vetoable, dumb or makin too much of it

[Inferno 0]

Here's my conclusion on this topic:

 

1. Whoever is involved in this debate should stop playing fantasy football. If this much time is spent arguing over something like this, then something in your REAL lives are being neglected (job, wife/girlfriend, hygiene, etc.)

 

2. Settle the issue like everyone else on the planet. Let the commissioner make the call or a league vote. If you don't like the result, too bad. Deal with it and join a different league next year.

 

3. Stop posting this garbage. No one likes a topic that's relevant to only 2 or 3 people that has this many responses. It's as relevant as me posting a recipe for chocolate chip cookies.

[lambert58 71]

Here's my conclusion on this topic:

 

1. Whoever is involved in this debate should stop playing fantasy football. If this much time is spent arguing over something like this, then something in your REAL lives are being neglected (job, wife/girlfriend, hygiene, etc.)

 

2. Settle the issue like everyone else on the planet. Let the commissioner make the call or a league vote. If you don't like the result, too bad. Deal with it and join a different league next year.

 

3. Stop posting this garbage. No one likes a topic that's relevant to only 2 or 3 people that has this many responses. It's as relevant as me posting a recipe for chocolate chip cookies.

 

 

Sorry dude, I thought this was a discussion forum. If you don't like the topic or conversation move to another topic of conversation. Now for the record, and I am sure Sho Nuff, My.02Cents, and I will all come together for this worthy queston, WHO ARE YOU??

[rdrs4life 0]

[x] Awaiting recipe for chocolate chip cookies.

[lambert58 71]

[x] Awaiting recipe for chocolate chip cookies.

 

 

Chocalate chips

 

Brown Sugar

 

Eggs

 

And a whole lot of LOVE!!!

[Sho Nuff 720]

I never realized until this thread what a focking idiot you really are.. Trends are only one year?? COME ON!!

You cannot read...yet I am the idiot? Where in the fock did I claim that trends are only one year? Where? You will never find me saying that or even thinking that.

 

 

 

Trends are what is defined by parameters. Trends can be last 40 plays, last 8 games, last 16 games, last 24 games. Why do you think the housing market has quarterly, yearly, and 5 year trends?? So you ARE saying that you will only acknowledge the last 16 games as a trend. That means that YOU are defining the only parameters that we can look at.

 

Quit spinning...I never claimed that its only the last 16 games...quite far from it actually.

 

 

 

You seriously need help. Your ego is out of control if you believe that trends can only be defined as a year to year thing.

It is you who need help...help in the form of someone reading my actual words to you.

I never claimed trends can only be defined as a year to year thing. I put more stock in that. You seem to want to cherry pick which trend to talk about as much as, if not more than, I do.

 

 

 

At least my02cents showed Johnsons production over the last 4 years to give a valid argument why he believes Johnson is improving. (though it does not show, in my opinion, any reason to believe that he will be a top 10 receiver). Of course you can't do that because you don't want to use 4 years and a players improvement should only be counted on the last 16 games..

 

I referenced the last 4 years several times. (though you continue to ignore that). And nowhere did I claim that a players improvement should only be counted on the last 16 games. That is your spinning BS.

 

Now if you would please answer the question as it pertains to Johnson by providing stats or facts instead of focuing on repeatedly denying what you said or that I am spinning things.. etc.. You must be a politician because you will not answer a question, you instead choose to go after the person asking the question..

 

I have already done so...you refuse to read what I actually wrote. I claim that you are spinning things...because, well, you are. You continue to make claims about things I said (that I never actually said). Sorry...that is spin. I have talked about Johnson the last 4 years...I have talked about Kennison the last 4 years. Its not that hard to see. What? You need me to post the stats for you? Do you not know where to look for them. I thought that was pretty simple enough for anyone to pull up their stats.

 

If you AGAIN refuse to give a valid argument why you believe that Andre Johnson is a top 10 pick than I am finished with this topic. You are truly the hopeless one because you have yet to even attempt to show why Johnson should be a top 10 receiver. I have shown that he led the league in receptions but finished 35th in touchdowns (tied with Kennison). I have shown that he finished 38th in touchdowns per start. (Kennison finished 37th). I have gave reasons as to why I am concerned with Houstons offense, specifically with a new unproven quarterback, you have called this "spin".

 

If I refuse to give a valid argument? I have...several times. You refuse to listen to it. Though, I never claimed he was a top 10 pick. That is more spin by you. You will also see when I came into this thread I did not say a thing about vetoing the trade. Just more spin and assumptions by you and others.

 

 

I have simply claimed that their values and production are quite far off and they are not equal going into this season. The rest, despite your denial, is spin.

 

I have gave reasons as to why I believe defenses figured out how to stop Johnson ( last 8 games) and you call that idiotic.. Reminds me of arguing with a 2 year old..

 

I never called that idiotic...but nice try. Talk about arguing with a two year old. My two year old understands english better than you and gets what I said correct...rather than making crap up to try and argue with me. My actual words about the 8 game thing...

 

Actually I say 8 games on its own is not relevant...nor is just this trend I am talking about. 8 games is cherry picking. Its like people claiming...if you take away the one long play he did not have such a good day. Its terrible.

