Name calling? More like hyperbole, Comrade. Teams blow themselves up in real life all the time. When a team moves in a new direction in the NFL, do we call that collusion? The reality he's the owner and he can sign whatever contracts he wants. That's HIS right. It's capitalism because he has the right to decide where he wants to play and at what price he will be paid for his new services. Unfortunately, we have people like you that want to control and regulate that because you don't think it's fair. I say let the market decide what's fair. If it was one player, this thread would be empty. The problem is he's taking 6 very good players with him.....so then it's a problem. That team would still be capable of beating The Thunder even without those guys.
Forum > North American Pro League > USA Conference > New York Gangsters are looking to merge with another team
purehatred
offline
offline
Originally posted by Shagg
But until something is put into place this is exactly what will happen. We will take and take and take until theirs nothing left or someone puts the ultimate stop to it. Always going to be someone out there that will do the opposite of what you or me think is right.
There is something in place. It's called the rules of the game.
You're being very philosophical about something that has actually been addressed several times before. Gutting is against the rules. So is collusion.
But until something is put into place this is exactly what will happen. We will take and take and take until theirs nothing left or someone puts the ultimate stop to it. Always going to be someone out there that will do the opposite of what you or me think is right.
There is something in place. It's called the rules of the game.
You're being very philosophical about something that has actually been addressed several times before. Gutting is against the rules. So is collusion.
texasdanger
offline
offline
Originally posted by Hollywoodx2x
Originally posted by texasdanger
Originally posted by whteshark
What we have here is good old fashioned socialism--let's even the playing field so EVERYBODY has a chance to win while sitting around a campfire singing John Lennon's "Imagine."
Give me a break.
It's called a free market. Let the individual have the choice, let Frankel have the choice to take his players where ever his impulse may take him.....which better be The Revolvers, Comrade Frankel
.
Hah, actually I figured someone would equate part of what I said to socialism, but look at what I have said in context. I do not care that all teams be equal. Rather, what I am advocating is not creating another welfare team. There are three options as I see it:
1. Give the players to a needy team - I am against this idea after thinking about it and I have tried to make that clear in my posts. I do not want the players on the Thunder if it means the end of the Gangsters.
2. Have a draft - distribute equally to all teams. This is what the NFL would do, the real-world model of what we are playing.
3. Keep the team as is and sell it to another owner. *DING* *DING* *DING* We have a winner! This is the perfect solution!
okay that might be your point now but your original thought was that no team that was decent already should be in the running for Frankel's services. Only teams that currently subpar should have any chance to sign him.. or am I mistaken?
You are right that my initial comments can be and probably should be construed that way, but you will have to take my word that I was not advocating socialism or a league of equals. I simply hadn't thought my argument through before posting and was not clear enough. Giving the players to one of the bottom teams I initially viewed as at least evening out the loss to the Gangsters. Giving the players to a good team would be creating another welfare team at the bottom (while still leaving the others as is) and I definitely didn't want that to happen. After thinking it through (unfortunately after posting...doh!), I realized that giving the players away to ANY one team created a problem that we didn't want.
Originally posted by texasdanger
Originally posted by whteshark
What we have here is good old fashioned socialism--let's even the playing field so EVERYBODY has a chance to win while sitting around a campfire singing John Lennon's "Imagine."
Give me a break.
It's called a free market. Let the individual have the choice, let Frankel have the choice to take his players where ever his impulse may take him.....which better be The Revolvers, Comrade Frankel
. Hah, actually I figured someone would equate part of what I said to socialism, but look at what I have said in context. I do not care that all teams be equal. Rather, what I am advocating is not creating another welfare team. There are three options as I see it:
1. Give the players to a needy team - I am against this idea after thinking about it and I have tried to make that clear in my posts. I do not want the players on the Thunder if it means the end of the Gangsters.
2. Have a draft - distribute equally to all teams. This is what the NFL would do, the real-world model of what we are playing.
3. Keep the team as is and sell it to another owner. *DING* *DING* *DING* We have a winner! This is the perfect solution!
okay that might be your point now but your original thought was that no team that was decent already should be in the running for Frankel's services. Only teams that currently subpar should have any chance to sign him.. or am I mistaken?
You are right that my initial comments can be and probably should be construed that way, but you will have to take my word that I was not advocating socialism or a league of equals. I simply hadn't thought my argument through before posting and was not clear enough. Giving the players to one of the bottom teams I initially viewed as at least evening out the loss to the Gangsters. Giving the players to a good team would be creating another welfare team at the bottom (while still leaving the others as is) and I definitely didn't want that to happen. After thinking it through (unfortunately after posting...doh!), I realized that giving the players away to ANY one team created a problem that we didn't want.
purehatred
offline
offline
Originally posted by whteshark
Name calling? More like hyperbole, Comrade. Teams blow themselves up in real life all the time. When a team moves in a new direction in the NFL, do we call that collusion? The reality he's the owner and he can sign whatever contracts he wants. That's HIS right.
