Fantasy commisioners - Fantasy Football Cafe 2014 Fantasy Football Cafe


Return to Football Talk

Fantasy commisioners

Moderator: Football Moderators

Postby ravage » Wed Apr 13, 2005 9:02 am

Sixxgunn wrote:
ravage wrote:If owners vote on every trade how do you avoid this situation?


Simply ask them to give a brief explanation as to why they want to veto the trade,and if they can't give a satisfactory answer,the commisioner has final say,plain and simple.
So now you're giving the commish two responsibilities, or two chances to make an error, instead of just one. First he has to decide if the complaint is viable and if he decides it's not he still has to decide on the trade. Makes little sense to me.

I still believe there is only one answer to handling trades. The commish has all authority. If your commish is good it will be fine. If he's not you'll be in trouble anyway. I've had one trade in the 9 years of my league that I questioned. I talked to both owners, they made their case, and I let the trade go through. Trades are much more difficult to judge when dealing with a keeper with restrictions or a dynasty. Often having the owners explain it makes the trade become more clear.
ravage
Defensive Assistant
Defensive Assistant


Posts: 360
Joined: 26 Jan 2005
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Wisconsin

Postby proKrastinate » Wed Apr 13, 2005 10:01 am

Hehe i guess it all comes down to who you have in your league, and what works for them. People who like they way you run your league will stick around, and those that don't will leave and find somewhere they do like. It all depends on the other owners personalities. What works for you, won't work for someone else and vice versa.

I think there is no sure way to run a league.
Image
proKrastinate
Offensive Coordinator
Offensive Coordinator

User avatar

Posts: 889
Joined: 25 Aug 2003
Home Cafe: Football

Postby Sixxgunn » Wed Apr 13, 2005 11:25 am

[quote="ravage"] I talked to both owners, they made their case, and I let the trade go through. Trades are much more difficult to judge when dealing with a keeper with restrictions or a dynasty. Often having the owners explain it makes the trade become more clear.[/quote]

This is basically what I meant,but the league should feel they have the right to speak up if something isn't fair,at least in their minds.I just worded it poorly is all.
[url=http://imageshack.us][img]http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/1065/sixgunn7ao0rc.jpg[/img][/url]
Sixxgunn
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 4887
(Past Year: 3)
Joined: 20 Jul 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Who?

Postby Sixxgunn » Wed Apr 13, 2005 11:26 am

[quote="ravage"] I talked to both owners, they made their case, and I let the trade go through. Trades are much more difficult to judge when dealing with a keeper with restrictions or a dynasty. Often having the owners explain it makes the trade become more clear.[/quote]

This is basically what I meant,but the league should feel they have the right to speak up if something isn't fair,at least in their minds.I just worded it poorly is all.
[url=http://imageshack.us][img]http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/1065/sixgunn7ao0rc.jpg[/img][/url]
Sixxgunn
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 4887
(Past Year: 3)
Joined: 20 Jul 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Who?

Postby MCG321 » Wed Apr 13, 2005 4:12 pm

Sixxgunn wrote:
ravage wrote:
chaindog35 wrote:I just think allowing teams to vote on changes, trades, etc. keeps everyone happy and things run more smoothly.
One of the biggest complaints I've heard from owners in several leagues is allowing owners to vote on every trade. They complain that when all owners get to vote they veto trades that should be allowed. Not because they're lopsided or collusion but because it will hurt their chances to win the division or eventually in the playoffs.

If owners vote on every trade how do you avoid this situation?


Simply ask them to give a brief explanation as to why they want to veto the trade,and if they can't give a satisfactory answer,the commisioner has final say,plain and simple.On an unrelated subject,being too honest can hurt a commish if he is also a player.Last season I had put in a FA request,but someone had mentioned another owner who expressed an interest in the same player the same day.We didn't use a waiver system at the time,and as commish of the league i didn't want to seem as if I was favoring myself so we called him to ask and he said yes he was thinking about it,and since we had him on the phone he would go ahead and do it.Technically I had my request in first,but I let him have the player so I wouldn't be construed as a cheat.


