Real Collusion (1 Viewer)

[fantasycurse42]

My home league, everyone has been friends since HS... $400 entry fee so it is a decent sized league. Scenario; Last place team 3-7 trades with his best friend in the league who is 6-4.

3-7 team sends AJ Green, Moreno, & Russel Wilson in exchange for BJGE, Larry Fitzgerald, & Jay Cutler.

As a league we are all friends, obviously we have all stayed in touch with each other at different levels, but nonetheless everyone is friends. As soon as this trade goes through everyone is in an uproar instantly - Every owner has posted, emailed, & some have texted the owner receiving BJGE, Fitz, Cutler as to why he would do this deal - No response. The other owner is defending the trade tooth and nail as legit. The owner of the 3-7 team isn't a moron, he understand how lopsided this trade is & wouldn't usually make a trade this stupid.

The commish has emailed all members excluding these two as to what the right course of action is.

Honestly, friends or no friends I want them out and disqualified...

What say you?

 

[KCitons]

Explain the difference between collusion and a bad trade.

Then explain how you know it's collusion. Or how you can prove it's collusion.

 

[Buffaloes]

is this really an lhuck's alias?

 

[fantasycurse42]

Explain the difference between collusion and a bad trade.

Then explain how you know it's collusion. Or how you can prove it's collusion.

Someone who needs to win right now to even try and stay alive trading a top 5 QB for an injured QB is a red flag... This guy understands football.

Why would a team on the brink of elimination make a trade that downgrades significantly at all positions (one of which is hurt)...

is this really an lhuck's alias?

Yea brostein, I'm lhucks. turkey, provolone, lettuce, mayo, salt & pepper - no tomato... If there is tomato we will have problems

 

[Cliff Clavin]

Definitely not collusion.

 

[KCitons]

Explain the difference between collusion and a bad trade.

Then explain how you know it's collusion. Or how you can prove it's collusion.

Someone who needs to win right now to even try and stay alive trading a top 5 QB for an injured QB is a red flag... This guy understands football.

Why would a team on the brink of elimination make a trade that downgrades significantly at all positions (one of which is hurt)...

is this really an lhuck's alias?

Yea brostein, I'm lhucks. turkey, provolone, lettuce, mayo, salt & pepper - no tomato... If there is tomato we will have problems

Still didn't answer my questions with any facts. Those were just your opinions.

 

[T with T]

My home league, everyone has been friends since HS... $400 entry fee so it is a decent sized league. Scenario; Last place team 3-7 trades with his best friend in the league who is 6-4.

3-7 team sends AJ Green, Moreno, & Russel Wilson in exchange for BJGE, Larry Fitzgerald, & Jay Cutler.

As a league we are all friends, obviously we have all stayed in touch with each other at different levels, but nonetheless everyone is friends. As soon as this trade goes through everyone is in an uproar instantly - Every owner has posted, emailed, & some have texted the owner receiving BJGE, Fitz, Cutler as to why he would do this deal - No response. The other owner is defending the trade tooth and nail as legit. The owner of the 3-7 team isn't a moron, he understand how lopsided this trade is & wouldn't usually make a trade this stupid.

The commish has emailed all members excluding these two as to what the right course of action is.

Honestly, friends or no friends I want them out and disqualified...

What say you?

Yea that trade should be vetoed and the reason the person accepted shouldn't even be listened to. I would break up the league because that's shady and obviously they have a deal under the table that helps out the guy giving away AJgreen and Moreno. If I was in a league and something like that Happened and the trade wasn't Vetoed, I would dismiss myself Immediately from further activity in that league.

 

[McGarnicle]

I understand the concept of having to prove collusion, but since that is usually impossible unless there is a confession, I like to have a good trustworthy commish who can smell something like this for what it is, and yes remove the owners starting next season. And block the trade.

 

[T with T]

I understand the concept of having to prove collusion, but since that is usually impossible unless there is a confession, I like to have a good trustworthy commish who can smell something like this for what it is, and yes remove the owners starting next season. And block the trade.

agreeed.. Block trade and owners are done after this season.

 

[Phenix]

We need a commish thread!

 

[FF Wiseguy]

You can never prove collusion. That's why I always add the clause "or is so lopsided as to completely upset the balance of the league." Again, a tricky gray area, and not much easier to prove than collusion. But it gives you another leg to stand on.

That being said, in my early years running a league of mostly friends, I vetoed a trade between cousins in the league on the basis of being a completely unfair trade. In my reasoning, I used arguments like "in order for this to be a good trade, "A" needs to happen, and "B" needs to happen, which is extremely unlikely. Well, both "A" and "B" happened (including "C" and "D"), so in the end, I blocked a trade that I should have let pass. However, I felt vindicated, when one of the owners actively approached me and others to give him a good trade, and he would split the cash prize with us. He did not return the next year.

