Vetoing A Trade Because You're Jealous...

[SabreNation 3]

I want to get some more opinions on this from the FFToday community. I'm seriously fuming right now. Am I overreacting?

 

Here's the situation. I'm 4-1 and have a sickening amount of depth on my team, there are a bunch of guys sitting on my bench every week who could easily be starting on other teams in the league. TIME FOR A TRADE! The guy with Peyton Manning in our league has practically nothing else. His team is 1-4, his RBs are a mess and his WRs aren't much better. We spent two days negotiating a trade and came to an agreement. I offered the trade and he accepted it.

 

It was vetoed today.

 

Here's the kicker though - everyone in the league AGREED that it was a perfectly fair trade. I gave up Romo, Jordy Nelson, and Danny Woodhead. I got Peyton Manning and Dewayne Bowe. All 3 guys would be clear starters on his team and obviously would have scored more points between the three than Manning is going to score himself. Difference is they will actually PLAY on his team while they were wasting away on my bench. It's a work league and rumblings started popping up at work today about vetoing the trade. When I asked them if it was a fair trade for both parties involved they all agreed it was and that, overall, the other team probably benefited even more than I did. The follow up question was, of course, then why veto a trade you have just said is totally fair? Their answer was, basically, "because your team is good so you can't have Peyton Manning." In effect "you did a great job drafting and you're a serious contender so you are not allowed to use your depth to improve your team."

 

I think it's a load of crap. Why should I be punished for having a good team? More so, why should the other guy - who was totally amped up about possibly being able to get back in the running - be punished because the rest of the owners don't want me to have Peyton Manning.

 

What do you guys think? Am I overreacting here? Or are these guys a bunch of cry babies?

[jrbdmb 28]

Quit the league immediately, invite the vetoing players to your manager's office, and punch them in the face in front of the manager and the rest of the department.

 

These guys are dooshes - I would quit a league if I got hosed like this.

[idiotec 31]

It's bush league. Is this a money league? Do you know the guys?

[Frozenbeernuts 1,653]

This is the kind of stuff that happens with people who aren't hard core fantasy zombies like many of the people here. They don't care or understand why something like this would offend a true addict.

 

It sucks but you have to realize this stuff is plausible in these types of leagues.

[SabreNation 3]

It's bush league. Is this a money league? Do you know the guys?

 

Yeah, I work with all of them. Yes, it is a money league. Not a monster one but decent money - $75 per team.

 

I'm the commish and right now I'm seriously considering just giving everyone their money back and saying the money part is cancelled because of this BS. Can still play for free if they want but I'm not putting my money on the line in this nonsense.

 

Editted: Sorry, was thinking about my other league, this is the $75 one, not the $100 one.

[ian Potter 9]

Had it happen two years ago as well. One guy quit because of it. I intended only to pay my money if I win. When I had fluke loss in fantasy playoffs I didn't pay and told them to F off. Id play out the season. If u win keep their money. If u lose refund everyone their money at the end of the season and tell them to pound sand!

[BigDaddy808 8]

How does someone have Peyton and still be 1-4? D!ck move by your co workers but I had the same happen to me a few years ago, forced the commish to make it a non voting league and that seem the way you should go next season. If they have a problem with a trade they can letter the commish but he's the only one with veto power.

[stonewall 647]

Whatever their reasoning, they vetoed it......move along. You still have a good team with depth.

[madd futher mucker 36]

Since you are the commish, how did you ever permit a league vote rule to begin with?

 

Don't quit the league - let it play out this year. Next year, if you don't get a rule change to commissioner veto only, do not re-join the league. Instead of playing in the work league, play with the big boys. There are plenty of leagues you can join if you look in the "Find a League, fill a league" forum about a month before the season starts.

[SabreNation 3]

How does someone have Peyton and still be 1-4? D!ck move by your co workers but I had the same happen to me a few years ago, forced the commish to make it a non voting league and that seem the way you should go next season. If they have a problem with a trade they can letter the commish but he's the only one with veto power.

 

His running backs were Trent Richardson, Shane Vereen, and Andre Brown (draft was 1 week before Brown got hurt) and his wide recievers are/were Andre Johnson, Dewayne Bowe, and Tavon Austin. Peyton Manning is literally the only thing he has left at this point.

[TheUsualSuspect 207]

Since you are the commish, how did you ever permit a league vote rule to begin with?.

Bingo.

I understand the OPs frustration... BUT the power has been given to the people. When the power is given to the people, he/she need not explain why they choose to veto a trade or not.

 

Eh... Woodhead being a "clear starter" is debatable.

