Does your league do this???

[mikeydread9]

I've been in a league with basically the same people for many years. I just flipped out at my league because some people don't participate. Trades are going through with 5 or 6 votes out of 10, waiver players are getting picked up by the same few teams that actually look at the wire. Those slackers don't realize that it affects the output of the entire league. Do any of you have this same problem?

[spodog]

voting on trades is the worst way to determine trade status anyway. If your league is a long standing league, you should have abolished voting on trades years ago.

If trades were voted on in the NFL, The Lions, Bears and Packers all would have voted to REJECT the Vikings trade with NE to acquire Moss a while back.

Too many conflicts of interest.

[mikeydread9]

I disagree. A few dumb trades will absolutely destroy the league's output. You can't compare this to trading in the NFL, that's ridiculous.

[Controlled Chaos]

Probably the wrong forum for this question, but anyway I've been commish of my league for 12 years. We don't have that problem anymore, but we used to. Ya need to weed out those teams the next year. The other thing you can do is offer some incentive for teams to stay in it all year. Have weekly payouts. Have a consolation playoff worth something. Here's our money breakdown for 12 teams.

$125.00 per team
$20.00 weekly to the team who wins predetermined category.(this used to go to high score of the week, but basically those scoring high consistently are going to win money in the end anyway. Different categories give everyone a chance at some cash even if they're having an off year. Be sure to restrict player performance based weeks to weeks without a bye.)
Week 1: Lowest team score (kind of the consolation prize for sucking when you’re presumably trying to win) (tie - splits winnings)
Week 2: High score by QB (Tie Breaker-Most pass yards – T2 – Most rush yards)
Week 3: High score by RB (Tie Breaker-Most rush yards – T2 – Most rec yards)
Week 4: Highest score with a loss in Weeks 1-4
Week 5: High points for the week (tie - splits winnings)
Week 6: Largest margin of victory (tie - splits winnings)
Week 7: Player of the Week -Most points by a starter (tie - splits winnings)
Week 8: Highest score with a loss in Weeks 5-8
Week 9: Longest Field Goal (tie - splits winnings)
Week 10: Bust of the first round (Prize goes to the owner of the 1st-round player with the lowest point production through Week 10; it should go to the owner who drafted the player even if he has since been cut or traded or placed on IR).
Week 11: High score by WR (Tie Breaker-TD’s– T2 – Most rec yards)
Week 12: Highest score with a loss in Weeks 9-12
Week 13: High score by Defense (Tie Breaker-Turnovers– T2 –sacks)
Week 14: Waiver/FA pickup of the year (Prize goes to team that picked him up, even if he has since been cut or traded.)

Playoffs is teams 1-4
1st = $650.00 and trophy for the year.(Winner responsible for engraving)
2nd = $250.00
3rd = $150.00
4th = $100.00
Consolation is teams 5-8
5th = $45.00
6th = $25.00

This keeps teams at least trying to get to that 8th spot so then can get into the consolation bracket. If you get in and take 5th and you won a couple weeks during the year. That's half the cost to enter the league. Much better then being in 9th, 10th, 11th, or 12th and going home empty handed.

So there are some things you can do, but really when you're sitting 0-9, 1-8 it's hard to stay motivated. You just need good peeps in your league.

With regard to voting on trades...I think all vetos should lie with the commish....Usually the only reason you even need a veto is collusion and putting veto's up for a vote unfortunately doesn't always work.

[mikeydread9]

Cool, thanks for your insight. Bottom line is people will pay attention for money and you need all players to be knowledgeable about football. In my opinion, the commish shouldn't be the only veto, it' should be like a jury: all owners vote for yes or no. Next year I'd like to join the most serious and expensive league. Know any available online?

[Controlled Chaos]

Here's the problem with voting.
Just had a situation this year in a different league I'm in. The first place 6-1 team traded with the last place 0-7 team. That 0-7 team is the 6-1 teams friend that he brought into the league. The first place team lost Romo when he got hurt...so he traded Sanchez and Forsett for Orton and Flacco. 2 bench players for 2 starting QB's. Collusion without a doubt. It's pretty dam shady trading with the last place team as it is, but for the last place team to lose on the trade is him just giving up. I'm not the commish of this league.. and unfortunately the commish has an 8 person veto and not enough people were signed on during the 2 day trade period to veto it. If the trade happens on a Tuesday...some guys aren't checking their teams during the week. It can easily get through.

Another example, a league I was in had a 4 team or more veto. Well sure enough 4 guys got together and veto'd a perfectly fair trade. Why? Because one of the teams was playing the team involved in the trade and didn't want him getting a QB. They called that good strategy cause it doesn't say you can't do that in the rules. They needed 4 to veto and thats what they had.

The veto is simply there to stop collusion. That's it...let people coach their team...if they get hosed, they get hosed. Most teams are trying to improve themselves...so who are you to determine otherwise.

[mikeydread9]

Obviously collusion can't happen but I think the jury system is correct. If a trade is vetoed by 5/10 then too bad for those who thought it was fair. My only concern is a league that doesn't have full participation in voting. One guy claimed to be "indifferent". I said that means you don't veto, so then you must click accept. Lame leagues are formed exclusively by not having 100% attention, sort of like when the blackjack player hits when he shouldn't and it messes up everyone else's outcome. I like the idea of adding more incentive bonus payouts and a loser's bracket for a prize.

[spodog]

I disagree. A few dumb trades will absolutely destroy the league's output. You can't compare this to trading in the NFL, that's ridiculous.

Output? what kind of output does your league produce?

It isn't so ridiculous to compare to the NFL, consider this:

Yes, dumb trades will impact a league. So will lopsided trades, and so will trades that are cooked up by two owners who are colluding together to attempt to cheat the system.

Just like in the NFL, no one would argue that the Vikings made a collosally stupid trade by dealing a 3rd round pick for Moss and then cutting him loose 4 weeks later. Possibly the worst trade of the decade. You don't see the the NFL Comissioner stepping in to reverse that trade just because it turned out to be stupid now do you? It's just part of life. Dumb trades happen.

Dumb trades and lopsided trades are just part of life in fantasy as well, however, and you shouldn't try and legislate them away with a veto system.

Trades born of collusion, do need to be prevented, however.

I'm only stating having a league vote is not the best way to prevent collusion. Having a strong comissioner who is willing to take a stand and reject trades where evidence of collusion exists is much better. It's hard to find a good commish who is willing to act in a noble way and review trades with the best interests of the league in mind, but having one in place is far superior to a voting process.

When you allow a voting process, you don't get consistency in rulings and you certainly don't get any differentiation between the 3 things above (dumb trades, lopsided trades, and collusion).

What you get are teams voting based upon their own self interests, or worse yet, attempting to project their own opinions onto the relative value obtained by both sides in the trade and then shooting trades down based upon their viewpoint of a trade being too weighted to one side or the other.