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!

I've called our commish out on collusion (2 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
H

Harry Backman

Footballguy
Commish paid for this guy's team because it was his "first year" playing, and he wanted him to enjoy it and get a feel for it without having to pay the money (which was only 20 bucks but I digress)Week 4Commish traded Manning and kicker for McNabb and kickerWeek 8Commish traded McCardell/Moulds for Glenn/Gardner and then traded Gardner for Galloway to someone elseAm I way off base here?

 
The arrangement with the commish paying for another team is questionable but you missed your chance to nip that in the bud before the season. Those trades don't look like collusion otherwise.

 
Commish paid for this guy's team because it was his "first year" playing, and he wanted him to enjoy it and get a feel for it without having to pay the money (which was only 20 bucks but I digress)Week 4Commish traded Manning and kicker for McNabb and kickerWeek 8Commish traded McCardell/Moulds for Glenn/Gardner and then traded Gardner for Galloway to someone elseAm I way off base here?
Click to expand...
Ummm, I think you're going way overboard here.First off, him paying for another owner is not a big deal. In fact, it's a very nice thing to do. Now if there were some seriously lopsided trades going on between the two afterwards, then yes, I'd be looking further into it.Second off, neither trade, at the time they happened, appear super lopsided. Looking at the first trade, Manning for McNabb (ignore the kickers) during week 4 is not THAT bad. Back then, people (like myself) were still hoping McNabb would break out of his funk. Heck, he had only played 3 games after week 4! NOW, we can look at it and think Manning for McNabb is ludicrous. But at that time, it was not. Looking at the second trade, McCardell/Moulds for Glenn/Gardner is not THAT bad of a trade. I personally wouldn't have done it, but that's just me. I see no reason to veto, or go the extra mile and start throwing out the "C" word.You might want to rethink this position before it REALLY starts a s*itstorm...
 
Could this just be a case of the Commish losing out on a couple of trades to see the new player have some success. Successful new owners = Returning owners. Just like losing a couple of small bets to win the big one. Or at the time he traded Manning, I was ready to trade him myself. I offered him straight up for McNabb and we all know how that would have worked out if the owner would have accepted that trade! In the most current trade Moulds has been useless since he got hurt and he may need production now if he has any hopes of making the playoffs.

 
Sorry, but I don't see collusion. :no: Collusion is when two owners conspire to make a lopsided trade in order to significantly improve one team - usually with a side agreement or intent for the owners to split any resultant prize money or just in general screw someone else.Relax man.

 
I would need to look at both roster's to give you an adequate evaluation, but if the Commish has just inserted a "Proxy" team #2 to build up then yes it may be Collusion. Otherwise he is not too slick at trading or like someone else said, just trying to help a new owner out. It seems sort of fishy to me though, especially the Manning for Mcnabb deal, regardless of the kickers.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I guess I'm alone here. It does look like the more experienced played is dumpping talent to the other guy. I need more info:Week 4: If your the experienced FF player - would you have sent Manning for McNabb? I WOULDN'T. Who was his other QB at the time? Was he not using Manning? McNabb looked bad for sure, why did he take the risk?Week 8: Again it's productive players for lesser producers. Moulds is a big time WR and McCardell is looking like a career year for Glenn (1 big game) and Gardner (WR2 on a struggleing WASH team - on a bye week)? Again, i don't see why the EXPERIENCED player would make this deal. If it was reversed, it would make mroe sense as the new'b would overvalue the single big game by Glenn and ignore that Moulds production has been slowed by injuries.NOTE: Some player juts make bad trades. It's not so lopsided that it's obvious, but I would definately question what the commish was thinking here.

 
Am I way off base here?
Click to expand...
Way off. " Haven't even arrived at the stadium" off base.Is umm.. there anything else to this story? PLEASE? C'mon.... like, "Manning + kicker for McNabb, kicker and girlfriend" ?? C'mon. :wacko:
 
The commish is taking the raw end of at the VERY least the Manning deal.We would have to understand why to know if it is collusion.Records, rosters, ect?My take is without knowing records is that either the Commish is just helping the newbie out alittle, has valued players much differently than I have going into the second half, or is up to something, but for the life of me, I don't know what it is. :confused:

 
The commissioner pays for the newbies team and then proceedes to make trades that benefit the newbie. If the newbie was giving up good players to the commish for crap, then you have an argument that the newbie was brought in to a farm team for the commish. I don't see any underhandedness. Sounds like you are upset because the newbie is kicking your tail! :P

 
its owners like you .. who wreck leagues .. nothing wrong with any of these trades.... simply a comish tryin to get his new owner involved and is good enough to possibly take a loss on a trade.. pathetic that you complained about it

 
Couple of odd things. Commish paid for his team? $20.00. Kind of strange. As far collusion - I don't think so. However...I'm commish and owner in three leagues and I avoid trades altogether unless it glarring team needs are addressed. Your commish should have done the same. The trades he is making seem to be made for the sake of trading. The Manning trade is like that of close coded milk. It doesn't smell funny yet, but it doesn't smell quite right.IMO, you should get a better comish or league next year just to feel better. Last thought - that's the p[roblem with $20.00 leagues. Lack of commitment and stupid people can make for no fun.

 
Thanks for all the replies guys, I had a feeling I was going overboard which is why I posted this. HOWEVER:Newbie was number 1 in the league with best record, Commish was dead last in the league and winless at the point of both of the trades. Newbie's only glaring weakness at the time of the McNabb/Manning debacle was at QB. And yes, I am a very close number 2 in this league, which probably makes whoever said I was pissed that I was getting beaten by a newbie right.In retrospect, yes he made two trades I never in my life would have made, and his reasons for making these trades ARE suspect, but there is no real base for calling him out on collusion. I did it in a very joking matter in the first place and can cover my a** pretty well on this, but I may just send him a link to this board.

 
Newbie was number 1 in the league with best record, Commish was dead last in the league and winless at the point of both of the trades. Newbie's only glaring weakness at the time of the McNabb/Manning debacle was at QB.
Click to expand...
I think I change my opinion.The commish is out of it, and has just given the best team the one piece he was lacking. Add that the Commish paid the entrance fee of the team, and I now think you might have something.Wouldn't shock me at all if a deal was made at the start of the season that the Commish gets the winnings off the newbie and that basically the newbie gets to play without a financial obligation just to get his feet wet this season.Not saying that is the case, but it wouldn't shock me.Either way, as the second place team, you might have a case.***** For the record, this is probably the first time I've said that it might actually be collusion after all in 15 years of playing fantasy football.You really should post all the facts when asking a question.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks for all the replies guys, I had a feeling I was going overboard which is why I posted this. HOWEVER:Newbie was number 1 in the league with best record, Commish was dead last in the league and winless at the point of both of the trades. Newbie's only glaring weakness at the time of the McNabb/Manning debacle was at QB. And yes, I am a very close number 2 in this league, which probably makes whoever said I was pissed that I was getting beaten by a newbie right.In retrospect, yes he made two trades I never in my life would have made, and his reasons for making these trades ARE suspect, but there is no real base for calling him out on collusion. I did it in a very joking matter in the first place and can cover my a** pretty well on this, but I may just send him a link to this board.
Click to expand...
For all of you that say he is 'just trying to get the new owner involved'....That's just BS. You don't help other in FF just beacuse their new players. The commish should not have to baby this guy into returning. The new guy is still his competition and it does not sound like he is treating it as such.If the commish was last and his solution was to make these deals, I'd say that it does look lame. Your not fixing things by giving up on Manning. Lets look back to week 4.Manning had just come off of a 6 TD game and had thrown for 914 yards and 9 TDs to that point. McNabb had 506 yards and 0 TDs in 3 games. Why do that deal?Week 8 analysis pending. I think you do have a beef.
 
Week 8McCardell (505 yards and 5 TDs) and Moulds (510 yards and 1 TD - 2 games missed due to injury)forGlenn 359/4TD (3 in 1 game) andGardner 335/3TDThen Gardner for Galloway 410/1TDI see no reason you would make this deal unless your dumping. Is it the worst collusion, no. But there is no way you can say Glenn and Gardner are an improvement. At BEST an even deal, but probably a digression in team strength.The second deal of giving Gardner for Galloway really makes no sense as Galloway has not scored since week 1. Is the guy a Dallas homer?So it's not Priest for Rod Smith, but these deals Just makes no sense.

 
I'd say let it go for now...but keep a close eye. You might not be wrong here, but the only way you'd win (since the commish is involved) is convincing the other owners of this.

 
Not to demean the commish, but maybe he's just not a good judge at trades. We have a guy in my money league who is all about the Patriots - he grabs 'em all at the expense of talent. Maybe the commish just has a thing for the NFC East.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Ministry of Pain
New Dynasty League and we've had our first trade where people are asking questions
2
Replies
79
Views
749
JohnnyU
JohnnyU
S
Commish Chat - Avoiding Flake Out Factor in Re-draft (Punishments)
Replies
31
Views
2K
sushinsky4tsar
S
Anarchy99
Do Teams Have An Advantage Playing With A QB On A Rookie Contract?
Replies
19
Views
2K
Tau837
Tau837

Users who are viewing this thread

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