RANT!!! Guys in my league trying to veto trade!!!?

[proKrastinate]

I know a lot of people here don't like this solution, but if it were me than I would just walk away. I can't decide wether or not I would drop my players or not (probably not), but I would definately remove myself from this league.

In my previous post I was unaware that they veto'd solely because they too wanted to make offers for TO. Playing with owners such as these I don't think will result in a very fun laegue. Even if you move on from here and do well, you will still think abou it and fume over it. If this is the first time *everyone* is doing fantasy football, than maybe they don't have a good concept of the game. However, even when I was a FF noob (im only one notch above that now :p) I still didn't veto trades solely because I too wanted to make offers to someone. I was a believer in the no collusion trades back than. And it doesn't have to be a money league for collusion either.

I hope this isn't your only fantasy league this year, so as to make it easier to walk away if that is your decision. But I would definately explain to the guys at work if they ask why you are upset. Since you also work with them, I wouldn't bark in their faces either.

[maddog60]

ampant, this has nothing to do with fantasy football and everything to do with people. Fact is, you're playing fantasy football with a bunch of immature brats. You could be playing any other game, and rest assured these people would act the same way. Simply put, it sucks, just make sure you don't make the mistake of playing fantasy football with these people again.

[ampant]

I posted a league-wide email summarizing why I thought this whole thing was BS. It almost spun out of control over the weekend. I patched things up, now. But thanks for the love. Part of the problem was that nobody ever explained how things were supposed to work. (Sort of the "if the software lets you do it, then it should be allowed" mentality).

[proKrastinate]

I posted a league-wide email summarizing why I thought this whole thing was BS. It almost spun out of control over the weekend. I patched things up, now. But thanks for the love. Part of the problem was that nobody ever explained how things were supposed to work. (Sort of the "if the software lets you do it, then it should be allowed" mentality).

care to elaborate? curious

[WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot]

your league is stupid. I traded my Cadi for another managers Randy Moss straight up in my league. Guy who had Moss had Lewis, Bell, and Staley for RB's so was really hurting. Nobody in my league said jack because they knew it wasn't collusion. Ofcourse I was getting the better end of the deal and trading my 5th round pick for his 1st but HE NEEDED AN RB. a trade should only be veto'd if collusion is suspected. Everyone makes trades that they think are helping their own team. Unless the last place team is trading Randy Moss for Lee Suggs to the 1st place team or something grossly lopsided (collusion) it should be let through. It doesn't matter if it is lopsided, the commish is in the same division as you, or jesus told him to do it.

I'd drop my team and ask for my money back. You play with a bunch of babies and n00bs.

[Pete123444]

If a league is giving power to vote om trades to the owners, then you should expect anything when they vote. If a league only wants trades to be vetoed because of collusion only, then the commish should be the only one with power to shoot down a trade. If a owner in this type of setup sees wrongdoing , he can bring his ideas up to the commish. Then the Commish can evaluate the trade. But if you give the power to the owners, then expect some owners to block trades if it makes someone stronger than them.

[iloveny18]

I don't think he is getting enough value for TO's. Davis isn't woth much to him becuase he'll be starting portis/green, so it's basically portis/mcardell for TO. TO's a stud, and he should be getting at least a semi-stud for TO.

But on the other hand, I don't think a trade should be vetoed if a guy wants to give up too much to get something in need.