Welcome to the new Beta version of the MyFootballNow website! Please note that while using the Beta website, some features may not work correctly and other features are not complete. Some elements, such as notifications and chat, may act strangely during the time that both versions of the site are available. If you need to return to the old version, click on the button below.
Return to old website
People who liked this post
greyghost1225
Re: Concerns About Trading
by greyghost1225 @ 2/14/2019 2:20 pm
Pernbronze wrote:
greyghost1225 wrote:
This is true but that doesn't mean they want to not be allowed to if they want to. This isn't an exploit so there is no reason for the rule to apply to MFN but makes sense to have as an option for created leagues. I know I wouldn't touch a league like that with a 20 foot pole and would likely leave MFN if such a cap were put in place even though I don't think I've ever traded more than 15 times in a season myself, though I could be mistaken.

This is exactly why it should be league base. Myself, along with other owners(yes I have communicated with them) have seen certain leagues that we wouldn't get in due to certain individuals and their trades practices.

Then I'm confused what you are asking for since it's already possible.

I covered all of this in my initial proposal.
greyghost1225
Re: Concerns About Trading
by greyghost1225 @ 2/14/2019 2:20 pm
Pernbronze wrote:
greyghost1225 wrote:
Simple the current trade restrictions are in place to prevent collusion. This is as close as jbd could get to the NFLs anticollusion policies since it's impossible for him to investigate every trade from every platform of media. It also keeps newbies a little protected from more predatory expert players.

It may be the reason, but there is no way in the world they prevent collusion. There is absolutely nothing based under the current trade guidelines that in anyway resembles the NFL.

Prior to them being put in place a bit before your time I believe there were significant issues with owners working together to strip teams and make super teams. They do a very good job at preventing or at least limiting the worst of collusion by owners.

There still is, they are allowed to make 93 trades per season.
Pernbronze
Re: Concerns About Trading
by Pernbronze @ 2/14/2019 2:23 pm
greyghost1225 wrote:
Pernbronze wrote:
greyghost1225 wrote:
This is true but that doesn't mean they want to not be allowed to if they want to. This isn't an exploit so there is no reason for the rule to apply to MFN but makes sense to have as an option for created leagues. I know I wouldn't touch a league like that with a 20 foot pole and would likely leave MFN if such a cap were put in place even though I don't think I've ever traded more than 15 times in a season myself, though I could be mistaken.

This is exactly why it should be league base. Myself, along with other owners(yes I have communicated with them) have seen certain leagues that we wouldn't get in due to certain individuals and their trades practices.

Then I'm confused what you are asking for since it's already possible.

I covered all of this in my initial proposal.

So which is it? A ban on that amount of all MFN to punish those who like to trade or a request for it to be available to leagues which it already is?
Pernbronze
Re: Concerns About Trading
by Pernbronze @ 2/14/2019 2:26 pm
greyghost1225 wrote:
Pernbronze wrote:
greyghost1225 wrote:
Simple the current trade restrictions are in place to prevent collusion. This is as close as jbd could get to the NFLs anticollusion policies since it's impossible for him to investigate every trade from every platform of media. It also keeps newbies a little protected from more predatory expert players.

It may be the reason, but there is no way in the world they prevent collusion. There is absolutely nothing based under the current trade guidelines that in anyway resembles the NFL.

Prior to them being put in place a bit before your time I believe there were significant issues with owners working together to strip teams and make super teams. They do a very good job at preventing or at least limiting the worst of collusion by owners.

There still is, they are allowed to make 93 trades per season.

Not with one team and if it is collusion with the whole league behind it then it isn't collusion is it. Owners are not forced to accept any trade therefore potential trades is absolutely irrelevant.
greyghost1225
Re: Concerns About Trading
by greyghost1225 @ 2/14/2019 2:32 pm
Pernbronze wrote:
greyghost1225 wrote:
Pernbronze wrote:
greyghost1225 wrote:
This is true but that doesn't mean they want to not be allowed to if they want to. This isn't an exploit so there is no reason for the rule to apply to MFN but makes sense to have as an option for created leagues. I know I wouldn't touch a league like that with a 20 foot pole and would likely leave MFN if such a cap were put in place even though I don't think I've ever traded more than 15 times in a season myself, though I could be mistaken.

