Trade gets vetoed..

[eaglesfreak 10]

Ok I commish 4 leagues and never had any issues with vetoes..

 

In all leagues I changed the ONLY commish veto trades to league vote..And I made it clear to everyone in this league that veto power that I am passing to all of them should ONLY be used IF a team thinks collusion is in play...And that we are all adults etc...

 

Well yest. a team texted me asking what I wanted for Lacy...He says he needs a rb since he only has Ingram..I told him I would do ELI and Lacy for Brees...I sent offer via cpu and he accepted...

 

Then I get a text this morning by him asking to cancel..He says he changed his mind..I texted back and said I can't cancel just because you changed your mind..He texts back and says ok well I'll convince people to veto...So yup trade got vetoed..And all the teams that vetoed it said they vetoed cause that team asked them to..I asked them if he didn't ask them to veto the trade would you have..and they all said no..

 

So being a commish...Whats my course of action with this team? This leagues only 2 yrs old so I wouldn't even be fazed if I just eliminated this league after this yr....

 

Sorry had to vent beyond pissed

[Jarvis Basnight 119]

Seems if that story was made public to you league, the veto would get vetoed. How stupid.

[tanatastic 2,061]

I think its pretty fair. Voting is the worst way of doing trades. Why would any team vote to approve a trade that makes his opponents better but not himself? Commish should have the one and only vote and its vetoed only if collusion or tanking. In special cases like this, I could understand if he came to you and asked to reverse. then you could take league vote to see if thats acceptable.

[$epphori$ 118]

I think its pretty fair. Voting is the worst way of doing trades. Why would any team vote to approve a trade that makes his opponents better but not himself? Commish should have the one and only vote and its vetoed only if collusion or tanking. In special cases like this, I could understand if he came to you and asked to reverse. then you could take league vote to see if thats acceptable.

I agree with Tanastic, only difference we have instead of just the commish ruling on it we have a board made up of 5 league members who are honest unbiased people who make the ruling. If one of the board members is invlolved in trade he is replaced for that one vote.

[thePRO 78]

Happened to me too one year. I thought it was BS. Once you agree, it's agreed that the trade will go down.

 

It's not my fault you didn't take long enough to evaluate the trade before you accepted.

 

What happens if someone else offered him a better trade, vetoed yours, and then he accepts the new trade?

 

With all that said, I'd probably just let it go. But I could see why you would overrule it and have the trade go through.

[tanatastic 2,061]

What happens if someone else offered him a better trade, vetoed yours, and then he accepts the new trade?

 

That is a very good point and example. It has to be dealt with on a case by case basis and at commish judgement.

[redsrback 30]

I think the trade suks, who is to say Eli dont have a better year and plus lacy with number 1 RBs being in demand.

[eaglesfreak 10]

I think the trade suks, who is to say Eli dont have a better year and plus lacy with number 1 RBs being in demand.

I actually thought he was getting the better deal (lacy and eli) everyone said it was totally unfair for brees lol

[Byrdman5 104]

Eli sucks. Brees is an upgrade, but I wouldn't give Lacy for qb upgrade because qb is so deep and u can stream a qb who puts up 20+ every week.

 

Still Bs it got vetoed. If u want to keep the league next year u can just kick out whoever u want. If I was in your league I would have no problem with you kicking out the idiot who went back on a trade, then convicted others to get it vetoed because he changed his mind. Good friend or not kick him.

[tanatastic 2,061]

I actually thought he was getting the better deal (lacy and eli) everyone said it was totally unfair for brees lol

Nothing unfair about it. Not every trade has to be even steven perfect down the middle. Thats what makes trading so frustrating in FF. Everyone has an opinion and will say "what??!!!! No way thats totally bogus!!" at any deal.

[Ray_T 591]

Nothing unfair about it. Not every trade has to be even steven perfect down the middle. Thats what makes trading so frustrating in FF. Everyone has an opinion and will say "what??!!!! No way thats totally bogus!!" at any deal.

you gotta allow people to make errors in judgement.

