Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Official Offseason Mock Trade Revision Thread


  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

Poll: What direction should we go in? (18 member(s) have cast votes)

What direction should we go in?

  1. Leave trades alone. (6 votes [33.33%])

    Percentage of vote: 33.33%

  2. Review questionable trades. (6 votes [33.33%])

    Percentage of vote: 33.33%

  3. Restart mock. (6 votes [33.33%])

    Percentage of vote: 33.33%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 Carolina Crazy V2

Carolina Crazy V2

    !

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,417 posts

Posted 06 February 2010 - 11:52 PM

Lately, there has been a lot of questions of how unrealistic some trades are. It has gotten to the point where order needs to be restored. If the majority of GMs vote for one of these 3, we will go in that direction. I felt that there are three directions that we can go with this:

1) Leave all trades as they are, it's fantasy.
2) Review all Questionable Trades and Veto unrealistic ones.
3) Start new Mock in which I'll be much less lenient with using vetoes.

#2 R0CKnR0LLA

R0CKnR0LLA

    Drunk Posting

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,907 posts
  • LocationLas Vegas, NV

Posted 07 February 2010 - 12:15 AM

Start a new mock.
Allow only trades of draft picks.
Link a Draft Pick Value Chart and make sure every trade is reasonably close in value.

#3 KBRed

KBRed

    Scooter Swag

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,946 posts

Posted 07 February 2010 - 12:32 AM

Honestly, I might get a lot of crap for this, but it's fantasy, your a GM of a 'fantasy' team. This is in no way realistic. If it was realistic I would be fired...maybe. You are either trying to make your team better through trades or through draft picks. If you don't make your team better then, you in turn lose. But, I got crap for trading for Brett Favre b/c he would retire in two years. Great, I have him for the one year that I need him. Again, it's FANTASY, not the real deal.

Edited by KBRed, 07 February 2010 - 12:36 AM.


#4 PantherBrew

PantherBrew

    Educated White Trash

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,034 posts

Posted 07 February 2010 - 12:42 AM

I like it the way it is, if we change it then it will set a bad precedent.

We all knew the rules when we agreed to this league, and just because some people are mad they couldnt get the better end of trades like some have (myself included). They are made and wanna scream about it being "unrealistic" .

It will be sad if we revamp and start this league over because some of these trades are unrealistic. It is a fantasy league. IMO the fun in this comes from getting to do these trades that dont happen in the real NFL. If we are going to have boring "Carolina Panthers" offseason GM league, then I dont see the point. We might as well just watch what the real NFL does this year.

People who are demanding a league change are looking like cry babies.

#5 RedMage138

RedMage138

    YES!YES!YES!

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,533 posts

Posted 07 February 2010 - 01:17 AM

I think some need to be reviewed, but don't restart the whole thing.

#6 PantherBrew

PantherBrew

    Educated White Trash

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,034 posts

Posted 07 February 2010 - 01:20 AM

Keep this league.

and start a new one just for the draft and draft pick trading.

#7 Urrymonster

Urrymonster

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,264 posts

Posted 07 February 2010 - 08:32 AM

Personally I feel the vast majority of trades have been fair and rather interesting to watch. The ones in question are genuinely in the minority, but they were significantly unbalanced to the extent it ws hard to fathom why they were done.

I would most likely disagree with a reload as most GMs here have done pretty good things and shaped their teams into what, it would be somewhat unfair to the guys who have done a great job.

There is a great feeling when you feel you get 'one over' on a trade over another team, or if you manage to get a young gem from another team for next to nothing. Analysing each trade under a microscope would likely take a lot of the fun out of it as you would always be trading players for face value.

Sometimes players will give up more to get a specific player, or a few high profile players to generally make their team more rounded. So, removing that, will make no teams get a net gain as they will always be traded things of equal value.

I think for the really questionable ones, just have a few GMs flag it and it can be reviewed. No need to do this for everything.

#8 Carolina Crazy V2

Carolina Crazy V2

    !

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,417 posts

Posted 07 February 2010 - 10:35 AM

Would everyone be satisfied if I moved up the draft date and then started a new Mock soon after. I'm not sure what the trading rules would be for that one, but I would leave less time for trading so that we could get the draft done around the same time as the actual draft.