 

Instead...I made one comment in a hypothetical saying I did not want idiots in my league...and have been called a pompous ass, and idiot...and so on. Yeah...who is the one getting personal?

[Sho Nuff 720]

Sorry dude, I thought this was a discussion forum. If you don't like the topic or conversation move to another topic of conversation. Now for the record, and I am sure Sho Nuff, My.02Cents, and I will all come together for this worthy queston, WHO ARE YOU??

 

Agreed.

[Inferno 0]

[x] Awaiting recipe for chocolate chip cookies.

 

Here you go! Oddly enough, this is most useful post in this whole topic.

 

 

8 ounces (2 sticks) unsalted butter, at room temperature

1 cup packed dark brown sugar

1/2 cup granulated sugar

2 large eggs

2 cups all-purpose flour

1 teaspoon salt

3/4 teaspoon baking soda

1 teaspoon pure vanilla extract

4 cups semisweet chunks (preferably imported).

 

1. Place the butter in a large bowl and cream at high speed until

fluffy. Add the sugars and beat until light and fluffy, about 4

minutes, scraping down sides of bowl occasionally. Beat in eggs, one

at a time, until completely mixed.

 

2. In a separate bowl, mix flour, salt and baking soda. Add to the

butter mixture at low speed until just combined and add vanilla

extract. Beat on medium speed, scraping bowl down, until blended. Do

not overmix.

 

3. Add chocolate chunks and mix till thoroughly combined. Refrigerate

batter until cold, preferably overnight.

 

4. Preheat a conventional oven to 350 degrees or a convection oven to

300 degrees, and line several baking sheets with parchment paper. Drop

heaping spoonfuls of batter 2 inches apart on the lined baking sheets

and bake, turning tray once, until golden brown around edges and soft

(but not bubbly), about 9 minutes in a convection oven or 12 in a

conventional one. Cool on a wire rack.

 

Yield: 36 to 72 cookies, depending on size

[rdrs4life 0]

Chocalate chips

 

Brown Sugar

 

Eggs

 

And a whole lot of LOVE!!!

 

 

That's just the ingredients man, a recipe also instructs you on how to cook/bake it. I got the ingredients so what do I do know to turn them into chocolate chip cookies? Also, though I have never made chocolate chip cookies before I am inclined to believe the ingredients list include more than 2 items. Chocolate chips are not an ingredient, that's the finished product.

[rdrs4life 0]

Sweet nevermind, Inferno's got it. These are gonna be bomb.

[Sho Nuff 720]

Go to store...buy store made chocolate chip cookies. Go back home. Pour glass of milk. Open the package...eat the focking cookies.

 

Not just chips ahoy though...Kroger cookies rock!!!

[lambert58 71]

You cannot read...yet I am the idiot? Where in the fock did I claim that trends are only one year? Where? You will never find me saying that or even thinking that.

 

Trending is looking at how each is progressing each year

 

 

Quit spinning...I never claimed that its only the last 16 games...quite far from it actually.

It is you who need help...help in the form of someone reading my actual words to you.

I never claimed trends can only be defined as a year to year thing. I put more stock in that. You seem to want to cherry pick which trend to talk about as much as, if not more than, I do.

I referenced the last 4 years several times. (though you continue to ignore that). And nowhere did I claim that a players improvement should only be counted on the last 16 games. That is your spinning BS.

I have already done so...you refuse to read what I actually wrote. I claim that you are spinning things...because, well, you are. You continue to make claims about things I said (that I never actually said). Sorry...that is spin. I have talked about Johnson the last 4 years...I have talked about Kennison the last 4 years. Its not that hard to see. What? You need me to post the stats for you? Do you not know where to look for them. I thought that was pretty simple enough for anyone to pull up their stats.

If I refuse to give a valid argument? I have...several times. You refuse to listen to it. Though, I never claimed he was a top 10 pick. That is more spin by you. You will also see when I came into this thread I did not say a thing about vetoing the trade. Just more spin and assumptions by you and others.

I have simply claimed that their values and production are quite far off and they are not equal going into this season. The rest, despite your denial, is spin.

I never called that idiotic...but nice try. Talk about arguing with a two year old. My two year old understands english better than you and gets what I said correct...rather than making crap up to try and argue with me. My actual words about the 8 game thing...

 

Instead...I made one comment in a hypothetical saying I did not want idiots in my league...and have been called a pompous ass, and idiot...and so on. Yeah...who is the one getting personal?

 

I brought up a 4 year average and you come back with anyone who uses a 4 year average is an idiot. How is tha hypothetical?

[kwhiz73 0]

Agreed.

 

 

Agreed as well.

 

Inferno---most people that truly don't care don't post.

[killersquids 3]

To me it's cut & dry that it's so far out of whack that it should be vetoed regardless of the explanation,

 

I completely disagree with you here. It has been over 3 weeks since the draft, things have changed in those three weeks whether you want to admit it or not. Now I'm still in the boat of something doesn't smell right here and I would need a damn good explanation from the jacobs/johnson owner.