[SabreNation 3]

Since you are the commish, how did you ever permit a league vote rule to begin with?

 

 

Blame it on inexperience as a commish. This is my first time running a league though I've been playing for about 15 years. I've been in plenty of leagues with league voted vetoes and in all those years I've never actually seen something like this happen. When I was setting up the rules I saw the league veto and figured "yeah, seems fair" and just moved along.

 

Lesson learned.

[BigDaddy808 8]

 

Blame it on inexperience as a commish. This is my first time running a league though I've been playing for about 15 years. I've been in plenty of leagues with league voted vetoes and in all those years I've never actually seen something like this happen. When I was setting up the rules I saw the league veto and figured "yeah, seems fair" and just moved along.

 

Lesson learned.

Yeah we never had a problem in ours either till one got barely got vetoed, come to find out that one person that vetoed never had a problem with the trade he just found it fun to veto every trade that was trying to be made. The problem with allowing vetoes is when others see the trade they always say they're vetoing because they would have given a better offer. My answer is always, you should have made the offer first and you would have gotten the player.

[SabreNation 3]

Bingo.

I understand the OPs frustration... BUT the power has been given to the people. When the power is given to the people, he/she need not explain why they choose to veto a trade or not.

 

Eh... Woodhead being a "clear starter" is debatable.

 

When his only other option for his RB2 is Jason Snelling or LaGarrette Blount? Woodhead's the clear starter in this scenario.

[kobe808lak 7]

The veto should only be used to prevent obvious collusion... I thought that was just common practice.

[SabreNation 3]

Since you are the commish, how did you ever permit a league vote rule to begin with?

 

Don't quit the league - let it play out this year. Next year, if you don't get a rule change to commissioner veto only, do not re-join the league. Instead of playing in the work league, play with the big boys. There are plenty of leagues you can join if you look in the "Find a League, fill a league" forum about a month before the season starts.

 

I won't quit but I'm converting it to a free league and giving everyone's money back. I'm not gonna ask the other guy to pay up when his best shot at turning his season around just got shot down simply because a group of guys decided they don't want me to have Peyton Manning. I could still win the league with my team, he has no shot at all now. It was unlikely he would've won anything even with the trade but he might've managed to sneak into the playoffs and at least got some of his money back.

 

I'm definitely done with work leagues. The reason this league exists is because of some shady nonsense that went down in another work league. The commish suddenly changed the playoffs from 4 teams to 6 about 3 weeks before the playoffs. The #6 team in the league? His, of course. A bunch of us splintered off and created our own league. Now this. No more work leagues for me. I'll stick to my family league and online leagues with guys who actually know what the hell they're doing and won't cheat to win.

[SabreNation 3]

The veto should only be used to prevent obvious collusion... I thought that was just common practice.

 

Same here. That's why I didn't think twice about allowing league votes. In over a decade I've never seen veto power abused like this and I've played in all manner of leagues from family to work to hardcore pro leagues all the way down to lulz-tastic Yahoo free leagues. Like I said, lesson learned, there will never again be league voted vetos in a league I join. Either it's commish-only or I'm not interested.

[jerryskids 5,436]

 

I won't quit but I'm converting it to a free league and giving everyone's money back. I'm not gonna ask the other guy to pay up when his best shot at turning his season around just got shot down simply because a group of guys decided they don't want me to have Peyton Manning. I could still win the league with my team, he has no shot at all now. It was unlikely he would've won anything even with the trade but he might've managed to sneak into the playoffs and at least got some of his money back.

 

I'm definitely done with work leagues. The reason this league exists is because of some shady nonsense that went down in another work league. The commish suddenly changed the playoffs from 4 teams to 6 about 3 weeks before the playoffs. The #6 team in the league? His, of course. A bunch of us splintered off and created our own league. Now this. No more work leagues for me. I'll stick to my family league and online leagues with guys who actually know what the hell they're doing and won't cheat to win.

When I started reading this, I figured it was a free work league, and I was going to suggest you just suck it up and talk some smack for the rest of the season. But I don't understand why the other owners would do this in a money league. I mean, I guess I would if it was a league full of people you don't know, but I would expect a certain honor or integrity from work mates where money is on the line.

 

Maybe your choice to turn it into a free league will wake them up.

[TheUsualSuspect 207]

I mean, I guess I would if it was a league full of people you don't know, but I would expect a certain honor or integrity from work mates where money is on the line

Great point... I mean, (to the OP) what type of work do you do? Do these guys make similar unethical decisions at work?

[SabreNation 3]

Great point... I mean, (to the OP) what type of work do you do? Do these guys make similar unethical decisions at work?

