ProFSL: Pro Fantasy Sports Leagues
Fantasy Leagues => Franchise GM: History Books => Franchise GM => MLB Leagues => Franchise GM: Archives => Topic started by: shooter47 on October 02, 2013, 07:09:34 PM
-
FGM RC,
As most of you know there was a situation earlier this summer that lead to 2 long time GMs almost leaving the league which forced the RC to vote on internal transfers. The RC voted 4-3 to eliminate internal transfers but partially left internal transfers open for special occasions. The discussion and vote can be found below.
http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?topic=94767.0
The ruling that was passed has resulted in a subjective rule that is open to interpretation and opinion. The ruling was not concrete enough to be easily understood without possible mis-interpretation.
This situation is to great for the commissioner to decide on alone and I ask the RC to please vote on one of the options below so that this situation may finally be put to rest once and for all and FGM will have a concrete approach to Internal Transfers within the league that is easy for everyone to understand.
1) No Internal Transfers be allowed at any time even under special cases. (This option would be similar to what was previously passed by the RC but eliminates any potential internal transfers due to special cases.
2) Allow Internal Transfers but only during special cases. (At this point in time I am not going to say what special cases will be allowed. If this option is chosen by the RC then at that time the RC will vote on special cases that will allow an internal transfer to happen).
Thanks,
Shooter
-
I vote for option 2. I believe that there should be internal transfers allowed. I think that for GM's that have shown loyalty, activity, and good performance should be rewarded. I know this can lead to hurt feelings for owners that don't get to manage their favorite teams but I still feel that if the special circumstances are met then it should be allowed.
-
I vote forOption #1 - No internal transfers under any circumstances.
There can be no gray area when it comes to this issue. We have witnessed in the recent past how hurtful the process can be when existing members are not allowed to transfer to an open team. Personalities inevitably rear their heads and the potential damage is not worth it. People say hurtful things, quit--or threaten to quit, and feeling do get hurt. Is such a thing really necessary or even worth it? I say no.
When GMs are accepted into the league, there is no proviso saying, "Take this opening and when another one comes up later you can transfer." GMs come into the league with their eyes wide open and they are approved for a given team. We all participate for different reasons, but if a league has an opening, and it's a team you "hate", why agree to take it over?
-
I vote for option # 1 absent the specific conditions by which we would allow transfers. I fear that the condition for transfer would not be be one I had in mind when I was the commissioner and left the door open for the remote possibility down the road.
-
#2 is my vote, however I would give precedent to an owner who has not yet changed teams. I don't want to see a system that just allows GMs to jump from one team to a better one every time one opens up. I feel if a GM has made a move once, that should be it, thus making the decision to stay or move more important. We need GMs who are "all in" with their teams, not just treading water with an eye on greener pastures. As for those who will feel compelled to leave over the outcome, I say let them leave. It really is as simple as that. The league will survive. That being said, I sincerely hope everyone stays on as I think the league is heading in the right direction and the members have much to do with that.
-
I vote for #2 but let's make it clear where a GM needs X months service time with their current club to become eligible.
-
The current vote is:
Option #1 - 2 Votes (:SF: Flash, :TEX: Rcankosy)
Option #2 - 3 Votes (:PHI: Papps, :TB: Volsraysbucs, :PIT: Profsl)
Following RC Members have yet to vote
:BAL: Shooter47 (Myself)
:LAD: Bhows
:KC: Kungfuwig
:MIL: BrewersGM
-
Also, I would have a clear points system for how transfers are awarded.
3 pts for favorite team
2 pts for betterment of league (taking a very bad team)
1 pt for any other transfer
Ties are broken by performance relative to expectations during most recent completed season. If a team has the 12th highest cap and finished 8th then that is a +4 rating.
-
I vote option 2 but with a concrete set of parameters around who can transfer and how often. I think an owner MUST be with their team one complete season and only be allowed to transfer teams once during their tenure with FGM. I also believe if a GM leaves the league for one reason or another they can be allowed into the league again once, and not be able to transfer once in. Also they would obviously need to be voted back I to the league. If multiple GM's who fit the guidelines apply we give points on time in the league, contribution, favorite team and a league vote.
-
I like Freddy's idea of concrete parameters and voting being involved.
