Trade Veto

[brm2073]

Ok so Im not the commish in this league but I dont like the trade and it seemed like the trading forum was more for is this trade fair or not. Its pretty simple a (A)6-3 team is making a trade with a (B)1-8 team, A is receiving Vick and McGahee for Roethlisberger, Maurice Morris and Benson. Ok now I dont think the trade is terribly lop sided and I have to say Ive never vetoed or had a problem with any trade in any league Ive ever been in and Ive been playing for a while with a few leagues each year. A little more info 12 team league and 6 teams make the playoffs pretty standard, not a keeper league. My problem isnt the players involved in the trade its the fact that one of the teams is mathematically eliminated. If the team was 2-7 I wouldnt say anything because youd have an outside shot at it. Always thought this was understood. Any and all opinions welcome here.
Thanks

[bigmck]

There is nothing wrong with the trade. Just because a team is out of playoff contention does not mean they have to stop playing. Be thankful he is still playing instead of not setting his lineup each week. There is no reason to question the trade.

[dgan]

Yeah, I'm not opposed to rules that stop teams from making trades once they are mathematically eliminated. There is something peculiar about waiting to make a trade until your team is beyond help...particularly if there aren't weekly winnings or a loser's playoff pot or something like that.

As it is, however, certainly nothing wrong with it. It clearly isn't collusion. If it is a money league, I would consider (next year) adding small weekly winnings or a loser's playoff bracket pot just to make sure owners stay active and then they would have a legitimate reason to continue making trades to improve their team. If it isn't a money league, you may want to consider (next year) a rule that prohibits a mathematically eliminated owner from making a trade, or simply moving the trade deadline up a week or two. It seems kind of arbitrary, but I would never make a trade once I was out of it...it does have an unethical feel to it...

[brm2073]

There is nothing wrong with the trade. Just because a team is out of playoff contention does not mean they have to stop playing. Be thankful he is still playing instead of not setting his lineup each week. There is no reason to question the trade.

There is something wrong when one owner perhaps bugs another about a trade until the other says you know what I dont give a $hit im out and decides to accept it. Which is pretty much what I think happened here. And as far as being thankful hes still playing if he wasnt he wouldnt be invited back everyone is expected to have a legit lineup each week.

[brm2073]

Yeah, I'm not opposed to rules that stop teams from making trades once they are mathematically eliminated. There is something peculiar about waiting to make a trade until your team is beyond help...particularly if there aren't weekly winnings or a loser's playoff pot or something like that.

As it is, however, certainly nothing wrong with it. It clearly isn't collusion. If it is a money league, I would consider (next year) adding small weekly winnings or a loser's playoff bracket pot just to make sure owners stay active and then they would have a legitimate reason to continue making trades to improve their team. If it isn't a money league, you may want to consider (next year) a rule that prohibits a mathematically eliminated owner from making a trade, or simply moving the trade deadline up a week or two. It seems kind of arbitrary, but I would never make a trade once I was out of it...it does have an unethical feel to it...

It is a money league and it used to be a keeper league till this year. We used to have it setup where teams that did not make the playoffs did have a losers tourny which dictated the order of next years draft so this wasnt an issue. I like the idea of adding a small pot to weekly high score or maybe a losers tourny for a free entry the following season. I will def make those suggestions in the offseason thanks for the response.

[GAMETIME03]

a team out of playoff contention should be making trades, that's just ridiculous.

[chargersdiehard]

A keeper league has different trade issues than a non-keeper league. I have been in a keeper league for 20 years, yes I'm old, and we always have trades happening in the last week of the trading deadline that owners make not for this year but for the next year and beyond. That is just part of a keeper league. As an example, we had a team that is eliminated this year trade away Hasselback and Chris Johnson for Tebow. That trade made no sense to the team eliminated except that his other QB was Grossman and he wanted to get what he feels was a keeper QB that he could build around. Made sense to the rest of the owners and the trade was allowed. That is just what it is like to be in a keeper league.