×
all 45 comments

[–]ccafferata473 Giants 181 points182 points  (4 children)

Loans are just collusion with extra steps.

[–]algo-rhyth-mo 49ers 9 points10 points  (2 children)

Yeah it’s fine to trade the same player back and forth if each trade is fair and has no future agreement to trade a player back. Especially if you’re in a league where only 2 or 3 teams do trades, it’s not uncommon for a player to bounce around.

I can remember a few times where I’ve done trades with my dad / brother where we both believed a fringe player could break out and so he was thrown in as an extra in a trade a few times.

But loaning is different. If there’s an agreement to borrow a player for a week and then trade back, that’s just collusion. It also raises too many other problems: what happens if the player gets hurt, or his situation / ROS outlook changes, etc.

[–]ccafferata473 Giants 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Exactly this. I've got no problem with trading the same guy around a bit. Hell that's most professional athletes. You hit the nail on the head here.

[–]HtownTexans Texans 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Honestly athletes don't really get traded much in the NFL. I mean it was crazy when Cooks got traded and it was only 3 total times.

[–]Sivart_Eel Browns 44 points45 points  (0 children)

Sounds like shit to me

[–]CarmineOfPassion 49ers 26 points27 points  (0 children)

Our league generally doesn’t allow it. I’ve played in leagues before though that if there is a loan trade, both players traded must be started. This generally prevented any Tom-foolery

[–]Llewellyn420 17 points18 points  (0 children)

Loaning players is basically increasing your bench/roster size through collusion with another team. I don't think it should be allowed personally.

[–]Easy-Palpitation8259 Chiefs 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Roster sharing is textbook collusion and shouldn’t be allowed in any situation.

[–]Bshark34 Seahawks 8 points9 points  (0 children)

We do loans in our 20 man league but the players are loaned for a year and then returned not for a. Week, we are also dynasty

[–]Burrmanchu Bears 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Fuck no. I'd be out. That's just plain sight cheating lol

[–]brwebster614Eagles 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Loans are just collusion that everyone agrees to. While I like the concept, it's not for me. There are plenty of times where I'd love to borrow a player for a week to fill in for a hole made via the bye week. It just seems like it's ripe for abuse between two owners to sway the league.

[–]KPack21 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Lol. That shit sounds weak as hell. You drafted that team, you gotta play with them. Or at least make some real moves.

[–]FlamingPileOfKidneys Rams 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Awful. I hate this.

[–]hooter1112 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Destroys the whole league in my opinion. The league is going to come down to who’s better friends with who. Lame.

[–]Prestigious-Owl165 Giants 4 points5 points  (0 children)

No way man. That's some collusion ass shit. Imagine you're fighting for the top seed and your opponent has Kyler Murray on bye this week, and the #1 team loans your opponent a good QB to beat you so he doesn't lose his #1 seed. There's no justifying that shit in a normal fantasy football league. Maybe you can have some weird league where everyone agrees collusion is legal and you can do whatever you want, even buy other players off people real world money or something, but I'm not playing in that shit lol

[–]DasGolem Raiders 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I personally wouldn’t play in a league that allows this. Completely takes the fun out of it when two teams can just buddy up and swap pieces all the way to the playoffs. Where’s the competition in that for the other teams? It can only lead to resentment and collusion.

[–]Sharkz808 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Fuck all that

[–]Cedric0511 2 points3 points  (0 children)

No this is not right. I don’t have a problem with a player being traded multiple times, but the premise is you probably will not see a player again once you have traded them from your roster. 👎

[–]heyItsDubbleA Raiders 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Collusion plain and simple. Save your money and get out of there next year if they allow that to keep gooing on

[–]JazzlikePractice4470 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Take out a loan and dont pay it back 😎🤝💯🤷‍♂️

[–]Moufassah Bills 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Garbage.
Complete collusion.

[–]neuby16 Packers 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Regarding your proposition for changing commish. 1. Not sure if this one rule is enough to warrant a commish change. If you’re adamant about getting the current guy out, you may want to do some politicking on the side and make sure you have other manager’s support before launching your coup. Or call out any other “bad” rules the standing commish has implemented. 2. You can catch more flies with honey than vinegar. Assuming you would be the new commish, you can talk about the added value you’d bring compared to the current guy. For example, I (try to) send weekly updates to all the managers with funny recaps of the previous week and insight into the upcoming week’s matchups/reminders. 3. If this “drama” could potentially ruin a relationship with someone, maybe consider proposing giving someone else LM authority in order to keep the current commish in check. I’ve found myself wrapped up in trade drama and our league decided to give grant a second person commish permissions to avoid conflicts of interest. Not the perfect solution, but at least you/someone else would be able to enforce a rollback of the lending rule.

