, far and away, the best TE for the rest of this season. No one else seems as consistent as he does. I wanted Graham. I could have moved on to a lesser TE, but I wanted Graham.

 
I think with no other context, it's a lopsided deal; that doesn't make it collusion, of course, but your leaguemates probably don't understand the difference.

With the added context that you don't really need Romo, Lacy, etc. and need a TE, while the other owner needs a QB, RB, etc. then it becomes less lopsided.

Either way there's no reason you shouldn't be able to make this trade.

You're probably going to lose this fight, though. because your league allows other owners to vote on trades, which is one of the dumbest FF conventions out there. :shrug:

 
Ignoratio Elenchi said:
I think with no other context, it's a lopsided deal; that doesn't make it collusion, of course, but your leaguemates probably don't understand the difference.

With the added context that you don't really need Romo, Lacy, etc. and need a TE, while the other owner needs a QB, RB, etc. then it becomes less lopsided.

Either way there's no reason you shouldn't be able to make this trade.

You're probably going to lose this fight, though. because your league allows other owners to vote on trades, which is one of the dumbest FF conventions out there. :shrug:
Click to expand...
I know. Part of the point of this thread was to see if I was missing something that made it look like collusion, or those owners are using that as justification to block this trade, because it would help my team.

 
First off this isn't collusion. As the others have indicated it isn't even close. Sounds like your league mates are bitter and/or can't differentiate a bad trade from collusion.

Second, I think you made a bad trade and I think the others in your league think so too. Because you made this perceived bad trade with your brother is why you’re hearing collusion. I don't think anyone would disagree that Graham is the best TE. What others are saying is that you just dealt all your depth for one position (granted the best at his position). Personally I would have moved on to the Gronk owner after the initial trade offers to get a quality TE while not emptying the cupboard but that's just my opinion. Your starting lineup is absolutely stronger for making this trade but is your team better? Good luck and if you have no injuries the trade works but I think you just made your brother a serious threat for the championship.

Tell your league to settle down and brush up on what collusion is.

 
People think this is a bad trade in favor of the quantity side???

You don't need Romo, Peyton's bye has passed.

Cook is worth literally nothing.

Lacy and Gordon for one of the few guys who gives you a huge advantage at TE isn't bad for either side. Your flex options are still fine.

If this redraft, you're talking about a reliable RB1 going forward and a WR2 for Graham. That's fair. Romo and Cook might help him, but losing them doesn't hurt you at all. It frees up valuable roster space.

When I got past the OP I assumed the thread was going to be filled with people telling you your league is crying collusion because you are 8-1 and can now start the guys who give you the greatest advantage at QB and TE every week in Peyton and Graham, and the rest of your roster is still fine.

Could a rash of injuries kill you? Sure. But it's week 10. We're only a few weeks from the fantasy playoffs in most leagues. Screw depth, you went all in on winning, and you'll probably have a first round bye during which you'll just hope none of your studs get hurt.

Graham is >>> than Cook, enough to more than make up for the drop from Lacy/Gordon to the other guys you'll be starting.

I really can't believe everyone thinks you screwed the pooch on this trade. I really thought they'd tell you the rest of the league is just afraid of your starting lineup.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Buzzbait said:
First off this isn't collusion. As the others have indicated it isn't even close. Sounds like your league mates are bitter and/or can't differentiate a bad trade from collusion.

Second, I think you made a bad trade and I think the others in your league think so too. Because you made this perceived bad trade with your brother is why you’re hearing collusion. I don't think anyone would disagree that Graham is the best TE. What others are saying is that you just dealt all your depth for one position (granted the best at his position). Personally I would have moved on to the Gronk owner after the initial trade offers to get a quality TE while not emptying the cupboard but that's just my opinion. Your starting lineup is absolutely stronger for making this trade but is your team better? Good luck and if you have no injuries the trade works but I think you just made your brother a serious threat for the championship.

