Post by The Ghost of Swo on Feb 27, 2008 2:16:24 GMT -5
I want to start off by saying this is in no way of my feelings toward any GM here. I think we have a good group of guys that are very knowledgeable. So please no one take offense to this, as it is not my intention to offend anyone I'm simply trying to figure out what is best for the league
I think it needs to be said that everyone realize, the purpose of a trade review panel, and the purpose of reviewing a trade. a trade review panel is set up, believe it or not to review trades. We vote on each trade that raises interest. If the panel votes that they feel the trade is in some way unfair, then the trade is invalid. It is not the sole decision of the league office. Its a collaborative decision.
I would now like to break down the different trade review approaches we have had. We started out leaving it up to the GMs in the league to bring up when trades are unfair and then vote upon them by themselves, with very little influence from the league office. I think we all remember what happened Grady Sizemore was traded for a Fenway frank and a bratwurst. We have heard a number of times how bad the Sizemore trade was, and trust us me and Ty realized this at the time, but the plan we had in place was the GMs decide what trades are unfair, no one brought it up for discussion at all. The Indians, after pillaging their team, left the league. and we had to convince someone to take over the team. It was about at this point Ty and I realized something had to change.
We decided we would be the ones to bring up trade fairness. Since we are already spending most of our free time on the boards (as I am writing this I'm neglecting 3 5 page papers and 2 tests i need to be getting ready for) making sure everything goes smoothly, it made sense for us to assume these responsibilities. What ensued was a 72 hour "fight" over the decision to start a conversation on a trade we thought seemed unfair.
After that we thought lets get a group of guys that everyone can agree on as quality GMs who are active, which is what i think we did no one really complained about the choices for the panel at least. And it seems the first time we void a trade we get a problem again.
What Ty and I want to know is does anyone here have any suggestions on what to do?
Many have said just let the GMs do whatever they want, well then we get pillaging of teams and certain teams turn into the Steinbrenner team. They get whoever they want and seemingly never give anything up. We tried to do it among me and Ty, people didn't like that. We tried a panel, we now have complaints about the way we are doing that.
So please tell me what to do. neither Ty or I have ever run a league like this, we are doing what we think is best for everyone, apparently we are dumber than i thought, which seems odd considering our combined level of academic success. But that is neither here nor there, this league is never going to succeed if GMs complain everytime a trade is vetoed, and it will most definitely not succeed if a couple teams are competing for the title every year.
I think it needs to be said that everyone realize, the purpose of a trade review panel, and the purpose of reviewing a trade. a trade review panel is set up, believe it or not to review trades. We vote on each trade that raises interest. If the panel votes that they feel the trade is in some way unfair, then the trade is invalid. It is not the sole decision of the league office. Its a collaborative decision.
I would now like to break down the different trade review approaches we have had. We started out leaving it up to the GMs in the league to bring up when trades are unfair and then vote upon them by themselves, with very little influence from the league office. I think we all remember what happened Grady Sizemore was traded for a Fenway frank and a bratwurst. We have heard a number of times how bad the Sizemore trade was, and trust us me and Ty realized this at the time, but the plan we had in place was the GMs decide what trades are unfair, no one brought it up for discussion at all. The Indians, after pillaging their team, left the league. and we had to convince someone to take over the team. It was about at this point Ty and I realized something had to change.
We decided we would be the ones to bring up trade fairness. Since we are already spending most of our free time on the boards (as I am writing this I'm neglecting 3 5 page papers and 2 tests i need to be getting ready for) making sure everything goes smoothly, it made sense for us to assume these responsibilities. What ensued was a 72 hour "fight" over the decision to start a conversation on a trade we thought seemed unfair.
After that we thought lets get a group of guys that everyone can agree on as quality GMs who are active, which is what i think we did no one really complained about the choices for the panel at least. And it seems the first time we void a trade we get a problem again.
What Ty and I want to know is does anyone here have any suggestions on what to do?
Many have said just let the GMs do whatever they want, well then we get pillaging of teams and certain teams turn into the Steinbrenner team. They get whoever they want and seemingly never give anything up. We tried to do it among me and Ty, people didn't like that. We tried a panel, we now have complaints about the way we are doing that.
So please tell me what to do. neither Ty or I have ever run a league like this, we are doing what we think is best for everyone, apparently we are dumber than i thought, which seems odd considering our combined level of academic success. But that is neither here nor there, this league is never going to succeed if GMs complain everytime a trade is vetoed, and it will most definitely not succeed if a couple teams are competing for the title every year.
