Commissioner Corner Message Board
First it must be said that team 1 has drew brees as starting qb and payton manning as a backup....clearly manning is great but this person would rarely if ever start manning over brees
next this team has made several attempts to make a trade for manning all of which have been rejected by other team owners, after seeing the value for qbs is not as high as this person though (since even bad qbs that can be picked up off free agents such as alex smith can still put up 30 points sometimes and several qbs can put up numbers very close to manning that other teams had) he then started offering manning for tight ends (since he had a bad tight end) several of which were also declined then he offered me a trade for witten, of course i accepted, but the bottom line is team 1 got rid of a bench player they would never use and got an every week starter in return, so i believe both teams benefited although i agree the trade was lopsided
and of course 1 person was upset, so the question is was the trade so lopsided that it should not have even happened?
Sounds like you have a lot of butt-hurting owners in your league. Probably started with the first veto because they felt team 1 became a better team, not because the trade was a result of collusion (the only real reason a trade should be vetoed). Then the team that had the 1st trade vetoed decided he was going to try and block any other trade involving Manning in spite. And it just snowballed into everyone doing it.
Every commissioner that has their league hosted on yahoo should have a league constitution. Yahoo allows a lot of flexibility in running your league and there are workarounds where they don't, such as not allowing players on IR unless they are on a teams real-life IR. In regards to trades, nothing is stopping you from having in place a rule that would allow the override of a vetoed trade. There are options available that allows the commissioner to manual push through a trade. In my keeper leagues, I have the following clauses that pertain to vetoed trades:
(c) Trade approval
All trades will be approved after a 2-day protest period. If 1/3 (4 teams) of the league protest the trade, the trade will be reviewed by the CC*. If the CC feels the trade doesn’t violate the integrity of the league and finds no reason the trade shouldn’t be allowed, the protest shall be overruled and sent to the commissioner for final approval with their reasons why the league protest should be overturned. If the commissioner still feels the trade should in fact be disallowed, it shall be his responsibility to give a detail account to the entire league as to why he feels the trade violates the integrity of the league. If the CC unanimously disagrees with the commissioner, then the trade shall be allowed.
(d) Commissioner Override
Any trade which the commissioner feels violates the integrity of the league and doesn’t receive the 1/3 protest votes, shall be sent by the Commissioner to the CC with a detail explanation as to why he feels the trade should be rejected. If the CC unanimously disagrees with the Commissioner, then the trade shall be allowed.
* - The CC is a Competition Committee that consists of 3 people who I have known and played FF with for more then a decade and trust their judgement in these matters. This also prevents the commissioner form having total control over the league and running it like a dictatorship...looking at you Max!
- 1 Reply to Chris
I don't see anything wrong with the trade. The guy was looking to trade his backup QB for a starting player. Obviously you got a better deal in getting Manning (assuming you needed a QB), but I don't think there is any reason at all to veto this trade.