[USML Announce] Serious Rule Change Proposal

[Richard E. Robbins]

People can say what they want about last year, but I thought it was a great
one.  Great draft day risk taking by some coupled with a series of brilliant
trades by several team owners.  The trades included both the now for the
future variety as well as the current year category swaps.  Lots of teams
were involved in trades (sadly, the Red-Hots not often enough).  Our
anti-dumping rules limited the ability of a single pair of trading partners
to engage in one or more outcome determinative moves.  The talent (both
current and future) was dispersed fairly widely around the league.  Too make
it sound like the fun has been sapped from the league doesn't ring true to
me.
 
I disagree with Mark Blocker's observation that limiting rules changes to
the deep off-season is a recipe for never making any changes.  We have a
rich history of making rule changes that proves otherwise.  Think about what
it took to get the current anti-dumping rules in place.  That involved lots
of debate and careful drafting done in the off-season.
 
What Jeff suggests seems straight-forward enough and from my perspective,
appears unlikely to have significant unintended effects.
 
I can support this alternative.
 
Can we please not engage in a current rules debate about a controversial
issue.  All we'll achieve is ill-will and poorly drafted rules.  If people
care about this topic enough then they should be able to remember to raise
it at an appropriate time.  Now is not that time.
 
-- Rich 
 
  _____  

From: announce-bounces at usml.net [mailto:announce-bounces at usml.net] On Behalf
Of JHWinick at aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 2:37 PM
To: announce at usml.net
Subject: Re: [USML Announce] Serious Rule Change Proposal


In a message dated 3/28/2007 2:23:07 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
RERobbins at iTinker.net writes:


Let me try to rephrase what I think you are suggesting Jeff.
 
The rule would prohibit the trade of a player prior to June 1 if that
player's USML contract is not yet running.
 
Is that the proposal?
 
-- Rich


I think that's it.
  _____  

See what's free at AOL.com <http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000503> . 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lyra.siteprotect.com/pipermail/announce/attachments/20070328/129a1eb1/attachment-0001.htm