Tell your league to settle down and brush up on what collusion is.
Click to expand...
I didn't deal all my depth. I dealt some of it (the best players), but I picked up Foles off the WW; he's my backup QB. Behind Forte and Moreno, I have L. Bell, M Bush, and S Vereen (when he comes back). Behind Calvin and DJax, I have Allen, Antonio Brown, and R Randle. Sure I don't have any depth at TE, but I didn't have that before. At least now, I have a stud TE with no depth, rather than a crap TE with no depth. Except for DJax, all my RB/WRs have had their byes, so depth isn't as important. If one of my guys does suffer an injury, I should be able to overcome it (except for Manning or Graham).

 
Yes. it's not collusion, but as Julius said: "Caesar's wife must be above suspicion." On an objective basis, it's not a good trade, because you are giving up more than you're getting. Graham has been injured, and could be again.

But the fact that you made this trade with your brother, who is fighting for a spot in the playoffs, makes it smell, collusion or not.

 
just have your bro throw in the 2 guys he's going to have to drop anyway (to accommodate the trade). there, now it's 4 for 4 and the morons in your league might feel better about it.

 
DiStefano said:
Yes. it's not collusion, but as Julius said: "Caesar's wife must be above suspicion." On an objective basis, it's not a good trade, because you are giving up more than you're getting. Graham has been injured, and could be again.

But the fact that you made this trade with your brother, who is fighting for a spot in the playoffs, makes it smell, collusion or not.
Click to expand...
Also, I feel like this should be in a sticky thread or something...

"Collusion is an agreement between two or more parties, sometimes illegal and therefore secretive, to limit open competition by deceiving, misleading, or defrauding others of their legal rights, or to obtain an objective forbidden by law typically by defrauding or gaining an unfair advantage."

 
it makes your starting lineup better... the other owners should be ashamed they let you acquire that much talent. this trade makes sense for both parties... your league mates are babies and whiners, tell them to pound sand

 
Chaka said:
Maybe not collusion but you are way overpaying for Graham.
Click to expand...
Sometimes you have to do that. I did a similar trade for Calvin Johnson a couple years ago in a keeper league. People complained that it should not have gone through because I gave up too much, but both teams got better. Turned out mine more so.
 
Collusion isn't when someone gets the better of a trade deal...

Not sure why people can't understand that all trades can't be 50/50, and that someone is always going to come out better than the other person, and/or improve their team.

Teams should be able to make the trades they need to make as long as there isn't any, "I'll trade you X if you give me $X if you win" type of conversation. That's collusion. A bad trade (not that this is), is not grounds for protesting a trade.

As to the trade, with your lineup, I'd make it happen. Close enough to playoff time to give up depth to consolidate/upgrade starting talent.

 
Bayhawks said:
This trade is being voted on in one of my leagues (I hate voting on trades), and several owners have claimed that it is collusion.

Team A (me) gives: Tony Romo, Eddie Lacey, Josh Gordon, Jared Cook

Team B gives: Jimmy Graham, Michael Bush

I'm is currently 8-1, and have P Manning, Matt Forte, K Moreno, Calvin, DJax, and L. Bell/Antonio Brown/K Allen as flex options. My TE has sucked all year (save week 1). I have the depth to make this move, which would greatly improve my starting lineup. Obviously, I'm giving up a lot to improve 1 position (and get a handcuff for my RB1).

Our trade deadline is this week, so it's not like I can "shop" my players around forever.

The catch is that Team B is one game out of the playoff spot & had Rodgers as his QB (Cutler was his backup), with Foster as his main RB, and Wayne has his main WR. So this weakens him at one starting spot, but bolsters him at 3 others.

He's also my brother, which is where the collusion claims are coming from.

I know I'm giving up a lot for Graham, but in my mind, it improves my starting lineup, and improves the other team as well. Isn't that the purpose of a trade?
Click to expand...
Every trade is collusion.

 
ConnSKINS26 said:
People think this is a bad trade in favor of the quantity side???

You don't need Romo, Peyton's bye has passed.

Cook is worth literally nothing.

