People should be able to run their teams the way they want. Imagine if Chicago tried trading for Cutler, but other teams around the league vetoed it.
Let's say I have several good RBs, but need help at WR. So I trade one of my RBs for a similar valued WR. Maybe the other guy needs a RB badly, so it improves both teams. Now, if you're an opposing player trying to win, why would you NOT veto this trade?
By vetoing every trade that comes along, it improves your chances of winning, and people do just that. They abuse the veto like crazy, and why not? It's anonymous and there are no repercussions whatsoever.
If you end up in a veto-happy league you basically can't trade at all, no matter how equal the trade is. And you don't know how bad those veto-mongers will be until you've already joined, drafted, ect. This really is the worst part about some of the leagues here.
What about cheaters though? Well, it doesn't even help there. Someone with multiple accounts can time their trades, or just get vetoed and try again and again until it finally goes through.
Here's my solution: Trades go through instantly, no veto possible. Yet, the trade is reported/shown to all members, with a link next to it "Report if you suspect cheating"
The trade happens regardless, but if the person is reported and found to be cheating, all their accounts are banned and they are removed from possibly winning anything. This actually will deter cheaters AND still give regular rule-following members the freedom to run their team the way they see fit.
I have seen vetos because someone else wanted the player. Or because another owner was evaluating the needs of the teams rather than look at the trade on face value. IE: guy already has 3 stud WRs, but trades for another. Thats his business, if he trades a 3rd or 4th round pick for a Colston or similar, thats really not Veto worthy in a keeper league. A WR for a 4th or 3rd round pick, thats how that should be evaluated.
Or someone gets an extra draft pick for trading a player not on their Keeper roster that another owner wants. Some will veto in hopes that they can draft them instead. IE: if I am not keeping Colston and someone offers a 4th rounder for him instead of risking he goes in the first 3 rounds.
I have seen some people who veto everything. Just doesn't matter. If they aren't involved, they veto.
By the same token, there are trades that ARE out and out BS. Usually by collusion, or stupidity, or someone wants that player bad enough that they pay anything. Trades like these need to be vetoed for obvious reasons.
What I do now as the commish, is this. If a trade is vetoed, I want the parties who vetoed to give a valid, reasonable explaination as to why. Not some BS like, he doesn't need another WR, or I wanted that guy and he traded with someone else. Or my favorite, he's not on his keeper list.
If there are not enough legit reasons for the veto, I have the parties resubmit the trade and manually do it. If one owner continually vetoes trades with no explaination then they lose their rights at trades and vetoes for a given period of time in increasing sanctions. Where their vetoes do not count during that time, then they are not able to make trades themselves. If the abuse of this priviledge continues, they are removed in the off-season.
Sounds harsh I know, but unfortunately until flea gives commishoners the choice between veto system and commish approval for trades, I don't see another way.
On another site, I have it set as commish approval and I give all owners with a MB post the ability to contest any trade for 48 hours. It truly works out better that way.
Reading over your post, I think this is a solution that would work. It's basically a hybrid veto/commish system.
Whenever a trade is posted, all players can approve (with comment) or disapprove (again with comment). Also, the people trading can post comments to explain why they want to make the trade. Sometimes a trade looks stupid at first glance, but when the owner explains the reasons behind the trade, it makes more sense.
Now, the approves/disapproves have NO effect on canceling the trade. Ultimately, the commish decides to cancel it or not. The comments, though, would be very helpful to the commish when weighing all sides. Also in this system, the people that veto every trade with no reason would end up being ignored and wouldn't be a problem.
Trade a draft pick for favre 2 month's ago and it went through. The guy might have made a good deal. The commish does have final say and that's the way it should be, or you can just run away like you did.
LOL they seem to be under the presumption that my leagues are Democracies, when in fact they are benevolent dictatorships...muhahahahaha
j/k I have found that in custom leagues with solid owners MANY of these issues go away. Also, I don't usually have to play bad cop as the folks in the community have a good way of sniffing out BS and handling it. That is truly one thing this site has that others do not.
Also, when it comes to trade policies and scoring rules, etc. It usually is a good idea to build consensus. It is only when I have a rogue owner or two who upset the cart that I click the "restore commish powers" button.
One other bit of advice. I always leave the lower commish powers on. That way any time I make ANY change no matter how small, it registers in the log and generally I will post on the MB if it is something major that affects the league.
