The real solution to the C bidding issue is to abolish all 2 team managers. From our beginnings we have had 2 team managers. Those have always been need driven. Simply put we needed the managers to fill out the teams. We are no longer on a need basis. We have virtually no turnover and with proper notice could always find managers. The problem with 2 team managers has always been 2 fold. One, when they leave the league we have two holes to fill instead of one and two, the ever present potiential for conflicts in interest. I would hope that we would abolish all two team managers and grandfather in the current ones with emphasis on them setting a time limit that they would give up their other team. This position in no way infers that the current and most recent past two team managers have been anything but honorable, infact some of them should be applauded for their efforts many years ago problably saved the league from extinction. I know this position will not be popular with some two team managers and their are some two team managers who will moan and groan about "loving" all their players and not wanting to choose, but I say it's time for them to choose and move on. In the long run it will make the league stronger.
I second Ken's proposal. This league has continued to lose diversity as owners have left the league and those teams were passed on to other current owners. I think this has stagnated the league in the efforts of trades and the dynamics of league as managers tend to run both teams under the same style.
It's been brought to my attention over the past couple years from several managers how the league has become clickish in ways. Certain managers will only trade with their friends or somehow brothen-in-law certain deals with their buddies(I won't name names). When these actions are taken by managers of multiple teams then the opportunity to move players is limited greatly in the league as the number of possible teams to trade with is greatly limited. Just my two cents. But I do think more managers would make the league far more entertaining.
do we have a list of prospective gms who are wiating for a team but unable to get one? I remember when I was commish having to beg gms to keep or pick up a team so that all the teams would have gms.
As a two team manager I would be against giving up either one of my teams. As far as the trade scenario goes I think looking at my past track record of having more trades than just about anyone else in the league and trading with everyone disproves that theory. Further I believe there has to be a real problem to warrant a "real solution", do you really think the c issue is a problem? I mean we are talking about 150K and guys that no one else in the league wants. I enjoy drafting and trading even more than playing the games, so having two teams allows me to do more drafting and trading. As far as moaning and groaning goes it appears from this first message that it is a one team manager that is doing the complaining. I challenge anyone to tell me one time that I turned down a trade and told them "no I refuse to trade with you because you aren't my friend." Come one how old are we? I enjoy both of my teams and I think I do a good job handling both teams, both trading with the league and making my teams competitive. I don't see any reason why I should be forced to give up either one of my teams.
Jeff, I'm one of the managers who is guilty of what you're saying as far as making trades with a limited number of people. But the reason is pretty simple: most of the time I don't know what the hell I'm doing. I've asked potential trade partners to do some of my legwork for me, by giving me some of the pros and cons of doing the trade. That's a strange way of doing things - it requires my counterparty to negotiate strangely, to identify reasons why I might not want to do the trade. The people I've made the most trades with have been particularly good at explaining (or at least convincing me) why the trade may make sense.
On the other hand, there are a large number of people I'll probably never trade with, because I very rarely come up with proactive trade offers myself, and there are other managers who won't actively seek any of my players out. I can't fix that without doing more research than I have time for. So I don't really know how to solve that problem.
Well bro, you're not one of the ones I'm talking about. You make the most trades almost every year. I'm not claiming all managers are like this but it definitely exists. Now if you want to discount the argument b/c it allows you to argue your point in defense of owning two teams then do what you have to do. But you and I have had conversations about trading in the league so you know what I'm talking about.
As much as I would like for diversity to spread through the league, I feel there would be enough belly aching for me not to get in an argument over it b/c in the end I don't really care. I just think it would make the league more interesting.
I barely have enough time to deal with one team so I'm not going to tell people they should give up one if they have lots of time on their hand. I don't think anyone is moaning or groaning b/c it's merely an opinion. I could say you're moaning and groaning about him moaning and groaning based on your response b/c you're a two team manager. But then "how old would I be?"
It's just an opinion. IF it's a big deal then it will be brought up for a vote. I think by Monday all will be calm and no will care one way or the other.
I disagree that there is discrimination in who people trade with. NOBODY would trade with me this year. (practically) Between my two teams, (yes I'm one of those), I made three trades, all with Houston.
