In remembrance of 9/11/01



Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register.
Nov 22nd, 2017, 8:45pm EST

Home Home Help Help Search Search Members Members GamesGames Login Login Register Register
Fantasyfootballer.com's Gridiron trade

"Welcome to 'the Gridiron'... Fantasy football at its best!"

Fantasy Football News Feed Co-commissioner Services Add "the Gridiron" to your site
Lend a hand...  Make a donation to "the Gridiron"!!!
   Fantasyfootballer.com's Gridiron
   Featured Leagues
   GBRFL
(Moderator: Stegfucius)
   trade
Previous topic|Next topic
Pages: 1  Reply Reply Notify of replies Notify of replies Send Topic Send Topic Print Print
   Author  Topic: trade  (Read 574 times)
DB
Fantasy Field General
GBRFLer
Champ - '95, '98, '08, '09, '10, '13, '15
*****
# 22



7X Ultimate Supreme Champion

   
View Profile

Posts: 682

Back to top

trade
« on: Oct 29th, 2002, 10:50am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Yo guys,
 
Frank and I made a deal -- Miller and Chandler for Toomer and my 2nd round pick.  However, I forgot to drop an extra player.  Steve emailed us about what to do...  He suggested voiding the trade or using one of my other drops from my free agent requests.  
 
I would have picked up two players in free agency.  Steve is suggesting taking my second drop to balance this trade.  However, that does not make sense to me.  Why not take my first drop for that matter.  My other drops have nothing to do with this trade.  Further, to void the trade is ridiculous.
 
I think the best way to go is to just drop another player.  Clearly, it would have to be someone who did not play for me this week, so it would not effect any games.  Does anyone have a problem doing it that way?
Logged
DirkDiggler
Gridiron Great
GBRFLer
Champ - '14
*****
# 5





   
View Profile

Posts: 3118

Back to top

Re: trade
« Reply #1 on: Oct 29th, 2002, 4:42pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Since I am relatively new to the league, I would have to defer to past history and the rules.  What has happened in the past?  Has this ever happened before?
 
Logged

"Every rule has an exception....the exception can't become the rule"
Stegfucius
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

*****




I love ''the Gridiron''!

   
View Profile WWW Email

Posts: 18971

Back to top

Re: trade
« Reply #2 on: Oct 29th, 2002, 5:31pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Yea, I do!
 
Here is the e-mail message I just sent:
 
"Dave,
 
This is actually how I have dealt with it in the past, as recently as this year in a trade between Steve Warner and Doug Owens.  Ironically Tyrone Wheatley was the player dropped in that deal, as well (I think).  What else I have done is delay the trade¡¯s taking effect for a week.  To do otherwise sets the wrong precedent!  Regarding your question as to how your ¡°second drop¡± has anything to do with your drop for the trade, COME ON, DAVE!  By your listing him as a drop, you are indicating that this is a player with whom you are willing to part services.  Don¡¯t give me this tendentious, loophole-finding bullshit!  You made a mistake!  There are consequences for that.  Your making me have to explain this out and giving me this headache is very disappointing.  Moving right along, to make a drop after the games have been played allows you to do so with information you are NOT supposed to have.  Yea, this situation may (apparently) be an easy one (to you).  But, the ¡°Pandora¡¯s Box¡± I would be opening could make for HUGE headaches and clusterfucks in the future.  All free-agent requests, trades and according drops MUST be submitted by the kickoff of the first game(s) of the week.  NO EXCEPTIONS!  You did not do so!  You don¡¯t get a free pass!  I thought I toed the line as best as possible by letting the trade go through and doing it as I did.  Obviously, you don¡¯t appreciate the objective and fairly merciful judgment I tried to apply.  You just want it YOUR way.  Well, that ain¡¯t happenin¡¯!  And, again, I can¡¯t give you a choice here about whether to let the trade stand or pick up the kicker because you would be allowed to do so with information you are not supposed to have.  It is funny how intelligent people can become so deluded when they are only thinking of themselves.  Yea, I am not happy about your line of inquiry...
 