Me personally, I would veto this trade. I'm sure the debate would rage for the rest of the season, but I would feel pretty confident that I did the right thing. Stinks like collusion to me. As McGarnicle said, you can almost never prove collusion, so the LM has to use their best judgement, which in this case, I think would lead to veto.

 

[fantasycurse42]

I understand the concept of having to prove collusion, but since that is usually impossible unless there is a confession, I like to have a good trustworthy commish who can smell something like this for what it is, and yes remove the owners starting next season. And block the trade.

I understand the concept of having to prove collusion, but since that is usually impossible unless there is a confession, I like to have a good trustworthy commish who can smell something like this for what it is, and yes remove the owners starting next season. And block the trade.

agreeed.. Block trade and owners are done after this season.

You can never prove collusion. That's why I always add the clause "or is so lopsided as to completely upset the balance of the league." Again, a tricky gray area, and not much easier to prove than collusion. But it gives you another leg to stand on.

That being said, in my early years running a league of mostly friends, I vetoed a trade between cousins in the league on the basis of being a completely unfair trade. In my reasoning, I used arguments like "in order for this to be a good trade, "A" needs to happen, and "B" needs to happen, which is extremely unlikely. Well, both "A" and "B" happened (including "C" and "D"), so in the end, I blocked a trade that I should have let pass. However, I felt vindicated, when one of the owners actively approached me and others to give him a good trade, and he would split the cash prize with us. He did not return the next year.

Me personally, I would veto this trade. I'm sure the debate would rage for the rest of the season, but I would feel pretty confident that I did the right thing. Stinks like collusion to me. As McGarnicle said, you can almost never prove collusion, so the LM has to use their best judgement, which in this case, I think would lead to veto.

Thanks all for the sound advice... It is kinda a #### move kicking friends out of a league, but this is so bush league I think it is justified.

 

[Black]

If not collusion, major d-baggery. Reverse the trade, tell them to stop being stupid.

 

[fbelange]

LOL not even close.

Cutler = Out for Season. Russell Wilson is better anyway.
AJ Green is lightyears ahead of Fitzgerald in the fantasy world. Theres nothing even slightly pointing at a Fitz outbreak or an AJ decline... No debate on that one either.
Oh, but that last ones the best. BJGE is outright the better of the two backs, so maybe that balances things.


This is a joke. OP is trolling or this league is not as honest as it once was.

 

[FF Wiseguy]

I understand the concept of having to prove collusion, but since that is usually impossible unless there is a confession, I like to have a good trustworthy commish who can smell something like this for what it is, and yes remove the owners starting next season. And block the trade.

I understand the concept of having to prove collusion, but since that is usually impossible unless there is a confession, I like to have a good trustworthy commish who can smell something like this for what it is, and yes remove the owners starting next season. And block the trade.

agreeed.. Block trade and owners are done after this season.

You can never prove collusion. That's why I always add the clause "or is so lopsided as to completely upset the balance of the league." Again, a tricky gray area, and not much easier to prove than collusion. But it gives you another leg to stand on.

That being said, in my early years running a league of mostly friends, I vetoed a trade between cousins in the league on the basis of being a completely unfair trade. In my reasoning, I used arguments like "in order for this to be a good trade, "A" needs to happen, and "B" needs to happen, which is extremely unlikely. Well, both "A" and "B" happened (including "C" and "D"), so in the end, I blocked a trade that I should have let pass. However, I felt vindicated, when one of the owners actively approached me and others to give him a good trade, and he would split the cash prize with us. He did not return the next year.

Me personally, I would veto this trade. I'm sure the debate would rage for the rest of the season, but I would feel pretty confident that I did the right thing. Stinks like collusion to me. As McGarnicle said, you can almost never prove collusion, so the LM has to use their best judgement, which in this case, I think would lead to veto.

Thanks all for the sound advice... It is kinda a #### move kicking friends out of a league, but this is so bush league I think it is justified.

Yeah, that's the problem with running a friends' league, sometimes the money is just not worth the headache of ruining a friendship. Although a $400 buy-in league is serious money for most people. And if someone is that willing to try and screw over their friends so blatantly, you might not need him as a leaguemate or a friend.

 

[DoubleG]

As has already been stated several times, sometimes it's tough to sense the difference between collusion and just a bad trade. This is NOT one of those times. This is about as clear "prove-able without a confession" collusion as you will ever see. Clearly, the 3-7 team is not and will not be better Cutler instead of Wilson, BJGE instead of Moreno or Fitz instead of AJ Green. Reverse the trade and give both owners the smack down.

And I am usually on the "don't run everybody's team" side - but this is clearly and obviously collusion.

