What can I do about a biased comminser??? - Fantasy Football Cafe 2014 Fantasy Football Cafe


Return to Football Talk

What can I do about a biased comminser???

Moderator: Football Moderators

What can I do about a biased comminser???

Postby donnie75 » Fri Sep 29, 2006 12:11 am

Iam trying to trade for LT...For Ronnie Brown, A Green, LJ Smith, and the Colts Def...for LT.. They already rejected the trade without Green in it.. My comminiser said it makes me too strong, which i think is bullshit It makes the other team better, curently he has only 1 point from his TE"s the whole season, and his other rb's are Morris and Rhodes.. Should I leave this League ? Or what should I do? THANKS FOR ANY INPUT
RB"s--SJ, Henry, Deanglo Williams, D Mcalister WRs--Evans,Houshmanzada,Driver, Galloway, Kevin Curtis QB-Brees,Farve TE-- Cooley, LJ Smith Def-Seattle K- Gostkowski Ten team league--Half a point per completion Redraft,
donnie75 Beginner
Cheerleader
Cheerleader


Posts: 15
Joined: 21 Aug 2006
Home Cafe: Football

Postby XHendrix » Fri Sep 29, 2006 12:18 am

it's part of fantasy football, being able to veto trades, and having trades vetoable. Think if you were in there position, would you let this go through if it made you biggest opponent that much stronger...
Get over it.
XHendrix
Special Teams Staff
Special Teams Staff

User avatar

Posts: 273
Joined: 18 Apr 2006
Home Cafe: Football

Postby flotsamnjetsam » Fri Sep 29, 2006 1:48 am

XHendrix wrote:it's part of fantasy football, being able to veto trades, and having trades vetoable. Think if you were in there position, would you let this go through if it made you biggest opponent that much stronger...
Get over it.



That is NOT part of fantasy football. That's one thing that's VERY wrong about fantasy football. Everyone has different opinions on the values of certain players. A trade should never be vetoed just because you think the trade is unfair or makes 1 team too strong. A trade should only be vetoed if it's obvious collusion (cheating) between 2 teams. Some trades make you scratch your head but they shouldn't be vetoed unless collusion is suspected. Obviously the 2 owners involved in the trade feel they're getting equal or better value in return. You might think the trade is onesided but as long as it's not collusion the trade shouldn't be vetoed.

I wouldn't participate in the league next year if owners veto trades just because they are afraid the trade makes 1 team too strong. Again, that's NOT part of fantasy football.
Image

Thanks to deluxe_247 for the awesome sig!
flotsamnjetsam
Moderator
Moderator

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterGolden Eagle EyeCafe MusketeerTrivia Time Trial ChampionPick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 17169
(Past Year: 78)
Joined: 12 Oct 2005
Home Cafe: Football
Location: New York State Of Mind: 18-1

Postby mattb47 » Fri Sep 29, 2006 2:32 am

flotsamnjetsam wrote:
XHendrix wrote:it's part of fantasy football, being able to veto trades, and having trades vetoable. Think if you were in there position, would you let this go through if it made you biggest opponent that much stronger...
Get over it.



That is NOT part of fantasy football. That's one thing that's VERY wrong about fantasy football. Everyone has different opinions on the values of certain players. A trade should never be vetoed just because you think the trade is unfair or makes 1 team too strong. A trade should only be vetoed if it's obvious collusion (cheating) between 2 teams. Some trades make you scratch your head but they shouldn't be vetoed unless collusion is suspected. Obviously the 2 owners involved in the trade feel they're getting equal or better value in return. You might think the trade is onesided but as long as it's not collusion the trade shouldn't be vetoed.

I wouldn't participate in the league next year if owners veto trades just because they are afraid the trade makes 1 team too strong. Again, that's NOT part of fantasy football.


Agreed, it is the owners who are a part of the trades' responsibility to look at both sides of the deal and make sure it doesn't make one team too strong even if it may benefit both teams. If it is not collusion, and it is not simply a ridiculous trade, there is no grounds for a veto. Simple bias towards either what one team already has, or just if a commish doesn't like the trade for whatever reason, it is most certainly not a valid reason to veto a trade like this.

I would say that you shouldn't be in the league anymore either. Finish the year out, but make your complaints well known, maybe even point them to this thread so that they can see what the true rules involving the vetoing of trades (especially when just a commish is responsible for vetoes) should work.
Image
mattb47
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe MusketeerCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 14238
Joined: 29 Nov 2004
Home Cafe: Football

Postby BigDballer » Fri Sep 29, 2006 8:38 am

flotsamnjetsam wrote:
XHendrix wrote:it's part of fantasy football, being able to veto trades, and having trades vetoable. Think if you were in there position, would you let this go through if it made you biggest opponent that much stronger...
Get over it.



That is NOT part of fantasy football. That's one thing that's VERY wrong about fantasy football. Everyone has different opinions on the values of certain players. A trade should never be vetoed just because you think the trade is unfair or makes 1 team too strong. A trade should only be vetoed if it's obvious collusion (cheating) between 2 teams. Some trades make you scratch your head but they shouldn't be vetoed unless collusion is suspected. Obviously the 2 owners involved in the trade feel they're getting equal or better value in return. You might think the trade is onesided but as long as it's not collusion the trade shouldn't be vetoed.

I wouldn't participate in the league next year if owners veto trades just because they are afraid the trade makes 1 team too strong. Again, that's NOT part of fantasy football.


x100

I am almost sick of playing with my friends because of this. My friends are idiots, miss the draft (well i missed the draft but set up a real strong autodraft that got me a pretty good team and made some real strong pickups) w/o settingup autodraft, make stupid drafts, and then complain about how much they suck and other teams are real good. So they veto EVERY trade regardless. I worked on my friend for this trade:

Favre, B. Edwards, and Caddy Williams for C. Taylor and Marony. Well they saw it was me and him (2 of the stronger teams making a good trade to help us both) so they all veto and I thought for sure the commissioner wasn't going to veto because it was pretty fair. BUT NOOOOO

o well, I like FF to much to quit because of that, and I know I will make good drafts/pickups and take my friends money regardless.

;-D
( __ /)
(=*.*=)
( ")_(" )
BigDballer
Offensive Coordinator
Offensive Coordinator

User avatar

Posts: 850
Joined: 7 Oct 2005
Home Cafe: Football
Location: San Marcos

Postby J_rob_the_ Baller » Fri Sep 29, 2006 11:16 am

yeah, I really thing that leagues should have rules stating that if you veto a trade, you must explain why, and saying because it makes a team to good should not be a valid reason. It should be looked at from the views of just the 2 teams involved, and not how it affects the rest of the league
Image

"He walks amoung us, but he is not one of us."
J_rob_the_ Baller
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar

Posts: 1383
Joined: 14 Dec 2005
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Chicago, IL


Return to Football Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Start & Sit Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Get Ready...
The 2014 NFL season kicks off in 8:32 hours
(and 39 days)
2014 NFL Schedule


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