Processed:TUL/DAK

[DakotaGeorge]

Are these the same 2 guys from the 80 outside thread?

[ukpatfan]

I've travelled up to London for the Pats-Rams game so have only just seen this thread.
Hell, I've certainly missed some fireworks!!

[SteveBsFan]

I've travelled up to London for the Pats-Rams game so have only just seen this thread.
Hell, I've certainly missed some fireworks!!

Enjoy the game! Pretty sad someone from the UK will see the Pats live before someone who lives about an hour away from the stadium haha.

[Suicane]

I'm amazed that knowing full well I can read the PM's you sent you still stand by your actions. You flat out told each other you'd skirt the rule by trading a 1st rounder for a 7th rounder. Tarcone, I do need to apologize to you slightly because you wanted Matt to sign off on the 1st for 7th deal you had planned. But it doesn't change the fact that when he said no, you still pre arranged a deal.

I get that your a troll George, I get that that's how you get off, so everytime I reply I know it makes your tiny dick a little bit harder, that's cool too. But please don't think you've stuck with the league, because if it wasn't for Matt you would have been gone 2 seasons ago. Whether you're here or not, I really don't give a fuck, I gave up caring about you a long time ago. But if you want to stay in the league, which I doubt it matters to you one way or another outside of getting your troll fun in, I'd be careful about pushing Matt too far, he oughta be Sainted for dealing with your petulant, ignorant pm's the past few days.

As far as being offended that I read your pm's, tough shit.

[Matt]

Even if it was a part 2 trade. There is no rules against 2 part trades specifically. rule 3d only comes into play if it a backend lopsided deal. Which everyone and their grandmother agreed that it wasnt unfair that it was pretty fair value. Rule 3c was never broken because there was NEVER a trade that included picks outside the game. So no matter what you say you cant even quote a rule in our rule book that was violated. Matter of fact the trade was so fair that if nothing had been mentioned to matt previously about doing something like that there wouldnt have even been an investigation or a big bitch fit. but hey Sui good job alienating the Veteran GMs you do have in the league.


P.S.
Sorry but this wasnt a violation of league rules. a backended lopsided trade woulda been if Tarcone traded me a 1st rounder for a 28 rated player I was going to cut. THAT woulda been cheating. For you even to toss around the word Cheaters and cheating with veteran guys who have stuck with your league for years IRL is a gross statement by you.

Not one rule you can quote from our rule book that was violated. Thats all. 3c was never violated because there was no trades that involved picks outside the game... which btw is in place so you guys wouldnt have to keep track or police out of game draft picks in trades. Which didnt come in to play. rule 3d says that to be scrutinized or vetoed a trade would have to be a backend Lopsided deal to circumvent rule 3c. Which there was no backend lopsided deal.


P.S. 2

So I think without any rule in the rule book violated it is offensive for you to call Tarcone and I cheaters and said we were cheating and we knew we were cheating. I also think it is offensive that you went through all our PMs too.

I went through the PM's, not suicane...so that is clear. I went through them in an investigation to see if you purposly circumvented a rule in the league constituion. I think there's a fair amount of evidence showing that you did.

If you asked me that you could do a trade in 2 parts, 1 before the picks were available and one after picks were available.............., I would say no. I did say no.

[DakotaGeorge]

I'm amazed that knowing full well I can read the PM's you sent you still stand by your actions. You flat out told each other you'd skirt the rule by trading a 1st rounder for a 7th rounder. Tarcone, I do need to apologize to you slightly because you wanted Matt to sign off on the 1st for 7th deal you had planned. But it doesn't change the fact that when he said no, you still pre arranged a deal.

I get that your a troll George, I get that that's how you get off, so everytime I reply I know it makes your tiny dick a little bit harder, that's cool too. But please don't think you've stuck with the league, because if it wasn't for Matt you would have been gone 2 seasons ago. Whether you're here or not, I really don't give a fuck, I gave up caring about you a long time ago. But if you want to stay in the league, which I doubt it matters to you one way or another outside of getting your troll fun in, I'd be careful about pushing Matt too far, he oughta be Sainted for dealing with your petulant, ignorant pm's the past few days.

As far as being offended that I read your pm's, tough shit.

This forum really needs an ignore feature.

Any 1 for 7 idea was Tarcones not mine. The whole 2026 idea wasnt mine it was Tarcones and when told no that a lopsided deal would be illegal we did a FAIR fucking trade that woulda been passed without a 2nd look if tarcone hadnt brought up a 1 for 7 to begin with. This is all im saying on the matter. no rules were violates.


