In the Edit League screen for commissioners, I have an option available to "allow unbalanced trades." If I turn this on, it will allow a trade to be completed that is unbalanced by the trade meter's reckoning.
I am considering doing this and wanted to put it in front of the league membership for discussion. Here is my reasoning—It would help teams that want to rebuild by trading away veterans for draft picks.
Because the trade meter values are SO broken, I see this scenario a lot (screen shot from another league):
I have a lousy team and would like to trade away this aging OL to a contender. But, the trade meter wants the contender to offer me two first-round picks and a third-rounder. No way is he going to do that. Even if I settled for half of his trade meter value, the contender would still have to give me a No. 1 and a No. 3. I would take much less — but I can't.
But, "turning off" the trade meter would allow me to settle for less, make this trade, move my rebuilding process along, free some salary cap, and maybe help trigger a more active trade market.
In some leagues, this would not work, because experienced coaches with no scruples would take advantage of inexperienced coaches. I don't think our league is in that category.
The USFL/WFL has changed and matured over nine seasons. We rarely get a "noob" coach any more. We have 32 coaches who are among the best in MFN. Many have multiple titles in other leagues. We do have a trade review committee in place, but the committee has only vetoed two trades in nine seasons. So we do have safeguards in place to prevent one coach from fleecing another or to prevent a coach from damaging his franchise beyond repair. But, I think we are beyond that.
Anyway, tell me what you think. I won't consider putting it to a vote unless we find a consensus during the discussion phase.
