Worth protesting Bryant/Manningham FOR Mathews/Burress?

[taw856]

Trade made and accepted the day after the draft between two owners, one of whom took Dez Bryant in the fourth round and Mario Manningham in the sixth round AND the other of whom took Ryan Mathews in the fifth round and Plaxico Burress in the tenth round.

Lopsided enough to be worth fighting?

Personally, I think it's a slightly unfair trade made more ridiculous by the fact that it's happening one day after the owner who wants Mathews/Burress could have simply selected those players with his earlier picks in the draft (and thus annoys me that the other guy gets two starting WRs for players on his bench). But I can't decide whether it's worth lobbying to veto it: On the one hand the earlier a trade happens the more time for it to impact the league, on the other hand it's not so egregious as to make me necessarily want to be the main one marshaling opposition.

Thoughts?

[11stever11]

I do not think it is worth fighting over. I do not believe in vetos unless there is collusion involved. If you are the LM or Co-LM I suggest emailing the owners to see what there reason for doing the trade. I think vetos just hurt the league.