 

And for everyone that is saying johnson and kennison are about equal........what a load of crap. You can manipulate stats all you want, but johnson is clearly the better fantasy wr for this year, it's not even a debate......

[phillybear 366]

Here you go! Oddly enough, this is most useful post in this whole topic.

8 ounces (2 sticks) unsalted butter, at room temperature

1 cup packed dark brown sugar

1/2 cup granulated sugar

2 large eggs

2 cups all-purpose flour

1 teaspoon salt

3/4 teaspoon baking soda

1 teaspoon pure vanilla extract

4 cups semisweet chunks (preferably imported).

 

1. Place the butter in a large bowl and cream at high speed until

fluffy. Add the sugars and beat until light and fluffy, about 4

minutes, scraping down sides of bowl occasionally. Beat in eggs, one

at a time, until completely mixed.

 

2. In a separate bowl, mix flour, salt and baking soda. Add to the

butter mixture at low speed until just combined and add vanilla

extract. Beat on medium speed, scraping bowl down, until blended. Do

not overmix.

 

3. Add chocolate chunks and mix till thoroughly combined. Refrigerate

batter until cold, preferably overnight.

 

4. Preheat a conventional oven to 350 degrees or a convection oven to

300 degrees, and line several baking sheets with parchment paper. Drop

heaping spoonfuls of batter 2 inches apart on the lined baking sheets

and bake, turning tray once, until golden brown around edges and soft

(but not bubbly), about 9 minutes in a convection oven or 12 in a

conventional one. Cool on a wire rack.

 

Yield: 36 to 72 cookies, depending on size

 

Diabetics all over the world are trying to find out where you live so they can drop by and beat you to death with a rolling pin.

[lambert58 71]

Agreed.

 

 

Now enough about this thread.. Let's go have a beer and make fun of other people..

 

 

 

 

[Sho Nuff 720]

Spin spin spin.

 

Trending looking at how some progresses each year. Do you know what progressing means? Again...how is that looking at just one year?

And no...you stated if you were commisioner and such and such came to you with that data. That is where I said I don't play with idiots. That was a hypothetical situation...or do I need to post the focking definition of the word for you.

 

Keep up the spin.

[Sho Nuff 720]

Now enough about this thread.. Let's go have a beer and make fun of other people..

 

Cool.

Im from Wisconsin...I have no problem drinking at 10:45 on a Wednesday.

[kwhiz73 0]

Oh come on - you're really not going to use this topic as evidence of why the deal can't be vetoed are you? Please - this has been a bunch of monkeys focking a football. We're all over the place man. Many who feel it's not vetoable are arguing against it because they are against ALL vetoes, and that's been an argument in and of itself.

 

Just because a few people can speculate 100 different ways about the why, it doesn't change the basic premise that a guy is handing another team an extra 3rd and an extra 4th round pick for his 6th and 15th round picks. And despite the creativity displayed by the "no veto at all costs" crowd in trying to explain that away, I still have yet to see anything that tells me that this isn't "cut & dry".

 

To me it's cut & dry that it's so far out of whack that it should be vetoed regardless of the explanation, because nothing explains away the fact that the Jacobs/AJ owner could have drafted all four of these players yet chose not to, then suddenly 3 weeks later deemed them worthy of 2 of his 1st four picks. Sure he could have had a change of heart about the players, but the valuation of the players being dealt is somewhat universal - and is set by the fact that they were drafted where they were. Jacobs/AJ guy is either none too bright or the two are colluding, and either way some of us happen to believe that one man's extreme stupidity should not be allowed to hurt the entire league.

 

But my point is that this topic has people arguing philosophy more than anything and cannot be pointed at as "proof" that this deal shouldn't be killed. That's you imposting your preference and propping up this topic as weak support of your call.

This is such a lame attempt to discredit anyone who uses projections - they mean plenty. ADP is what it is: where the majority of FFB-ers value players as they actually drafted them. Projections are what they are and a great many people put a hell of a lot of time & research into them - and often they are very accurate and well past round 4. And if it's being considered at all by the commish in any of my leagues (including the ones I do not commission) it means that 50%+ of the league took issue with it and the commish needs to use all tools at his/her disposal to evaluate the trade. That might include pre-season rankings from various credible FFB sites, it might mean checking ADP (where the Caddy/Kennison side gets totally rolled) and it might mean talking to the managers to determine intent as explained by them. On top of it all though it will be the decision of the commish - and if the commish shoots down the deal and can present HIS reasoning for doing so then it doesn't matter what happens at season's end. It's "asked & answered", per the league constitution and there ya go.

 

I think it's amusing that so many point to the intent of the managers as the end all be all in a completely lopsided deal when even if they are cheating they'd be able to come up with something...hell, we have 10 people in here reaching for the deepest of possible reasons and they have no idea what's really happened so I guarantee the managers can make some crap up just the same. Yet if the commish makes a call as expected to at the point that the league vetoed, then suddenly you all know his intent and declare that he's a power mongering nazi basing it all on his projections.

 

Sorry, but you're leaping to some pretty definitive conclusions here without a lot to support them, friend.

