Proposal to Ban Loans - Discussion thread

[Stumps]

Originally posted by dono:
I can't believe this is even being discussed.

<font size="3" face="Sylfaen, Verdana, Helvetica">Dono, it's being discussed because that's the way we've agreed to address all of these issues in this league -- through an open, considered democratic process. Once everybody has stated their case and the majority has made a decision, then EVERY owner is bound by it, unlike other leagues, where 31 owners could tell somebody to stop cheesing and they might say "Heck, I'll do what I want -- it's my team, my money, and Scott hasn't prevented me from doing it". And I think we all know that's not a far-fetched scenario [img]wink.gif[/img]

[kidpreacher]

I agree with Dono - there is no logical reason for loans of any type- but that is why there has to be a vote

[rprodent]

With the separate votes for cash and player loans I thought I'd put forward 2 scenarios for consideration.

1. Cash loans.
Team A has $100 mil in the bank, team 2 has $2 mil. Team A loans team B $40 mil. Team B immediately gains, can by a new stadium, sign new conc/merch contracts, or can offer cash bonuses to players. They could also now train players more regularly. Team A doesn't lose at all because they still have bucket loads of cash and can still train daily.

2. Player loan.
Team A loans a $10 mil player to team B. Team A immediately loses the use of that player and can then fill that roster spot with someone. Team B must have $10 mil free in cap space to use that player.

The difference? Well scenario 1 effects the league more as Team A has no real loss. Whether he has $60 mil or $100 mil in the bank does not effect anyone else at all. However the change in Team B will have an effect as they can afford to do more things. Scenario 2 is different because the loss and gain of players for the teams is kept largely in check because of the salary cap. No team can gain any significant advantage because of the cap. So the effect on my team (when I play them) is relatively balanced.

Conclusion.
I can't see the point in banning player loans but then allowing cash loans to go through. Given these 2 scenarios the cash loans will cause more of an inbalance in the league than a player loan.

[eo2seabee]

Whats The definition of a player loan? If i tade a player away then he bl;ossoms into a superstar with someone else and 3 seasons later i want him back is that a loan?

If you ban any kind of loan i think you would have to consider banning all trades with players and money.

[rprodent]

Douglass - that's what I was trying to get at with my previous posts. The cash loan vote is very close to being allowed, yet the player loans look like unanimously being banned. As Douglass says, what is a player loan by definition? What is a cash loan? Would you not be allowed to get your player back because people could argue you loaned your player with the intention to buy back for more later on? What if I borrow cash and to pay it back I agree to train a player for 1 full year and then trade the player as part payment? It's a grey area that I don't think a yes/no vote will resolve even by splitting it into 2 separate votes.

My suggestion - discard the loan vote threads. And since I don't think loans will happen that often a loan proposal should be put to the league in it's own right for people to vote for or against on it's own merits. Once a loan type has been proposed and approved of by the league then this sets a precedent only under the exact same circumstances, though any proposal for a new loan will have to go through the same process but can cite the previous loan to support it's case. Though maybe exclude the loan already in place from precedence.

[hornetjohn]

Originally posted by rprodent:
[QB]Douglass - that's what I was trying to get at with my previous posts. The cash loan vote is very close to being allowed, yet the player loans look like unanimously being banned. As Douglass says, what is a player loan by definition? What is a cash loan? [QB]

<font size="3" face="Sylfaen, Verdana, Helvetica">Cash Loans are not that close to being allowed. It is 11-11 right now, but the Ban on Loans has led most of the time. A player and cash loan is giving someone cash or a player with the intent and agreement to acquire that person or said amount of cash back sometime in the future. In most leagues, it is considered cheating - so the same kind of trades that would be scrutinized in other leagues would come under the same scrutiny here.

[QB]Would you not be allowed to get your player back because people could argue you loaned your player with the intention to buy back for more later on?[QB]

<font size="3" face="Sylfaen, Verdana, Helvetica">The deals would have to be even - and make sense. This league has more than enought smart owners to see through a scam of a trade.

[QB] What if I borrow cash and to pay it back I agree to train a player for 1 full year and then trade the player as part payment?[QB]

<font size="3" face="Sylfaen, Verdana, Helvetica">That would be "No" - that is a loan.

[QB] It's a grey area that I don't think a yes/no vote will resolve even by splitting it into 2 separate votes.[QB]

<font size="3" face="Sylfaen, Verdana, Helvetica">So, no we will complain that 2 separate votes is not enough. It should be enough that it is not allowed in all the other leagues - that Scott has not made any allowance for it.

[QB]My suggestion - discard the loan vote threads. And since I don't think loans will happen that often a loan proposal should be put to the league in it's own right for people to vote for or against on it's own merits. Once a loan type has been proposed and approved of by the league then this sets a precedent only under the exact same circumstances[QB]

<font size="3" face="Sylfaen, Verdana, Helvetica">The voting threads cannot be just discarded - I still think that loans will be banned - but if they are approved, I would be behind a league approval (or at least commissioner approval) of any loans.

<font color="#000002" size="1">[ April 02, 2005 03:26 PM: Message edited by: hornetjohn ]</font>

[jazmartinn]

I have and had no problem with the intial loan. Sheed and I traded coaches in League 7 before it was said that was not allowed. I just don't like the idea of loans - and was very surprised to see a topic discussion that I had assumed was just about that one loan be used to state that the league had okayed loans. And hey, if a vote goes in favor of loans then that works for me - hey, I was against the salary cap too and now I like the salary cap.