Would this be considered collusion? I'm a Schaub owner, and due to bench restrictions (only 6 bench spots) and bye week pickups, I couldn't have Rosenfels on my roster. I'm way down the waiver wire priority (all players are on waivers after the week's games start, priority is in reverse order of record). I'm considering asking someone high up on the priority list to pick up Rosenfels, with an agreement to make a trade with him for Rosenfels. I would hopefully have the trade details worked out before the waiver process runs on Wednesday. Kosher?
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Would this be collusion? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter fsck_101
- Start date
FantasyTrader
Footballguy
Nope. Not collusion. The other owner has the right to pickup any player he wants. And if he's doing so with the intention of trading the player to you, so be it.
wombatcarn
Footballguy
I think it's the right thing to do. Wouldnt hesitate. But, with only 6 bench spots, there is no one better?
I love my screen name
Footballguy
A secret agreement between two or more parties for a fraudulent, illegal, or deceitful purpose.
I wish. Flacco and Quinn are the only ones who I'd target if I can't get Rosenfels. I have Delhomme rostered and will likely play him, but I don't want the lack of a quality QB to hose my season were Delhomme to go down. I'm deep everywhere else.
Black
Footballguy
I don't think it is, esp since the person who picks him up has every right to keep him or trade him to the highest bidder.
Borat
Footballguy
Why does it have to be secretive?
ratbast
Footballguy
Has to be OK. How would you monitor it? If someone picked up Sage, would they not be able to trade right away to the Shaub owner? If they can, well why not start negotiating now.
This process will actually drive the price up for you. The guy who owns the waiver pick must want one of your players more than who they would get AND they must need/want who you will give them. If you stayed quiet you might get Sage for your worst player and your own waiver.
This process will actually drive the price up for you. The guy who owns the waiver pick must want one of your players more than who they would get AND they must need/want who you will give them. If you stayed quiet you might get Sage for your worst player and your own waiver.
Last edited by a moderator:
stevegamer
Footballguy
It's not collusion, it's a trade inquiry.
You simply approach the guy with the #1 waiver pick, and see what he wants in trade for picking the guy you want. If he's got someone else he wants, go to the #2 guy.
You simply approach the guy with the #1 waiver pick, and see what he wants in trade for picking the guy you want. If he's got someone else he wants, go to the #2 guy.
Krewe
Footballguy
This happens all of the time in professional drafts. How many times have we seen a team draft someone they clearly do not need...
everyone reacts to the stange pick--then we learn minutes later of a trade being made to another team, usually for other picks and/or existing talent.
Thats always a secret until the commish makes the annoucement at the podium. More in the NBA, but still...
Not collusion, just smart.
everyone reacts to the stange pick--then we learn minutes later of a trade being made to another team, usually for other picks and/or existing talent.
Thats always a secret until the commish makes the annoucement at the podium. More in the NBA, but still...
Not collusion, just smart.
Josh Hamilton spent almost an hour as a Cub a few years ago. :(
FantasyTrader
Footballguy
I don't get how it could be predetermined. Until the owner actually selects the player, he can't trade him. I think that's pretty much understood in this scenario.
T.A.
Footballguy
This is somewhat true. But lets say a third owner offers way more for the free agent in a trade and gets turned down because "I already agreed to something else." Then you have a predetermined trade.
FantasyTrader
Footballguy
I see your point. I still wouldn't deem that to be collusion.This is somewhat true. But lets say a third owner offers way more for the free agent in a trade and gets turned down because "I already agreed to something else." Then you have a predetermined trade.I don't get how it could be predetermined. Until the owner actually selects the player, he can't trade him. I think that's pretty much understood in this scenario.
Stinkin Ref
IBL Representative
not at all...stuff like this is part of what makes this hobby fun
If the owner turns down a better offer, then that owner is an idiot. You can only discuss a deal like this until waivers occur. Nothing binding can be agreed on as it is all speculation.T.A. said:This is somewhat true. But lets say a third owner offers way more for the free agent in a trade and gets turned down because "I already agreed to something else." Then you have a predetermined trade.FantasyTrader said:
GregR_2
Footballguy
I think what he's saying is... unless a league's rules are setup otherwise... if owner A tells owner B, "If you get Rosenfels from waivers, I'll be interested in trading for him and would give players X and Y for him".... that doesn't constitute a trade agreement that the league is going to enforce. Either owner could change his mind at any time prior to Sage being picked up from waivers and then a normal trade agreement being submitted by the league's normal methods. If owner B decides to keep Sage and not trade him, Owner A cannot go to the commish and force the trade to happen.Though the previous post about trading waiver position would be the easiest way to do it, if that is allowed in the league.FantasyTrader said:I don't get how it could be predetermined. Until the owner actually selects the player, he can't trade him. I think that's pretty much understood in this scenario.
Warhogs
Footballguy
It sounds highly unlikely to be collusion but I can not say 100% until you would have full details of what the deal would be. A waiver claim spot is a commodity that can be traded. No problem with saying I will trade you WR Donald Driver for whomever you can claim for me with your waiver wire claim this week. That is a fair deal.
If the deal were to be I will trade you RB Shaun Alexander if you claim QB Sage Rosenfels for me and the other team said OK and then just cut Alexander because they were doing you a favor I would have a problem with that.
Again, if you trade something of fair value for the right to claim a player in that waiver spot this should not be an issue.
If the deal were to be I will trade you RB Shaun Alexander if you claim QB Sage Rosenfels for me and the other team said OK and then just cut Alexander because they were doing you a favor I would have a problem with that.
Again, if you trade something of fair value for the right to claim a player in that waiver spot this should not be an issue.
