Should this trade be vetoed? T Henry for DWill ? (1 Viewer)

[Phurfur]

Here are the rules in the League Constitution

Article XIV -- Trades

If two franchise owners wish to trade players, they must do so via the league website. Once proposed and accepted on the website, a trade is official. All trades are subject to a 48-hour hold period during which it can be revoked by a majority vote of the league owners not involved. League owners will be notified of a pending trade via email and may exercise their veto rights at the website if they desire. All trades not receiving at least 6 vetoes will be automatically processed by the website exactly 48 hours after both trading owners accept the trade; all trades must be accepted by both owners at least 48 hours prior to the kickoff of the involved players’ games in order for owners to use their new players in that week’s lineup.

One-sided trades.

Majority vote has full veto power over obviously one-sided trades and consolidation of teams. The league encourages free trading of players. However, if it is believed by a majority of owners that an owner involved in a trade is not making a genuine attempt to improve his team, that trade may be vetoed. Any owners voting to veto a trade should make public via email or the league message board their reasons for doing so. Bad trades are allowed, but ones that do not appear to be made in good faith are not. It must be each team’s intention to improve his team and to win every game. This applies mainly to situations where owners have lost interest in the league or are out of contention.

Here is a message placed on the bulletin board this morning AND emailed to all owners -

Before I decided to voted to approve the DeAngelo Williams for Travis Henry trade, I called Damian to make sure he knew of Henry's failed drug test and his pending year long suspension. Damian said he didn't and asked me to make sure the trade was vetoed. As you all know, the only way to get the necessary veto votes to veto a trade in 24 hours is to call everyone to make sure they can evaluate the trade. We have established that a situation like this is grounds for a veto vote. Per Damian's request, please veto the trade by going to Communications > League Polls.

Which way should I vote ?

Should I mention the points leader is the one getting DWill in this trade.

You guys are nuts, I would not play in a league like this. What business do you have calling a guy and giving him player information. I could see it if this news were just breaking but we've all know this for weeks. I would throw Damian out of the league next year because he is an idiot and has no business playing FF.

 

[Steeler43]

Retar.edness is enough reason to veto a trade.

 

[Torque666]

Just elmininate trading imo.

 

[froafro]

Here are the rules in the League Constitution

Article XIV -- Trades

If two franchise owners wish to trade players, they must do so via the league website. Once proposed and accepted on the website, a trade is official. All trades are subject to a 48-hour hold period during which it can be revoked by a majority vote of the league owners not involved. League owners will be notified of a pending trade via email and may exercise their veto rights at the website if they desire. All trades not receiving at least 6 vetoes will be automatically processed by the website exactly 48 hours after both trading owners accept the trade; all trades must be accepted by both owners at least 48 hours prior to the kickoff of the involved players’ games in order for owners to use their new players in that week’s lineup.

One-sided trades.

Majority vote has full veto power over obviously one-sided trades and consolidation of teams. The league encourages free trading of players. However, if it is believed by a majority of owners that an owner involved in a trade is not making a genuine attempt to improve his team, that trade may be vetoed. Any owners voting to veto a trade should make public via email or the league message board their reasons for doing so. Bad trades are allowed, but ones that do not appear to be made in good faith are not. It must be each team’s intention to improve his team and to win every game. This applies mainly to situations where owners have lost interest in the league or are out of contention.

Here is a message placed on the bulletin board this morning AND emailed to all owners -

Before I decided to voted to approve the DeAngelo Williams for Travis Henry trade, I called Damian to make sure he knew of Henry's failed drug test and his pending year long suspension. Damian said he didn't and asked me to make sure the trade was vetoed. As you all know, the only way to get the necessary veto votes to veto a trade in 24 hours is to call everyone to make sure they can evaluate the trade. We have established that a situation like this is grounds for a veto vote. Per Damian's request, please veto the trade by going to Communications > League Polls.

Which way should I vote ?

Should I mention the points leader is the one getting DWill in this trade.

You guys are nuts, I would not play in a league like this. What business do you have calling a guy and giving him player information. I could see it if this news were just breaking but we've all know this for weeks. I would throw Damian out of the league next year because he is an idiot and has no business playing FF.

If the majority of the guys have been playing for 10 years or so like you said before...the owner who received Henry should know better. Trade stands.

 

[coachjim]

whats wrong with this trade? There's no guarantee that Henry will get suspended. Its highly probable, but you never know for sure until it happens. IF Henry somehow beats the suspension, I bet all the cry babies will then turn around and whine that henry was stolen.

This is the best answer to the problem. The trade should stand for several reasons. The first being that if Henry gets suspended then this guy will never make that mistake again will he. Who is in first, last or whatever should have no bearing.

 

[coachjim]

Here are the rules in the League Constitution

Article XIV -- Trades

If two franchise owners wish to trade players, they must do so via the league website. Once proposed and accepted on the website, a trade is official. All trades are subject to a 48-hour hold period during which it can be revoked by a majority vote of the league owners not involved. League owners will be notified of a pending trade via email and may exercise their veto rights at the website if they desire. All trades not receiving at least 6 vetoes will be automatically processed by the website exactly 48 hours after both trading owners accept the trade; all trades must be accepted by both owners at least 48 hours prior to the kickoff of the involved players’ games in order for owners to use their new players in that week’s lineup.

One-sided trades.