I hope you've added a waiver system...things like that shouldn't happen.
MCG321
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Cafe RankerEagle EyeInnovative MemberCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 2644
Joined: 10 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Football

Postby MCG321 » Wed Apr 13, 2005 4:16 pm

ravage wrote:
Sixxgunn wrote:
ravage wrote:If owners vote on every trade how do you avoid this situation?


Simply ask them to give a brief explanation as to why they want to veto the trade,and if they can't give a satisfactory answer,the commisioner has final say,plain and simple.
So now you're giving the commish two responsibilities, or two chances to make an error, instead of just one. First he has to decide if the complaint is viable and if he decides it's not he still has to decide on the trade. Makes little sense to me.

I still believe there is only one answer to handling trades. The commish has all authority. If your commish is good it will be fine. If he's not you'll be in trouble anyway. I've had one trade in the 9 years of my league that I questioned. I talked to both owners, they made their case, and I let the trade go through. Trades are much more difficult to judge when dealing with a keeper with restrictions or a dynasty. Often having the owners explain it makes the trade become more clear.


If the commish has all the say, what about when he's involved in a trade? For a variety of reasons, he may not think the trade is unfair, but it's a conflict of interests if he's involved in the trade. Do you give the rest of the league a chance to have some power when the trade involves you?
MCG321
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Cafe RankerEagle EyeInnovative MemberCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 2644
Joined: 10 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Football

Postby Sixxgunn » Wed Apr 13, 2005 4:17 pm

MCG321 wrote:
I hope you've added a waiver system...things like that shouldn't happen.


Yes,yes I did.I used this as an example as to why we need one.Some initially balked,but have come on board since.
[url=http://imageshack.us][img]http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/1065/sixgunn7ao0rc.jpg[/img][/url]
Sixxgunn
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 4887
(Past Year: 3)
Joined: 20 Jul 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Who?

Postby chaindog35 » Wed Apr 13, 2005 4:19 pm

ravage wrote:
chaindog35 wrote:I just think allowing teams to vote on changes, trades, etc. keeps everyone happy and things run more smoothly.
One of the biggest complaints I've heard from owners in several leagues is allowing owners to vote on every trade. They complain that when all owners get to vote they veto trades that should be allowed. Not because they're lopsided or collusion but because it will hurt their chances to win the division or eventually in the playoffs.

If owners vote on every trade how do you avoid this situation?


We have a majority vote. You have to get 6 out of 10 owners to vote to veto the trade before it gets vetoed. Since I tend to trade alot, voting makes it easier so that we don't need a co-commissioner to decide on my trades. The voting system works well in my mind for this reason. First, it allows all owners a say on all trades. We have time to dsicuss, so any worries can be presented. Second, getting 6 votes is not easy, that means alot of people think the trade is completely lopsided. Third, since it's a dynasty league that I use this system in, the values of players are a little harder to gauge, a little more fluid and that makes it less likely that close trades will get vetoed. Finally, the biggest reason I am in favor of voting is that I actually think it allows more trades. When an owner votes, they have in the back of their mind that if this trade gets vetoed, then the next time they have a trade that favors them, it will get vetoed. So most often it allows trades to go through unless it is ridiculous because owners don't want to get vetoed in the future.
A new forum opened up! Read about the latest "Great Debate" where YOU ask the questions. You lucky VIP, you.
http://www.fantasyfootballcafe.com/forums/viewforum.php?f=106
chaindog35
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Mock(ing) DrafterCafe Musketeer
Posts: 4269
(Past Year: 1)
Joined: 9 Oct 2002
Home Cafe: Football

Previous

Return to Football Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Start & Sit Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Get Ready...
The 2014 NFL season kicks off in 10:06 hours
(and 42 days)
2014 NFL Schedule


  • Fantasy Football
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact