Is something going to be done to limit the amount of horrible trades that have been going on in this league? Seems as though we have a ton of owners who just don't get it or either we have a ton of players with multiple teams making trades with each other to make one super team. Some of these trades are just ridiculous. Trading away future first and second round picks for good but old players, who will likely be retiring in a few seasons, is just horrible team management that will cripple a franchise for a long time. Which means the next guy will have to deal with a **** team with no high round picks. And on the other hand having players owning multiple teams is just as bad. Those owners can basically dump high salary/bad contracts that good but older players often come attached with once they start to reach the downside of their careers. Maybe something like a franchise tag will help in the future i don't know. But what i do know is that the way things are now will not keep new owners around very long. There should be a punishment for those owners who have multiple teams in the same league. Conflict of interests at it's highest.

Ok, rant over. As you were ladies and gentlemen.

If you suspect a situation where there is a multi account please send me a PM with your case. I investigate all such reports. It is against the terms of service to do that. I may or may not respond with my findings, but I will investigate.

As for bad trades, there have been several discussions about how to limit the potential damage without making it too difficult to actually do trades. I continue to welcome discussion on that topic because I too want to keep it from being too far out of hand but also allow you to make trades. The trade meter is serviceable but far from perfect, but coming up with a completely objective calculation over such a subjective issue is challenging if not impossible. The pieces in place to help the issues you describe and to limit the number of bad trades and reduce the negative impact of the bad trades that do get made are:

* New accounts are held to a 30-day probation before they are able to make any trades
* The trade meter tends toward rejecting questionable trades (although I concede that there are plenty of cases it does not)
* The draft picks available for trading don't go very far into the future
* There is a limit of 2 trades between teams in any given season

Again, I welcome any additional discussion on this issue!

Can you list some examples? Whether a trade is horrible or not is a subjective matter so it would help if you listed some. So listing them could either a) help the owners who maybe don't get it understand that they made bad trades or b) help identify potential collusion/multiple-team owners.

Your player weightings could also be skewing the numbers you see.

I think an easy fix would be to list on the player card the default ranking that each player has..

Owner ranking 59/72
Default ranking 64/75

I felt like I had to pay through the nose just to get the Green I needed on the bar to put a Trade through.

I wanted Powell, a 5th Year DT who is really solid. I wanted him so I could move Sexton, a 2nd Year DT out to RDE in my 34 (and Kingston, the back up DT to LDE). Build a 'Wall' of 3 big, strong DT to keep the LBs clean was the idea.

For a 5th Year DT, without Speed (and not even one of those All 100 Guys) I couldn't even get the Computer to let me try without giving up a 12 Year DE that was rated 85 (Powell was rated 92), a 2nd in the upcoming Draft, a 1st and 3rd in the Draft after that.

Obviously his Owner had no issue with this... nor would I have had if that offer came my way. I had to pay out the nose just to OFFER the Trade.

I went ahead with it, because I had a vision for what I wanted from my Defense and getting the DL in my 34 set for the next 5-8 Years is going to be helpful in the long term... but I really fell that giving up the 1 Year Rental DE and a 1st would have been fine, that extra 2nd and 3rd really push it. But I couldn't even send the Offer until I added them.

And this was DL for DL of rather similar Rating... it's not like I was giving up a Punter or Kicker for a QB or something where Values would be skewed.

Is this being addressed soon, or already in mfn1?

https://mfn7.myfootballnow.com/trade/details/1079

Now let me first say, I offered this Trade. I wanted Powell. But even making the Trade I felt it was to much. If I wasn't intent of building my 34 DL and 'forgetting it' for the next 7 Seasons, no way I do this deal.

But it only got the Green Bar barely out of Red for me to propose this... and from my view I'm giving up WAY to much.

Daniels is an 85 at WLB, but he's a Rental since he's coming up on Retirement Opportunities. But I add a Back Up to Marginal Starter DT as well in Smith who is a 78 and still growing (79 Max). I ALSO give up a 1st and 2nd in 2024 (it's 2023, so not the Upcoming Draft but the following one).

For that I get Powell, who is a 89 DT. Guy isn't even a 90, much less a Mid to High 90. A 4th in 2023 (this upcoming Draft) and a 5th and 6th in 2025, 3 Drafts from now.

Again, I not only agreed but proposed to this... but only because I didn't have the option of offering anything less. I really feel that the Bar forced me to rake myself over the coals here, and that Kansas City would have been more than happy with a slightly lesser deal.

I'd have loved to have Bartered a bit... to have started off with the 2 Players and a 2nd, see if he counters it to a 1st and sweetens with some Mid-Late Picks in Future Drafts. That's how it SHOULD work. But on this deal, I had to start on the Ceiling before even being allowed to Offer.