- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
A "couple" just initiated a trade giving Denver's defense for Cleveland's
Posted on 11/3/16 at 12:56 pm
Posted on 11/3/16 at 12:56 pm
My bud is matched up with the SO receiving the Denver's defense and he is not happy about it. Other trader receiving Cleveland's already has Minnesota's defense. What should we make of this?
14man $100 Money league. Commissioner seems to be ignoring the trade.
14man $100 Money league. Commissioner seems to be ignoring the trade.
10
Posted on 11/3/16 at 12:59 pm to steeltiger17
Smells fishy to me
This post was edited on 11/3/16 at 1:00 pm
Posted on 11/3/16 at 1:01 pm to steeltiger17
Why was Cleveland's defense even rostered? Anyway, I'm not one to veto a trade, but that's clearly vetoable. No legit argument can be made for receiving Cleveland's defense, as they don't even have a good matchup this week.
If I was commish, I'd ask both to explain there thoughts on the trade and if I didn't like the answer, I'd veto the trade and not invite them back next season.
If I was commish, I'd ask both to explain there thoughts on the trade and if I didn't like the answer, I'd veto the trade and not invite them back next season.
Posted on 11/3/16 at 1:02 pm to steeltiger17
tell your friend to put them on blast to see what their explanation is.
Posted on 11/3/16 at 1:04 pm to steeltiger17
Cleveland just had a crappy outing against the Jets. They have bare talent and are on waivers in most leagues.
I know people hate vetos here but this should not pass. Make the Denver receiver put a real piece in the trade. Not even a starter but at least a quality bench player.
and frick SO leagues.
I know people hate vetos here but this should not pass. Make the Denver receiver put a real piece in the trade. Not even a starter but at least a quality bench player.
and frick SO leagues.
Posted on 11/3/16 at 1:15 pm to steeltiger17
Shut the frick up
Posted on 11/3/16 at 2:02 pm to LooseCannon22282
quote:whoah
Shut the frick up
Posted on 11/3/16 at 2:49 pm to steeltiger17
I've only seen 2 trades vetoed in 4 leagues over the course of 10+ years. 1 shouldn't have been vetoed the other was the exact same situation (minus the couple). Two guys trading defenses so the other could have a better shot at beating the top team in the league.
Team A- 2 great defenses (top 3 team)
Team B- shite defenses (potential playoff team)
Team C- playing B and was the #1 or #2 team in the league
A & B traded defenses so that B could beat Team C. Defenses are minor but it's bullshite, and the league came down hard.
edit: there's a money refund to the top 2 regular season teams. $200 league. So, it made the situation worse
Long reply but yes that trade is complete shite
Team A- 2 great defenses (top 3 team)
Team B- shite defenses (potential playoff team)
Team C- playing B and was the #1 or #2 team in the league
A & B traded defenses so that B could beat Team C. Defenses are minor but it's bullshite, and the league came down hard.
edit: there's a money refund to the top 2 regular season teams. $200 league. So, it made the situation worse
Long reply but yes that trade is complete shite
This post was edited on 11/3/16 at 2:51 pm
Posted on 11/3/16 at 3:09 pm to steeltiger17
Just straight up? Should be veto'd, and one or both should be kicked from the league for next year. Is there a vote for veto'ing? Make sure people know to vote against it.
This post was edited on 11/3/16 at 3:18 pm
Posted on 11/3/16 at 3:09 pm to steeltiger17
Definitely should be vetoed.
Posted on 11/3/16 at 3:12 pm to LooseCannon22282
quote:
Shut the frick up
Must be the "SO".
Trade should be vetoed. No justification for that trade and seems like collusion.
Posted on 11/3/16 at 3:44 pm to steeltiger17
That's not a trade a reasonable person would make. Not arm's length. Should be vetoed.
This post was edited on 11/3/16 at 3:45 pm
Posted on 11/3/16 at 3:48 pm to steeltiger17
Vote to block.
Posted on 11/3/16 at 4:25 pm to LooseCannon22282
quote:
Shut the frick up
Sounds like this is the guy and based off his reply, I'd kick him out of the league. He gets butthurt bc of your post, while making no attempt to explain why the trade was made.
This post was edited on 11/3/16 at 4:26 pm
Posted on 11/3/16 at 7:31 pm to LooseCannon22282
quote:
Shut the frick up
quote:
LooseCannon
ISWYDT
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News