...Frustrated,
Steve"
 
The real pisser, here, is that you are using the objective and fairly merciful judgment I did make against me, trying to convolute things to garner support.  Come on... don't bullshit me!  If you did not have to pick up another player, Wheatley probably would have been the drop.  Instead, you make it sound otherwise, and in the process take what was a kind action on my part and turn it against me when I really did not have any other choice according to the rules other than to delay/nullify the trade!  FUCK!
« Last Edit: Oct 30th, 2002, 6:39am by Stegfucius » Logged
DB
Fantasy Field General
GBRFLer
Champ - '95, '98, '08, '09, '10, '13, '15
*****
# 22



7X Ultimate Supreme Champion

   
View Profile

Posts: 682

Back to top

Re: trade
« Reply #3 on: Oct 29th, 2002, 8:20pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Steve,  
 
The problems with your argument are clear.  First, my suggestion of dropping another player was not self-serving.  As it turns out, it would not be disadvantageous to me to either have the trade nulled or to have no kicker.  I only needed the QBs for Farve's bye week, which is over.  Further, the kicker was only for the bye week too.  To nullify the trade would be to my advantage.  Instead, it was I who was objective in suggesting I DROP another player.  How can DROPPING another player be self-serving?
 
Your solution does not make sense.  What is the rule?  Is the rule that if you fail to drop a player after a trade then players you intended to drop for other players are then used?  What if I player is ear-marked to be dropped for a certain player, such as a kicker on a bye week.  What if I dropped a defense for another to upgrade at that position?
 
The real problem here is your response to my inquiry....  I incorrectly submitted a line-up, which happens.  As commissioner, you decided what to do, which is fine.  I asked what the rule was and the basis of your judgment.  I suggested an alternative and advised the league of the situation for their opinion.  In response, you imply that I am self-serving and you accuse me of underhanded tactics.  
 
The only dangerous precedent I see is disuading owners from doing what I did.  This league has always been a democracy.  However, I did not have input on how to deal with Steve and Doug's problem.  I did not even see a post about it.  Whatever the rule is, I will certainly abide.  However, should I suffer ad hominen attacks because I disagree with you?  As you said, you decided to "toe the line" here.  If I have a problem with your ruling or want the league's opinion, I have a right to say so.  
 
Steve (Warner), you said you want to defer to past history and the rules.  You are right.  Ironically, Stegeman implies that you were in a similar situation this year.  Clearly, you are not sure of the rule which is the basis of my earlier post.  Neither was I!
 
The bottom line is this...  dropping a random player is a bad rule.  Either the trade should be voided or delayed or I drop another player.  More importantly, the whole league should have input on these issues.
Logged
Stegfucius
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

*****




I love ''the Gridiron''!

   
View Profile WWW Email

Posts: 18971

Back to top

Re: trade
« Reply #4 on: Oct 29th, 2002, 8:29pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

on Oct 29th, 2002, 8:20pm, Fiedlers Choice wrote:
Steve,  
 
The problems with your argument are clear.  First, my suggestion of dropping another player was not self-serving.  As it turns out, it would not be disadvantageous to me to either have the trade nulled or to have no kicker.  I only needed the QBs for Farve's bye week, which is over.  Further, the kicker was only for the bye week too.  To nullify the trade would be to my advantage.  Instead, it was I who was objective in suggesting I DROP another player.  How can DROPPING another player be self-serving?

 
OH MY FUCKIN' GOD, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?  You NEEDED BOTH the quarterbacks and the kicker THIS PAST WEEK!  Yea, now, for this upcoming week, it doesn't matter.  But, any change to my ruling affects this past weekend's games, not this upcoming weekend's. ???
 
I am merely on break now.  I will revisit this later and sift through the rest of the bullshit.
Logged
Stegfucius
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

*****




I love ''the Gridiron''!

   
View Profile WWW Email

Posts: 18971

Back to top

Re: trade
« Reply #5 on: Oct 30th, 2002, 8:33am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Okay, now for a more thorough scrutinization...
 
on Oct 29th, 2002, 8:20pm, Fiedlers Choice wrote:
Steve,  
 
The problems with your argument are clear.  First, my suggestion of dropping another player was not self-serving.  As it turns out, it would not be disadvantageous to me to either have the trade nulled or to have no kicker.  I only needed the QBs for Farve's bye week, which is over.  Further, the kicker was only for the bye week too.  To nullify the trade would be to my advantage...