Majority vote has full veto power over obviously one-sided trades and consolidation of teams. The league encourages free trading of players. However, if it is believed by a majority of owners that an owner involved in a trade is not making a genuine attempt to improve his team, that trade may be vetoed. Any owners voting to veto a trade should make public via email or the league message board their reasons for doing so. Bad trades are allowed, but ones that do not appear to be made in good faith are not. It must be each team’s intention to improve his team and to win every game. This applies mainly to situations where owners have lost interest in the league or are out of contention.

Here is a message placed on the bulletin board this morning AND emailed to all owners -

Before I decided to voted to approve the DeAngelo Williams for Travis Henry trade, I called Damian to make sure he knew of Henry's failed drug test and his pending year long suspension. Damian said he didn't and asked me to make sure the trade was vetoed. As you all know, the only way to get the necessary veto votes to veto a trade in 24 hours is to call everyone to make sure they can evaluate the trade. We have established that a situation like this is grounds for a veto vote. Per Damian's request, please veto the trade by going to Communications > League Polls.

Which way should I vote ?

Should I mention the points leader is the one getting DWill in this trade.

You guys are nuts, I would not play in a league like this. What business do you have calling a guy and giving him player information. I could see it if this news were just breaking but we've all know this for weeks. I would throw Damian out of the league next year because he is an idiot and has no business playing FF.

Hardcore. I would keep him and try and make trades with him all year.

 

[madd futher]

This was the weirdest 'should this trade be vetoed post I've ever read. And i agree with the general conclusion and the part about 'living under a rock'.

I would suggest that a much higher percentage of FF owners could tell you about Henry's 'impending suspension' than the &age who could name our current President of the US (but all of us would know it is not Bush (he plays for the Saints - or is it the Raiders?)

But slow down a minute, kemo sabe. Isn't it already week 8? Assuming it is not a keeper league, almost all of the facts submitted are irrelevant. I'll make book that the 'impending suspension' is irrelevant to this FF regular season, and PROBABLY irrelevant to the FF play-offs. Meanwhile, it has just been announced that Deshawn Foster has turftoe, and you can believe that DeWill will start to get more touches. And T. Henry is completely dinged up right now. (both per Rotoworld)

So how can ANYBODY say who got the best of this trade???

Bottom line: An owner has seller's or buyer's remorse (for whatever reason) should not be a consideration in deciding whether anyone should veto this trade either. That is probably why your league rules state (and mine also) clearly state that once a trade has been offered and accepted, the parties to the trade have no vote in the veto process.

But it is a friendly league and you are gonna do what you want to anyway, so why solicit our opinion in the 1st place?

 

[Chaka]

Time for Full Disclosure:I'm the Henry owner. I've been trying to deal him for weeks and the offers have been getting lower and lower. I posted this to get outside opinions from the FBG community. I feel bad for Damian and don't want any bad blood between us, although he is a Wildcat fan... bleck...I cancelled the trade on this alone and saw no reason to let the veto process carry on.Each league has its own "direction" or the way it wants to best handle these when they come up. I personally agree that the league shouldn't be vetoing trades unless it's an attempt to push a team over the top, ie, a team out of contention is trying to help another team win. Collusion is a big no no. I turned over Commish duties of this league several years ago and its really not up to me. I see Jon's reasoning that he didn't want Damian to get swindled, but I personally don't think that phone call would have happened if it were between two teams that really had no playoff implications. (I may be wrong here) As long as other people get treated the same in trades, I don't see a problem with the call or the veto. It's each league's decision how they see fit to run a league, but I whole heartedly agree it's very difficult to seperate the personal team interest from the decision, although the integrity of this league is pretty high.

I'm the guy who called the guy who was trading for Henry. I also consider all of the other owners among my closest friends, so that should shed some light on the "cuttthroat" league question. I helped both previous commissioners formulate our rules and the "made in good faith" language was intended to prevent exactly this sort of scenario. You can trade Ronnie Brown before he goes on IR, but only if the guy getting Ronnie Brown has all the information. That's why I called - to evaluate whether or not I should veto the trade. If the owner would have just said, "I've got all the facts and I want Henry", I would have approved the trade. It should be noted that we've never vetoed a trade in this league, and I've formulated my anti-veto stance by reading responses like those above on this message board for several years. I helped write the rules in such a way that trades are NEVER vetoed in this league. We must get 6 votes in 24 hours! The only way that can be done is by one owner getting on the phone. We've let 99 bad trades stand. In the end, the Henry owner did the right thing by honoring the Williams owner to reverse the deal. That's why we've got a great league and so many of you guys are always complaining about yours.And when it comes to tactically blocking the better team or the division rival from improving his team, Team Legacy is the pioneer of this strategy and I've seen him execute it to perfection on many occasions!

It was not your position to play informant for Damian. You went out of your way to undermine a trade that you did not believe was collusive just stupid.You're a bad man Mr. Burgundy!

 

[HULLOBUDMAN]

This is why having rules in leagues where trades are voted on suck. If the people in the league can't be trusted to run their own teams then why are they in the league? If you are in a league where you think there may be collusion going on then don't allow trades or set the trade deadline earlier before people are out of it.

 

[Traders2001]

How much do you get paid for babysitting other teams?Trade stands

 

[King of the Wolfies]

This is simple. Tell the new Henry owner that the trade will be reversed but that he obviously is not involved enough in football to be a owner next year. i wouldn't want an owner that misses the biggest story in the NFL in my league.

If this was a breaking news story, thats one thing. But this has been known for WEEKS.

 

[fsufan]

the mod is inconsistent on threads like this. they move some to the AC and let some stay in the SP