 

I only concern myself with the deal if it looks like they are either trying to get around the rules, or if it was some form of collusion.

 

 

If the trade was Brees for Jay Ajayi The deal should be vetoed. but this deal, while a bit of an overpay, is within the realm of what I consider 'Generally fair'.

 

No veto is warranted. the trade should be reinstated.

[shutdown 40]

Unfortunately when you went to league vote, you created this. Whether the trade is fair or not, isn't the issue now. The issue is you changed your league rules to trade voting and this is ALWAYS what happens when you do this. I've never seen a league where owners don't always vote in their own interests when making trade decisions. You're just going to have to live with it this year and hopefully once every trade gets vetoed this season, change it back next year. But as for this trade, you're stuck with it being vetoed.

 

The fact that your owners vetoed the trade on the basis of an owner telling them that he wanted it vetoed should be evidence enough that this league isn't responsible enough to have trade votes.

[weepaws 2,460]

If it's a league vote and the league voted against it that's it.

 

Don't do a league vote next season.

[IGotWorms 3,315]

Wow that is BS.

 

Not much you can do here but you should change the veto system going forward or find a different league not populated by stupid pvssies

[mgs316 14]

You can change the rules after but this went through fair and square, you need to close this loop hole after the fact, not retroactively. If you insist on voting, only the commish can place something up for vote, not just any dude with a bone to pick.

[redsrback 30]

Who is to say u know collusion better then me. i stick by the u all want to suckle Brees and not give Eli his due for 2016. Then u are giveing a possible guy in my division what he needs which will really whiz me off. You can always tell the sucker at a draft party, he is the 1 that walks in and everyone of you that think this trade is okay runs to. Don't act like Brees and Eli are so far apart based on history and if u run down this years running backs everyones struggling for 2 good ones and byes aren't even here.

[mgs316 14]

Who is to say u know collusion better then me. i stick by the u all want to suckle Brees and not give Eli his due for 2016. Then u are giveing a possible guy in my division what he needs which will really whiz me off. You can always tell the sucker at a draft party, he is the 1 that walks in and everyone of you that think this trade is okay runs to. Don't act like Brees and Eli are so far apart based on history and if u run down this years running backs everyones struggling for 2 good ones and byes aren't even here.

 

Can someone translate that for me?

[redsrback 30]

Bingo we found clueless.

[IGotWorms 3,315]

 

Can someone translate that for me?

I think the dingbat is saying it was a bad trade for the guy giving up Eli and Lacy and so despite no collusion the league was right for vetoing it.

 

Also ironically this would be a bad trade for the guy who DIDN'T back out which just goes to show once again how subjective trades are and why nobody should be in a position to say whether another person's trade is "good" or "bad" in a veto-worthy sense

[TennisMenace 156]

Very simply put- if the rules say 4 votes veto a trade, then it is vetoed, no matter what the reasoning in my opinion. It sounds like you have a bunch of losers in that league or maybe they fear you and don't want you to get stronger.

[redsrback 30]

All players in a league deserve a vote since they paid there money and not just a select few. If it was Eli for Brees I could live with, but adding Lacy onto Eli is stupid at this point in the year. I would be in your grill over it you worm.

[brotherbock 349]

 

Can someone translate that for me?

I think he was claiming, "it was a bad trade, therefore it was collusion".

[nobody 2,040]

if you don't think the players will score the exact same amount of points you must veto

[cavern 70]

so you apparently support being able to veto other people's trades if YOU THINK they are unfair. yeah, i wouldn't want to be in that league. other managers should be able to manage their own teams and decide their own value of players regardless of whatever I THINK . They just can't cheat or collude. each league can do whatever they want obviously, i just wouldn't want to be in one where league members vote based on perceived fairness of a deal

 

All players in a league deserve a vote since they paid there money and not just a select few. If it was Eli for Brees I could live with, but adding Lacy onto Eli is stupid at this point in the year. I would be in your grill over it you worm.