 

LOL, I guess it depends on your viewpoint of the situation. I'm a floor manager at a collection agency so yeah take that for what you will.

 

They're good guys though, a lot of them are people I consider to be good friends not just coworkers and most of them have plenty of prior fantasy football experience so I would expect them to have more integrity, especially with money on the line. I was laughing it all off when we were all talking about it at work today. I seriously thought it was all a joke in good fun. I didn't for one second believe any of them were serious. When I went to the site to check for injury updates and saw it was actually vetoed I couldn't believe it. When I contacted the other owner involved he was, understandably, probably even more pissed than I am. He's someone who hasn't paid yet and while he never said anything about quitting or refusing to pay, I'm not even going to put him in that position because, quite frankly, if I was in his place I probably wouldn't pay.

[$epphori$ 118]

if I find out sum1 tried vetoing a trade out of spite they are kicked out of league following year. plain and simple

[The Next Generation 10]

Whatever their reasoning, they vetoed it......move along. You still have a good team with depth.

 

This. If you allow vetoing these things are gonna happen. Suck it up and move along.

[jpcdds 21]

Maybe it's the fact you're trading with a 1-4 team. Pretty much needing a miracle to make a run for the playoffs and he is trading away a player that's potentially on his way to having the greatest fantasy football season ever? And he's giving that player to the best team in the league for his backups? I would have an issue too I think!

 

Also.... The three players you're trading him have less tds combined than manning does. So basically he has to use 3 spots in his lineup to get similar production he's getting from manning alone. And the same goes for you but opposite. You're getting 3 spots of production from 1 qb! The more I think about the more I veto too!

 

In my league... I just checked and manning is outscoring those 3 players by himself... Plus you added depth with bowe.

 

VETO!

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

Hard knocks there OP.

 

Rules can't be changed midseason................sucks but had you not been involved, would you still be refunding everyone's money or just say 'we'll change that next year"?

 

I can understand your frustration but I say let the league play out WITH the money still in play.

[BTL99 34]

Yeah, that is total BS. No way that trade should be vetoed.

[bscheibs 8]

The only time a trade should be vetoed is when there is collusion. Anything else goes. If you're mad someone ripped another owner off,shame on you for not getting there first.

[jwself 0]

All trades are crap. It's very unrealistic that a starting player gets traded for another starting player during the season in real NFL. Richardson was a shock and that was still for draft picks. I've played FF for 14 years and never made a single trade. You draft for depth, injuries are part of the game, and you take your lumps. The best way to avoid all the collusion and other crap that makes leagues not fun is to ban all trades. You simply don't need them.

[jwself 0]

BTW: please let me know if you think the Broncos would consider trading Manning right now. All trades are crap!

[SNZ11 5]

I control all trades in my league, and make all final decisions. I have not had to reject a trade yet, and it has worked for over 10 years.

[SabreNation 3]

In my league... I just checked and manning is outscoring those 3 players by himself... Plus you added depth with bowe.

 

Well I don't know what kind of scoring your league has (non-PPR?) but I just checked the season totals in this league and it's not even close:

 

Manning - 156.86

Romo, Nelson, Woodhead - 268.12

 

That's an extra 100 points, an average of 20 points per game. Add that extra 111.25 points to his current total and he vaults from the second lowest scoring team in the league to the 5th highest and instead of having almost 50 more points against than for, he's got 695.11 points for vs 627.82 against.

 

Even if you add Bowe's numbers into the mix - though Bowe's been benched in recent weeks in favor of Terrance Williams - you're STILL talking a 50 point increase over his current production.

[SabreNation 3]

sucks but had you not been involved, would you still be refunding everyone's money or just say 'we'll change that next year"?

 

I may not have been given a choice. I got an owner who hasn't paid yet and feels as though he's been robbed of his best chance to turn his team around. He never said he was not going to pay his money but I wouldn't blame him if he did refuse to pay and judging by 87% of the people who've responded to this thread/poll, he'd be justified in doing so. If it was me and another guy in the playoff hunt I wouldn't be so inclined to start refunding money. That's not the case. I got screwed, the other owner got screwed 10 times worse and through absolutely no fault of his own but simply because a group of guys decided they don't think I should have Peyton Manning regardless of whether it's a fair trade or not.

 

As I said earlier in the thread, I'm willing to suck it up and move on. I could still win the league and I'm still one of the favorites to do so even without the trade. At the end of the day I may end up COSTING myself $400 with this decision. The same can't be said for the other person involved. His season's done. There was a small glimmer of light at the end of the tunnel but some jealous owners snuffed it out.