I agree with lmcjaho when he says that accusing someone of cheating is not something that should be taken lightly. I also agree with the poster who thinks these guys are colluding (based on the evidence given by the original poster, particulary the contradictory "need RB help and then trade back my best RB" comment).
Because of this, and because neither team poses a serious threat (as of yet), I would simply raise your level of scrutiny based on what you have seen and act accordingly in the future (a middle-ground of sorts). Don't risk league turmoil to keep a guy in dead last when he will finish close to there anyhow. However, if these moves continue, it may have a legitimate effect on the outcome and it must be stopped.
Matthias wrote:alright. based on your reaction, i'm also accusing you of roid-rage.
christ. can't someone have an opinion without some back-alley bozo saying they'd, "knock your teeth out the back of your head"? you have to get back to class. recess is over. now, be quiet while the grown-ups talk.
Maybe you should go back and try reading what I wrote:
If someone accused me of cheating to my face - which is essentially what Rockets is saying when he says Collusion - I would punch that person in the head. You can have whatever opinion you want but if you insult my honor to my face you better be ready to accept the consequences.
Are you going to sit there and tell me you would accept some back-alley bozo accusing you of cheating? You seem to be the one that needs to grow up - or at least grow a sense of personal pride...
I see enough evidence to believe it was collusion. If u read the rest of my original post, I said I wanted an explaination from both of the owners. From first glance, it is collusion. It would have to be an incredible explaination for me to change my mind.
It seems to me that u take my post as a personal attack on you. Are u one of these owners? Relax.
RocketsDWM wrote:I say collusion. Portis has a lot more value than Martin right now and Clayton has more potential than Stallworth.
You think Mark Clayton (the Baltimore one) has more upside than Stallworth? By defacto of their respective offenses Stallworth has more upside, with Joe Horn's injury the difference is even bigger. Derrick Mason is struggling to put up points in that offense, I can't see how any rookie has more upside playing 2nd fiddle to him, and Heap.
ChyBoy wrote:Their is a trade up for approval now and it seems a little shady.
Team A trades Clinton Portis and Mark Clayton to Team B for Curtis Martin and Donte Stallworth.
The problems is not totally with this trade. There was a trade last week between the exact same teams.
Team A traded Hines Ward and PHI DEF Team B traded Marshall Faulk, Kevin Faulk, Frank Gore and Marcus Pollard. I thought this was a very uneven trade but allowed it. Team A was 0-3 and Team B is 1-2.
Both guys are new members in the league and they know each other. This is a money league. The trades are not obviously collussion, but they are a little suspicious. Team A told me that team B told him that he was giving up a good WR to get some RB help, but then a week later he trades his best RB to get a upgrade in WR. Something just doesn't add up.
Team A Roster
Frerotte, Gus Griese, Brian Bell, Tatum Duckett, T.J. Fason, Ciatrick Faulk, Kevin Faulk, Marshall Gore, Frank SFO Portis, Clinton Bennett, Drew Clayton, Mark Gaffney, Jabar Johnson, Andre Parker, Samie Pollard, Marcus Putzier, Jeb Elam, Jason Hanson, Jason Falcons, Atlanta
Brooks, Aaron Dilfer, Trent Leftwich, Byron Davenport, Najeh Droughns, Reuben Green, Ahman Griffin, Quentin Martin, Curtis Zereoue, Amos Boldin, Anquan Chatman, Antonio Horn, Joe NOS Randle El, Antwaan Stallworth, Donte' Ward, Hines Gates, Antonio Kaeding, Nate Eagles, Philadelphia Steelers, Pittsburgh
Is there a problem with this trade in which I should not allow it.
Those statements in bold jump out at me. The second trade is even more suspicious with these statements in mind. Money changes everything.
It's very suspicious given that team A has been willing in the past two weeks to give up Portis, Ward and Philly for a bunch of backups, Curtis Martin and Stallworth. But since you accepted the first trade I think you have to here also.
With all due respect, I do not agree that if you accept one questionable trade, you must accept the other. I think that the scrutiny should build with each questionable trade (between the same owners that is). When attempting to identify collusion, you should look to more than face value of the trade.
I re-iterate that the Team A owner is most likely just stupid and not a cheater - look at the rest of his roster guys, it's not like he has anybody on there that is very good - he probably honestly thinks he is improving his team with the changes he made...
And Rockets - I am not one of the teams involved and I don't take personal umbrage to your comments - I was merely pointing out that people who are quick to throw out the word collusion need to be aware that they are accusing someone of cheating and that there are consequences to be considered in such a case and one had best be aware of those consequences and be willing to accept them if one is willing to throw such an accusation out there...
cards05 wrote:With all due respect, I do not agree that if you accept one questionable trade, you must accept the other.
I meant that more in this exact instance because the second trade doesn't look very bad. By itself there is nothing objectionable and the only reason it raises an eyebrow is because of the first trade which was hideous. If you have one questionable trade followed by another sure but this second one isn't all that unreasonable.