-
Since I am the subject of this debate I'd love to recuse myself from this discussion but I signed up for the RC so here's my two-cents:
It was decided a few short months ago that switching teams within FGM would no longer be permitted. There was an afterthought, however, that would allow such a maneuver if:
A.) A proven, competent GM was willing switch teams in order to rebuild or, B.) The club in question was a someones favorite team.
The Cubs are far from destitute. It would be a major step forward for Brent and, at best, a sideways step for Jeff. Not that either don't deserve it but those are the rules.
The favorite team aspect has very little credence with me. As far a I can tell the Cubs have few, if any, real life Cubs players on their roster. As with the all of the teams in FGM, it's the team in name only.
I believe Brent is a conscientious, knowledgeable owner and has the Angels headed in the right direction but as I interpret the rule I have to go with Option #1.
-
Rick, I will say this about the favorite team. While it may just be a team name, the caps of teams make them very realistic. Add in division rivalries and you have a feel that you are GMing the real club.
-
I think defining parameter might be tricky, but perhaps we require something like X number of nominations from the RC (4?). Then if someone who is truly a longtime member with lots of contributions recognized by the league wants to move, they'll get support.
If we could agree on something simple like that, I'd vote option #2. If we need a complex system I'd think it would still lead to loopholes and issues I'd say forget it lets just go with #1.
-
The current vote is:
Option #1 - 3 Votes (:SF: Flash, :TEX: Rcankosy, :LAD: BHows)
Option #2 - 4 Votes (:PHI: Papps, :TB: Volsraysbucs, :PIT: Profsl, :KC: Kungfuwig)
Following RC Members have yet to vote
:BAL: Shooter47 (Myself)
:MIL: BrewersGM
If Option 1 passes internal transfers will not be allowed. If option 2 passes then the next step would be to have the RC vote on what special cases or situations will allow internal transfers (Betterment of the league, Favorite team, Etc.) If no option gets the 5 votes needed then internal options will not be allowed. If any special cases do pass then the RC will next need to vote on what will be the requirements that a GM must meet to be eligible for an internal Transfer.
The other problem that must be determined that goes along with this topic is how GM's will be decided on in the future. Does an internal candidate who qualifies for a transfer take precedent over outside candidates? If there are two or more managers who qualify for an internal transfer to an open team how do we settle who will be the manager to transfer?
It is my opinion that GM openings should be determined by the RC. I would prefer a simple voting system where the RC votes on candidates for the open position. I would favor a system where current GM's do not take precedence over outside candidates. I think all positions should be offered to the best candidate for the job. If there is only one candidate they would need to receive 5 yes votes from the RC to become the new GM. If there are two candidates then the RC would vote and the candidate with 5 or more votes would become the new GM. If there are 3 or more candidates then the RC would vote and the two candidates who receive the most votes would then go to another vote to determine the new GM. This system would be simple to implement but is a more subjective system that could lead to hurt feelings.
Im not sure how well a point system for internal transfers would work. Performance relative to expectations in this league would be a hard thing to judge. Basing this solely on finish related to cap ranking would not be a good thing in my opinion. GM's who take over a team like the Angels who have a high cap and perform poorly would be punished by a previous owner. This ranking would say they should be performing good because they have a high cap but they are a very poor team and it will take time to re-build them to a successful franchise.
-
It is my opinion that GM openings should be determined by the RC. I would prefer a simple voting system where the RC votes on candidates for the open position. I would favor a system where current GM's do not take precedence over outside candidates. I think all positions should be offered to the best candidate for the job.
I am in favor of this. Perhaps we can expand to include the TC in addition to the RC so there is a larger pool of GM's voting and we have less room for favoritism (or perceived favoritism).
-
I am in favor of this. Perhaps we can expand to include the TC in addition to the RC so there is a larger pool of GM's voting and we have less room for favoritism (or perceived favoritism).
To clarify, this is a vote for Option 2.
-
The current vote is:
Option #1 - 3 Votes (:SF: Flash, :TEX: Rcankosy, :LAD: BHows)
Option #2 - 5 Votes (:PHI: Papps, :TB: Volsraysbucs, :PIT: Profsl, :KC: Kungfuwig, BrewersGM :MIL:)
Option #2 has been chosen. Internal transfers will be allowed in special cases. The RC will now vote on what those special cases are.
:judge: