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!

Should / Can this be VETO'ed ? (1 Viewer)

Can / Should this trade be veto'ed ?? (see below)

  • Total voters
    91
Dirk Digler

Dirk Digler

Footballguy
Im the commish of a league, I need outside opinions as this trade involves my franchise.

First it has been conceited that there is absolutely no collusion involved in this trade. Usually, that would be the end of this conversation and the trade would stand as a matter of individual owner opinions. No cheating (collusion) / No veto'ing has been my longstanding policy.But this involves me so its not as easy as just ignoring the owners that disagree with the trade being "fair".

If it matters, this is a multi-trade trade that started w/ Team 2 giving up Thompkins & Hartline for Nicks* & McFadden* to combine McFadden & Jennings together to aquire a WR1.

Scoring: PPR, 12 teams

Start: 1 QB, 2 RB, 2 WR, 1 RB/WR Flex, 1 WR/TE Flex, 1 TE, 1 DEF & 1 K

TEAM 1: (4-0 Record)

QB- Manning

RB- Snelling, PThomas, LBell, ABradshaw, Reece

WR- Dez, DJax, Marshall, Shorts, SMoss, VBrown, TWilliams

TE- Olsen

(and a def & k)

TEAM 2 (0-4 Record)

QB- Vick, Pryor

RB- TRich, DWilson, LMiller, GBernard, McFadden, Jennings

WR- Fitz, Nicks*, Royal, Kerley, PHarvin

TE- Cameron, Gronk

(and a def & k)

TEAM 2 TRADES....... McFadden / Jennings for Marshall from TEAM 1.

Should this trade be veto'ed / reversed ?

please give opinions.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
djjosee said:
?? Really ?? You put in a lot of effort in your post for such an even trade.
Click to expand...
I know. To me it no where near veto range.

but whatever, I appreciate the effort getting outside opinions so I put the effort into posting this.

But I have a couple owners requesting a vote about the "fairness".. Because it involves me, Im asking for unbias, experienced commishes and FF ballers to chime in.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Absolutely not. It's not even something that requires a second of consideration or further discussion. If your league is complaining about this then they are, as the previous poster commented, whiners.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not even worth considering a veto.

An 0-4 team has done some nice work to improve.

A 4-0 team is buying RB security.

You know the league members better than any of us, so handle them accordingly, but allowing them to block this trade would be an awful precedent. They should be cheering this type of activity going forward. There's alot of dead leagues out there.

In the leagues I commish there's no votes and no commish review. A trade happens as soon as it is accepted. I write an explanation why this is the best way to handle trades -- mutual trust, minding our own teams, everyone trying to win, doing what's best for their team in their opinion. I treat them like adults and expect them to act like adults. If someone is dumb, then someone is dumb. It isn't the job of a nosy league consensus or an overbearing commish to try to make them smart.

eta, before anyone asks. I do reserve the right to reverse obvious collusion. In my explanation I refer to it, jokingly, as reversing evil. Trades happen instantly so there's no waiting around for me. I've commished leagues for a long long time and never vetoed a trade. I'd like to see more leagues grow up and use these settings.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
No collusion. No veto.

Owners that ##### about trades like this either need to be more active sending out offers or get involved in a no trade league.

 
Dirk Digler said:
I had the exact same situation happen with this same owner a couple (2) years ago I posted it here too. http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=609961&hl=

Im at work, so a little busy i cant deal with this in full right now.

but appears he's saying / lobbying the other owners via that the "integrity of the league" is at stake.

I will likely link this thread in my league page when I can...
Click to expand...
Sounds like the only "integrity of the league" issue is this sausage-bag owner. Rallying other owners to veto/complain about a trade that isn't even CLOSE to being a horrible trade.

I hate owners like this and if they persist (like you say this guy has in the past) to cause stupid and needless problems for the leauge I don't hesitate to raise a vote to get them booted the following season.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Godsbrother said:
if they have a problem with this trade then you might as well disallow all trades.
Click to expand...
:goodposting:

Can we have a pinned thread that simply says "No collusion = No veto"? Please????

Sadly, there are FF owners who think vetoing trades is part of FF strategy - it's not. Making them is.

 
Just realized if my league mates don't have memeberships here they can't see the results...

As of now it's...40 votes.

Can / should this trade be reversed or vetoed

39 votes NO

1 vote to YES

 
Yeah I understand,

I have issues with your and you're and all sorts of gramaticals thingys that forum nazis hate me for.

I'm not a smaaaart man Jenny

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dirk Digler said:
Im the commish of a league, I need outside opinions as this trade involves my franchise.

First it has been conceited that there is absolutely no collusion involved in this trade. Usually, that would be the end of this conversation and the trade would stand as a matter of individual owner opinions. No cheating (collusion) / No veto'ing has been my longstanding policy.But this involves me so its not as easy as just ignoring the owners that disagree with the trade being "fair".

If it matters, this is a multi-trade trade that started w/ Team 2 giving up Thompkins & Hartline for Nicks* & McFadden* to combine McFadden & Jennings together to aquire a WR1.

