Cactus Jack wrote: azcatz11 wrote:
I'm good with this. I usually never veto any trades anyways. I assume we are all grown men making the best decisions for our team. As long as no blatant collusion i'm good with it lol
Iâ€™m not accusing anyone of collusionâ€¦but sometimes managers truly donâ€™t have their best interest at heart (sometimes they donâ€™t realize it)
Have many votes would you recommend (Veto)? 2, 3? Or more?
If we do move to a vote based system. I vote at least 4 people have to veto.
10 teams - 2 involved in the trade.
Should be at least minimum of 50% of the teams not included in the deal. (but I generally hate allowing teams to veto)
Not pinpointing AZ but in his mind he would have vetod the deal because he felt that he offered you a better deal. That to me is not even close to grounds for veto. Its not even disagreeing with the trade, more so just that his deal wasn't accepted. Again, not picking on him, just in my 10 years of fantasy experience, I tend to see this is what happens. People won't allow the top dogs to trade because they don't want them to improve. Not because the trade was bad or unfair, just to spite them. Thats not cool.