Phil.
The last comment I made was tongue in cheek.
With regards to the Trade where I got "knocked" I felt that it was right for me. I am the VIRGIN of all of the players in this league, but should it stop me from playing it??? Yes I will make mistakes and probably make more but should it stop me from playing??? I only really took interest in the League when I seen there was places and clearly stated in my opening post that my knowledge of NFL is limited but would love to learn and I assumed that I would as majority of players were experienced and enjoyed the fun.
Tell me if im wrong?
cheers, it's better to know how you see it than the earlier posts.
It absolutely should not stop you from playing, far from it. In the long run if you are trading and feel uncomfortable about it/ the response is negative then is that going to make you feel like playing again or more likely to think that was horrid and no fun at all. Would it make you feel like trading again?
Someone else mentioned earlier that they don't like trading because they feel they are going to get the rough end of a trade, so when the person running the league is sending out numerous trades like that it affects everyone in the league. Moreso when they are accepted for reasons that have already been discussed. Ours is a strange league as we have 16 teams drafting 16 players so that leaves very little on the waiver wire to fill any gaps when you have needs. It should mean trading is more important/often but it wont be if players are just scared because their default setting is they think they could get conned. So when Curtis as the guy running the league is sending a lot of bad value trades around it affects everyone.
Some leagues have a player veto option where trades get accepted and then if you think it is unfair you can vote against it, that way it needs a majority vote to get it thru. The downside of that is there are some players who will vote tactically to try and stop a trade going thru because it affects their match ups or players in their league/ones they are fighting for play off spots etc.
Other leagues just have a system where a trade is accepted there is a day or so waiting time, if you want to say it is unfair you contact the person running the league and they will seek other opinions or make a decision as the merits of that trade. We don't have either of those.
Last year Jek was given a load of grief from many of us for sending out a large amount of bad value trades weighted heavily in his favour, in fact I think someone might have told him to fuck off back to America or summat like that**. There is no difference between what he did and Sheriff doing a 'son of Jek' impression and doing the same thing so why would we just say it is ok this year?
**my memory isn't great but it was summat like that and I checked the son of Jek line wouldn't be offensive first.
In short my idea of the responsibilities of the person running the league is to make sure it runs properly, looks after the players and makes sure it runs fair. Sending out a load of Jek style trade offers hoping to get some accepted doesn't achieve any of those things and the worry is I have played in leagues where 'trade rape' is rife and at some stage one gets thru near the end of the season that totally dictates the results.
@Dean, It was a reply to your post too, the difference between having a caveat emptor approach is a trade doesn't just affect the buyers or sellers it affects everyone else in the league. I don't believe Rich will stop playing the league, I really hope he doesn't but I don't see how I am at fault for wanting it to run fairly. My gripe is mainly that the person running it is the one trying to get bad trades thru and take advantage and the ones I got and others said they got were attempting just that.
If AP is genuinely injured now then Rich might be the one that benefit's, hand on heart I hope that is the case because Sheriff will have ended up worse off when as the one in charge he was trying to make the other players worse off.
I still think there is a need for some kind of trade veto to be put in place.
Author