To put it another way. There's a reason I traded Gordon this particular week, But now I'm stuck with a player I'm not playing who I don't want on my team because... reasons?
Quote:
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Kid" data-cid="294926" data-time="1476411408">
I think everybody gets an e-mail when a trade is made and the point is to give everyone some opportunity to object. I'm not sure what a trade would look like that actually draws an objection, but that's the idea.
If Wi had said he'd agreed, I'd have OK'd the trade because there more than 24 hours had passed. But I don't think I'd have approved it if, for example, you just made the trade at the time you asked for it to be approved.
But in this case, I believe this trade was completed Tuesday. That's ample time for review and completion. Having to wait until next week to complete it is ludacris.
</blockquote>
You're sort of casting blame in the wrong place. The trade gets processed on Thursday night/Friday morning - 2 days after it's completed. Yahoo does everything overnight. You included a player that plays tonight, so you knew or should have known this would be the effect (including because there were warning notices on the screen for your trade).
There is an option to reduce the time for protests to 1 day (i.e. trade completed on Tuesday is processed on Wednesday night/Thursday morning), and I'd be fine with changing that, but if we do, I think it should also mean that trades do not get approved before the time actually expires.
Whether a rule change is appropriate is a separate question, but you're casting blame when:
1. This has always been the rule
2. There were notices before, during, and after when you made the trade as to when it would take effect.
3. You chose not to say anything until a few hours before the game and were at the mercy of Wi agreeing in time.
It's fine. I'll deal with it.
Speaking of rule changes, there was never a final decision on how to deal with late-added players.
The consensus seemed to be that there would be 2 elements:
1. Rosters are locked for non-playoff teams as of the end of the regular season, and for playoff teams once they are eliminated; and
2. Any players added by playoff teams after the regular season are not eligible to be kept.
That way, nobody can keep a player added after the regular season, and any waiver wire players are available for teams with something to play for.
Other than that, anybody can keep any players added to their roster before the end of the regular season (subject to other league rules).
If you have any objection on this, speak up by this weekend.
All this suggests to me is that the NFL needs to quit it with the Thursday night games. I hate them.
I'm fine with that Kid. It seems fair
And I'm down with the proposed keeper rules.
Sorry, just seeing this now. I read that the trade wouldn't go through after the Thursday game, so I didn't plan on having Gordon this week anyway. I didn't realize the commish could push it through earlier if we wanted.
I'm for reducing the protest time. It seems silly to wait this long for the trade to go through. We both agreed to the trade 3 days ago, and it'll stay pending until tomorrow. 4 days seems a bit excessive.
Actually, the reason it says Saturday is because the trade now cannot be processed until after the week is over. It previously said the trade would be processed Friday. If there was nobody in the trade who had played last night, it would have been processed today, not tomorrow. Instead, it's just going to keep extending it.
Why did that trade go through?
I have no clue. I didn't approve anything. It doesn't seem like it should have.
Yahoo told me it did earlier. Did BT do it?
I didn't approve or disapprove anything.
Well, the upshot is it makes no difference. PcB wasn't losing to anybody and Wi wasn't beating anybody regardless of this trade.