General Message Board

You would have gotten the better ens of the deal but they should not have vetoed it. Unles...

You would have gotten the better ens of the deal but they should not have vetoed it. Unless someone is trading Foster for Steve Smith or an out of contention guys tries to trade his good players to his buddy towards the end of the year then no trades should get vetoed. If the two parties are ok with it then let it go through.

It a basic league no bonus for return yardage or ppr or anything like that just rush yards...

It a basic league no bonus for return yardage or ppr or anything like that just rush yards recep yards and TDS

i think u would have gotten the better deal. if you get points for return yardage also. de...

i think u would have gotten the better deal. if you get points for return yardage also. depends on how many yards per point i would have vetod it also. if no points i would let it go thru

That is the problem with Group Vote. If it doesn't benefit them they will veto becaus...

That is the problem with Group Vote. If it doesn't benefit them they will veto because they can. So the next time you will veto, so on and so on. No trades will go through. In this case they can see you are in a hole and they could keep you there, thus it benefits them. GL At least with a Commish review league there is only one person you can blame. They should at least have to show their vote instead of hiding. jmo

I knew I was getting a better deal because I was taking advantage of all his RBs having by...

I knew I was getting a better deal because I was taking advantage of all his RBs having bye weeks. I just didn't think it was super lopsided it merited a veto. I resent a trade and added steve smith because he'd sit on my bench while Wallace, Austin, and Harvin play