View Single Post
Old
12-04-2012, 02:35 PM
  #907
Evolu7ion
Registered User
 
Evolu7ion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Victoria, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,155
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by xX Hot Fuss View Post
My deals are absolutely subject to just as much scrutiny as others. Being the Commissioner is irrelevant. Like i said in my earlier post, the deal is being re-worked right now.

Honestly, what happened was i did a BAGM mode with Phoenix, saw that Summers was a 70 something, played a few games with him and then really liked how he played. I didn't even look up his new overall until after i posted lol.

Deal is being re-worked as we speak.

EDIT: With Summers 83 Overall, it would absolutely look like its part of another deal. Completely agree.
Why would it matter if it was part of the first deal though? The purpose of the max players in deal rule was to prevent GMs from blowing up or changing their teams too much. So if a GM wants to waste their two deals on a small extension to the first deal tbh I don't see a reason why that shouldn't be allowed as it doesn't go against the nature/reason for the max players rule.

Fair value rules should definitely still apply tho, and I think in a back to back scenario like this the trade should be evaluated as a whole rather than two desperate deals.

Just my opinion anyways.

Evolu7ion is offline   Reply With Quote