- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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
Veto? AP for Bell
Posted on 9/13/18 at 9:32 am
Posted on 9/13/18 at 9:32 am
Had this one pop up on me a second ago and of course the guy getting Bell is going nuts. I flat out said no then he screamed for a league vote. 9-3 and he is still bitching. Is this as much BS as I think it is?
Argument was Bell might not play this season and AP offered immediate RB help. Funny thing is he refused a trade from another manager where he would give up Mark Ingram and get Carlos Hyde... against the Saints this week...
Argument was Bell might not play this season and AP offered immediate RB help. Funny thing is he refused a trade from another manager where he would give up Mark Ingram and get Carlos Hyde... against the Saints this week...
This post was edited on 9/13/18 at 9:37 am
23
Posted on 9/13/18 at 9:35 am to Mr. Wayne
I would vote no. If we're still at this same spot come week 6 or so, maybe then I flip to yes. Still too early in the season for that trade to pass though. IMO.
Posted on 9/13/18 at 9:36 am to Mr. Wayne
quote:
Had this one pop up on me a second ago and of course the guy getting Bell is going nuts. I flat out said no then he screamed for a league vote. 9-3 and he is still bitching. Is this as much BS as I think it is?
That is absolute complete BS. Don't get me wrong, I'd be pissed if I talked some dumbass into giving me Bell for AP but that is a completely imbalanced trade.
Posted on 9/13/18 at 9:38 am to Mr. Wayne
I think the "only veto if there's collusion" is an overrated line of thinking. Some trades are just not good for the league.
With that being said, what if he thinks Bell isn't coming back until week 10? Offer him a better deal for Bell.
With that being said, what if he thinks Bell isn't coming back until week 10? Offer him a better deal for Bell.
Posted on 9/13/18 at 9:38 am to Mr. Wayne
Posted on 9/13/18 at 9:39 am to Mr. Wayne
I mean, did yall offer anything better for Bell?
Posted on 9/13/18 at 9:40 am to Mr. Wayne
Allow it. Bell isn't playing and there are no guarantees he does.
Posted on 9/13/18 at 9:40 am to Mr. Wayne
Do you have proof this is collusion? Otherwise the trade stands. Collusion is the only justification for denying a trade.
League vote is bush league. People are just going to vote on whether the trade is good or bad for their team. It should always simply be commish approval.
On the trade, I'd just ride bell out but a case can be made for AP here. Its not you or the rest of the leagues job to protect owners from dumb trades.
League vote is bush league. People are just going to vote on whether the trade is good or bad for their team. It should always simply be commish approval.
On the trade, I'd just ride bell out but a case can be made for AP here. Its not you or the rest of the leagues job to protect owners from dumb trades.
This post was edited on 9/13/18 at 9:42 am
Posted on 9/13/18 at 9:44 am to Mr. Wayne
quote:
Had this one pop up on me a second ago and of course the guy getting Bell is going nuts. I flat out said no then he screamed for a league vote. 9-3 and he is still bitching. Is this as much BS as I think it is?
Your league sucks. It's entirely up to the owner of Bell to determine his worth. Maybe he has a gut feeling Bell doesn't come back until Week 10? Maybe he thinks AP can be a breakout and have huge value? It's not up to your league to decide whether he's right or wrong.
Unless there is collusion, let the goddamn trade go through. It's such a simple concept yet so many people can't seem to grasp it.
Posted on 9/13/18 at 9:45 am to Mr. Wayne
I don’t see anything wrong with it. AP saw a huge work share week 1 and Bell has shown no indication of showing up.
Posted on 9/13/18 at 9:46 am to Mr. Wayne
bullshite to veto this.
Why punish an owner who worked a deal, who gives a frick if its one sided, the owner put in work to pull off a deal.
Bush league to veto this.
Just because a deal is one sided in a majority of the leagues eyes does not make it vetoable.
Why punish an owner who worked a deal, who gives a frick if its one sided, the owner put in work to pull off a deal.
Bush league to veto this.
Just because a deal is one sided in a majority of the leagues eyes does not make it vetoable.
Posted on 9/13/18 at 9:46 am to WhoDatTigahsTampa
quote:
I would vote no. If we're still at this same spot come week 6 or so, maybe then I flip to yes. Still too early in the season for that trade to pass though. IMO.
It's not your job to manage another team's roster.
Glad I am not in any of these leagues with idiots vetoing.
This post was edited on 9/13/18 at 9:48 am
Posted on 9/13/18 at 9:48 am to Mr. Wayne
So what if AP goes off and Bell doesn’t play until Week 10?
“Oops our bad...”
“Oops our bad...”
Posted on 9/13/18 at 9:49 am to Honkus
quote:
It should always simply be commish approval.
I agree
What could possibly go wrong with one person having all that authority?
Posted on 9/13/18 at 9:49 am to Mr. Wayne
quote:
Argument was Bell might not play this season and AP offered immediate RB help.
Sounds reasonable
quote:
Funny thing is he refused a trade from another manager where he would give up Mark Ingram and get Carlos Hyde... against the Saints this week...
What's the problem with that? I wouldn't give up Ingram for Hyde either.
Posted on 9/13/18 at 9:52 am to Mr. Wayne
There is a very good chance Bell doesn't play for the first 10 weeks. There is also a good chance that when he comes back he won't get a bell cow workload. Both are taking risks. The guy getting AP could in all likelihood be getting the better end of the deal.
Posted on 9/13/18 at 9:54 am to Mr. Wayne
Trade should go through. If Bell doesn’t come back till week 10, a healthy AP
would have more value. Risk on both sides. Ridiculous to block that
would have more value. Risk on both sides. Ridiculous to block that
Posted on 9/13/18 at 9:56 am to Mr. Wayne
quote:
Funny thing is he refused a trade from another manager where he would give up Mark Ingram and get Carlos Hyde... against the Saints this week...
"Bro, give me Ingram for Hyde he's playing the Saints this week"
"WTF, you're giving him Bell for AP and you didn't want to accept my trade?"
"Veto"
This post was edited on 9/13/18 at 9:57 am
Posted on 9/13/18 at 9:57 am to DeathValley85
Those of you against how would any trade get vetoed if you have to "prove" collusion? Hire a private eye or attain a subpoena for their text and email records? Everyone would be making side deals if this was the standard. He turned down Hyde for Ingram and then accepted AP for a top 3 player.
If Bell reports tomorrow and AP gets hurt, very likely, the next day?
"Oops our bad..."
If Bell reports tomorrow and AP gets hurt, very likely, the next day?
"Oops our bad..."
Posted on 9/13/18 at 9:58 am to Mr. Wayne
Feel like you have to let this go through.
If you are worried it will stack a team then get better fantasy owners, if you can’t prove they are cheating then it’s gotta stand.
If you are worried it will stack a team then get better fantasy owners, if you can’t prove they are cheating then it’s gotta stand.
Page 1 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News