|
Post by Rams GM (Frank) on Oct 9, 2018 16:01:32 GMT -5
Legacy GM's,
I have received an official appeal from a league member concerning the trade made between the Colts and the Seahawks this past Sunday, that could have implications on a score change that will affect the outcome of a game. Something like this has never happened before in Legacy NFL, and Im not sure Im a 100% comfortable, but I respect the appeals process of any league member who has a concern. I will let the Colts GM who filed the appeal make the case , and then the Cards GM will be allowed to respond. We will have a DOT vote on the matter, in which I will not be a part of. As your commissioner I will retain complete impartiality. This may seem strange to some people, but we have always been a league where we have encouraged members rights to appeal concerns they may have. I felt in this case that the Colts GM presents a passionate case that has a right to be heard. Bare in mind the implications here, a precedent that could result in a game change outcome.
Thanks
Frank
|
|
|
Post by Rams GM (Frank) on Oct 9, 2018 16:01:46 GMT -5
Colts GM has the floor...
|
|
|
Post by Colts GM (Darryl) on Oct 9, 2018 16:20:53 GMT -5
Colts GM has the floor... Thank you Frank, DOT Members, Recently I have submitted an appeal to the commissioner- which addressed making a retroactive change to the Week 5 Line-up of two teams, the Colts and the Seahawks. This change was requested regarding the recent trade between these teams and the appeal was based upon the time frame between the acceptance of the offer and the DOT's' late approval, which prohibited each team from making a timely change to their respective line-ups. I have also forwarded this request to the opposing teams, letting them know of my intentions because such a decision would also effect them. This is a competition, and there is no doubt that sometimes passions will run high. First of all it is important to understand that this is not a knock on the DOT, but a challenge to the process. In stating this I do not dispute the fact that the proposed trade sat in limbo about a week before its acceptance. Neither am I unaware of the fact that a proposed trade on game day may present its own set of issues. However I do not believe these facts to be contrary to my request. What is relevant, is that a cursory review of the League Rules say nothing about casting timely votes in order to process a trade once it is accepted. That said, let me also briefly reiterate the facts in support of the appeal. 1) the trade was accepted by the Hawks almost 3 hours before K/O of the evening game ((a)both players were playing in the late game, (b) the trade was accepted at 1:38 pm EST, while (c) the game started at 4:25 pm EST); Thus the question becomes, "Was this enough time to have the trade approved and for the teams to place their players into the line-up?" In support of the question, I offer the following facts: 2) the first vote was cast immediately following acceptance (1:45 pm EST); 3) at the time more than enough DOT's were online (continually on an off before K/O), but no other votes were cast; 4) the second vote was not cast until well after the game was started (5:25 pm EST); (this fact, in and of itself would support that the trade was not valid as it was not approved...however please see below) 5) although the second vote was vetoed, it is significant to mention the fact that the Hawks immediately responded to the request in the veto (5:36 pm EST) and that the vote was immediately recast as an approval (5:43 pm EST). (This speaks toward the intent Hawks had of placing the K into his starting line-up, and that had this vote been timely there would be no need to appeal. From the above set of facts, it could be arguably plausible that had the DOT, who was in position to timely vote, had cast a vote, there would be nothing to appeal as Seahawks would have placed their new PK into the starting line-up and won the game. So the retroactive placing of the players into the line-up, while literally placed after the game has started, would be merely a correction of what would have been had the DOT acted timely.
Thank you...I only ask that you consider answering the question proposed by number 1 above.
|
|
|
Post by Rams GM (Frank) on Oct 9, 2018 16:34:22 GMT -5
The Cards GM has the floor for a response...
|
|
|
Post by Bills GM (Anthony) on Oct 9, 2018 18:16:11 GMT -5
What trade are we talking about
|
|
|
Post by Colts GM (Darryl) on Oct 9, 2018 18:20:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Cardinals GM (Gremlin) on Oct 9, 2018 19:25:16 GMT -5
Im not going to get too passionate about this, it would obviously suck if I pull a loss out of this. What i will do is stay consistent in my approach, something that has made me the bad guy in previous votes and caused passionate responses (See Clay Mathews).
A 32 team salary dynasty league is as big as FFB gets, and this league imo has set the standard for that and has actually achieved parody in 2018. A 365 game of personal responsibility with the owners working in the interest of the league. That said, it appears the DOT votes lagged, but that could also be a merit from the trade acceptance lingering on the board 4 days later,.. on game day. So there isnt a single party at fault, but a chain of failures and that is likely why we now have this thread. There isnt a move that will make all parties happy.
Now there isnt a rule in place this type of situation, but we now have a new exploit. Make a trade, let the other party post it, and accept it days later prior to the game, play both sides if the outcome of the game changes. We might have to have a gameday/Sunday rule, and maybe restrict it to Sundays while Thursdays are more murky because most players who are injured are known to be in or out by Saturday night.
|
|
|
Post by Rams GM (Frank) on Oct 9, 2018 19:50:00 GMT -5
I want to thank Gremlin for his thoughtful response, now we will open the discussion for all league members for the next 24 hours before a vote.
