me too....but i have been in one league where vetoes are crazy.
it is a league where you get one move/week so this week i used my move to pick up edelman. ...and dropped my defense...i had a trade accepted where i gave up greg jennings and my K for another guy's kicker and 2nd def.....vetoed....LOL....that other team was 1st place and my team is pretty stacked as well...pretty funny to me...used to make me mad but whatever.
ok fw, i'm going to come clean...there was some collusion but i don't think it counts....depends how you look at that term
we have one move a week...i used mine to get edelman....dropped my defense fully prepared to run without a defense....
anyways...i saw someone that was the leader wasn't going to use their pick. I told him if he picked up a defense i'd trade him greg jennings for it. he said if i also swap kickers....so thats what he did...picked up a d, then we traded
is that collusion? I think it is as much collusion as a sign and trade...we aren't roster dumping or anything....we both still want to win over the other guy
we have one move a week...i used mine to get edelman....dropped my defense fully prepared to run without a defense....
anyways...i saw someone that was the leader wasn't going to use their pick. I told him if he picked up a defense i'd trade him greg jennings for it. he said if i also swap kickers....so thats what he did...picked up a d, then we traded
is that collusion? I think it is as much collusion as a sign and trade...we aren't roster dumping or anything....we both still want to win over the other guy
Yeah that's not collusion, collusion would be you are out of it and agree to trade your team away to your buddy so he wins and you get a cut.
I can see that trade being vetoed though, a DEF for a decent WR just seems strange to me. But the 1 move per week thing does make it a little more understandable why you'd want to do that.
FWIW I don't think it got vetoed cause people were afraid it would make 1st place better per se, it just looks like a kinda fishy trade honestly.
I can see that trade being vetoed though, a DEF for a decent WR just seems strange to me. But the 1 move per week thing does make it a little more understandable why you'd want to do that.
FWIW I don't think it got vetoed cause people were afraid it would make 1st place better per se, it just looks like a kinda fishy trade honestly.
I was giving up:
Phil Dawson
Greg Jennings
He was giving up:
Miami
Justin Tucker
It was worth it for me....league is only 10 deep and the scoring structure is diff so you want RBs in the flex....so only 2 WRs needed....my WR roster is:
Julian Edelman
Mike Wallace
Dwayne Bowe
Torrey Smith
Brian Hartline
Greg Jennings
I will never use Jennings....so I pretty much traded jennings for a second move in the week....(which was miami def).....now i feel bad cause other guy has 2 defenses....lol (lots of teams keep 2 def and k and idp because it sucks using your one move for the bye weeks)
Phil Dawson
Greg Jennings
He was giving up:
Miami
Justin Tucker
It was worth it for me....league is only 10 deep and the scoring structure is diff so you want RBs in the flex....so only 2 WRs needed....my WR roster is:
Julian Edelman
Mike Wallace
Dwayne Bowe
Torrey Smith
Brian Hartline
Greg Jennings
I will never use Jennings....so I pretty much traded jennings for a second move in the week....(which was miami def).....now i feel bad cause other guy has 2 defenses....lol (lots of teams keep 2 def and k and idp because it sucks using your one move for the bye weeks)
You wanted to trade for a defense and trade better kicker for a lesser kicker and also send him Greg Jennings.
I would send everyone who vetoed the trade a thank you letter.