 

[Wilfredo Ledezma]

on it's face this trade looks pretty bad. I'm in the never veto save collusion department, but I'd sure like to hear the 3-7 teams "why I made this trade schpiel"

 

[Holy Schneikes]

I understand the concept of having to prove collusion, but since that is usually impossible unless there is a confession, I like to have a good trustworthy commish who can smell something like this for what it is, and yes remove the owners starting next season. And block the trade.

I understand the concept of having to prove collusion, but since that is usually impossible unless there is a confession, I like to have a good trustworthy commish who can smell something like this for what it is, and yes remove the owners starting next season. And block the trade.

agreeed.. Block trade and owners are done after this season.

You can never prove collusion. That's why I always add the clause "or is so lopsided as to completely upset the balance of the league." Again, a tricky gray area, and not much easier to prove than collusion. But it gives you another leg to stand on.

That being said, in my early years running a league of mostly friends, I vetoed a trade between cousins in the league on the basis of being a completely unfair trade. In my reasoning, I used arguments like "in order for this to be a good trade, "A" needs to happen, and "B" needs to happen, which is extremely unlikely. Well, both "A" and "B" happened (including "C" and "D"), so in the end, I blocked a trade that I should have let pass. However, I felt vindicated, when one of the owners actively approached me and others to give him a good trade, and he would split the cash prize with us. He did not return the next year.

Me personally, I would veto this trade. I'm sure the debate would rage for the rest of the season, but I would feel pretty confident that I did the right thing. Stinks like collusion to me. As McGarnicle said, you can almost never prove collusion, so the LM has to use their best judgement, which in this case, I think would lead to veto.

Thanks all for the sound advice... It is kinda a #### move kicking friends out of a league, but this is so bush league I think it is justified.

Yeah, that's the problem with running a friends' league, sometimes the money is just not worth the headache of ruining a friendship. Although a $400 buy-in league is serious money for most people. And if someone is that willing to try and screw over their friends so blatantly, you might not need him as a leaguemate or a friend.

Agreed. I am usually on the "let it go unless it is totally obvious that it is real collusion" end of things, but I really can't construct any reasonable argument about how that trade makes sense from the "bad" side. And as Wiseguy says if you lose a "friend" who is trying to F the league like that, you'll be OK.

 

[Wrigley]

What GG said

 

[KCitons]

Just want to point out that the OP didn't clarify if this was a redraft or a dynasty. Not that it matters much.

But, He also didn't mention what rules were in place to address this situation.

 

[Wilfredo Ledezma]

Somewhat interesting that this trade would have not even turned heads week 1. But it smells rotten. Especially the disappearing act of the 3-7 team.

 

[fantasycurse42]

I know it's collusion, don't need a confession on that - Asking how you would go about this situation in your home league?

Since we are all friends and some are better friends with the offenders then others, we are at a disagreement. I think I want them out and also disqualified - The problem with disqualifying teams is that it changes playoff structures. Some also think they crossed the line but we should just reverse and move on.

In all honesty it's just upsetting as this bull#### messes up my home league which we have had for 9 years now.

 

[Hoosier16]

I assume this is redraft?

If so, Have the one who traded away the good players explain how this benefits his team making the playoffs (or whatever the benefit is to him). If he cannot give a reasonable explanation, the trade should be reversed. I don't think you have to prove collusion to reverse an obviously unbalanced trade.

 

[DoubleG]

Put it to a league-wide vote - Two options:

1) Reverse and carry on

2) Reverse and disqualify

IMHO, they should be disqualified. That prevents future teams who are decent from trying a similar (but slightly less obvious) tactic. That is to say, if everyone knows that collusion will get them DQ'd, they wont run the risk. Since it's friends, I'd let them back in next year - but they tried to cheat, therefore they should be poonished!!

 

[FF Wiseguy]

I know it's collusion, don't need a confession on that - Asking how you would go about this situation in your home league?

Since we are all friends and some are better friends with the offenders then others, we are at a disagreement. I think I want them out and also disqualified - The problem with disqualifying teams is that it changes playoff structures. Some also think they crossed the line but we should just reverse and move on.

In all honesty it's just upsetting as this bull#### messes up my home league which we have had for 9 years now.

Yeah, you're pretty much in a no-win situation. It will get messy regardless of what you do.

Here's what I'd suggest. Tell the league you're disallowing the trade temporarily. Then, give the 3-7 owner 24-48 hours to post his reasonings for doing the trade. Once they do that, have the non-involved owners vote (up to you if you want to vote or not) on whether the trade should be allowed. If the majority vote to allow, let the owners re-propose and accept the trade. If they do not vote to allow, or the 3-7 owner doesn't give his side, you let the veto stand and everyone moves on. You let everyone know that the league vote will stand as final, and any shenanigans (roster tanking, verbal abuse, etc.) afterwards will not be tolerated. It's gonna suck either way, but at least everyone will get to voice their opinion through post or vote.