#9 RedMage138

RedMage138

    YES!YES!YES!

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,533 posts

Posted 07 February 2010 - 11:35 AM

You can't have the draft before the combine though

#10 Urrymonster

Urrymonster

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,264 posts

Posted 07 February 2010 - 11:56 AM

Would everyone be satisfied if I moved up the draft date and then started a new Mock soon after. I'm not sure what the trading rules would be for that one, but I would leave less time for trading so that we could get the draft done around the same time as the actual draft.


I would not change the time scale. You had the initial flurry of trades, but since then there has been just the occassional agreement. This is not to say there isn't things going on though. A lot of people will be jostling for position in the draft to get the guy that will complete the roster etc...

I think it would be a shame to change teh structure and the results of what we have done thus far.

Personally, I think only a couple of trades were eligible for review, most of the 'dodgy' trades were just lack of judgement by one GM. By all means review these particular ones.

#11 X-Clown

X-Clown

    Positive Polly

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,194 posts

Posted 07 February 2010 - 01:04 PM

I would not change the time scale. You had the initial flurry of trades, but since then there has been just the occassional agreement. This is not to say there isn't things going on though. A lot of people will be jostling for position in the draft to get the guy that will complete the roster etc...

I think it would be a shame to change teh structure and the results of what we have done thus far.

Personally, I think only a couple of trades were eligible for review, most of the 'dodgy' trades were just lack of judgement by one GM. By all means review these particular ones.


This.

#12 kman72

kman72

    Sports Maniac

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,061 posts
  • LocationNC

Posted 07 February 2010 - 01:57 PM

the main problem with reviewing certain trades is that many teams that may have a questionable trade, may not do the next trade without the questionable one going through? for example im the eagles, i traded jeremy maclin. for a rb benie wells, but if i hadnt already aquired devin hester and roddy white to boost the recivers i never would have moved him......

im sure this will occur alot for many teams like chargers, colts, vikings

#13 DynastyRTR

DynastyRTR

    newnfldraft.com writer

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,570 posts
  • LocationGeorgia

Posted 07 February 2010 - 02:27 PM

the main problem with reviewing certain trades is that many teams that may have a questionable trade, may not do the next trade without the questionable one going through? for example im the eagles, i traded jeremy maclin. for a rb benie wells, but if i hadnt already aquired devin hester and roddy white to boost the recivers i never would have moved him......

im sure this will occur alot for many teams like chargers, colts, vikings


it would be too confusing reviewing all of the trades and finding out who has what pick because in a trade, there could have been a draft pick and then that person traded it, etc. the best thing to do would be restart

#14 PantherBrew

PantherBrew

    Educated White Trash

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,034 posts

Posted 07 February 2010 - 02:49 PM

I would not change the time scale. You had the initial flurry of trades, but since then there has been just the occassional agreement. This is not to say there isn't things going on though. A lot of people will be jostling for position in the draft to get the guy that will complete the roster etc...

I think it would be a shame to change teh structure and the results of what we have done thus far.

Personally, I think only a couple of trades were eligible for review, most of the 'dodgy' trades were just lack of judgement by one GM. By all means review these particular ones.



So let me get this straight.

We are going to punish GM's because they got the better end of a trade?
and reward the GM's who made bad moves by revoking the "dumb" trades.

Okay, this is the same thing thats going on Wall-street. We are rewarding failure by giving them another chance and "bailing" them out, and then punishing success of those who play by the rules and just happen to get the better end of the deal.

I dont think any of the trades should changed, but you cant just review certain ones. That is so subjective. Either revoke all trades and start over, or dont mess with it.

"Its not fair! Im not smart enough to get a trade like that so no one else should!":incazzato:

#15 CaliPanthers

CaliPanthers

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 677 posts

Posted 07 February 2010 - 02:50 PM

CrimsonTide, you are the one that has made the most dramatic trades and now you want to restart?

I say we review the trades that are questionable or just leave as is.



If we change the schedule of this process and start another one, are you still gonaa run a Madden Sim, or is this just all for nothing?


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.