 

Two cents you crack me up. It's obvious your gospel preaching is not going to change my mind, nor am I going to change yours. I stand by the fact that projections(especially post 4th round ff stats), regardless of the amount of time spent, are not always accurate. For one to automatically question the character and integrity of a player's choices based on projections is ridiculous. For a commissioner to side one way or the other based solely on the conversations on this board is equally ridiculous. Not vetoing a trade doesn't mean the trade is right--it simply means there is not enough evidence to support collusion--which there isn't. Perhaps you'll see the light by page 12.

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

Two cents you crack me up. It's obvious your gospel preaching is not going to change my mind, nor am I going to change yours.

Very possible, I agree.

 

I stand by the fact that projections(especially post 4th round ff stats), regardless of the amount of time spent, are not always accurate.

Except you disregard that it's not solely based on projections. That's the hook y'all seem to keep wanting to hang your collective hats on, when in fact it's been stated time and again that it's based on

1. league vote against (50% or more)

2. Rankings by various trusted FFB sites (FFToday, FBGuys, CBS, Rotoworld, TSN, ewtc

3. Projections (of the commish and of the various sites)

4. the round in which these players were actually picked by the managers involved in the trade

5. Commissioner's intuition, insight and determination - it's his/her job to evaluate and make a ruling at this point.

 

I bolded that 4th one because I happen to think it's more relevant than anything. Sure things can change - players move up or down a round in the rankings. Mike Bell the undrafted rookie gets named the starter and suddenly jumps toa 3rd or 4th round value.

 

But nothing that dramatic happened this preseason to bump Caddy to a 3rd rounder (one poster on the "no veto" side said he was just taken in the 4th in his league - improved 2 rounds...still not as much value as Jacobs though) and Kennison to that of a 4th rounder, an 11 round improvement in valuation and contrary to where 100% of football analysis has him ranked. That's a complete joke.

 

For one to automatically question the character and integrity of a player's choices based on projections is ridiculous.

]

That's your projection. what I did was present a hypothetical where the league voted the deal down. At that point as commish it is your job to question the character and integrity of the players because they are involved in what the league has deemed a bogus trade. And at face value and even digging deeper and deeper, it still appears to be a bogus trade regardless of whether they are deliberately cheating or not. The impact on the league is the same: you STILL have more than 1/2 the league feeling ripped off. And in any league of adults who've known each other for any length of time, this doesn't just happen "automatically" so that people can shoot down every trade as some here suggest - that's yet another slippery slope. In my league a deal has NEVER been voted down and I've never had to interfere - so if it DID come to pass, you bet your ass something is fishy with the deal, and equally you bet your ass that it would ruin the league to allow the deal to pass. I'm not sure how many more times I have to post that before it gets into some of your heads - it's not always just about the trade itself, and you can't leap to the conclusion that the league is a bunch of whiners trying to c0ckblock another team from improving. The irony is that when you do that you are questioning the "character and integrity" of the 50%+ of the league who voted down the deal.

 

So it's ok to assume that more than 1/2 the league is colluding to block a trade, but it's completely unreasonable to determine that a trade is so far out of whack so as to raise suspicion of either extreme stupidity or collusion? Seems contradictory to me.

 

For a commissioner to side one way or the other based solely on the conversations on this board is equally ridiculous. Not vetoing a trade doesn't mean the trade is right--it simply means there is not enough evidence to support collusion--which there isn't. Perhaps you'll see the light by page 12.

 

The trade doesn't have to be collusion to block it. The trade could well just be a 1st time FFB manager making the worst possible sucker trade on the planet. And the net result is the same: One team takes advantage of another to the extreme, netting himself an extra 3rd and an extra 4th round pick for a 6th round RB and a throw-away WR. The league is pissed off and more than likely would feel ripped off because they will have a very hard time competing in any league where you allow this level of stupidy to create "uber teams". Assuming stupidity and not cheating, the owner who got jacked in the deal won't want to play the following year, and more than likely all of the managers who feel that they got rooked out of theri league fees will also quit.

 

And perhaps you'll understand that and stop projecting by page 14.

[kwhiz73 0]

Very possible, I agree.

Except you disregard that it's not solely based on projections. That's the hook y'all seem to keep wanting to hang your collective hats on, when in fact it's been stated time and again that it's based on

1. league vote against (50% or more)

2. Rankings by various trusted FFB sites (FFToday, FBGuys, CBS, Rotoworld, TSN, ewtc

3. Projections (of the commish and of the various sites)

4. the round in which these players were actually picked by the managers involved in the trade

5. Commissioner's intuition, insight and determination - it's his/her job to evaluate and make a ruling at this point.

 

I bolded that 4th one because I happen to think it's more relevant than anything. Sure things can change - players move up or down a round in the rankings. Mike Bell the undrafted rookie gets named the starter and suddenly jumps toa 3rd or 4th round value.

 

But nothing that dramatic happened this preseason to bump Caddy to a 3rd rounder (one poster on the "no veto" side said he was just taken in the 4th in his league - improved 2 rounds...still not as much value as Jacobs though) and Kennison to that of a 4th rounder. That's a complete joke.

