Should this trade be vetoed

[jaymay75 0]

Jason Campbell

McGahee

Cotchery

 

for

 

Tom Brady

Steven Jackson

Wes Welker

[sbas2k 0]

On the surface it seems one-sided. Brady is a huge upgrade over Campbell but McGahee has had a better year than SJax, St. Louis is horrible. Cotchery is an upgrade over Welker. I would rather have Brady et al but it's not totally one-sided. Please help with mine.

http://www.fftodayforums.com/forum/index.p...howtopic=352146

[BigBlue7 0]

I'm a firm believer in:

 

A trade should never be vetoed unless collusion is involved. If one guy is able to pull one over on another guy...then so be it.

 

The league is there to veto trades if it looks like one team is trying to help another. If I work my a$$ off to pull off a trade that I KNOW will benefit me in the long run...and everyone else can see it but the guy i'm trading with...then oh well. They should've tried to do the same thing.

 

I often find that if everyone in the league thinks that you've just made a trade that makes your team much better and they fear your team...They'll veto it. Seen it happen.

 

Anyway...no...it shouldn't be vetoed even though I think the 2nd group is MUCH better.

 

 

edit for spelling

[PATSSOX 22]

Jason Campbell

McGahee

Cotchery

 

for

 

Tom Brady

Steven Jackson

Wes Welker

 

 

its obviously very very very very one sided!!! it is only week 4 so you would not think anyone is dumping players but this is BAD. i do not like people vetoing trades just to veto them but i would certainly have to veto this. that is just wrong.

[spacepirate 0]

I say no veto, but I'm pretty low on SJax.

The guy giving up Welker probably needs points now to even get in the playoffs.

I'd bet he has a better QB to start & is taking two starters & bench for two starters & bench

 

Let it go.

[envoy9 5]

A one sided deal yes, but does not rise to the level of Veto. Welker is injured and uncertain, SJ is on a horrible team... I would not make that deal, but it should not be vetoed.