The Veto Rule

Post Reply  
User avatar
Supreme Megalodon
Posts: 61691
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009
Sand$: 32,272.84
Yeah, I'd let the initial trade stand. Then kick them out of the league after the season is over.
User avatar
Megalodon
Posts: 15929
Joined: Sat Oct 19, 2002
Sand$: 52,998.36
Yup. They're stuck with the original trade. Disallow the trade back.
_______________________________________

canadianraiderfan wrote:Everybody used to have the coolest sigs on this site.... hardly anybody has them anymore.... did I miss the memo or something?
Leopard Shark
Posts: 165
Joined: Sat Sep 5, 2009
Sand$: 411.10
Thanks everyone! I've never used a veto and wanted to get some opinions before doing so, appreciate the input!
Chum
Posts: 32
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2018
Sand$: 104.62
I run a 10 team league that needs only 4 vetoes to bring it to the commissioners attention. Perhaps that would help.
User avatar
Great White Shark
Posts: 5475
Joined: Wed Sep 7, 2011
Sand$: 9,817.13
rpglantz4 wrote:I run a 10 team league that needs only 4 vetoes to bring it to the commissioners attention. Perhaps that would help.

You should definitely look at the other collusion/veto threads here. Not having vetoes at all would be better. Collusion should be the only reason to disallow a trade. Other teams valuations of players and trades are completely meaningless at best and self-interested at the worst.
User avatar
Great White Shark
Posts: 2110
Joined: Fri Sep 9, 2005
Sand$: 6,241.14
NautArch wrote:
rpglantz4 wrote:I run a 10 team league that needs only 4 vetoes to bring it to the commissioners attention. Perhaps that would help.

You should definitely look at the other collusion/veto threads here. Not having vetoes at all would be better. Collusion should be the only reason to disallow a trade. Other teams valuations of players and trades are completely meaningless at best and self-interested at the worst.


Geez, how is it that we're still on this? Can you imagine the NFL allowing trade vetoes by the other teams?
_______________________________________

OMITB Champion: 2004, 2005, 2007, 2015, 2016
CFL Champion: 2009, 2013, 2014, 2016, 2017
TSN 14971 Champion: 2003
Yahoo 1472355 Champion: 2014

"Best available kicker and the Colts D." Rest in peace, Ken.
Chum
Posts: 32
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2018
Sand$: 104.62
kkiddynamite21 wrote:Recently in one of my leagues these two trades were shot down... Personally Ive never been a fan of the veto bc it allows people to abuse it and control trades. Ive always felt that if something was way off or collusion was happening the league could speak up and commish could handle it. Wanted to get everybodys thoughts on this matter. After I really thought about it veto can really make/break a persons roster or at least have a bug outcome on their team/season.

Team A gives Julio/Chris Thompson

Team B gives Kerryon/Chris Warren

Team A gives Crabtree

Team B gives 19 1st(same team B as above that was set to receive Julio/Warren)

Team B obv attempting to upgrade the WR position..

I thought it was a steal for Julio and I wouldnt pay a 19 1st for Crabtree but I can see a scenario where if he performs well this year a team making a run would overpay for him. Just bc a trade is viewed as a “bad” trade doesnt mean its unfair. I made a bad trade in the same league but was in talks with several other owners and there were a lot of moving pieces. Not to get off subject but I made a “bad” trade and sold Brady/Alshon/19 1st for Mariota/Golladay/2.09(Burton) imo that trade was worse than either of the above trades. Im no fan of Alshon and it was a bad time to sell him but hes worth a late 1st... My team was in rebuild and I made a bad trade tk make a good one but walked away from the draft very happy.. is it time to get rid of the veto rule?



In my 10 team league, 4 vetoes will bring the trade to my ( as commissioner) attention, and I will decide accordingly. Unless I'm involved in the trade then the co-commissioner will decide.

The following comes straight from my league's constitution. Being as after a trade is agreed to, other teams can make "counter trades" this may alleviate your problem.

Trades

Owners can trade each NFL player only once per season and this includes the Regular Season and Postseason. Once a trade is agreed to and in the two day review period, the only way it can be cancelled, without a counter-trade being accepted, is if both owners agree to cancel it.

Owners will have a two day review period, to allow or veto each trade. If a trade has 3 or less vetoes, it will go through. If it has 4 or more vetoes, it will go to the Commissioner's attention for review. The owners that vetoed the trade must give a written explanation as to their reasoning to the Commissioner, within 24 hours of their veto. The Commissioner will decide, if the trade goes through.

