This is pretty much a first for me... seeing league voting and having members allowed to veto trades by DEFAULT.
For a site that prides itself on customization of rules, it's mind-boggling to think one of the most important transactions in fantasy football... THE TRADE... has one option and one option only... league voting for approval/disapproval.
While some may like this, there's plenty that don't.
Yes, yes, I know "the Commish can over-ride anything"... that's not the point.
You've got a default rule (members voting-down trades) and the Commish can only act after the fact... which can cause problems with owners (hey, we voted that trade down, why are you over-riding us!).
To avoid all of that, it would be really nice if the OPTION was there for Commish's who set-up a league to turn on "COMMISH APPROVED TRADES" right from the get-go... this would avoid problems during the season of people voting-down trades and the Commish having to go behind them and over-ride it.
Simply put, for a "fully customizeable" site to not offer anything but one option which is turned-on by default for league trades is quite surprising.
Please... for the love of all things Holy... allow/implement an option for Commish Approved Trades!
I believe that leagues that allow other owners to veto trades are ridiculous.
There is a fundamental conflict of interest in such leagues. Presumably, every good trade benefits both sides to the trade, by which I mean it makes both teams stronger. As an owner of a fantasy team, it is my duty to compete to the fullest. I must always try to gain every advantage for my own team, and do whatever I can to disadvantage all of the other teams. So, it's to my advantage to veto every good trade.
Now, it may be to my advantage to also veto certain bad trades in which one side gains a lot and the other side loses, such as if the gaining side is ahead of me or slightly behind me in the standings. That's besides the point. What I'm saying is that it ALWAYS benefits me to vote to veto every good trade, i.e. every trade in which both sides benefit.
Yet the point of allowing owner vetoes is presumably so that they will vote to veto only very bad trades.
So, as an owner in a league allowing owner vetoes, whenever a good trade is made, I am always in a position where I am either undermining the point of the rule allowing owner vetoes by voting to veto the good trade, or violating my own duty to compete to the fullest by not voting to veto the good trade.
The Commissioner is charged with looking out for the best interests of the league, and it is the Commissioner's duty, alone, to ensure that trades meet the League's standards, whatever they may be. The owners are in charge of trying to win the championship, and making any legal maneuvers they can that will help them to do so.
It is stupid to allow owners to veto trades. But it is truly ridiculous for there to not even be an option of not allowing the other owners to veto trades.
WolfshanzeThu 8/21/08 12:01 PM
For a site that prides itself on customization of rules, it's mind-boggling to think one of the most important transactions in fantasy football... THE TRADE... has one option and one option only... league voting for approval/disapproval.
While some may like this, there's plenty that don't.
Yes, yes, I know "the Commish can over-ride anything"... that's not the point.
You've got a default rule (members voting-down trades) and the Commish can only act after the fact... which can cause problems with owners (hey, we voted that trade down, why are you over-riding us!).
To avoid all of that, it would be really nice if the OPTION was there for Commish's who set-up a league to turn on "COMMISH APPROVED TRADES" right from the get-go... this would avoid problems during the season of people voting-down trades and the Commish having to go behind them and over-ride it.
Simply put, for a "fully customizeable" site to not offer anything but one option which is turned-on by default for league trades is quite surprising.
Please... for the love of all things Holy... allow/implement an option for Commish Approved Trades!
RobertKellyMon 8/25/08 5:21 AM
There is a fundamental conflict of interest in such leagues. Presumably, every good trade benefits both sides to the trade, by which I mean it makes both teams stronger. As an owner of a fantasy team, it is my duty to compete to the fullest. I must always try to gain every advantage for my own team, and do whatever I can to disadvantage all of the other teams. So, it's to my advantage to veto every good trade.
Now, it may be to my advantage to also veto certain bad trades in which one side gains a lot and the other side loses, such as if the gaining side is ahead of me or slightly behind me in the standings. That's besides the point. What I'm saying is that it ALWAYS benefits me to vote to veto every good trade, i.e. every trade in which both sides benefit.
Yet the point of allowing owner vetoes is presumably so that they will vote to veto only very bad trades.
So, as an owner in a league allowing owner vetoes, whenever a good trade is made, I am always in a position where I am either undermining the point of the rule allowing owner vetoes by voting to veto the good trade, or violating my own duty to compete to the fullest by not voting to veto the good trade.
The Commissioner is charged with looking out for the best interests of the league, and it is the Commissioner's duty, alone, to ensure that trades meet the League's standards, whatever they may be. The owners are in charge of trying to win the championship, and making any legal maneuvers they can that will help them to do so.
It is stupid to allow owners to veto trades. But it is truly ridiculous for there to not even be an option of not allowing the other owners to veto trades.
Thanks,
OOFFL Commissioner