On the other hand, last year when I was semi-dismantling FTW, EVERYBODY (practically) wanted to trade. I think I set a personla single season record for trades last year.
My bottom line is I don't think anything is broke in relation to the C-auction or the trading. Two team managers are a necessary evil until the day comes we have one manager for every team. As for the clickishness (is that even a word?) of the league? There is a little of that along the lines of region and friends, who brought who into the league, etc. But eventhough that hurts my ability to make some trades, that is just the way life is. There are clicks at school, work, church, little league baseball, etc. The way to overcome the clicks is to reach out to the individuals who appear to be clickish and try and engage them in trade talk.
Okay that's about 5 cents worth and worth even less.
i am a 2 team owner...god i think manhatten made the most trades of any team...as for same manager mode for both teams...that isnt true...with jersey i am going with a veteran team...hopefully to be competive ...as for manhatten i am doing just opposite...i loaded on good minor league prospects trying to go that way
I used to be a two team manager and gave up the second team due to time constraints and the issue of having to split the unowned players I had researched between two teams. I don't have a problem with two team managers OR a manager bidding on an exposed player from his other team. The whole point of not allowing movement between two teams was due to the players not being exposed to the rest of league. In this case everyone has the same shot to purchase said player. As for two team managers, the current rule reads "Members managing two teams will be liable for the dues of two teams. Should they only wish to pay dues for one team, then the second team will be made available to GMs on the waiting list". A rule proposal would need to be made and passed in order to get a change. As far as I know, there is no waiting list. My personal preference would be that if that were to exist, we could get two team managers to give up one of their teams. Without a rule change, I don't see being able to enforce that.
I feel the bigger issue is what has been mentioned in some of the posts above. There are definitely brother in law deals made in this league. I HAVE reached out to other managers in an attempt to make a trade for a player that has been put on the block. I know that trade value is subjective, but there have been several instances where offers have been made (by myself or someone else I know) only to be dismissed as not worthy and the player of interest seems to always wind up on another member of the "clique". I even know of conversations where the manager says "That sounds good to me, but I want to get an opinion from someone else". Only to see someone else wind up with the player. I won't name names but this exists and if anyone wants to deny it they are either very naive or refuse to admit it because they don't want to make waves. I have seen buddies trade players coming off A contracts to each other to stack one team and then turn around and stack the other team the next year. Sometimes by trading the same player back to the original team as a non-A player. All of this is within the rules of the league, although I am not sure it is ethically within the rules. Some managers will twist whatever rule they can to win at all costs. I have accepted this as being a part of the league because I can't think of a way to fix it, but equal access to all players thru trades does not exist.
Some how we have transgressed to trading. My point is VERY simple. Two team managers have built in confilcts in interest. Thats not evil its just not in the absolute best interst of the league. The subject of trading is a VERY, VERY slippery slop and should be approached with the greatest of caution. There have been many trades through the years that I have considered to be "What the Hell!". But, beauty and value are in the eye of the beholder. There are many reasons why trading has become more difficult. The internet has lessened the need for direct telephone communications, fewer full time players due to to fewer players playing hurt, consistently poor pitching leading to constant needs for pitching and more part time players because of more and more players being called up and sent down during the season. I restate my original position that out of ALL the current and most recent past two team managers they have all be honorable and only doing what is best for their prospective teams. We do not need a rule to force 2 team managers out of exsistence we need for each one to be able to say I'll give up this team if a manager can be found. I challange all two team managers to make that committment, if they do not want to I do not propose that we make them.
YOu know an interesting angle on this is my situation.
I have had two teams in ARBA since oh maybe 1990. When I left the league for three years, others took my teams. When I returned, I picked up FTW again. Being insane about this league like I am, I asked if any two team managers wanted to give up one of them so I could have two again. Of course someone was happy to relinquish the added burden of running two teams. So, Even after being gone for a period, I was able to come back and pick up two teams with no problem. It is just the way it is. And it is necessary. I like having two teams, for all the reasons others have stated. I don't think it will change unless we get an influx of new blood.