Lacy and Gordon for one of the few guys who gives you a huge advantage at TE isn't bad for either side. Your flex options are still fine.

If this redraft, you're talking about a reliable RB1 going forward and a WR2 for Graham. That's fair. Romo and Cook might help him, but losing them doesn't hurt you at all. It frees up valuable roster space.

When I got past the OP I assumed the thread was going to be filled with people telling you your league is crying collusion because you are 8-1 and can now start the guys who give you the greatest advantage at QB and TE every week in Peyton and Graham, and the rest of your roster is still fine.

Could a rash of injuries kill you? Sure. But it's week 10. We're only a few weeks from the fantasy playoffs in most leagues. Screw depth, you went all in on winning, and you'll probably have a first round bye during which you'll just hope none of your studs get hurt.

Graham is >>> than Cook, enough to more than make up for the drop from Lacy/Gordon to the other guys you'll be starting.

I really can't believe everyone thinks you screwed the pooch on this trade. I really thought they'd tell you the rest of the league is just afraid of your starting lineup.
Click to expand...
They're mostly mad that it helps both teams. In my experience with redraft leagues, people hate that.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
We need a new Forum on FBG entitled "The Collusion Thread" so people can have their own place to whine about trades.

Good Lord.

 
This is a first for me. Someone asking if THEIR OWN trade is collusion? DUDE!!! I suspect this one falls under the....Yes I overpaid on purpose to help my brother out.....oh and it made my starting team better so you cant prove it. Of course there are really only 2 people who know for sure huh.

 
zomg! A trade that benefits both sides MUST be collusion. I mean, isn't that the definition of collusion? why would you do a trade that benefits the opposition? It must be stopped.

Of course, any trade that helps one team and significantly hurts the other must obviously be tanking/taking advantage of the feebleminded. These, too, must be stopped.

The only trades that are allowed are trades of 4th string players who will surely never see a starting lineup and only if they have scored identical points at the same position, and only if the trade is between teams that are already mathematically eliminated from the playoffs.

 
da_budman said:
This is a first for me. Someone asking if THEIR OWN trade is collusion? DUDE!!! I suspect this one falls under the....Yes I overpaid on purpose to help my brother out.....oh and it made my starting team better so you cant prove it. Of course there are really only 2 people who know for sure huh.
Click to expand...
This is the trouble with trading between family members and close friends. It's easy to give up just a *little* more to help someone when you're close to them. That doesn't classify as collusion though.

 
buck naked said:
Every trade is collusion.
Click to expand...
This statement is incorrect...no matter how many times people try to trot it out. Re-read the FULL definition of collusion, then come back and explain why you are mistaken. TIA.

 
cstu said:
da_budman said:
This is a first for me. Someone asking if THEIR OWN trade is collusion? DUDE!!! I suspect this one falls under the....Yes I overpaid on purpose to help my brother out.....oh and it made my starting team better so you cant prove it. Of course there are really only 2 people who know for sure huh.
Click to expand...
This is the trouble with trading between family members and close friends. It's easy to give up just a *little* more to help someone when you're close to them. That doesn't classify as collusion though.
Click to expand...
The bolded is the part that DOES make trades like this collusion ( if in fact it was done for that reason) Any time you make a trade unballanced for the express purpose of helping someone out that pushes it from an unballanced trade that helps both teams into collusion. Hey Bro I dont really need player X but I will throw him into the trade because I know he will start for you is definitely a form of collusion. And for the record I AM NOT saying all unbalanced trades are collusion ( or even that I know for sure this one is) but it seems odd to me someone would ask if their own trade was collusion if there wasnt some of that "help a bro out" included in the trade. .