 
Dude, the first paragraph of your message makes no sense/is so convoluted.  First, the key wording here is "as it turns out."  My solution here should have absolutely NOTHING to do with the games.  I get what you mean.  To nullify the trade now after you have either won or lost, probably lost, the games, regardless of whether you did or did not have the QB or the PK, would be to your actual advantage.  BUT, that is not for me to consider.  I have to consider things as if the week's games still have not yet been played.  I have not even started running the stats yet for this week.  The reality that these transactions ultimately make no difference to the outcomes of your games is a variable that MUST remain irrelevant in my decision-making process.  Next time it may make a difference.  Ultimately, from your side though, on a personal note, since you do appear to know the results of your games, it does beg the question as to why you are even putting me through this.  Moreover, when, in fact, during this process did you come to know that it did not make a difference?
 
Quote:
...  Instead, it was I who was objective in suggesting I DROP another player.  How can DROPPING another player be self-serving?

 
Your wording makes it sound like you are just going to drop another, third player and that is all that is going to happen, in effect donating another player to the free-agent pool.  That does not make sense though.  So, what you are really saying here is that you want to drop a third player over and above Wheatley, whom you would drop in order to get your kicker, which I understand now, but MUST IGNORE nevertheless, does not affect the outcomes of your games whatsoever.  The problem with this is that you get to choose an extra drop for Week 8 knowing what happened during Week 8.  For argument's sake, let's say the player you were going to drop was Dorsey Levens, who would have been a consideration prior to Week 8 (still is actually).  But, let's say Duce Staley tore an ACL during Monday Night's game and Levens accrued his numbers instead.  Well, all of a sudden, Levens would (unfairly) be off your drop list.  Now, I know this did not happen here, but it DEFINITELY could.  There have been many weeks during my fantasy football career where I wish I could have dropped a different player after the fact.  I wish I would have cut Marcus Robinson instead of Corey Bradford back in Week 4 and would have if I had been able to see Bradford's stats through Week 4 before submitting the cut.  To further my point, I have even dealt with cases where one of our GM's dropped a player he did not even have on his roster for a free-agent.  Said GM has typically been Feder. Bottom line, during those weeks (has not happened this year), he did not get squat for that drop.  The precedent I am setting now applies to both of these situations, ones involving uneven trades and an innocent mistake like yours as well as ones involving utter stupidity.  Again, I have to consider all of this when making a ruling, and that ruling cannot be... (to be continued)
 
Quote:
Your solution does not make sense.  What is the rule?  Is the rule that if you fail to drop a player after a trade then players you intended to drop for other players are then used?  What if I player is ear-marked to be dropped for a certain player, such as a kicker on a bye week.  What if I dropped a defense for another to upgrade at that position?

 
Dave, come on, bro'! You're killin' me here!  My solution does not make sense. Dude, it was your lineup submission that did not make sense, friend.  Now, I am merely in cleanup mode.  Almost any decision I make at this point is dubious/can be questioned to one degree or another.  But, the bottom line is I am in reaction mode, trying to salvage things as best as possible and if you think that my decisions do not have the best interest of the GBRFL at heart, well, ... no answer I give will suffice.  That is why I simply put for "obvious" reasons in my initial response.  I thought by pairing this fact up with the situation at hand, I would not need to spell things out SO specifically the way I am having to.
 
Regarding ear-marking players, sure, I am with you.  That is what the "Comments" section is for.  If such was stated in your "Comments" section, I would have had no choice but to void the trade.  That is not the case, BUT, to be honest, if, in my assessment, I thought that your second-round pickup was so crucial to your Week 8 lineup that it outweighed the (PRE-WEEK EIGHT) interests in the trade on both your and Frank's parts, I would have nullified the trade.  I thought that the acquisition of necessary QB's and the interest of an innocent third party, Frank, outweighed your getting a kicker, albeit a necessary one.  So, I came up with the best possible solution given the cards I had been dealt/you dealt me (let's not forget that fact, even though you did so innocently).  AGAIN, THE KEY HERE IS THAT I CANNOT ALLOW ANY TRANSACTIONS, TRADES, FREE-AGENT PICKUPS OR DROPS, AFTER THE WEEK HAS BEGUN... not because it would not work out okay this time, but because of the precedent it would set and the "Pandora's Box" it would leave open.  If I were to allow this, people could (though I would not expect it, but would nevertheless still not want to leave it open to possibility) consciously submit uneven trades without their extra drops with it in mind that they want to (unfairly) watch the games first.  Or, maybe like the Feder example above, they could make a "mistake" with their drops for free-agents in order to get a glimpse of the games before submitting their "real" drop.  What about when a guy's free-agent list has been exhausted?  Can I then defer to that drop?  Should be able to, but given your line of reasoning...  I am just laying out a few obvious examples.  There is really an exponential amount of permutations here.  Ethics aside, this is an administrative nightmare.  Moreover, these possible realities are exacerbated by the fact that I am in Korea and not able to process things immediately after the start of the first set of games for the week.  If I could make a quick phone call and get the drop within minutes of the start of the first game(s), then I suppose what you propose would not be that big of a deal.  That having been said, I have always done it the way I have this time even when I was Stateside.
 
