And it starts......

Discussion in 'Thread Archive' started by weblink21, Aug 24, 2010.

  1. weblink21

    weblink21 Walk On

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2009
    Messages:
    2,720
    And it starts......

    This is exactly what I wanted to avoid. Myself and Dunn have already heard from 2 owners, pepperlink included that have bitched that we are passing the commish's lopsided deals and not his. I knew this was going to happen. I called it yesterday. I think we either need to tell them to respect the results or let all trades go through. This is getting pretty old, pretty quick. We are damned either way and we are catching it in here and out there.
     
  2. DJDunn6

    DJDunn6 Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2010
    Messages:
    2,203
    I spoke to pepper they are coming back with another deal a little better player then Beckum we shall see. He said after talking to him he meant nothing by that comment was just busting on me but it is getting old fast with he and Dritsch not letting things go they have closure issues I think. LOL
     
  3. Emmdotfrisk

    Emmdotfrisk Working half days on my days off.

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Messages:
    11,955
    I tried to tell pepper it wasn't anything personal and regardless he was upset. I don't know, he is not as easy going as I am. Personally I think you guys are doing a good job. Whether you like it or not someone will be unhappy, thats what happens when you are in a competitive league. So if it is something you guys can't handle then I respect that and maybe we need to expand the trade committee to a larger group. I am just throwing out some ideas, but be prepared to catch some flak because we can't make everyone happy you know.
     
  4. Big D

    Big D Walk On

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Messages:
    4,398
    I am going to say this, and it it NOT going to be a popular opinion. . .I may lose respect form some people because of this but I will say it anyways.

    While I appreciate my trade being passed by Nate's ruling yesterday, I am a bit concerned with the micromanaging and undercutting we are doing to the trade committee. First of all tho, I'm not sure what Pepper and the other guy were bitching about because Frisk and Nate's first deal was denied. . .did he miss that?

    However I do see a big potential for issues here. Let's just look at a recent trade on its face:

    TEAM A SENDS:
    82 ovr

    PLAYER B SENDS:
    67 ovr
    68 ovr

    THAT is what we should judge a trade on, not the teams involved, not the player's name, not his speed rating. Just the OVRs. We have just opened up a door where Any mid 80's player can be traded for two mid 60s players. If I, as an owner, judge tackle rating to be as important as some guys think speed rating is, well now if that tackle rating is high even if the OVRs are low then I should be allowed to have a trade pass.

    Furthermore the above trade was passed unanimously while this trade was not:

    TEAM A:
    84 ovr
    77 ovr

    TEAM B:
    83 ovr
    75 ovr

    Again, I know I am not winning any friends here, but Weblink is pretty upset about this from how we've talked away from the forums. . .and rightfully so. We came into this new version saying that our trade committee would be tough. Really tough. We have stressed this over and over again, and then they get a couple board members mad at them when they deny a trade that was borderline. I'm kind of disappointed that non trade-committee guys trying to actively 'sell' their trade to the them.

    If you are asking for a solution, here is what I propose. . .from now on you DO NOT post teams, owners or names when discussing a trade in the board you simply post as I have above:

    TEAM A RECEIVES
    82 ovr
    77 ovr
    69 ovr

    TEAM B RECEIVES
    99 ovr
    92 ovr
    70 ovr

    Then you can have an UNBIASED debate, where no other factors are involved.
     
  5. weblink21

    weblink21 Walk On

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2009
    Messages:
    2,720
    Dunlap I repect you opinion and support buddy. I agree with everything you said. It is getting to the point that I don't want to decline a trade because someone will get pissed. Didn't think this commitee would turn me into a punching bag for the league. I am not even the head of this comittee and I'm taking a beating.
     
  6. Big D

    Big D Walk On

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Messages:
    4,398
    That's not Nate or anybody else's intention. I'm not questioning anybody's motives. . .I think we are truly a good bunch of guys who 95% of the time want whats best for the league. I just think sometimes our judgement gets clouded sometimes. . .

    I know mine did with the position changes and team swaps..... :D I'm not infallible (y)
     
  7. weblink21

    weblink21 Walk On

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2009
    Messages:
    2,720
    I didnt mean to insinuate that was Nate's intention. I looked at your example of:


    TEAM A RECEIVES
    82 ovr
    77 ovr
    69 ovr

    TEAM B RECEIVES
    99 ovr
    92 ovr
    70 ovr

    I still think I would have voted the same way on each of those trades yesterday. I like the idea alot though.
     
  8. natedawg212000

    natedawg212000 New Orleans Saints

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2009
    Messages:
    6,558
    plan and simple you can't just look at overall because then a 99 ov kicker is worth a 99 ov qb, or a 99 ov le is worth a 99 ov qb. you have to look at ratings, age, position, everything as a whole
     
  9. natedawg212000

    natedawg212000 New Orleans Saints

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2009
    Messages:
    6,558
    also we are all grown men here so don't pull this not naming teams stuff that you pulled dun, we all know you were talking about my deal. Bottom like is in REAL LIFE a probowl lt of the saints was traded for a 6th rounder. Our deals are way more even than that.
     

Share This Page