This is exactly why it should be league base. Myself, along with other owners(yes I have communicated with them) have seen certain leagues that we wouldn't get in due to certain individuals and their trades practices.

Then I'm confused what you are asking for since it's already possible.

I covered all of this in my initial proposal.

So which is it? A ban on that amount of all MFN to punish those who like to trade or a request for it to be available to leagues which it already is?

I never said ban, a ban refers to eliminating all trades. I never said punish, that means inflict a penalty on trades. I never said apply it to anything. I never said not to allow trades in any fashion. You can keep trying to spin it however you want for the crowd at home, it carries no weight with me. This hasn't been applied to anyone directly. This is strictly a proposal that either appeals to the direction MFN is going with their NFL thought approach or not.
greyghost1225
Re: Concerns About Trading
by greyghost1225 @ 2/14/2019 2:33 pm
Pernbronze wrote:
greyghost1225 wrote:
Pernbronze wrote:
greyghost1225 wrote:
Simple the current trade restrictions are in place to prevent collusion. This is as close as jbd could get to the NFLs anticollusion policies since it's impossible for him to investigate every trade from every platform of media. It also keeps newbies a little protected from more predatory expert players.

It may be the reason, but there is no way in the world they prevent collusion. There is absolutely nothing based under the current trade guidelines that in anyway resembles the NFL.

Prior to them being put in place a bit before your time I believe there were significant issues with owners working together to strip teams and make super teams. They do a very good job at preventing or at least limiting the worst of collusion by owners.

There still is, they are allowed to make 93 trades per season.

Not with one team and if it is collusion with the whole league behind it then it isn't collusion is it. Owners are not forced to accept any trade therefore potential trades is absolutely irrelevant.

If that is the case, allow me to trade with a team as many times as I want and as many players as I want. Don't act one way and talk another.
greyghost1225
Re: Concerns About Trading
by greyghost1225 @ 2/14/2019 2:39 pm
This has been fun, but my initial proposal stands as posted. Have a good day.
Pernbronze
Re: Concerns About Trading
by Pernbronze @ 2/14/2019 2:39 pm
It's not about which wording you use it's about what the results you are asking for are. Which putting a cap on the max number of trades a player can make is nothing more than punishing those who used that style by no longer allowing it. It is not an exploit and does not damage the integrity of the league so there is no reason to cap it and punish those who employ that strategy.
Pernbronze
Re: Concerns About Trading
by Pernbronze @ 2/14/2019 2:42 pm
greyghost1225 wrote:
Pernbronze wrote:
greyghost1225 wrote:
Pernbronze wrote:
greyghost1225 wrote:
Simple the current trade restrictions are in place to prevent collusion. This is as close as jbd could get to the NFLs anticollusion policies since it's impossible for him to investigate every trade from every platform of media. It also keeps newbies a little protected from more predatory expert players.

It may be the reason, but there is no way in the world they prevent collusion. There is absolutely nothing based under the current trade guidelines that in anyway resembles the NFL.

Prior to them being put in place a bit before your time I believe there were significant issues with owners working together to strip teams and make super teams. They do a very good job at preventing or at least limiting the worst of collusion by owners.

There still is, they are allowed to make 93 trades per season.

Not with one team and if it is collusion with the whole league behind it then it isn't collusion is it. Owners are not forced to accept any trade therefore potential trades is absolutely irrelevant.

If that is the case, allow me to trade with a team as many times as I want and as many players as I want. Don't act one way and talk another.

One team to one team or trading massive amounts unequally is the problem if you had read what was said about collusion.
greyghost1225
Re: Concerns About Trading
by greyghost1225 @ 2/14/2019 3:23 pm
Once again your personal building strategy is irrelevant. It is about what MFN is trying to accomplish. The trading rules right now are set up in a fantasy football format and does not reflect the NFL in any fashion. All of this was covered in the proposal. I don't believe in making rules for the minority of groups. It is the majority that is the most important. Once again, you can spin this however you want, which you seem to do. My original proposal states the facts. If the NFL and its structure, formats, financial model, strategy models are being used, then stick with it. Don't come back and justify something that is not in NFL format and use bs terms like collusion in a format that is not even similar to the NFL.
Last edited 2/14/2019 9:23 pm