Owner mad about trade, drops every player on their team

Pretty much what the title says. An owner (who’s in first!) is mad about a trade, so they decided to drop every player from their roster just now.

Our commish is in the UK, so likely asleep. We’re unsure how to proceed with this.

Does someone else want to be temporary co-commissioner? They could remove this user from the team and add all the players back.

And he’s in first place? How f’ing weird.

I think we’ll wait until morning because the waivers won’t run by the time he can hop on and reverse it.

I’m thinking we’ll find a new owner and then just carry on? The team is definitely at a disadvantage with innings but will likely cash and could have finished first if they were willing to make win-now moves.

1 Like

It’s not weird by any means.

The league is more crooked than a 3-dollar bill.

There was admitted dirty tactics/collusion … Both in chat and e-mail to me.

Multiple owners admitted that the goal was to force me to make trades.

The focus on my complaint of a trade is NOT the issue.

Even though, several people in the chat acknowledged the trade wasn’t good. They landed on “owners can manage rosters however they want.”

So … to prove the hypocrisy, I cut all the players and wrote that I was focused on '23.

I just built the team in '21 … Why not do it again?

That resulted in this complaint post by the other owner and me being banned from league.

There is anger in the league … But not from me.

I’m not sure what you are calling hypocrisy here. “Owners can manage rosters however they want” is pretty much spot on. Unless there’s more to the story, two managers making a trade you don’t like and other managers saying “yeah it’s not good but it’s not illegal” is sorta…normal? Maybe I’m missing something, but nothing you described seems problematic.


An owner posted in league chat that “(me) could not finish first with that much surplus value.”

Then, proceeded to trade with the recipient of the first trade.

If that isn’t dirty tricks / collusion … Not sure what is around here.

Then … They get upset and ban me because I want to cut my players and start over in '23.

There’s hypocrisy … some owners can do as they wish, others cannot.

So two teams made a deal - one of them tried to get better this year and the other tried to push the trade market and give themselves a better shot to win next year? That seems pretty acceptable to me. Cutting all your dudes to prove a point is certainly the worse/more destructive/more problematic thing to do.


I mean, there is big a difference between trading Woodruff for Baz vs. dropping your entire team to the waiver wire.

Just to be explicitly clear, none of this falls even close to the idea of collusion. Collusion happens in secret without full disclosure. One team publicly announcing their intentions means by definition this cannot be collusion.

Examples of what is collusion around here include one person controlling 2 teams and not telling anyone, or executing a trade where one side gives the other side $5 in cash off platform without telling anyone.

Still not seeing the issue. A manager made it publicly known that he was willing to make a trade to help someone else compete, in order to force you to make more moves. Then he did made a trade to help someone else compete and hoped to force you to make more moves. Is that about it?

1 Like

What was the trade?

1 Like

Doesn’t really matter, no trade warrants this kind of response.

Gonna lock this thread, not sure there’s more to be said about this.