Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

SiCespedes52

Is This Collusion?

Recommended Posts

My opinion is secondary to the health of the league, bhawks. Would I be happy? No. Would I work with the commish to find an acceptable alternative? Sure.

If you dont want inexperienced people making trades then dont invite them into the league. Aside from completely obliterating one team and stacking another, all trades should go through.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bhawks no where in my first post I wrote this trade should be vetoed. I am for all trades should be process and none should be vetoed, let the owners make mistakes .... I just think Si did a dirty and he knows IT, but nowhere do I think Si tried to cheat and made this inexperience owner make this trade.

maybe Lynch & OBD will get injured ..... then this inexperience owner has hit the big one

Took me a minute to figure out who "Si" was but then I remembered that's my user name on here, lol.

I nowhere tried to cheat, nor did I tell my friend he HAD to make the deal. Did I think I was making my team better as a result of the trade? Sure. But isn't that the whole point of trading? To improve your team? And whether or not others agree, my buddy thinks he improved he team, as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bhawks no where in my first post I wrote this trade should be vetoed. I am for all trades should be process and none should be vetoed, let the owners make mistakes .... I just think Si did a dirty and he knows IT, but nowhere do I think Si tried to cheat and made this inexperience owner make this trade.

maybe Lynch & OBD will get injured ..... then this inexperience owner has hit the big one

Took me a minute to figure out who "Si" was but then I remembered that's my user name on here, lol.

I nowhere tried to cheat, nor did I tell my friend he HAD to make the deal. Did I think I was making my team better as a result of the trade? Sure. But isn't that the whole point of trading? To improve your team? And whether or not others agree, my buddy thinks he improved he team, as well.

Thats all that matters in a trade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We put new players on probation the first season in my big $/keeper/dynasty leagues. All their trades (offered or received) have to be approved. Works pretty well and a veto is seldom required because the other guys know it's not a free for all to fleece the new guy.

Just my experience...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bhawks no where in my first post I wrote this trade should be vetoed. I am for all trades should be process and none should be vetoed, let the owners make mistakes .... I just think Si did a dirty and he knows IT, but nowhere do I think Si tried to cheat and made this inexperience owner make this trade.

maybe Lynch & OBD will get injured ..... then this inexperience owner has hit the big one

Took me a minute to figure out who "Si" was but then I remembered that's my user name on here, lol.

I nowhere tried to cheat, nor did I tell my friend he HAD to make the deal. Did I think I was making my team better as a result of the trade? Sure. But isn't that the whole point of trading? To improve your team? And whether or not others agree, my buddy thinks he improved he team, as well.

Thats all that matters in a trade.

I think the main issue with this whole situation is that nobody voiced their concerns and objections of the trade until AFTER it was officially processed by Yahoo!. No where in the 2 day pending period did anybody formally speak up about their disliking of the trade. If people had spoken up during the pending period and said I would have to add more, I definietly would have worked on making a deal that wasn't going to deemed as "collusion" and "corrupt."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We put new players on probation the first season in my big $/keeper/dynasty leagues. All their trades (offered or received) have to be approved. Works pretty well and a veto is seldom required because the other guys know it's not a free for all to fleece the new guy.

Just my experience...

New players as in new to the league? Or new to fantasy football?

And who approves the trades? Commish? The conseus of the league?

Just asking because this is an interesting idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We put new players on probation the first season in my big $/keeper/dynasty leagues. All their trades (offered or received) have to be approved. Works pretty well and a veto is seldom required because the other guys know it's not a free for all to fleece the new guy.

Just my experience...

this is how things should work....bhawks & Si leagues are all about fleecing the noobies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple collusion test:

Has someone said they want to tank when asked?

If the answer is "no" you can't prove collusion IMO.

You may not like a trade. My suggestion to you would be to join another league next year.

It's a good reason to have very clear bylaws about what is and isn't acceptable in trading and have the rest of the league agree to it. If no such bylaw exists, IMO, crying about trades being "unfair" is for losers. If you think competitive balance in your league has been altered, don't play in that league.

It's really simple. People make it so complicated.

But when you start opening the door to trades being vetoed based on the mob mentality of what is a "fair trade" that very quickly becomes a league I don't want to play in, myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We put new players on probation the first season in my big $/keeper/dynasty leagues. All their trades (offered or received) have to be approved. Works pretty well and a veto is seldom required because the other guys know it's not a free for all to fleece the new guy.

Just my experience...

this is how things should work....bhawks & Si leagues are all about fleecing the noobies.

And your leagues are "Aw I wish someone would trade with me but they arent so Im going to veto everything". Grow up and invite players who have played before and stop whining.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Si- New to the league, unless it's someone we know well with a documented history in FF. This would be new business voted on prior to draft.

the commish decides to approve or deny probatory trades unless there is a protest raised from a league member. Then it goes to majority vote. Rarely has it been needed but is a nice safeguard to avoid the newbie feeding frenzy that destroys league balance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Si- New to the league, unless it's someone we know well with a documented history in FF. This would be new business voted on prior to draft.

the commish decides to approve or deny probatory trades unless there is a protest raised from a league member. Then it goes to majority vote. Rarely has it been needed but is a nice safeguard to avoid the newbie feeding frenzy that destroys league balance

Okay yeah that makes sense and seems like a pretty solid safety net.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lynch for Foster is collusion. I would not be a happy camper if someone pulled that in my league.

But the trade was a far cry from just "Lynch for Foster". It included BY FAR the best player in the league at his position and a kid who'

s has played just a hand ful of games in the NFL. So you are sying that opposing owners have to be happy with every single trade that goes down in a league? One could make an arguement that Gronk is the best player in the deal.

Unless the league goes by a trade chart (like CBS's), this isn't even close to a vetoable trade IMO. Foster could very well come back the same week as Bell and no one would think twice if Bell was the other RB in this deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think its because Foster is going to be out a few weeks .....if he wasn't injured i would think it would be OK ...

but your team got a boost from the trade.... i don't see collusion though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trade raping is legal. This happens all the time. Someone who is more experienced takes advantage of those less. That's not colluding and others should have though of it first rather than complain about it after the fact. After every draft I quickly offer lopsided trades to everyone to see who the patsy is.

However if it turns out that this guy was not really at a "concert" and you caught him cheating on his wife on draft night such that this trade is a quid pro quo, then I'm afraid it needs to be vetoed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites