I also have a situation on my hands over trades. We recently moved to an online package so everyone was more in control of their teams. I set up trade veto rules to require 5 votes to veto a trade(10 team league). Unfortunately all the owners did not know about this(my fault), but we had always used league votes on trades and I assumed it was understood.
I made a deal with one owner for a RB. 3 weeks later I dealt him for a WR(damn injuries, and it screwed me in the end!). The owner who I got the RB from voted against the trade, and another voted against it "because I never vetoed a trade before and just wanted to". One other person voted for it. Nobody else voted. After the trade went through the owner who I had gotten the RB from was furious. He wanted it vetoed because the majority of those who voted were against it.
I explained the makup of the rule, but it didn't help. I heard other owners had seen it, not cared and not voted. Obviously this will happen.
So now this owner wants me to force participation by fining owners who don't vote on trades. This guy is very involved in the league and has forced me to create new rules. He used to buy trades. Pay for another owner's league fee to do a deal with him. That was one of the bigger issues a while back. So now I have one very disgruntled owner and another who will go along with his ideas. I really don't like the idea of having fines, but I too would like to have more involvement from all the owners.
I did like the idea of an outside person ruling on a trade if an owner has an issue with one. Someone with no interest in the league, but with fantasy knowledge could take a more objective view on it.
This shows that league voting can be easily manipulated by an owner's hurt feelings.
edanono wrote:So now this owner wants me to force participation by fining owners who don't vote on trades. This guy is very involved in the league and has forced me to create new rules. He used to buy trades. Pay for another owner's league fee to do a deal with him. That was one of the bigger issues a while back. So now I have one very disgruntled owner and another who will go along with his ideas. I really don't like the idea of having fines, but I too would like to have more involvement from all the owners.
This so-called "owner" that "wants you to force participation by fining owners who don't vote on trades...forces you to create rules...buy trades by paying another owner's league fee to do a deal with him...."
That owner would be called a cheater...and you need to kick him out of the league ASAP!!! I don't care if he's your best friend. You, as the commissioner, should NOT allow anyone to "force" you to create a new rule, or allow anyone to pay another owner's fee so that he can make a trade with him. Your league is in serious trouble, and you need to lay down the law. First of all, the final decision on whether a trade goes through or not is YOUR DECISION...do not leave it up to a majority of league members since this doesn't work for you, and leads to some disgruntled owners. Make the rules known, make sure everyone knows about the rules (post them on the website, email everyone, call them, whatever). It is your responsibility to make the league fair and fun for all members, and not allow members to blatantly cheat by "buying trades".
The buying trades was taken care of years ago. When I took the job this league had only guidlines and a lot of backdoor deals.I stated that no money was allowed in any deals, and everyone agreed. I agree that voting on trades will probably not work in the long run for us. I was considering hiring a co-commish for trade rulings that I am involved with and allowing owners to voice their opinion if they don't like a trade. Or using an outside source since they would have no personal stake in any deals.
Not bad, but being as they are that "independent", the only thing you have to worry about is that these people don't "know" the people making the trade. Is one owner trading for a WR (by giving up a slightly better RB) because he's a fan of that "real" football team and simply likes him better? Do these people know the trade history of the teams involved, their dedication to the league, their active participation (past and present) in the league, their competitiveness, their "reasons for making the trade" which are not as obvious sometimes as you might think...sometimes it is better to be "judged" by people that know that people involved.
If a league has a solid commissioner, an unbiased and impartial commissioner, who is the sole individual responsible for vetoing a trade, then this is the system to use. I have been a commissioner (in the same league) since 1993. My fellow owners know that I am fair and impartial, sometimes I don't like accepting the trade because it might benefit a rival of mine, but I do it anyway (now, I'll still talk smack to the owners AFTER the trade is done, but that's about it). Bottom line, if you're changing out a lot of owners in your league every year, somethings wrong, and you need to correct it. If you have a "waiting list" of people that want to join your league, but haven't had an opening in years, you as a commissioner are doing something right. Keep up what you're doing, ask for input from the other league owners, but just realize that you as commissioner have the final say, whether people like it or not. If you're fair, they'll be fine with any decision you make even if they don't agree with it.
These are good points. In 14 years, we've never had a trade that actually had to be resolved via this independent league method, so we'll stick with this policy.
I have always wondered what could be done with this topic. I like the Commish veto power. I have also seen some Commish veto's due to a lack of understanding of the trade. I would like to have something like a trade panel of 2 voted in by the owners along with the commish. If the trade seems unfair or not understood the commish could have a vote between the three panel members. If a trade was approved by the commish and challenged by an owner, the panel could also vote making their majority decision final. If a trade is vetoed by the commish the trading owners could appeal to the board. Every year the trade panel members could be voted in on draft day. Not all owners should have veto votes but they should be able to challenge a trade. Arguements could be heard by the panel and panel votes taken. This is done nicely online where the league has a message board. All arguements for and against could be posted for all in the league to read. This stops people from challenging for wrong or stupid reasons.