Quote:
The real problem here is your response to my inquiry....  I incorrectly submitted a line-up, which happens.  As commissioner, you decided what to do, which is fine.  I asked what the rule was and the basis of your judgment.  I suggested an alternative and advised the league of the situation for their opinion.  In response, you imply that I am self-serving and you accuse me of underhanded tactics.
 
The only dangerous precedent I see is dissuading owners from doing what I did.  This league has always been a democracy.  However, I did not have input on how to deal with Steve and Doug's problem.  I did not even see a post about it.  Whatever the rule is, I will certainly abide.  However, should I suffer ad hominen attacks because I disagree with you?  As you said, you decided to "toe the line" here.  If I have a problem with your ruling or want the league's opinion, I have a right to say so.

 
Well, here is where I may be wrong, maybe.  If you were just looking for opinion after the fact and not calling things "for a vote," there is no direct harm in that, I suppose, other than that it is just an ill thing to do.  I certainly have taken this that you were looking to garner support in order to change my mind or somehow protest the ruling and force me to change it.  If that is the case, that is not only ill but ill-conceived.  Yes, I have typically gone about things that can be dealt with in a democratic manner democratically.  My hands should not be tied by that positive fact, though.  I want your guys' input in the creative unfolding of the GBRFL.  That having been said, some things are just not up for vote, ever.  (This is where the "to be continued" part from above continues) One of those things MUST be the autonomy I have in making decisions like these.  The reasoning for this is twofold.  For one, we cannot allow other league members who have other "seemingly" unrelated, (potentially) self-serving interests, such as those in the Standings (let's say this did have an effect on the outcomes of your and Frank's games) or Player Transactions (let's say someone else wanted Phil Dawson), have a say in such issues.  Also, there are administrative considerations that only I deal with and can fathom.  We are at the point where you just got to trust me and let me do my job.  Democracy has its place.  Remember even Plato/Socrates, great contributors to the original ideals of democracy, ultimately believed that the best form of government was that of the "Benevolent Dictator/Philosopher King," not a democracy, which has its limitations.  Hell, that is why we have our Supreme Court set up the way we do.  Judges... and this is an issue of judgment.  Just because I have chosen to give you guys a say in matters, something that many commissioners would not even take the time to do, don't use that, in fact, (very positive) fact (conveniently and tendentiously) against me in an argument like this.  That just makes me feel rotten.  It makes me feel like when I was teaching middle school and my kids ignored the rules of the classroom after I had given them some leeway... too early on.  I never ended up getting back that control.  In any case, also consistent with how I have run things, but left tendentiously unmentioned, even if this were a votable issue, which I surely do not think it is, it would not be voted upon now for this current instance.  It would be voted on and decided during the offseason for the future.
 
Quote:
Steve (Warner), you said you want to defer to past history and the rules.  You are right.  Ironically, Stegeman implies that you were in a similar situation this year.  Clearly, you are not sure of the rule which is the basis of my earlier post.  Neither was I!

 
Well, Steve did not make the error.  Doug did and did not make a stink about it!  So, it went by Steve and the rest of you seamlessly.  (Of course, if you want to continue this argument, I am expecting you to say or at least be thinking, "But Doug is a newbie .  Of course he is not going to assert himself.")
 
Quote:
The bottom line is this...  dropping a random player is a bad rule.  Either the trade should be voided or delayed or I drop another player.  More importantly, the whole league should have input on these issues.

 
Dave, how is this a "random" dropping?  You listed him as a drop!  You would, even according to your own proposed solution, end up dropping Wheatley anyway.  A "random" drop would be like if I just took a player off your roster without your consultation/input at all.  This is not a "random" drop, for God's sake.  You obviously (cosmically) affected the decision.  According to what you state (directly) above, the only choice I had was to void the trade because, for the last time, ALL TRANSACTIONS, TRADES, FREE-AGENT PICKUPS AND DROPS, MUST BE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE WEEK HAS BEGUN.  Otherwise, a clusterfuck of exceptions and loopholes will be exposed and, besides all the ethical considerations, I will have an administrative nightmare in the waiting.  I will take your opinion that nullification may be the only option under advisement, though.
 