 

]

That's your projection. what I did was present a hypothetical where the league voted the deal down. At that point as commish it is your job to question the character and integrity of the players because they are involved in what the league has deemed a bogus trade. And at face value and even digging deeper and deeper, it still appears to be a bogus trade regardless of whether they are deliberately cheating or not. The impact on the league is the same: you STILL have more than 1/2 the league feeling ripped off. And in any league of adults who've known each other for any length of time, this doesn't just happen "automatically" so that people can shoot down every trade as some here suggest - that's yet another slippery slope. In my league a deal has NEVER been voted down and I've never had to interfere - so if it DID come to pass, you bet your ass something is fishy with the deal, and equally you bet your ass that it would ruin the league to allow the deal to pass. I'm not sure how many more times I have to post that before it gets into some of your heads - it's not always just about the trade itself, and you can't leap to the conclusion that the league is a bunch of whiners trying to c0ckblock another team from improving. The irony is that when you do that you are questioning the "character and integrity" of the 50%+ of the league who voted down the deal.

 

So it's ok to assume that more than 1/2 the league is colluding to block a trade, but it's completely unreasonable to determine that a trade is so far out of whack so as to raise suspicion of either extreme stupidity or collusion? Seems contradictory to me.

The trade doesn't have to be collusion to block it. The trade could well just be a 1st time FFB manager making the worst possible sucker trade on the planet. And the net result is the same: One team takes advantage of another to the extreme, netting himself an extra 3rd and an extra 4th round pick for a 6th round RB and a throw-away WR. The league is pissed off and more than likely would feel ripped off because they will have a very hard time competing in any league where you allow this level of stupidy to create "uber teams". Assuming stupidity and not cheating, the owner who got jacked in the deal won't want to play the following year, and more than likely all of the managers who feel that they got rooked out of theri league fees will also quit.

 

And perhaps you'll understand that and stop projecting by page 14.

 

I said this earlier but I'll ask again---Do you really think that Andre Johnson and Brandon Jacobs are going to elevate any team to elite status?

 

another question--Do you really find it unreasonable to assume the possibility that Cadillac could significantly outperform Jacobs and return to a late first or second round quality RB?

 

My problem is that I perhaps place too much value on Cadillac, and yours is that you definately are a full board band wagon leading Andre Johnson fan. When this guy actually does something that warrants someone screaming bloody murder when he's involved in a trade, this will all make more sense to me. Your argument would be much more convincing if it involved a receiver that actually made a difference.

[rdrs4life 0]

Team A trades: Jacobs and An. Johnson

Team B trades: Caddy and Kennison

 

Looks bad right? but vetoable? doesn't look like collusion from owners

thoughts?

 

 

 

/thread

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

I said this earlier but I'll ask again---Do you really think that Andre Johnson and Brandon Jacobs are going to elevate any team to elite status?

 

another question--Do you really find it unreasonable to assume the possibility that Cadillac could significantly outperform Jacobs and return to a late first or second round quality RB?

 

My problem is that I perhaps place too much value on Cadillac, and yours is that you definately are a full board band wagon leading Andre Johnson fan. When this guy actually does something that warrants someone screaming bloody murder when he's involved in a trade, this will all make more sense to me. Your argument would be much more convincing if it involved a receiver that actually made a difference.

 

 

Too funny that you completely dismiss projections when I indicate them, or when I refer to other sources of them, yet you stand by them steadfast when you make them.

 

Laughable, actually.

 

I am actually not that big an AJ fan, but how typical of you to project something yet again, asserting that I believe or hold true something that you have no way of knowing - that's an annoying trend in this and many topics, but I guess that's the tool of the desperate. By all means, please do a search and if you can find a single post outside this or the help forum where I represent the "Andre Johnson Bandwagon" you can own my sig space for a year. And if not I'll get yours - bet? After all, I'm a "full board band wagon leading Andre Johnson fan" right? You ought to think before you post to avoid saying stupid and inaccurate things like this.

 

That said, reality is what it is: a 5th year 26 y/o on the rise. The most amusing thing is that you not only stand by your own projections while arguing against using projections, but you do so at direct contradiction to the vast majority of football and fantasy football projections.

 

So you being in the extreme minority with your opinions and me being in the majority with my opinions would seem to weight this to the point that you would have to make an awfully compelling case for dealing a 3rd and 4th round pick (as valued not only by the vast majority but also by the two managers involved in this deal on draft day) for 6th and 15th round picks, (as valued not only by the vast majority but also by the two managers involved in this deal on draft day.

 

That you represent your extreme minority opinions as though either of us could be right and it's 6 of one and half a dozen of the other is where I take exception, because it's utterly ridiculous. It's the angle that many on the "no veto" side have been taking and time and time again they've been informed that rankings in this case are universal - pre, and post draft, these players are ranked where they are, and further that ranking/valuation has been solidified (set in stone, actually) by the very fact of where they were drafted by the managers involved in the deal. How that escapes you I have no idea.