|
|
|
Post by Broncos GM (Kevin) on Oct 10, 2018 4:19:55 GMT -5
Tricky one, I play in 8 of these and as a rule I play within the constraints of the league which includes slow at times trade approvals and roster updating on MFL, we can't expect 24/7 service from Admin. So should we just take it on the chin? Maybe a weekly trade deadline ...Say Friday night at Midnight ET..If the trade is posted and agreed by that point then that gives TAB and Admin a good amount of time to approve/veto and get the trade cleared on MFL Also how late is late ..in an ideal world as FF GM's we should all be on line 1 hour before KO on a Sunday adjusting line ups, reacting to late inactives but we also have to live in the real world so Trade may get put through 10 minutes after GM has looged off for the final time before kick off. (I run a few leagues and often get a message to install player B if player A can't go as "I'm not around" Which I'm happy to do ...if I'm around I'm not sure what page we open as GMs when we first log on to proboards but for TAB and Admin at least it should be legacynfl.boards.net/threads/recentAs that is an instant view of anything they may have to deal with. I'm assuming this is everyones first stop and not just the home page or team page. I'm wondering if TAB/ADMIN don't notice ongoing trades at times. There does seem to be a lot of TAB on at times who seldom respond to a trade...If you see a trade and want to think about it maybe post that. This though wasn't a contentious trade just one of those that needed a quick and simple pass
|
|
|
Post by Jaguars GM (Shane) on Oct 10, 2018 11:03:08 GMT -5
"Thus the question becomes, "Was this enough time to have the trade approved and for the teams to place their players into the line-up?"
No.
First - This would not be an issue if the trade partners had acted with the quickness now expected from the DOT. This issue isn't about the DOT, it's about what we owe each other when trading.
Second - changing wins into losses should be reserved for cases of cheating or some other unforgivable sin. To do so for any other reason opens a can of worms and affects the credibility of the league long term.
Third - on one hand we suffer a crisis of confidence because DOT is rubber stamping trades. On the other, this trade deserved the rubber stamp because fairness. My understanding has been that there is an unwritten rule (for a free league run by volunteers) that trades not completed by Saturday noon likely won't be reflected on Sunday's line ups. That unwritten rule should be written and added to the league rules.
I respect Daryl's opinion, but the DOT works in its own time frame. Lord knows we are spoiled with the incredible work done by Greg, Blaine and Frank. While there may be an unreasonable LENGTH of time a completed trade lingers, expectations of DOT acting within hours to finalize trades before KO is an impossible standard to meet consistently and only ensures this issue returns (along with the destabilizing prospect of again changing wins into losses).
I vote NO.
|
|
|
Post by BuccaneersGM (Greg) on Oct 10, 2018 11:32:00 GMT -5
I play in 5 of these 32 team leagues and help out with processing and administration in 3 of the 5. Saturday evenings and Sunday mornings are pretty hectic getting everything processed prior to game time but it usually gets done. I remember checking in on this trade a number of time to see if it had been accepted, but it had not. Unfortunately, many of use log in Sunday morning to make sure that our line-ups are set and any injured players are replaced. We really don't look at trade approvals first. From an administrative standpoint, I do my best to process any approved last minute trades and free agent wins.
I personally don't feel that setting a trade deadline of Friday or Saturday works well. I have this in one league I administer and it creates more problems and hard feelings than it solves. I sincerely think that it becomes incumbent on the two GMs involved in the trade to notify the league managers and/or TAB that they intend on using the trade players in this week's line-up. That way everyone is aware that the trade needs to be pushed through quickly. As an administrator in three leagues, I do these push throughs almost weekly when I know about them. In this case the trade was not approved by game time and no notification was sent. While the TAB has an obligation for timely approval, without notice it can just not be instantaneously. While I understand the Colts & Seahawks disappointment in not being able to use the players, I don't feel that it would be fair to change out the players after the games occur. I would vote No on this appeal.
|
|
|
Post by Lions GM on Oct 10, 2018 14:16:17 GMT -5
I have to vote no on this appeal.By noon on Sunday Im focused on making sure my lineups are set and players are active.I looked at the trade at least 20 times during the week to see if seahawks accepted.It was a last second acceptance to a trade that was posted for 4 days.i don't think it would be fair to take a win away from the cardinals,even though Im sick of him winning all the time
|
|
|
Post by Titans GM (Ricky) on Oct 10, 2018 16:45:37 GMT -5
I'm on the no side of this vote. I can understand where Colts are coming from and why would be worth consideration. Not exactly sure why we aren't hearing more from Seattle on this topic since they would be getting the win if changed. Yes DOT could have acted more swiftly in the vote but the accepting GM's had plenty of time to accept the trade prior to kick off. I use proboards to get to the MFL page. So even if I do login to proboards may not look at the site right then(as a DOT member I will try doing better job of checking those things). Especially when it's closing in on game time. I'm trying to double check multiple line ups in multiple leagues. I'm not sure it's necessarily fair to expect a quick approval from DOT when trade was sitting for 4 days. My biggest reason for the no vote is the long term issues that could arise once GM's learn can try debating your way through a changed win or loss. Seems to be a rare circumstance but still probably better we don't cross that road.
|
|
|
Post by Broncos GM (Kevin) on Oct 10, 2018 17:22:40 GMT -5
I also don't think the result should be altered if we're voting
|
|
|
Post by Bills GM (Anthony) on Oct 10, 2018 17:24:23 GMT -5
I don’t think results should change, As much as we’d all love deals to be voted as quickly as possible.., that it just simply doesn’t happen...for a variety of reasons Trades can only be officially processed on MFL after we have three votes.
|
|