Rules are rules. Where do we draw the line? Where ever its convenient to those who broke the rule?

This rule is in place not for the two teams involved, but for a potential new gm to either team who's gm decides to quit and leave said team empty of first rounders.

So a rule has been broken and since the usual thing to do would be to void the trade. Since that is not possible we are trying to find something that is fair not discuss a rule change to satisfy the two teams that broke it. So lets focus on a fair solution here in this thread.

Voting will start tomorrow night and last for 24hrs. Both teams hang on to those assets involved in this trade.

The rule is flawed. This is the perfect example. Jets made first round picks in this draft and now that the draft is over, they have a first round pick on their chart again. This rule should be completely inapplicable during a draft. But you all can vote however you want.

This trade never should have happened period. It left the Jets without a 1st rounder.

If you want to discuss the rules post them over in Rules Debate. All others in this thread will be delete from here on.

I feel like the problem is solved if you look at the Jets future draft picks they have a 1st round pick.

The problem will always be solved if one allows for the passage of time. The issue is whether there are any 1st round draft choices on the board immediately after making a trade. It’s basically a snapshot of the future draft choices at the time a trade is consummated.

The easiest way to resolve the matter is to trade the CB back for the 1st rd draft choice given with the added prohibition of being uable to trade the CB to the Jets during the upcoming season.

Otherwise, the teams can on simply make the trade during the upcoming season and skirt any repercussions for having made the trade in the first place (and utilized the 3rd rd draft choice that wouldn’t have been traded). Anyway, that’s how I vote.

The way I'm looking at this rule is simple: at any time Beercloud, or any other GM, opens the future draft picks page, there must be a 1st rounder, regardless of the future first coming in after the draft.

Perhaps this could have been avoided if the trade had occurred after the draft. The 3rd round pick may have been the coveted piece in the trade, and if it was, maybe a smaller package deal could have been done here.

Lastly, I'm not sure if we could come to a way to penalize owners, but a thought I had was when Pats had to forfeit their 2016 1st and 2017 4th after the infamous Deflategate. There's not a way to take away picks, but if Beercloud designated a useless player, (low default rating, low speed, no real intangibles), then that may be the closest we can get to a lost pick, as I'm sure that player/pick will immediately be cut anyways. What round? Since this trade happened in the 3rd, maybe we can designate the 3rd round.

Thoughts?

The cornerstone of the trade was the 1st rd draft choice for the CB (they are of practically equal value). That’s why I vote to reverse that aspect of the trade.

I agree with you, but it doesn't feel like a "punishment" since they could just trade the pieces right back to each other. And now that they have their '86 picks, this wouldn't be a situation or scenario we would be discussing.

If we are looking for a "punishment" to hold the GMs accountable, and future GMs accountable, then we should look for one that will define that definition.

Please Read carefully:

“The easiest way to resolve the matter is to trade the CB back for the 1st rd draft choice given with the added prohibition of being unable to trade the CB to the Jets during the upcoming season.”

The trade was made at 10 AM on the 4th. The draft ended at 7 pm on the 5th. The issue of having a 1st round pick on the page was resolved in 33 hours.