 

Hate to say it, but you're being a hypocrite because you choose to belittle those you disagree with for using projections/rankings and then you post this nonsense where somehow your own rankings/projections are suddenly the authority. You really expected to be able to post that and not be called on it? Come on - you have to be smarter than that.

[rdrs4life 0]

Team A trades: Jacobs and An. Johnson

Team B trades: Caddy and Kennison

 

Looks bad right? but vetoable? doesn't look like collusion from owners

thoughts?

 

 

 

/thread

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

/thread

 

/intelligent contribution

[rdrs4life 0]

As intelligent as the entire thread.

[DankNuggs 305]

Shouldn't my1.5cents be out vetoing trades that don't suit his fancy?

 

 

why is he writing manifestos on why his thinking is more important than everyone elses in the league? he has already stated it quite clearly.

 

 

1.) He will veto trades he doesn't like, regardless of collusion.

2.) An owners right to manage their squad is subordinate to My2cents particular view.

3.) Owners can only make roster moves that don't upset my2cents

4.) My2cents' projections are not only accurate, but more important than a particular owners personal projections.

 

 

I'm guessing at the draft, owners needed to ask My2cents if they could go to the bathroom.

 

 

 

 

There is only one rational conclusion: Fire My2cents as commish. clearly he has no business being one. Has no concept on how or why to use particular powers, and clearly is an egomaniac on a power trip.

 

He has all the worst qualities a commish could have.

[rdrs4life 0]

Shouldn't my1.5cents be out vetoing trades that don't suit his fancy?

why is he writing manifestos on why his thinking is more important than everyone elses in the league? he has already stated it quite clearly.

1.) He will veto trades he doesn't like, regardless of collusion.

2.) An owners right to manage their squad is subordinate to My2cents particular view.

3.) Owners can only make roster moves that don't upset my2cents

4.) My2cents' projections are not only accurate, but more important than a particular owners personal projections.

I'm guessing at the draft, owners needed to ask My2cents if they could go to the bathroom.

There is only one rational conclusion: Fire My2cents as commish. clearly he has no business being one. Has no concept on how or why to use particular powers, and clearly is an egomaniac on a power trip.

 

He has all the worst qualities a commish could have.

 

 

I wish he was in my league just so I could have the pleasure of kicking him the ###### out.

[DankNuggs 305]

I wish he was in my league just so I could have the pleasure of kicking him the ###### out.

You don't want guys like him....

 

 

He's the type of guy who'll go to a restaurant with a bunch of people and fight over how to split up the bill at the end.

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

Shouldn't my1.5cents be out vetoing trades that don't suit his fancy?

why is he writing manifestos on why his thinking is more important than everyone elses in the league? he has already stated it quite clearly.

1.) He will veto trades he doesn't like, regardless of collusion.

2.) An owners right to manage their squad is subordinate to My2cents particular view.

3.) Owners can only make roster moves that don't upset my2cents

4.) My2cents' projections are not only accurate, but more important than a particular owners personal projections.

I'm guessing at the draft, owners needed to ask My2cents if they could go to the bathroom.

There is only one rational conclusion: Fire My2cents as commish. clearly he has no business being one. Has no concept on how or why to use particular powers, and clearly is an egomaniac on a power trip.

 

He has all the worst qualities a commish could have.

 

Wow - you managed to make all that up yourself and somehow claim to attribute it all to me in one gigantic projection, eh? Fascinating. I imagine in your make-believe world you're also smart, have a college degree, are taller than 5'4, weigh less than 300 lbs and don't live in your mother's basement.

 

let's review the posting styles of the two members in question:

_my_2_cents_ = posting civilly, defending his position and debating intelligently with those who are respectful and interested in meaningful debate.

 

DankNuggs = name calling (at will and unprovoked), challenging the integrity of others, attacking thir credibility and questioning their ability to commission a league, baiting, incessantly badgering and projecting things onto _my_2_cents_ (and others) throughout this topic.

 

conclusion: DankNuggs chooses to take the low road with virtually every post, uses insults and ad hominem attacks to avoid having to actually discuss or debate anything intelligently. Often a sign of a weak mind, as the insults and abuse are merely something to hide behind in order to divert the attention of any reader. Simply put this all adds up to the portrait of a message forum troll.

 

As defined here:

An "Internet troll" or "Forum Troll" or "Message Board Troll" is a person who posts outrageous message to bait people to answer. Forum Troll delights in sowing discord on the forums. A troll is someone who inspires flaming rhetoric, someone who is purposely provoking and pulling people into flaming discussion. Flaming discussions usually end with name calling and a flame war.

 

Wow - every ove of those traits are displayed with virtually every post by DankNuggs. I would be willing to bet that an IP check on he and RenoZ would reveal that they are one and the same, as it cannot be coincedence that in every topic they magically appear to support each other as they've done throughout this topic.

 

Once again - just mroe reason to ignore DankNuggs - after all, not one of his posts has been even remotely on topic, while every one has been targeting someone he disagrees with to post something inflamatory.

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

In effort to collect some neutral opinions (meaning opinions of those not involved in this topic) on the valuation in this deal, to either validate or contradict the claims that "things have happened in the weeks subsequent to the draft to increase the value of Kennison & Caddy" to boost their valuation to equal jacobs & Andre Johnson, I posted a topic last night on the Help Forum.