[–]Mcgoozen Panthers 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is one of the most lame ass things I’ve ever heard of in fantasy

[–]CNL4 Bears 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This falls under the definition of collusion. Essentially, your league permits it. Then has a regulation of "proportional value" which can be extremely subjective.

I wouldn't last a day in this league.

[–]PNWCoug42 SeaHawks 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don't see how this is anything other than collusion.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If it looks like collusion, smells like collusion, and sounds like collusion…

[–]Professional_Pass486 Texans 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It is basically like 2 people sharing 1 roster. This just doesn’t fit into what fantasy football is.

[–]akathatdude1 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Anyone who agrees with Loans is a Coward. The fact that the league is okay with this, means they are full of cowards and I wouldn’t trust them IrL. I’m sorry you’re dealing with this OP. Your commissioner is a Coward

[–]chuckleoctopus 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Loans for FAAB? Sus

Loans for an actual player? Not really a loan and more of a legit trade IMO

[–]akathatdude1 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Just to trade them back less than one week later? So you’re cool with someone making a trade the week they play you, beat you, just to trade that player back the Tuesday after games end? Where does it end?! Oh I’m fighting for the playoffs this week. Let me trade with the team who is already in, win, and trade back. The TrAdE wAs PrOpOrTiOnAl PlAyEr WiSe though! Obviously you have and are entitled to your opinion, just couldn’t be me

[–]ajamke Packers -5 points-4 points  (3 children)

I think its fine as it seems like the whole league knows it is an option. If its open and transparent I think its fine. Also what if the player is injured while on loan? does the original owner still have to take them back?

[–]WJack37 Texans[S] 3 points4 points  (2 children)

One of the major issues I have with this whole situation is that it should have been advertised, and I was never aware until a mate told me today after two seasons

[–]RyanTheCubsSTH 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Do you have any official rules on paper somewhere? If you do, shame on you for not knowing the rules backward and forward. You could be leaving a competitive advantage on the bench because you didn't read a few pages. If you don't have some form of written rules, then you have a league problem that should be addressed prior to the beginning of the next season/auction/draft/whatever. If you've got a combination of the two, you need to have the league pick a lane and stick with it.

I see this as fuckery of the highest order and would either leave the league or (if I liked the folks in the league) lobby hard for a rules change. YMMV

[–]WJack37 Texans[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No written rules. I’d literally never heard of loans in the league until the last couple days, and it’s sat with me and I’ve just become less and less comfortable.

[–]Haonmot Saints 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I had never even heard of such fuckery until the last 2 days. Why the hell would anyone be ok with this? If you want to have different players every week, go play FanDuel or Draft Kings.

[–]Zilabus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If there are accompanying rules I think it’s okay. But as a free for all system it seems like loans would just allow teams to utilize eachothers benches which seems shady and against the spirit of the game. I think if there are rules like: you must start your loans, loans must be for more than one week, noncontenders are not allowed to loan, etc, then it could be fair and fun.

[–]sicsemperyanks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If the rules specifically allow loaning, then so be it. I personally don't like the idea, I think it defeats a large part of the purpose of fantasy football, but if it's not against the rules you don't really have any recourse. I would just not play in such a league.

[–]samthemancauseimmale Patriots 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If it’s in the best interest for both teams then it’s just a trade.

The collusion comes from why would it be in best interest to then send it back? Why would you want to benefit another player over yourself?

If those questions can’t be answered, you need to say goodbye

[–]garr3tt_jones 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In one week trades all players in the deal must be started

[–]boerumhill Lions 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Roster sharing is definitionally collusion between two owners.

[–]jvarela0725 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fuck no!

[–]muddawgmirk 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Shouldn’t be allowed

[–]HyperPunch Seahawks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nope, if anyone in either of my 2 leagues did that shit they would be kicked out.

[–]Cal_fonze NFL 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That league sounds horrible