I've never gone through the process of eliminating a team in the middle of a season, but my guess is it would be a nightmare logistically on ESPN or Yahoo.

 

[KCitons]

If the league has been around 9 years, rules should be set to deal with this.

 

[FantasyTrader]

Just sucks that they'd even try it in a friendly league. You gotta be a major DB to try this among friends and then even go so far as to defend it after the fact. After you get the smackdown at least laugh it off and say something like "Well, we thought we'd try!" That the 6-4 owner is defending it would piss me off more than anything.

 

[fantasycurse42]

Put it to a league-wide vote - Two options:

1) Reverse and carry on

2) Reverse and disqualify

IMHO, they should be disqualified. That prevents future teams who are decent from trying a similar (but slightly less obvious) tactic. That is to say, if everyone knows that collusion will get them DQ'd, they wont run the risk. Since it's friends, I'd let them back in next year - but they tried to cheat, therefore they should be poonished!!

I like this - I'm recommending this... No need for further responses, this appears perfect. The only issue we have with disqualifying is the change of playoff structure - we'll have to figure that out if it is voted, thanks again.

 

[maf005]

I know it's collusion, don't need a confession on that - Asking how you would go about this situation in your home league?

Since we are all friends and some are better friends with the offenders then others, we are at a disagreement. I think I want them out and also disqualified - The problem with disqualifying teams is that it changes playoff structures. Some also think they crossed the line but we should just reverse and move on.

In all honesty it's just upsetting as this bull#### messes up my home league which we have had for 9 years now.

Dude don't listen to the posters saying to disqualify and ban these guys forever. It's a league of friends for not a lot of money. Maybe winning $2k is a lot for some but it's nowhere near life changing.

Block the trade and send a "not cool..you know better than to try that bush league crap in this league" message to the colluding owners. Don't be dramatic and boot someones bff lol

When reviewing those owner's subsequent trades, keep the fact that they colluded in the back of your mind

 

[BroadwayG]

sleep with their husbands

 

[jdkapow]

I know it's collusion, don't need a confession on that - Asking how you would go about this situation in your home league?

Since we are all friends and some are better friends with the offenders then others, we are at a disagreement. I think I want them out and also disqualified - The problem with disqualifying teams is that it changes playoff structures. Some also think they crossed the line but we should just reverse and move on.

In all honesty it's just upsetting as this bull#### messes up my home league which we have had for 9 years now.

Dude don't listen to the posters saying to disqualify and ban these guys forever. It's a league of friends for not a lot of money. Maybe winning $2k is a lot for some but it's nowhere near life changing.

Block the trade and send a "not cool..you know better than to try that bush league crap in this league" message to the colluding owners. Don't be dramatic and boot someones bff lol

When reviewing those owner's subsequent trades, keep the fact that they colluded in the back of your mind

This sounds right to me, with the added caveat that any future trades between them (and maybe any future trades involving either of them) will be subject to greater scrutiny, such that they have to avoid even the appearance of impropriety.

This, to me, is collusion beyond a reasonable doubt. And "beyond a reasonable doubt" is stricter than the criterion I would normally apply.

 

[GregR]

Explain the difference between collusion and a bad trade.

Then explain how you know it's collusion. Or how you can prove it's collusion.

I see this posted frequently in threads like this and I find it doesn't contribute anything of worth.

You gather the pertinent information that you can, and you come to the best conclusion that you can based on it. This is no different than most every other decision we have in life.

People will get away with some collusion because they kept it close enough to the line of what is reasonable if bad judgment. But if a trade looks bad enough and the owner can't provide a believable explanation of why he thinks it is a benefit, we don't require a taped confession to decide it's collusion.

 

[GregR]

My home league, everyone has been friends since HS... $400 entry fee so it is a decent sized league. Scenario; Last place team 3-7 trades with his best friend in the league who is 6-4.

3-7 team sends AJ Green, Moreno, & Russel Wilson in exchange for BJGE, Larry Fitzgerald, & Jay Cutler.

As a league we are all friends, obviously we have all stayed in touch with each other at different levels, but nonetheless everyone is friends. As soon as this trade goes through everyone is in an uproar instantly - Every owner has posted, emailed, & some have texted the owner receiving BJGE, Fitz, Cutler as to why he would do this deal - No response. The other owner is defending the trade tooth and nail as legit. The owner of the 3-7 team isn't a moron, he understand how lopsided this trade is & wouldn't usually make a trade this stupid.

The commish has emailed all members excluding these two as to what the right course of action is.