Actually if the owner of one team were to divest interest in said team, and on the way out release several key players from their contract early, and then all those players were to go sign with another team that the owner suddenly has a connection to...yes, the NFL would actually call that collusion.
Name calling? More like hyperbole, Comrade. Teams blow themselves up in real life all the time. When a team moves in a new direction in the NFL, do we call that collusion? The reality he's the owner and he can sign whatever contracts he wants. That's HIS right.
Actually if the owner of one team were to divest interest in said team, and on the way out release several key players from their contract early, and then all those players were to go sign with another team that the owner suddenly has a connection to...yes, the NFL would actually call that collusion.
purehatred
offline
offline
What's frustrating is that this is even a debate.
We do understand that gutting is against the rules, right? There IS a giant thread dedicated to trying to get rid of gutting/collusion, right?
http://goallineblitz.com/game/forum_thread.pl?thread_id=175644
We do understand that gutting is against the rules, right? There IS a giant thread dedicated to trying to get rid of gutting/collusion, right?
http://goallineblitz.com/game/forum_thread.pl?thread_id=175644
Hollywoodx2x
offline
offline
okay again this is not collusion. we are talking about one person moving his players from one team to another... just so happens that the one person is in control of 6 players. If i move my two players from my team and move to another pro team am i guilty of collusion? by your definition i would.. i have made one team worse and one team better by moving my players...
texasdanger
offline
offline
Originally posted by whteshark
Name calling? More like hyperbole, Comrade. Teams blow themselves up in real life all the time. When a team moves in a new direction in the NFL, do we call that collusion? The reality he's the owner and he can sign whatever contracts he wants. That's HIS right. It's capitalism because he has the right to decide where he wants to play and at what price he will be paid for his new services. Unfortunately, we have people like you that want to control and regulate that because you don't think it's fair. I say let the market decide what's fair. If it was one player, this thread would be empty. The problem is he's taking 6 very good players with him.....so then it's a problem. That team would still be capable of beating The Thunder even without those guys.
Actually, my friend, they are talking about gutting the entire team. Go back and check the original post. Yes, I don't think it is fair to create another welfare team in USA Pro. The league is a co-operative, with each team out for itself only within the best interests of the league and the rules established by the league. That is why there are league commissioners in the real-life sports leagues - to make sure one team does not commit any action that is unduly anti-competitive, as this action clearly is.
Here is the original post:
Originally posted by lfrankel26
With the limited amount of time that I have to run a team, I am looking to merge with another USA Pro Team. You would be getting all 6 of my players (all level 18) and any other player that agrees to move if you want them on your team. If you are interested in merging please message me and I will respond as soon as possible.
Name calling? More like hyperbole, Comrade. Teams blow themselves up in real life all the time. When a team moves in a new direction in the NFL, do we call that collusion? The reality he's the owner and he can sign whatever contracts he wants. That's HIS right. It's capitalism because he has the right to decide where he wants to play and at what price he will be paid for his new services. Unfortunately, we have people like you that want to control and regulate that because you don't think it's fair. I say let the market decide what's fair. If it was one player, this thread would be empty. The problem is he's taking 6 very good players with him.....so then it's a problem. That team would still be capable of beating The Thunder even without those guys.
Actually, my friend, they are talking about gutting the entire team. Go back and check the original post. Yes, I don't think it is fair to create another welfare team in USA Pro. The league is a co-operative, with each team out for itself only within the best interests of the league and the rules established by the league. That is why there are league commissioners in the real-life sports leagues - to make sure one team does not commit any action that is unduly anti-competitive, as this action clearly is.
Here is the original post:
Originally posted by lfrankel26
With the limited amount of time that I have to run a team, I am looking to merge with another USA Pro Team. You would be getting all 6 of my players (all level 18) and any other player that agrees to move if you want them on your team. If you are interested in merging please message me and I will respond as soon as possible.
Last edited May 9, 2008 18:31:53
Shagg
offline
offline
Originally posted by Hollywoodx2x
okay again this is not collusion. we are talking about one person moving his players from one team to another... just so happens that the one person is in control of 6 players. If i move my two players from my team and move to another pro team am i guilty of collusion? by your definition i would.. i have made one team worse and one team better by moving my players...
