Unfortunately a situation has come up which has caused a ton of strife in the league and a number of guys are now apparently on the fence on whether or not they will be back because of it.
The issue at hand is that 3 or 4 owners are all workmates and there has been past instances where collusion was suspected (although I have to admit I have not seen anything blatant in my time in the league) and now there is a trade that has half the league up in arms and the other half up in arms in defense of it...
Essentially the situation is this:
Team A is in 4th (a figgie and a PAT behind me) and Team B is in 7th (100 points behind us and almost 240 out of 1st). Owners A and B work together and so they are more prone to make trades with each other first (they say it's because nobody else makes offers and they are not acting together - I don't know myself) before trading with anyone else in the league. Anyways, Team B gambled on keeping Culpepper and LT (it's a salary league and those 2 alone were over 33% of his available salary) at the beginning of the year and as a result had to go "budget" on the rest of his roster, so even his holding 7th position to date is the result of a combination of smoke, mirrors, and general ineptitude on the part of the 8th-12th place teams... Knowing that his chances are slim and none for this year with things the way they stand now, he has apparently decided to make some deals to build for next year, and herein lies the problem.
The trade that has everyone so divided is this:
TEAM A - GIVES
- Fred Taylor
1st and 3rd rounders from next year's draft
What has happened now is the 1st place team (and a couple of vocal others) has accused team B of dumping his Stud to Team A just so A can catch him, while B is saying he is merely making the best deal to improve his own chances of winning next year and the league seems to have divided just about down the middle with regards to who they are supporting...
The issue is getting particularly heated because our Commish originally had veto rights all to himself but changed it to a wishy-washy system where we have a majority vote which he will bear in mind before he makes the final decision. The funny thing is this happened after another trade earlier in the season (also between these two, involving Deuce Mac after the injury where Team B said he was trading for the future also) was nixed by him and they raised a stink about it and got support from a number of the other owners and he decided he didn't want the responsibility all to himself anymore since he was getting blasted for it...
So now the league is polarizing around the issue, with other guys in the bottom ranks threatening to dump their studs to the others in the top tier for picks too in order to "balance" the situation (Moss&Moss for Engram&Welker and a 1st was offered to the current points leader for example)...
My personal opinion is that the fact that B is willing to trade someone away this year to build a better team for next is fine, but a 1st+3rd (which is essentially a 5th+7th since we have 4 keepers each) is nowhere near enough to justify trading LT since he will definitely not find an LT calibre back in either of those rounds... (we start 2RBs plus a flex so there are VERY FEW RBs who are not rookies available in the 1st)
This is my first Keeper league, so I am not really clear on the commonly accepted practices of trading for the future at this point - any Keeper vets have some valuable insight to interject here? Any particularly good points may be brought up to the Commish who has called for a league discussion (in particular he has asked our normally less vocal members to contribute but I plan on getting more than my $0.02 in anyway) before he makes a final ruling on it on Saturday...