Do We Want a TC?

[joeshmoe]

I think it needs to stay as is.  If it isn't broken don't fix it.  I mean, really, who's on the TC?  Does anybody think there's people on the TC who are biased in their rulings?  I dunno, just doesn't seem to be broken to me.

[Brewers GM]

I don't think outsourcing the TC is the answer.  I don't think having an 'uber-educated' TC would make the difference, since I think we all agree the value in vetoed trades has been unbalanced.  It requires veteran league members to understand the difference between uneven and destructive as it relates to our league, and if the board members are from our league then what are we really changing? 

I would think people's frustration will only go up if some stranger who has never played here is vetoing their deal...

[Dan Wood]

Well said Ben

[Colby]

I really want to give the ProFSL TC a try.  It would be a benefit to multiple leagues as it would streamline a lot of activity.  For those interested, feel free to apply at the new ProFSL TC boards on the main index.

[Brewers GM]

I really want to give the ProFSL TC a try.  It would be a benefit to multiple leagues as it would streamline a lot of activity.  For those interested, feel free to apply at the new ProFSL TC boards on the main index.

I think whatever changes are made should go through the RC.  I also think it would be a good idea to let other leagues test out the TC if they're interested and FGM can check back in 6 months to a year to see if it would be a good improvement for us to also use it.  I personally don't think so, but at least this way we'll have some real evidence to make a decision from rather than our best guesses.

[Orange Country]

I am not on the rules, trade, or executive committee and I am still fairly new, however how much more longer can we discuss a TC? This has been discussed for what seems like eons. I see all of these ideas thrown out to attempt to improve it when the system in place obviously has worked for some time. As Joshemoe said, if it ain't broke, don't try to fix it. Colby is going forward with a new TC and the current one has vetoed 3 of my deals and the Yanks/Pirates deal is currently up in the air. It comes to a point where there is so many possible ideas that it might be best to just let it be and let this stuff die down. I am sure there are other issues the rules committee can discuss besides this.

[Corey]

i agree with you Colb

[hank]

i agree with you Colb

Me too.

[shooter47]

I think whatever changes are made should go through the RC.  I also think it would be a good idea to let other leagues test out the TC if they're interested and FGM can check back in 6 months to a year to see if it would be a good improvement for us to also use it.  I personally don't think so, but at least this way we'll have some real evidence to make a decision from rather than our best guesses.

Well said.  I think that any major changes to the league should be run through the rules commitee.  Why have a rules committee if we are not going to use them when making major changes to the league.  I also don't quite understand why the sudden urge to change the TC when it seemed to be working.  I am all for improving the system if it really needs to but to change this just because a few trades were vetoed doesn't seem to make sense.   I also don't really like the idea of taking the TC out of the league.  I feel like the people in the league would have a better understanding of the league and what the teams making the trades are trying to accomplish.  It would be alot of work for people outside of the league to fully understand FGM and then do the research into looking at both teams and the scoring of the league and how this impacts the trade.  I would like to see the TC in FGM continue in its current form through the end of the year.  I would also like to see the RC discuss the TC and decide if the process needs to be overhauled completely or just minor tweaks done to make it better.  I am not in favor of outsourcing the TC at all.  I also like the idea of supplying new GM's with a mentor in the league to show them the ropes and help them better understand the league.

[molinator]

Well said.  I think that any major changes to the league should be run through the rules commitee.  Why have a rules committee if we are not going to use them when making major changes to the league.  I also don't quite understand why the sudden urge to change the TC when it seemed to be working.  I am all for improving the system if it really needs to but to change this just because a few trades were vetoed doesn't seem to make sense.   I also don't really like the idea of taking the TC out of the league.  I feel like the people in the league would have a better understanding of the league and what the teams making the trades are trying to accomplish.  It would be alot of work for people outside of the league to fully understand FGM and then do the research into looking at both teams and the scoring of the league and how this impacts the trade.  I would like to see the TC in FGM continue in its current form through the end of the year.  I would also like to see the RC discuss the TC and decide if the process needs to be overhauled completely or just minor tweaks done to make it better.  I am not in favor of outsourcing the TC at all.  I also like the idea of supplying new GM's with a mentor in the league to show them the ropes and help them better understand the league.

well said Bob