I can attest to this because it happened to my team but I gave the players the option.
okay again this is not collusion. we are talking about one person moving his players from one team to another... just so happens that the one person is in control of 6 players. If i move my two players from my team and move to another pro team am i guilty of collusion? by your definition i would.. i have made one team worse and one team better by moving my players...
I can attest to this because it happened to my team but I gave the players the option.
Shagg
offline
offline
Bottom line is no one is enforcing these rules so crazy metaphors aside its pretty straight forward. Kill or be killed.
Hollywoodx2x
offline
offline
Originally posted by texasdanger
Originally posted by whteshark
Name calling? More like hyperbole, Comrade. Teams blow themselves up in real life all the time. When a team moves in a new direction in the NFL, do we call that collusion? The reality he's the owner and he can sign whatever contracts he wants. That's HIS right. It's capitalism because he has the right to decide where he wants to play and at what price he will be paid for his new services. Unfortunately, we have people like you that want to control and regulate that because you don't think it's fair. I say let the market decide what's fair. If it was one player, this thread would be empty. The problem is he's taking 6 very good players with him.....so then it's a problem. That team would still be capable of beating The Thunder even without those guys.
Actually, my friend, they are talking about gutting the entire team. Go back and check the original post. Yes, I don't think it is fair to create another welfare team in USA Pro. The league is a co-operative, with each team out for itself only within the best interests of the league and the rules established by the league. That is why there are league commissioners in the real-life sports leagues - to make sure one team does not commit any action that is unduly anti-competitive, as this action clearly is.
Here is the original post:
Originally posted by lfrankel26
With the limited amount of time that I have to run a team, I am looking to merge with another USA Pro Team. You would be getting all 6 of my players (all level 18) and any other player that agrees to move if you want them on your team. If you are interested in merging please message me and I will respond as soon as possible.
so you are saying every day in the nba teams dont intentional buy contracts that end at the end of the year to make them selves worse to build for the future? i guess that would be gutting.... and so you are saying that if frankel was to only move his guys then you would have no problem with this at all?
also commissioners also dont place silly rules like you guys are good enough, no free agents for you...
Originally posted by whteshark
Name calling? More like hyperbole, Comrade. Teams blow themselves up in real life all the time. When a team moves in a new direction in the NFL, do we call that collusion? The reality he's the owner and he can sign whatever contracts he wants. That's HIS right. It's capitalism because he has the right to decide where he wants to play and at what price he will be paid for his new services. Unfortunately, we have people like you that want to control and regulate that because you don't think it's fair. I say let the market decide what's fair. If it was one player, this thread would be empty. The problem is he's taking 6 very good players with him.....so then it's a problem. That team would still be capable of beating The Thunder even without those guys.
Actually, my friend, they are talking about gutting the entire team. Go back and check the original post. Yes, I don't think it is fair to create another welfare team in USA Pro. The league is a co-operative, with each team out for itself only within the best interests of the league and the rules established by the league. That is why there are league commissioners in the real-life sports leagues - to make sure one team does not commit any action that is unduly anti-competitive, as this action clearly is.
Here is the original post:
Originally posted by lfrankel26
With the limited amount of time that I have to run a team, I am looking to merge with another USA Pro Team. You would be getting all 6 of my players (all level 18) and any other player that agrees to move if you want them on your team. If you are interested in merging please message me and I will respond as soon as possible.
so you are saying every day in the nba teams dont intentional buy contracts that end at the end of the year to make them selves worse to build for the future? i guess that would be gutting.... and so you are saying that if frankel was to only move his guys then you would have no problem with this at all?
also commissioners also dont place silly rules like you guys are good enough, no free agents for you...
texasdanger
offline
offline
Originally posted by Hollywoodx2x
so you are saying every day in the nba teams dont intentional buy contracts that end at the end of the year to make them selves worse to build for the future? i guess that would be gutting.... and so you are saying that if frankel was to only move his guys then you would have no problem with this at all?
also commissioners also dont place silly rules like you guys are good enough, no free agents for you...
Commissioners don't allow entire teams to be gutted leaving an empty shell of a team that is not financially viable. Seriously... think about what you are saying. You are saying that it is perfectly ok to take all of a company's assets and make a side deal giving them away for no compensation to the owning company. This is called fraud.
so you are saying every day in the nba teams dont intentional buy contracts that end at the end of the year to make them selves worse to build for the future? i guess that would be gutting.... and so you are saying that if frankel was to only move his guys then you would have no problem with this at all?
also commissioners also dont place silly rules like you guys are good enough, no free agents for you...
