Pick is in.
I just cant stand with ya on this, sometimes a trade swings the entire draft and thats not what this has ever been about. There were a couple trades made in our last draft that went a long way in deciding the winner. We just can't let that happen.
I'm with UK on trades. Have them so that any trade can be made by any 2 owners or don't have them. I don't understand why trades being made that went a long way towards deciding the winner is a problem. Isn't the point of a trade to improve your team?
The only rule that I would make re: trades is that it has to fall within the rules of the draft. So, the trade still has to leave both owners with one player from each of the 32 teams.
To kinda simplify trading we could just use the 2 round rule. You cant trade players that are more than 2 rounds apart in where they were drafted and if you trade up 1 round you trade down 2 rounds with the other pick... EX... you trade your 6th round pick for someones 5th. you then trade your 7th for their 9th...
My thoughts are simply this... I am someone and others might be as well who take this seriously and I actually put in time studying and trying to draft the best team I can to win and seeing others give players away because they don't know any better kinda makes what I and others are trying to do irrelevant.
If someone who was a huge fan of RGIII agreed to trade Joe Montana and his 5th round pick for RGIII and a 9th round pick you think that's something that should be allowed?
If someone who was a huge fan of RGIII agreed to trade Joe Montana and his 5th round pick for RGIII and a 9th round pick you think that's something that should be allowed?