R0CKnR0LLASun 5/17/09 7:51 PM
Let's say I have several good RBs, but need help at WR. So I trade one of my RBs for a similar valued WR. Maybe the other guy needs a RB badly, so it improves both teams. Now, if you're an opposing player trying to win, why would you NOT veto this trade?
By vetoing every trade that comes along, it improves your chances of winning, and people do just that. They abuse the veto like crazy, and why not? It's anonymous and there are no repercussions whatsoever.
If you end up in a veto-happy league you basically can't trade at all, no matter how equal the trade is. And you don't know how bad those veto-mongers will be until you've already joined, drafted, ect. This really is the worst part about some of the leagues here.
What about cheaters though? Well, it doesn't even help there. Someone with multiple accounts can time their trades, or just get vetoed and try again and again until it finally goes through.
Here's my solution: Trades go through instantly, no veto possible. Yet, the trade is reported/shown to all members, with a link next to it "Report if you suspect cheating"
The trade happens regardless, but if the person is reported and found to be cheating, all their accounts are banned and they are removed from possibly winning anything. This actually will deter cheaters AND still give regular rule-following members the freedom to run their team the way they see fit.
VaBhodiWed 5/20/09 11:42 AM
I am implementing a new policy to deep-six it.
I have seen vetos because someone else wanted the player. Or because another owner was evaluating the needs of the teams rather than look at the trade on face value. IE: guy already has 3 stud WRs, but trades for another. Thats his business, if he trades a 3rd or 4th round pick for a Colston or similar, thats really not Veto worthy in a keeper league. A WR for a 4th or 3rd round pick, thats how that should be evaluated.
Or someone gets an extra draft pick for trading a player not on their Keeper roster that another owner wants. Some will veto in hopes that they can draft them instead. IE: if I am not keeping Colston and someone offers a 4th rounder for him instead of risking he goes in the first 3 rounds.
I have seen some people who veto everything. Just doesn't matter. If they aren't involved, they veto.
By the same token, there are trades that ARE out and out BS. Usually by collusion, or stupidity, or someone wants that player bad enough that they pay anything. Trades like these need to be vetoed for obvious reasons.
What I do now as the commish, is this. If a trade is vetoed, I want the parties who vetoed to give a valid, reasonable explaination as to why. Not some BS like, he doesn't need another WR, or I wanted that guy and he traded with someone else. Or my favorite, he's not on his keeper list.
If there are not enough legit reasons for the veto, I have the parties resubmit the trade and manually do it. If one owner continually vetoes trades with no explaination then they lose their rights at trades and vetoes for a given period of time in increasing sanctions. Where their vetoes do not count during that time, then they are not able to make trades themselves. If the abuse of this priviledge continues, they are removed in the off-season.
Sounds harsh I know, but unfortunately until flea gives commishoners the choice between veto system and commish approval for trades, I don't see another way.
On another site, I have it set as commish approval and I give all owners with a MB post the ability to contest any trade for 48 hours. It truly works out better that way.
R0CKnR0LLAThu 5/21/09 3:00 PM
Whenever a trade is posted, all players can approve (with comment) or disapprove (again with comment). Also, the people trading can post comments to explain why they want to make the trade. Sometimes a trade looks stupid at first glance, but when the owner explains the reasons behind the trade, it makes more sense.
Now, the approves/disapproves have NO effect on canceling the trade. Ultimately, the commish decides to cancel it or not. The comments, though, would be very helpful to the commish when weighing all sides. Also in this system, the people that veto every trade with no reason would end up being ignored and wouldn't be a problem.
scotto1959Thu 5/21/09 3:03 PM
scotto1959Thu 5/21/09 3:06 PM
scotto1959Thu 5/21/09 3:10 PM
mdriskellFri 5/22/09 8:36 AM
scotto1959Fri 5/22/09 10:52 AM
mdriskellFri 5/22/09 11:50 AM
R0CKnR0LLAThu 5/21/09 3:11 PM
1) (Default) Commish has final approval/disapproval on all trades.
2) Automatically push trades through with X number of Approves.
3) Automatically cancel trades with X number of Disapproves.
scotto1959Thu 5/21/09 3:13 PM
VaBhodiFri 5/22/09 3:15 AM
j/k I have found that in custom leagues with solid owners MANY of these issues go away. Also, I don't usually have to play bad cop as the folks in the community have a good way of sniffing out BS and handling it. That is truly one thing this site has that others do not.
VaBhodiFri 5/22/09 3:18 AM
One other bit of advice. I always leave the lower commish powers on. That way any time I make ANY change no matter how small, it registers in the log and generally I will post on the MB if it is something major that affects the league.