 

I posted it in a neutral tone, listing the trade details and where the respective players were drafted. I also provided the suggestions from the "no veto" crowd that somehow something has happened in the last wer weeks to boost the value of the Caddy/Kennison side.

 

Naturally when rdrs4life saw this topic, he attemped to shoot it down, himself admitting that " everyone is going to vote for the Jacobs side." :unsyre:

 

Right now it's 8:1 against the deal, with 3 people saying (unsolicited) that it's bad enough that something is seriously wrong with it/collusion.

 

 

I'm sure that now that I've posted about it the results will be skewed by DankNuggs and his 5 aliases voting it up the other way, but I find it very amusing that one of the more vocal people against the veto of this deal has

1. admitted that "everyone will vote for the Jacobs side"

and

2. attempted to sabatoge the post/poll while insulting me for posting it, as though asking for that neutral validation were a bad thing.

 

The desperation and hypocricy there is hillarious.

 

I was prepared for that poll to go either way - I cannot control how people respond and I took great care to not post it in any sort of biased fashion. And I guarantee if it did go against my opinion DankNuggs and his 5 aliases would have lept all over it and used it against me - but of course since it's in my favor rdrs4life is attempting to somehow make it out to be a bad thing that I even started the topic, attacking me and explaining to everyone the purpose of the poll, in order to skew it to suit his own pathetic needs.

 

Hillarious.

 

Here's the topic - have fun voting now that rdrs4life "outted" it:

http://www.fftodayforums.com/forum/index.p...howtopic=282610

[Blaneyfan 0]

Shouldn't my1.5cents be out vetoing trades that don't suit his fancy?

why is he writing manifestos on why his thinking is more important than everyone elses in the league? he has already stated it quite clearly.

1.) He will veto trades he doesn't like, regardless of collusion.

2.) An owners right to manage their squad is subordinate to My2cents particular view.

3.) Owners can only make roster moves that don't upset my2cents

4.) My2cents' projections are not only accurate, but more important than a particular owners personal projections.

I'm guessing at the draft, owners needed to ask My2cents if they could go to the bathroom.

There is only one rational conclusion: Fire My2cents as commish. clearly he has no business being one. Has no concept on how or why to use particular powers, and clearly is an egomaniac on a power trip.

 

He has all the worst qualities a commish could have.

 

Do what I did a couple yrs ago, make up a list of names, usernames, e-mail addresses, or whatever might help you identify someone, and avoid any league they have anything to do with, especially commish. My list is getting to be pretty big after a couple yrs but it has saved me from getting involved in a league with a couple tools that did show up on my list.

[Guest RenoZ]

Wow - every ove of those traits are displayed with virtually every post by DankNuggs. I would be willing to bet that an IP check on he and RenoZ would reveal that they are one and the same, as it cannot be coincedence that in every topic they magically appear to support each other as they've done throughout this topic.

 

Yep, either that or we have lives, jobs, wife and kids, etc. that demand a little more attention than watching a monkey (you) try to hump a basketball (this thread).

 

Bu-bye now.

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

Yep, either that or we have lives, jobs, wife and kids, etc. that demand a little more attention than watching a monkey (you) try to hump a basketball (this thread).

 

Bu-bye now.

 

Whatever you say DankNugg-er, RenoZ.

What coincedental timing that you're here to defend yourself right after DankNuggs posts...

[Guest RenoZ]

Whatever you say DankNugg-er, RenoZ.

What coincedental timing that you're here to defend yourself right after DankNuggs posts...

 

Damn, I was hoping to hold on to that alias for a while longer.

 

Congrats, toolbag, you've doubled your post count in one thread...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

...and still lost.

 

[treewarden 1]

Once again, I'm soo happy to play in leagues where my personal judgements are not questioned by every other owner!!

[darwin 0]

QUOTE

An "Internet troll" or "Forum Troll" or "Message Board Troll" is a person who posts outrageous message to bait people to answer. Forum Troll delights in sowing discord on the forums. A troll is someone who inspires flaming rhetoric, someone who is purposely provoking and pulling people into flaming discussion. Flaming discussions usually end with name calling and a flame war.

 

 

"Wow - every ove of those traits are displayed with virtually every post by DankNuggs. "

 

Yet, you're still here enabling it.

Think of what you could have accomplished in the last 2 days if you would have never gotten involved!

For every troll, drunk, abusive spouse there is an enabler.

This matter should be decided by the actual members of the league, not the commish, and NOT trolls vs. enablers.

[Guest RenoZ]

Once again, I'm soo happy to play in leagues where my personal judgements are not questioned by every other owner!!

 

For vetoes: 4

Against vetoes: 392

[phillybear 366]

In effort to collect some neutral opinions (meaning opinions of those not involved in this topic) on the valuation in this deal, to either validate or contradict the claims that "things have happened in the weeks subsequent to the draft to increase the value of Kennison & Caddy" to boost their valuation to equal jacobs & Andre Johnson, I posted a topic last night on the Help Forum.