 
Ask the owners who have Gronk or Julius Thomas if they want to make a better offer, otherwise tell them not to complain. I just traded Romo and Stevie Johnson in my league for Tannehill and Decker. I was willing to give up a little more since I also have Brees. You're doing the same, you have Manning so want to get something for Romo who you won't be using.

 
da_budman said:
cstu said:
da_budman said:
This is a first for me. Someone asking if THEIR OWN trade is collusion? DUDE!!! I suspect this one falls under the....Yes I overpaid on purpose to help my brother out.....oh and it made my starting team better so you cant prove it. Of course there are really only 2 people who know for sure huh.
Click to expand...
This is the trouble with trading between family members and close friends. It's easy to give up just a *little* more to help someone when you're close to them. That doesn't classify as collusion though.
Click to expand...
The bolded is the part that DOES make trades like this collusion ( if in fact it was done for that reason) Any time you make a trade unballanced for the express purpose of helping someone out that pushes it from an unballanced trade that helps both teams into collusion. Hey Bro I dont really need player X but I will throw him into the trade because I know he will start for you is definitely a form of collusion. And for the record I AM NOT saying all unbalanced trades are collusion ( or even that I know for sure this one is) but it seems odd to me someone would ask if their own trade was collusion if there wasnt some of that "help a bro out" included in the trade. .
Click to expand...
People make trades that more or less beneficial to the other team depending on their history with them all the time. That's human nature. As long as both teams are trying to win it's not collusion.

 
No Collusion. But if it is an issue, have your brother offer Graham to the rest of the league to see if he gets a better offer. Yours is so good I don't see how he would.

 
Alkahsu said:
As a participant in this trade you know 100% if it's collusion or not.
Click to expand...
I know it's not collusion. I wanted to see if my involvement in the trade was biasing my view of the situation, and whether others thought it was collusion, as well. My leaguemates tend to moan/##### about many (most) trades that go down in that league.

The trade vote was 9 to allow the trade, 3 to oppose. It seems the vocal minority on the league message board were over-ruled.

 
da_budman said:
cstu said:
da_budman said:
This is a first for me. Someone asking if THEIR OWN trade is collusion? DUDE!!! I suspect this one falls under the....Yes I overpaid on purpose to help my brother out.....oh and it made my starting team better so you cant prove it. Of course there are really only 2 people who know for sure huh.
Click to expand...
This is the trouble with trading between family members and close friends. It's easy to give up just a *little* more to help someone when you're close to them. That doesn't classify as collusion though.
Click to expand...
The bolded is the part that DOES make trades like this collusion ( if in fact it was done for that reason) Any time you make a trade unballanced for the express purpose of helping someone out that pushes it from an unballanced trade that helps both teams into collusion. Hey Bro I dont really need player X but I will throw him into the trade because I know he will start for you is definitely a form of collusion. And for the record I AM NOT saying all unbalanced trades are collusion ( or even that I know for sure this one is) but it seems odd to me someone would ask if their own trade was collusion if there wasnt some of that "help a bro out" included in the trade. .
Click to expand...
How is this (the bolded) collusion?

If I trade Romo to another owner (not my brother) who needs a QB, according to you, that would be collusion? The reason I would be willing to trade him is because I have Manning (ie-"I dont really need player X but I will throw him into the trade"). The reason he would trade FOR Romo is because he would start for him (ie-"because I know he will start for you.")

That's not collusion, that's a trade that is a win for both parties.

 
Just sounds like a few whining babies because you both got better.

I also definitely do not think you gave too much for Graham.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've got a solid gun dealer, he can help you out with this conflict...

In all seriousnes, I actually like your end better.

You have Manning, who cares about moving Romo? Lacy gets a huge downgrade IMO without Rodgers, the box will now be stacked... Weeden is to Gordon, what Palmer is to Fitz.

Graham hands down the best player in this trade and it helps your starting lineup. Tell everyone in your league to eat a ####, or you'll have Incognito #### down their throat.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Do or die week
Replies
1
Views
188
BobbyLayne
BobbyLayne
G
Non-PPR Trade Advice
Replies
3
Views
192
FairWarning
FairWarning
M
Jonathan Taylor: Will he ever score another Rushing TD?
Replies
21
Views
605
My_Bench_Scores_More
M

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top