In addition, all teams will be able to offer a counter-trade, to replace the original. For example, if team A and team B agree to a trade and team C makes a better offer to team A, and team A accepts prior to the two day review period expiring, then team A's trade with team B won't be completed and team A and team C will trade players. If team D makes a better offer to team A before the two day review period expires with team C, and team A accepts, then team A and team D will trade players. There is no limit to how many counter-trades can be made, as long as each two day review period has not expired.

All trades must be agreed to and under review by 12:00am Thursday of Week 12 (Thanksgiving Day), in order to be completed.
Chum
Posts: 32
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2018
Sand$: 104.62
gharmison wrote:I think I may have an issue with a trade in a league that I run but wanted to get the tanks thoughts before speaking up. There was a trade made last week and then traded back this week. Team A was in 7th place (5-3) at the original trade and Team B was in 12 place (3-5) and playing the 8th place team (4-4). Team B had their QB on bye so they traded Team A Baltimore defense for Mariota. This morning they then traded back so my thought is possible collusion from Team A in order to make Team B better when playing the team behind Team A in the standings. There seems to be no benefit of this move for Team A other than to hope that they beat the 8th place team to put them further behind them in the standings. Thoughts?


In my 10 team league, 4 vetoes will bring the trade to my ( as commissioner) attention, and I will decide accordingly. Unless I'm involved in the trade then the co-commissioner will decide.

The following comes straight from my league's constitution. Being as after a trade is agreed to, other teams can make "counter trades" this may alleviate your problem.

Trades

Owners can trade each NFL player only once per season and this includes the Regular Season and Postseason. Once a trade is agreed to and in the two day review period, the only way it can be cancelled, without a counter-trade being accepted, is if both owners agree to cancel it.

Owners will have a two day review period, to allow or veto each trade. If a trade has 3 or less vetoes, it will go through. If it has 4 or more vetoes, it will go to the Commissioner's attention for review. The owners that vetoed the trade must give a written explanation as to their reasoning to the Commissioner, within 24 hours of their veto. The Commissioner will decide, if the trade goes through.

In addition, all teams will be able to offer a counter-trade, to replace the original. For example, if team A and team B agree to a trade and team C makes a better offer to team A, and team A accepts prior to the two day review period expiring, then team A's trade with team B won't be completed and team A and team C will trade players. If team D makes a better offer to team A before the two day review period expires with team C, and team A accepts, then team A and team D will trade players. There is no limit to how many counter-trades can be made, as long as each two day review period has not expired.

All trades must be agreed to and under review by 12:00am Thursday of Week 12 (Thanksgiving Day), in order to be completed.
User avatar
Great White Shark
Posts: 4256
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009
Sand$: 7,302.76
und2006 wrote:Nothing but collusion should be vetoed.

We get 1000 of these threads a year. Leagues I commish in I rule on all trades, voting can just get petty. I appoint two others who can rule on trades I am involved in, so there is always an impartial person to approve or veto.

Never had a single issue.


This..

Trades should not be vetoed unless there is collusion and/or someone is picking on the 1st year FF manager or a child..

I'm in one league where there is a league vote and it's so ridiculous because nobody wants another teams to improve. EVERYTHING gets vetoed.

Imagine if the NFL did this... Our leagues are, after all, meant to be as close as possible to the real thing
_______________________________________

It is impossible to defeat an ignorant man in argument.
William G. McAdoo
User avatar
Great White Shark
Posts: 5475
Joined: Wed Sep 7, 2011
Sand$: 9,817.13
I think we should keep beating this horse.

There is NO good veto system. None. Nada. Zip.

DO NOT VETO UNLESS COLLUSION
Chum
Posts: 32
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2018
Sand$: 104.62
I agree that vetoes are meant for collusion, but without them the league is putting all the pressure on 1 person, the commissioner. Having the right rules is important, but having the right players is more important.
User avatar
Megalodon
Posts: 15929
Joined: Sat Oct 19, 2002
Sand$: 52,998.36
Pressure? There's not really much in the way of pressure.
_______________________________________

canadianraiderfan wrote:Everybody used to have the coolest sigs on this site.... hardly anybody has them anymore.... did I miss the memo or something?
User avatar
Great White Shark
Posts: 2110
Joined: Fri Sep 9, 2005
Sand$: 6,241.14
^ Totally agree with that.
_______________________________________

OMITB Champion: 2004, 2005, 2007, 2015, 2016
CFL Champion: 2009, 2013, 2014, 2016, 2017
TSN 14971 Champion: 2003
Yahoo 1472355 Champion: 2014

"Best available kicker and the Colts D." Rest in peace, Ken.