Edit 1
Matter of fact if you read PMs close enough when Tarcone first talked to me I told him no because it wasnt gonna be right. his first idea being trading 1 for a 7. I told him you get matt to sign off on that and then we will do it other wise no. Matt said no. So Me and Tarcone discussed a FAIR offer for a player HE WANTED. What the FUCK happened to a GM can do what they want with their team cause its theirs. This violated 0 rules and wasnt backended or lopsided or ANY fucking try to cheat. and to be called cheaters or say we cheated is flat out bullshit and a insult to both of us who have been here for years IRL.

[DakotaGeorge]

I went through the PM's, not suicane...so that is clear. I went through them in an investigation to see if you purposly circumvented a rule in the league constituion. I think there's a fair amount of evidence showing that you did.

If you asked me that you could do a trade in 2 parts, 1 before the picks were available and one after picks were available.............., I would say no. I did say no.

The trade was fair value so whether it was NEW or a PART 2 it violated no rules. and you can say oh it was pre talked about okay... so if you veto it and Tarcone STILL wants the WR then what? you tell him he can NEVER trade for that WR? because you suspect it to be a Part 2 trade? Like my question really lays with what if you veto and Tarcone comes to me still wanting the guy and we decide a similar deal would you have vetoed the trade a 2nd time? If so under what rules. This is pure curiosity not arguement.

[Suicane]

That's a hypothetical question which doesn't apply here, because you agreed to it beforehand.

[Jave]

This forum really needs an ignore feature.

Any 1 for 7 idea was Tarcones not mine. The whole 2026 idea wasnt mine it was Tarcones and when told no that a lopsided deal would be illegal we did a FAIR fucking trade that woulda been passed without a 2nd look if tarcone hadnt brought up a 1 for 7 to begin with. This is all im saying on the matter. no rules were violates.

Are you trying to get kicked out of the league? STFU while you still can.

[DakotaGeorge]

That's a hypothetical question which doesn't apply here, because you agreed to it beforehand.

Only thing agreed upon before hand is that he couldnt do his 1 for 7 idea. So we discussed a FAIR trade for a player he wanted. the end.

[DakotaGeorge]

Are you trying to get kicked out of the league? STFU while you still can.

/ignore

hmm damn that doesnt work here.

[Suicane]

Well then George I apologize to you for saying the 7th for 1st was your idea. See, it's not real hard to admit you did something wrong or made a mistake. It makes me sad that Tarcone was the one who did it though cause it affects my opinion of him, whereas my opinion of you can't really be affected.

And anyone who thinks the trade is far is only looking at the bars, and even then I have no idea how that guy is worth a 1 and a 2. The guy is 50% receiver over 6 seasons who's never come close to 1000 yards in a season. But that's not even the issue, the issue is that you agreed to a lopsided deal to circumvent our rule. When told your pre arranged deal wouldn't be allowed you found the closest guy you could to make the deal look legit. That's the truth and there is no way around it.

[SteveBsFan]

Are you trying to get kicked out of the league? STFU while you still can.

+1

You both talked about ways to circumvent the rules and were caught. Not only were you not punished for it, but the trade went through. Count your blessings and move on, stop burying yourself.

I feel bad for Tarcone in this issue. He's a pretty stand-up guy yet is having his name dragged through the mud because you continue to throw fuel on the fire.

Let it die

[DakotaGeorge]

Well then George I apologize to you for saying the 7th for 1st was your idea. See, it's not real hard to admit you did something wrong or made a mistake. It makes me sad that Tarcone was the one who did it though cause it affects my opinion of him, whereas my opinion of you can't really be affected.

And anyone who thinks the trade is far is only looking at the bars, and even then I have no idea how that guy is worth a 1 and a 2. The guy is 50% receiver over 6 seasons who's never come close to 1000 yards in a season. But that's not even the issue, the issue is that you agreed to a lopsided deal to circumvent our rule. When told your pre arranged deal wouldn't be allowed you found the closest guy you could to make the deal look legit. That's the truth and there is no way around it.

I havent heard anyone call this a lopsided deal before now. He hasnt been anywhere near 1000 yards because he plays on a 0-16 team with a parlay of high 30 rated QBs over the past seasons. The deal is fair and to say it isnt is to say that the front office of the league will decide what each and every player is worth and that 2 GMs at the table cant decide the value of their players themselves. The beef seems to me is that we discussed doing a deal before the file came out in which we could do the deal and I dont see a rule against that either.

After I told Matt last night I appreciate you passing the trade I think you did the right thing. I in no way expected to be blind sided with venomous messages of how much of a cheater I am and I am trying to cheat the game to get an advantage. It is just unreal. I have been here for many many seasons several years in real life and I havent tried to cheat no matter how bad my teams have been.

[JesterBlaze]

the end.

You always tease me so.