Scoring: PPR, 12 teams

Start: 1 QB, 2 RB, 2 WR, 1 RB/WR Flex, 1 WR/TE Flex, 1 TE, 1 DEF & 1 K

TEAM 1: (4-0 Record)

QB- Manning

RB- Snelling, PThomas, LBell, ABradshaw, Reece

WR- Dez, DJax, Marshall, Shorts, SMoss, VBrown, TWilliams

TE- Olsen

(and a def & k)

TEAM 2 (0-4 Record)

QB- Vick, Pryor

RB- TRich, DWilson, LMiller, GBernard, McFadden, Jennings

WR- Fitz, Nicks*, Royal, Kerley, PHarvin

TE- Cameron, Gronk

(and a def & k)

TEAM 2 TRADES....... McFadden / Jennings for Marshall from TEAM 1.

Should this trade be veto'ed / reversed ?

please give opinions.
Click to expand...
The trade should NOT be vetoed

But the thread should be

 
The more of these threads I see (and the answer is ALWAYS 'no', btw), the more I realize the commish asking really just wants to veto the trade for some reason or other, and is looking for somebody's blessing to do what they know they shouldnt.

Golden Rule- if you need to ask the answer is no.

 
I'm the commish and I'm not looking to or going to veto anything,

I just wanted outside fantasy footballers to confirm how absurd this conversation about reversing this trade is without having to write a book.

I been here 10 years cut me some slack. Lol. Thanks all.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The fact that you brought it here for third party opinions proves you're interested in the integrity of your league. No way does this get vetoed. It wouldn't even make a stop at my desk on its trip to Approvalville.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The only thing that should be put to a league vote is if the whiners should be allowed back in the league next year.

 
Dirk Digler said:
Im the commish of a league, I need outside opinions as this trade involves my franchise.

First it has been conceited that there is absolutely no collusion involved in this trade. Usually, that would be the end of this conversation and the trade would stand as a matter of individual owner opinions. No cheating (collusion) / No veto'ing has been my longstanding policy.But this involves me so its not as easy as just ignoring the owners that disagree with the trade being "fair".

If it matters, this is a multi-trade trade that started w/ Team 2 giving up Thompkins & Hartline for Nicks* & McFadden* to combine McFadden & Jennings together to aquire a WR1.

Scoring: PPR, 12 teams

Start: 1 QB, 2 RB, 2 WR, 1 RB/WR Flex, 1 WR/TE Flex, 1 TE, 1 DEF & 1 K

TEAM 1: (4-0 Record)

QB- Manning

RB- Snelling, PThomas, LBell, ABradshaw, Reece

WR- Dez, DJax, Marshall, Shorts, SMoss, VBrown, TWilliams

TE- Olsen

(and a def & k)

TEAM 2 (0-4 Record)

QB- Vick, Pryor

RB- TRich, DWilson, LMiller, GBernard, McFadden, Jennings

WR- Fitz, Nicks*, Royal, Kerley, PHarvin

TE- Cameron, Gronk

(and a def & k)

TEAM 2 TRADES....... McFadden / Jennings for Marshall from TEAM 1.

Should this trade be veto'ed / reversed ?

please give opinions.
Click to expand...
No... and the word is "conceded"

 
Since we're doing you a favor and letting you pollute the SP with crap because your leaguemates are morons, do us a favor and link the thread discussion in your league.

 
Dirk Digler said:
I had the exact same situation happen with this same owner a couple (2) years ago I posted it here too. http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=609961&hl=

Im at work, so a little busy i cant deal with this in full right now.

but appears he's saying / lobbying the other owners via that the "integrity of the league" is at stake.

I will likely link this thread in my league page when I can...
Click to expand...
LOL, I had to go back and I apparently voted fair on that one as well. I agree with the previous poster in that you might want to take a closer look at the 'source' of the problem. I wouldn't advocate kicking an owner without a long history of good reasons, but he is certainly approaching that realm if not already there.

 
PatsWillWin said:
Since we're doing you a favor and letting you pollute the SP with crap because your leaguemates are morons, do us a favor and link the thread discussion in your league.
Click to expand...
This.

Attention: Anybody and everybody whining about that trade: Shut the hell up.

 
iamkoza said:
this thread can probably be deleted so no one else accidentally clicks on it/reads it like i did
Click to expand...
Sadly, there are at least a couple of people who think this is a valid complaint (or a couple who can't read or are just being ####s or just clicked on the wrong thing by accident).

But the fact that someone in Dirk's league is whining - or even worse, considering vetoing this deal, sadly shows that this thread is somewhat necessary.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

JohnnyU
Post NFL DRAFT Dynasty or DEVY Drafts
3 4 5
Replies
227
Views
15K
eric rymer
eric rymer
K
My offseason partial rebuild moves. Long, sorry.
Replies
3
Views
781
eighsse2
eighsse2
Down Under
  • Locked
  • Poll Poll
Should we just shut it regarding this trade?
4 5 6
Replies
278
Views
6K
jobarules
J

Users who are viewing this thread

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