Honestly, friends or no friends I want them out and disqualified...

What say you?

The trade should be put on hold until the owner on the perceived short end of the trade gives his explanation of why he feels it improves his team, and why he thinks that was the best he could get for the players involved. Getting it from him face to face, or barring that, over the phone would be better than email/text if possible.

Once you have that, decide if you think what he said is reasonable. You don't have to agree he's correct, you just have to believe that he honestly feels that way.

 

[ImTheScientist]

Glad this isn't a thread about "fake collusion".

 

[fantasycurse42]

Glad this isn't a thread about "fake collusion".

Please return to your correct place on this board in one of the 82 Seahawks threads.

 

[KCitons]

Explain the difference between collusion and a bad trade.

Then explain how you know it's collusion. Or how you can prove it's collusion.

I see this posted frequently in threads like this and I find it doesn't contribute anything of worth.

You gather the pertinent information that you can, and you come to the best conclusion that you can based on it. This is no different than most every other decision we have in life.

People will get away with some collusion because they kept it close enough to the line of what is reasonable if bad judgment. But if a trade looks bad enough and the owner can't provide a believable explanation of why he thinks it is a benefit, we don't require a taped confession to decide it's collusion.

I also see frequent posts where people only divulge enough information to get the response they are looking for.

I asked the OP twice about league rules regarding collusion and vetoing trades. But, no answer.

He's just looking for someone to give him the answer he's looking for, then he can report to his league that FBG guys said the trade should be overturned. Odds are, the OP is probably 6-4 as well and at risk of missing the playoffs.

 

[fantasycurse42]

Explain the difference between collusion and a bad trade.

Then explain how you know it's collusion. Or how you can prove it's collusion.

I see this posted frequently in threads like this and I find it doesn't contribute anything of worth.

You gather the pertinent information that you can, and you come to the best conclusion that you can based on it. This is no different than most every other decision we have in life.

People will get away with some collusion because they kept it close enough to the line of what is reasonable if bad judgment. But if a trade looks bad enough and the owner can't provide a believable explanation of why he thinks it is a benefit, we don't require a taped confession to decide it's collusion.

I also see frequent posts where people only divulge enough information to get the response they are looking for. I asked the OP twice about league rules regarding collusion and vetoing trades. But, no answer.

He's just looking for someone to give him the answer he's looking for, then he can report to his league that FBG guys said the trade should be overturned. Odds are, the OP is probably 6-4 as well and at risk of missing the playoffs.

Honestly didn't/don't feel like dealing with nonsense - trading for Jay Cutler when you need to win now is a red flag for anyone (as I mentioned above) - you seem to think that is an opinion, so I didn't feel the need to explain any further.

 

[KCitons]

Explain the difference between collusion and a bad trade.

Then explain how you know it's collusion. Or how you can prove it's collusion.

I see this posted frequently in threads like this and I find it doesn't contribute anything of worth.

You gather the pertinent information that you can, and you come to the best conclusion that you can based on it. This is no different than most every other decision we have in life.

People will get away with some collusion because they kept it close enough to the line of what is reasonable if bad judgment. But if a trade looks bad enough and the owner can't provide a believable explanation of why he thinks it is a benefit, we don't require a taped confession to decide it's collusion.

I also see frequent posts where people only divulge enough information to get the response they are looking for. I asked the OP twice about league rules regarding collusion and vetoing trades. But, no answer.

He's just looking for someone to give him the answer he's looking for, then he can report to his league that FBG guys said the trade should be overturned. Odds are, the OP is probably 6-4 as well and at risk of missing the playoffs.

Honestly didn't/don't feel like dealing with nonsense - trading for Jay Cutler when you need to win now is a red flag for anyone (as I mentioned above) - you seem to think that is an opinion, so I didn't feel the need to explain any further.

Which means either

A: you have rules established. That you don't want to adhere to.

B: you have no rules established for a league that is 9 years old.

I'm not questioning the trade.

 

[ImTheScientist]

Just a bad trade. Deal with it bro.

This is why you need to move to high stakes....you don't have to deal with people making awful trades that affect the league. You brought this on yourself.

 

[fantasycurse42]

Explain the difference between collusion and a bad trade.

Then explain how you know it's collusion. Or how you can prove it's collusion.

I see this posted frequently in threads like this and I find it doesn't contribute anything of worth.

You gather the pertinent information that you can, and you come to the best conclusion that you can based on it. This is no different than most every other decision we have in life.

People will get away with some collusion because they kept it close enough to the line of what is reasonable if bad judgment. But if a trade looks bad enough and the owner can't provide a believable explanation of why he thinks it is a benefit, we don't require a taped confession to decide it's collusion.