[redsrback 30]

Not if i think, if the league as a whole thinks. And yes same goes with me, if i play in a league i deem bias or a bunch of people who just want to be part of something then i can go to a more challenging league. Fact is this 1 deal can make a guys team really good when u add in a possible top 5 RB. To have certain people in certain divisions decideing if it really matters to them is bias . otherwise you don't veto any trades, not 1 person ,and not 4 people should have the right to judge who is in collusion and who isn't when everyone paid there money.

[Ray_T 591]

Not if i think, if the league as a whole thinks. And yes same goes with me, if i play in a league i deem bias or a bunch of people who just want to be part of something then i can go to a more challenging league. Fact is this 1 deal can make a guys team really good when u add in a possible top 5 RB. To have certain people in certain divisions decideing if it really matters to them is bias . otherwise you don't veto any trades, not 1 person ,and not 4 people should have the right to judge who is in collusion and who isn't when everyone paid there money.

Dude, I think you need to put down the crack pipe.

[CookieG 4]

Not if i think, if the league as a whole thinks. And yes same goes with me, if i play in a league i deem bias or a bunch of people who just want to be part of something then i can go to a more challenging league. Fact is this 1 deal can make a guys team really good when u add in a possible top 5 RB. To have certain people in certain divisions decideing if it really matters to them is bias . otherwise you don't veto any trades, not 1 person ,and not 4 people should have the right to judge who is in collusion and who isn't when everyone paid there money.

 

[eaglesfreak 10]

Funny thing is I was trading eli and lacy for brees..the league claimed me getting brees was getting better end of deal

[cavern 70]

yeah. it's all individual perception. i think the definition of collusion is being misunderstood

Funny thing is I was trading eli and lacy for brees..the league claimed me getting brees was getting better end of deal

[IGotWorms 3,315]

All players in a league deserve a vote since they paid there money and not just a select few. If it was Eli for Brees I could live with, but adding Lacy onto Eli is stupid at this point in the year. I would be in your grill over it you worm.

I hope you're a troll

[tanatastic 2,061]

All players in a league deserve a vote since they paid there money and not just a select few. If it was Eli for Brees I could live with, but adding Lacy onto Eli is stupid at this point in the year. I would be in your grill over it you worm.

Yea no, not liking a trade personally is not reason to veto and its this mentality that makes trading in FF such a headache.

[tecklc2112 7]

I will never play in a league that votes on trades. Commish should have full control & should approve all trades, no matter how lopsided, unless collusion is glaringly obvious.

[polecatt 403]

Yeah the whole voting for trades thing doesn't usually work to well, been there, done that.

The thing is you can tell people how they are supposed to vote but it doesn't matter. If someone is angry with someone else or sees it as a way to gain a spot in the standings, they will vote with that in mind.

Not everyone of course but if you have a league of 12 different owners you will have at least a couple.

The trade itself?

It's the exact kind of trade that usually starts this kind of conflict.

Basically, it's 2 tier 2 players for a tier 1 player. At least that's how I see it.

Some see it differently.

[CookieG 4]

I would likely be so annoyed that I would just refund everyone's money and disband the league. If what you said was true about this owner marshalling the rest of the league and influencing all of them to vote it down.

[n_omarley 11]

Ok I commish 4 leagues and never had any issues with vetoes..

 

In all leagues I changed the ONLY commish veto trades to league vote..

 

 

 

WHY?

 

There is NO good reason for this practice, and it leads to trouble. Every year we see multiple threads about about BS related to league vetos. I would never be in a league that does such.

[Gladiators 1,904]

Mostly women in this league?

[Laurence Maroney's Nuts 2]

Leagues with vetoes are for amateurs.

[IGotWorms 3,315]

Mostly women in this league?

Women and small children

[GornFishin' 57]

Democracy is a great idea, it just doesn't work.

[mobb_deep 917]

That trade is pretty unbalanced. I'd be forced to veto it as well. Your commish did the right thing.