Commissioners don't allow entire teams to be gutted leaving an empty shell of a team that is not financially viable. Seriously... think about what you are saying. You are saying that it is perfectly ok to take all of a company's assets and make a side deal giving them away for no compensation to the owning company. This is called fraud.
Hollywoodx2x
offline
offline
i do believe a moderator was trying to get frankels players as well on dd's team... if he felt this was collusion we should be hearing this any time now....since we havent as of now... i am going to assume that it is not and I will continue my pursuit of high quality players coming to a high quality team. basically you all can say what you want.. the main problem you have that all people have is that they are jealous... unless it is you, you want to find something wrong with it. Or That you realize that chances are that yes I am right and his choice would be to come to a better situation for him than coming to a team that is not quite up to the level of another. Lord knows if he had said immediately i will come to the texas thunder or the other guy arguing this point team who is not quite up to par... you would be defending it.... and I will defend the right of the mighty to become even more mighty... or by gosh the patriots cant sign anyone else... they are good enough.. the celtics cant sign another player cuz they have the big three.. and the red sox are too good so they can't sign anybody... problem is they all can..and will.. and could care less whether the miami dolphins suck, the miami heat cant win a game, and that ) washington nationals have no chance to win the division.
D-will
offline
offline
Originally posted by texasdanger
Originally posted by Hollywoodx2x
so you are saying every day in the nba teams dont intentional buy contracts that end at the end of the year to make them selves worse to build for the future? i guess that would be gutting.... and so you are saying that if frankel was to only move his guys then you would have no problem with this at all?
also commissioners also dont place silly rules like you guys are good enough, no free agents for you...
Commissioners don't allow entire teams to be gutted leaving an empty shell of a team that is not financially viable. Seriously... think about what you are saying. You are saying that it is perfectly ok to take all of a company's assets and make a side deal giving them away for no compensation to the owning company. This is called fraud.
And this is called A GAME. wow
Originally posted by Hollywoodx2x
so you are saying every day in the nba teams dont intentional buy contracts that end at the end of the year to make them selves worse to build for the future? i guess that would be gutting.... and so you are saying that if frankel was to only move his guys then you would have no problem with this at all?
also commissioners also dont place silly rules like you guys are good enough, no free agents for you...
Commissioners don't allow entire teams to be gutted leaving an empty shell of a team that is not financially viable. Seriously... think about what you are saying. You are saying that it is perfectly ok to take all of a company's assets and make a side deal giving them away for no compensation to the owning company. This is called fraud.
And this is called A GAME. wow
Hollywoodx2x
offline
offline
Originally posted by texasdanger
Originally posted by Hollywoodx2x
so you are saying every day in the nba teams dont intentional buy contracts that end at the end of the year to make them selves worse to build for the future? i guess that would be gutting.... and so you are saying that if frankel was to only move his guys then you would have no problem with this at all?
also commissioners also dont place silly rules like you guys are good enough, no free agents for you...
Commissioners don't allow entire teams to be gutted leaving an empty shell of a team that is not financially viable. Seriously... think about what you are saying. You are saying that it is perfectly ok to take all of a company's assets and make a side deal giving them away for no compensation to the owning company. This is called fraud.
okay are you serious? i believe business is exactly this.. and i the las of the jungle brother.
and this is not a side deal.. was completely ON the table.. wasnt hiding anything from anyone...
Originally posted by Hollywoodx2x
so you are saying every day in the nba teams dont intentional buy contracts that end at the end of the year to make them selves worse to build for the future? i guess that would be gutting.... and so you are saying that if frankel was to only move his guys then you would have no problem with this at all?
also commissioners also dont place silly rules like you guys are good enough, no free agents for you...
Commissioners don't allow entire teams to be gutted leaving an empty shell of a team that is not financially viable. Seriously... think about what you are saying. You are saying that it is perfectly ok to take all of a company's assets and make a side deal giving them away for no compensation to the owning company. This is called fraud.
okay are you serious? i believe business is exactly this.. and i the las of the jungle brother.
and this is not a side deal.. was completely ON the table.. wasnt hiding anything from anyone...
Last edited May 9, 2008 18:50:43
Hollywoodx2x
offline
offline
okay i am done arguing with you is pointless I will continue to try to sway Frankel my way.... with the cheerleaders and the hot cars.. and you can go complain to Bort and DD if you think it is against the rules and threatens your existence in the pro league. and if they agree that it is in fact collusion then case closed. If they dont, i would expect that you wont have anything to do with trying to sign him because it is morally wrong and against the rules in your opinion...signing him would be going against your principles.
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