I also see frequent posts where people only divulge enough information to get the response they are looking for. I asked the OP twice about league rules regarding collusion and vetoing trades. But, no answer.

He's just looking for someone to give him the answer he's looking for, then he can report to his league that FBG guys said the trade should be overturned. Odds are, the OP is probably 6-4 as well and at risk of missing the playoffs.

Honestly didn't/don't feel like dealing with nonsense - trading for Jay Cutler when you need to win now is a red flag for anyone (as I mentioned above) - you seem to think that is an opinion, so I didn't feel the need to explain any further.

Which means eitherA: you have rules established. That you don't want to adhere to.

B: you have no rules established for a league that is 9 years old.

I'm not questioning the trade.

What are you talking about? A league with friends over 9 years we have never had to deal with this. "Hey if you cheat XYZ happens. Before this though we will need a confession."

I'd venture and guess a lot of hometown leagues don't have "these rules" you speak of in place.

 

[Wrigley]

Just a bad trade. Deal with it bro.

This is why you need to move to high stakes....you don't have to deal with people making awful trades that affect the league. You brought this on yourself.

yeah right, money never leads to cheating

 

[KCitons]

Explain the difference between collusion and a bad trade.

Then explain how you know it's collusion. Or how you can prove it's collusion.

I see this posted frequently in threads like this and I find it doesn't contribute anything of worth.

You gather the pertinent information that you can, and you come to the best conclusion that you can based on it. This is no different than most every other decision we have in life.

People will get away with some collusion because they kept it close enough to the line of what is reasonable if bad judgment. But if a trade looks bad enough and the owner can't provide a believable explanation of why he thinks it is a benefit, we don't require a taped confession to decide it's collusion.

I also see frequent posts where people only divulge enough information to get the response they are looking for. I asked the OP twice about league rules regarding collusion and vetoing trades. But, no answer.

He's just looking for someone to give him the answer he's looking for, then he can report to his league that FBG guys said the trade should be overturned. Odds are, the OP is probably 6-4 as well and at risk of missing the playoffs.

Honestly didn't/don't feel like dealing with nonsense - trading for Jay Cutler when you need to win now is a red flag for anyone (as I mentioned above) - you seem to think that is an opinion, so I didn't feel the need to explain any further.

Which means eitherA: you have rules established. That you don't want to adhere to.

B: you have no rules established for a league that is 9 years old.

I'm not questioning the trade.

What are you talking about? A league with friends over 9 years we have never had to deal with this. "Hey if you cheat XYZ happens. Before this though we will need a confession."

I'd venture and guess a lot of hometown leagues don't have "these rules" you speak of in place.

Thanks. That answers my question. My point is, it's much easier to establish rules during the off season, when there is no emotions involved.

Judging from the date you joined FBG's you should have seen dozen's of collusion posts in the Shark Pool.

Too late for your league, hopefully someone else reads this and will establish rules for their home town league.

 

[Apple Jack]

Just a bad trade. Deal with it bro.

This is why you need to move to high stakes....you don't have to deal with people making awful trades that affect the league. You brought this on yourself.

It's hard to believe that tools like this exist.

 

[TheStig]

My home league, everyone has been friends since HS... $400 entry fee so it is a decent sized league. Scenario; Last place team 3-7 trades with his best friend in the league who is 6-4.

3-7 team sends AJ Green, Moreno, & Russel Wilson in exchange for BJGE, Larry Fitzgerald, & Jay Cutler.

As a league we are all friends, obviously we have all stayed in touch with each other at different levels, but nonetheless everyone is friends. As soon as this trade goes through everyone is in an uproar instantly - Every owner has posted, emailed, & some have texted the owner receiving BJGE, Fitz, Cutler as to why he would do this deal - No response. The other owner is defending the trade tooth and nail as legit. The owner of the 3-7 team isn't a moron, he understand how lopsided this trade is & wouldn't usually make a trade this stupid.

The commish has emailed all members excluding these two as to what the right course of action is.

Honestly, friends or no friends I want them out and disqualified...

What say you?

First and foremost. It is a lopsided trade. Everyone here seems to agree on that.But to play Devils advocate here it isn't without some logic.

Team A has AJ Green, R. Wilson and K. Moreno and yet is STILL 3-6.

Motivation:

Team A May be frustrated with their season and acting out of that frustration. Perhaps he has been getting low ball offer after low ball offer from vultures and finally he took one. Who knows.

How many low ball "buy low" offers has anyone in here floated or been insulted by? What would you do or defend if the person clicked accept on an admitted "shot in the dark" trade offer? Raise your hand if you never sent a low ball trade hoping it would be accepted. Predatory trade offering? Yes. Collusion? No.