 

I posted it in a neutral tone, listing the trade details and where the respective players were drafted. I also provided the suggestions from the "no veto" crowd that somehow something has happened in the last wer weeks to boost the value of the Caddy/Kennison side.

 

Naturally when rdrs4life saw this topic, he attemped to shoot it down, himself admitting that " everyone is going to vote for the Jacobs side." :unsyre:

 

Right now it's 8:1 against the deal, with 3 people saying (unsolicited) that it's bad enough that something is seriously wrong with it/collusion.

I'm sure that now that I've posted about it the results will be skewed by DankNuggs and his 5 aliases voting it up the other way, but I find it very amusing that one of the more vocal people against the veto of this deal has

1. admitted that "everyone will vote for the Jacobs side"

and

2. attempted to sabatoge the post/poll while insulting me for posting it, as though asking for that neutral validation were a bad thing.

 

The desperation and hypocricy there is hillarious.

 

I was prepared for that poll to go either way - I cannot control how people respond and I took great care to not post it in any sort of biased fashion. And I guarantee if it did go against my opinion DankNuggs and his 5 aliases would have lept all over it and used it against me - but of course since it's in my favor rdrs4life is attempting to somehow make it out to be a bad thing that I even started the topic, attacking me and explaining to everyone the purpose of the poll, in order to skew it to suit his own pathetic needs.

 

Hillarious.

 

Here's the topic - have fun voting now that rdrs4life "outted" it:

http://www.fftodayforums.com/forum/index.p...howtopic=282610

 

The poll results will be completely and utterly useless. It's a complete tangent to whatever is happening in this thread. No one is arguing that Caddy and Kennison is a great deal, like you so "neutrally" posted in that thread. The whole point is whether to veto or not. That would be a MEANINGFUL poll.

 

But good luck with whatever point you are trying to make.

[Frankie Valiant 0]

But at the end of the day none of that matters. What matters is that the team with Jacobs/AJ could have had ALL of Jacobs/AJ/Caddy & Kennison with his 3rd, 4th, 5th and 14th picks if he valued those players that highly. People keep saying, "you don't know where the team with Jacobs/AJ has these guys valued!" - but we do. Obviously not valuable enough to spend a 5th or 6th roundrt on Caddy or any pick in the 1st 14 rounds on Kennison.

 

Instead he took other players, and is now dealing the 3/4 for the 6/15.

 

So no matter where they finish the year...no matter how over or underrated anyone is...no matter what stats they show, this trade is insane for the fact that if the Jacobs/AJ owner wanted those players he had several rounds to take Caddy, and 13 rounds to take Kennison and deemed them unworthy at the time. Yet now they're worth his 3rd and 4th round picks.

 

Finally your claim of AJ being overrated is interesting, but I posted their respective stats, and the fact is that AJ's WORST receiving season at 64 receptions was just 4 receptions lower than Kennison's best receiving season of 68 catches. AJ had over 100 catches last year. Kennison had 50-something. But again - it matters not because he could have had all 4 of these players if he actually valued them that highly.

 

All due respect, but sometimes I think people ignore the scenario to make a point about whether deals should be veto-able.

 

Let me ask you - are you in the "Kennison for Tomlinson" camp, where you'd allow that deal to fly because after speaking with the team manager it turned out to be based on stupidity rather than collusion? You'd allow a deal to ruin a 12 man league by gift wrapping the 1.01 pick for an unscrupulous manager to the detriment of 11 others because of 1 idiot making 1 idiotic move? Maybe they're a n00b to FFB. Maybe they aren't so bright to begin with. But allowing that deal would cost you the league. Guaranteed.

 

And if you aren't in the LT for Kennison camp, then please explain the difference between dealing a 1.01 for a 15.xx and dealing a 3/4 for a 6/15. I keep trying to mentally justify this deal and I keep coming up blank. I'm trying hard to see the other perspective here and I got nothing.

I was taking most of what you said into consideration untill you satrted with the ignorant posting! why you had to go that way is beyond me?

I have the stats at home, but you could just go to yahoo or NFL.com and look at Kennison and A.Johnsons last 4 seasons. Kennison only trails AJ by a few yards but has like 7 more TD's then him. but like I said right now AJ has more value...and is the younger, and better player.

I called him over rated because after his first season people were very high on him, and he was getting taken in the 2nd and early 3rd rounds, but only later ending up on the W/W at times.........

look at my profile I am not a noob....ok

I really enjoy reading people's opinions on here, and I also like helping others...

the first year I discovered this site I felt like I had a major edge over the guys in my big money league. and I ended up winning the Superbowl that year.

I was just giving an opinion that's all I didn't resort to name calling and I didn't call anyone out.

I just simply stated that if the decision was up to me I would let the trade go through.....

[Guest RenoZ]

OMFG...the 2_cent_hooker got TORE UP by the Newbs on the Help Bored too.

 

I seriously cannot stop laughing!!!! Oops, I think I just pissed my pants a little.

 

Four total people made reference to a veto and the results were 1 Veto and 3 NO Veto.

 

Problem is...the one guy that voted for it was rdrs4life focking with you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!