Perhaps he snapped and said "screw it! My season is toast, I want out and not have to watch anymore". Admittedly not having a shot the last few weeks is a terrible way to spend $400. Immature? Yes. Collusion? No.

Perhaps many of you have been D bags to him during the season and his sole motivation is simply to screw all of you. Spiteful? Yes. Collusion? No.

While the trade may be collusion, the leagues reaction and desire to keep 3 high profile and high scoring players stuck on a non threatening and losing team is what benefits the league more. That the league is is discussing blocking the trade is in fact collusion as everyone is working together to promote their own selfish agenda. I guarantee you that if the records of Team A and B were reversed this trade would not be discussed as "collusion" but simply as stupid knuckleheadness.

In essence, the leagues reaction is no different than any league that vetoes trades. The truth is a trade is fine only as long as it doesn't negatively impact your own chances at winning. And for this reason, the trade should stand and leagues should never have veto powers over trades.

The only people in the league that have any moral ground in this issue are the teams with worse records than Team A, but everyone else is just looking out for "Number 1" while claiming some moral high ground.

 

[Disc Shark]

Put it to a league-wide vote - Two options:

1) Reverse and carry on

2) Reverse and disqualify

IMHO, they should be disqualified. That prevents future teams who are decent from trying a similar (but slightly less obvious) tactic. That is to say, if everyone knows that collusion will get them DQ'd, they wont run the risk. Since it's friends, I'd let them back in next year - but they tried to cheat, therefore they should be poonished!!

I like this - I'm recommending this... No need for further responses, this appears perfect.The only issue we have with disqualifying is the change of playoff structure - we'll have to figure that out if it is voted, thanks again.

Not so fast.

I'd veto the trade. No league vote (unless that's in the league rules).

Let the season play out.

Kick them out of the league the day after the League Super Bowl.

 

[Wilfredo Ledezma]

My home league, everyone has been friends since HS... $400 entry fee so it is a decent sized league. Scenario; Last place team 3-7 trades with his best friend in the league who is 6-4.

3-7 team sends AJ Green, Moreno, & Russel Wilson in exchange for BJGE, Larry Fitzgerald, & Jay Cutler.

As a league we are all friends, obviously we have all stayed in touch with each other at different levels, but nonetheless everyone is friends. As soon as this trade goes through everyone is in an uproar instantly - Every owner has posted, emailed, & some have texted the owner receiving BJGE, Fitz, Cutler as to why he would do this deal - No response. The other owner is defending the trade tooth and nail as legit. The owner of the 3-7 team isn't a moron, he understand how lopsided this trade is & wouldn't usually make a trade this stupid.

The commish has emailed all members excluding these two as to what the right course of action is.

Honestly, friends or no friends I want them out and disqualified...

What say you?

First and foremost. It is a lopsided trade. Everyone here seems to agree on that.But to play Devils advocate here it isn't without some logic.

Team A has AJ Green, R. Wilson and K. Moreno and yet is STILL 3-6.

Motivation:

Team A May be frustrated with their season and acting out of that frustration. Perhaps he has been getting low ball offer after low ball offer from vultures and finally he took one. Who knows.

How many low ball "buy low" offers has anyone in here floated or been insulted by? What would you do or defend if the person clicked accept on an admitted "shot in the dark" trade offer? Raise your hand if you never sent a low ball trade hoping it would be accepted. Predatory trade offering? Yes. Collusion? No.

Perhaps he snapped and said "screw it! My season is toast, I want out and not have to watch anymore". Admittedly not having a shot the last few weeks is a terrible way to spend $400. Immature? Yes. Collusion? No.

Perhaps many of you have been D bags to him during the season and his sole motivation is simply to screw all of you. Spiteful? Yes. Collusion? No.

While the trade may be collusion, the leagues reaction and desire to keep 3 high profile and high scoring players stuck on a non threatening and losing team is what benefits the league more. That the league is is discussing blocking the trade is in fact collusion as everyone is working together to promote their own selfish agenda. I guarantee you that if the records of Team A and B were reversed this trade would not be discussed as "collusion" but simply as stupid knuckleheadness.

In essence, the leagues reaction is no different than any league that vetoes trades. The truth is a trade is fine only as long as it doesn't negatively impact your own chances at winning. And for this reason, the trade should stand and leagues should never have veto powers over trades.

The only people in the league that have any moral ground in this issue are the teams with worse records than Team A, but everyone else is just looking out for "Number 1" while claiming some moral high ground.

have you considered becoming a public defender?

 

[Rhythmdoctor]

I'd like to know what other QB is on the roster for the team who acquired Cutler. For someone who is big on mean reversion, there's a legitimate argument in wanting Fitz for ROS

 

[TheStig]

Here is an example of trade advice from the thread "The Art of the Trade"

"It's simple: find the most injury riddled, pathetic teams that are now 0-2 and in panic mode rt now and dangle your depth players in front of them for one of his studs. If the owner had forte and/or fjax he is likely on life support rt now and starting a guy like Dwyer. If you are deep at rb you guys are perfect trade partners. Sart by offering him multiple rbs (your rbs 4 and 5 for instance...like a Hillis and a Ben Tate for example) for his most studly wr or whatever area of need you have. You'd be surprised what a desperate owner will do to shake up his team after a very bad start to the season. If he doesn't go for that tell him your stud rbs are available and don't be afraid to trade one awAy if you have depth as long as you are gettin back a kings random for him. And b that I mean any combo of 2 stud wrs, qb/wr, TE/wr etc. For a legit stud rb you might be able to score jimmy graham AND a high end wr2 from a desperate owner. Again if ur deep at rb you won't miss a beat and will gain at 2 valuable positions. "

So when somebody actually follows this mostly terrible, predatory advice, and luck of the Irish, is actually successful, they then get to look forward to emails about collusion and getting kicked out of the league.

 

[KCitons]

Put it to a league-wide vote - Two options:

1) Reverse and carry on

2) Reverse and disqualify

IMHO, they should be disqualified. That prevents future teams who are decent from trying a similar (but slightly less obvious) tactic. That is to say, if everyone knows that collusion will get them DQ'd, they wont run the risk. Since it's friends, I'd let them back in next year - but they tried to cheat, therefore they should be poonished!!

I like this - I'm recommending this... No need for further responses, this appears perfect.The only issue we have with disqualifying is the change of playoff structure - we'll have to figure that out if it is voted, thanks again.

Not so fast.

I'd veto the trade. No league vote (unless that's in the league rules).

Let the season play out.

Kick them out of the league the day after the League Super Bowl.

There are no rules to handle this.

 

[TheStig]

My home league, everyone has been friends since HS... $400 entry fee so it is a decent sized league. Scenario; Last place team 3-7 trades with his best friend in the league who is 6-4.

3-7 team sends AJ Green, Moreno, & Russel Wilson in exchange for BJGE, Larry Fitzgerald, & Jay Cutler.

As a league we are all friends, obviously we have all stayed in touch with each other at different levels, but nonetheless everyone is friends. As soon as this trade goes through everyone is in an uproar instantly - Every owner has posted, emailed, & some have texted the owner receiving BJGE, Fitz, Cutler as to why he would do this deal - No response. The other owner is defending the trade tooth and nail as legit. The owner of the 3-7 team isn't a moron, he understand how lopsided this trade is & wouldn't usually make a trade this stupid.

The commish has emailed all members excluding these two as to what the right course of action is.

Honestly, friends or no friends I want them out and disqualified...

What say you?

First and foremost. It is a lopsided trade. Everyone here seems to agree on that.But to play Devils advocate here it isn't without some logic.

Team A has AJ Green, R. Wilson and K. Moreno and yet is STILL 3-6.

Motivation:

Team A May be frustrated with their season and acting out of that frustration. Perhaps he has been getting low ball offer after low ball offer from vultures and finally he took one. Who knows.

How many low ball "buy low" offers has anyone in here floated or been insulted by? What would you do or defend if the person clicked accept on an admitted "shot in the dark" trade offer? Raise your hand if you never sent a low ball trade hoping it would be accepted. Predatory trade offering? Yes. Collusion? No.

Perhaps he snapped and said "screw it! My season is toast, I want out and not have to watch anymore". Admittedly not having a shot the last few weeks is a terrible way to spend $400. Immature? Yes. Collusion? No.

Perhaps many of you have been D bags to him during the season and his sole motivation is simply to screw all of you. Spiteful? Yes. Collusion? No.

While the trade may be collusion, the leagues reaction and desire to keep 3 high profile and high scoring players stuck on a non threatening and losing team is what benefits the league more. That the league is is discussing blocking the trade is in fact collusion as everyone is working together to promote their own selfish agenda. I guarantee you that if the records of Team A and B were reversed this trade would not be discussed as "collusion" but simply as stupid knuckleheadness.

In essence, the leagues reaction is no different than any league that vetoes trades. The truth is a trade is fine only as long as it doesn't negatively impact your own chances at winning. And for this reason, the trade should stand and leagues should never have veto powers over trades.

The only people in the league that have any moral ground in this issue are the teams with worse records than Team A, but everyone else is just looking out for "Number 1" while claiming some moral high ground.

have you considered becoming a public defender?

Ha! At one time yes.

I'd strongly consider kicking the guys out of the League at the end of the season though even though I think the trade was more of the temper tantrum variety than true collusion. You'll never know if it was collusion unless you have away of following the money.