And, finally, again, yes, everybody in the league has a right to his opinion, but, no, not all issues are up for debate.
 
 
 
By the way, the million-dollar question:  "who is this fucking player you are so eager to give up for a fucking meaningless kicker anyway?"
Logged
Art Vandalay
GM
GBRFLer
Champ - '96, '05
*****
# 11



Bow to the master

   
View Profile

Posts: 421

Back to top

Re: trade
« Reply #6 on: Oct 30th, 2002, 12:56pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

So I get screwd for not doing anything wrong?
What the hell sense does that make?
This is bullshit!!
I'm quitting this freaking league, because I can't deal with this shit anymore.
  Allright, just kidding, I can live without the 16 receiving yards that Toomer put up. Se'la'vid.
 
 
Logged

Why don't you just tell me what you want to see.
DB
Fantasy Field General
GBRFLer
Champ - '95, '98, '08, '09, '10, '13, '15
*****
# 22



7X Ultimate Supreme Champion

   
View Profile

Posts: 682

Back to top

Re: trade
« Reply #7 on: Oct 30th, 2002, 8:51pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Well, is seems the issue is decided.   .  Steve's last post says it clear.  The commissioner makes decisions and they cannot be challenged.  Arguments should not be made and logic need not apply.  
Quote:
Just because I have chosen to give you guys a say in matters, something that many commissioners would not even take the time to do, don't use that, in fact, (very positive) fact (conveniently and tendentiously) against me in an argument like this
Logged
DB
Fantasy Field General
GBRFLer
Champ - '95, '98, '08, '09, '10, '13, '15
*****
# 22



7X Ultimate Supreme Champion

   
View Profile

Posts: 682

Back to top

Re: trade
« Reply #8 on: Oct 30th, 2002, 8:57pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

my past post posted too early.
 
...  If other league members have no problem with this then neither do I.
 
Actually, Steve, I believe the Supreme Court reviews other courts or branches of government.  Here you made clear that there are no checks and balances.  That was your point, right?
 
As such, based on Steve's decision to run the league as he stated, I retract my objection to his ruling.  However, I do not withdraw my objection to the way it was handled or the personal attacks.
Logged
Stegfucius
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

*****




I love ''the Gridiron''!

   
View Profile WWW Email

Posts: 18971

Back to top

Re: trade
« Reply #9 on: Oct 31st, 2002, 2:47am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

on Oct 30th, 2002, 8:57pm, Fiedlers Choice wrote:
Actually, Steve, I believe the Supreme Court reviews other courts or branches of government.  Here you made clear that there are no checks and balances.  That was your point, right?

 
Yes, that is correct!  At a certain point/On certain issues (particularly those with a narrow scope, especially if they are reparatory in nature like this incident), relatively few if you really think about it, I have the ultimate say.  Moreover, I firmly believe that it needs to be that way.  Someone needs to be "untouchable" in such situations, and I firmly believe I have established a good track-record of being fair-minded and level-headed.  I think the mere success of the league is evidence of that.  "Spare the rod; spoil the child!"  Somehow, in a manifold way, that applies here!
Logged
Stegfucius
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

*****




I love ''the Gridiron''!

   
View Profile WWW Email

Posts: 18971

Back to top

Re: trade
« Reply #10 on: Oct 31st, 2002, 3:08am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

on Oct 29th, 2002, 10:50am, Fiedlers Choice wrote:
...  I would have picked up two players in free agency.  Steve is suggesting taking my second drop to balance this trade.  However, that does not make sense to me.  Why not take my first drop for that matter. ...

 
BECAUSE I WAS GIVING YOU A FUCKING BREAK!  You even traded for that first pick, which indicates that you really wanted it and, at any rate, have more of a vested interest in maintaining it.  If I had taken your first pick, that would have totally fucked up your other trade.  I thought to myself that that would not be fair to you.  Obviously, de facto, one wants his first-round pick more than his second, anyway.  I was making the best of an already screwed-up scenario.  I had TWO choices, a fact which you still seem to not get.
 
Quote:
My other drops have nothing to do with this trade.

 
Come on, dude! A drop is a drop is a drop, at least 99.9% of the time and even then the specifics should be indicated in the "Comments" section.  In all of my years of playing fantasy football, I cannot specifically recall a time when I put in a specific drop for a specific pickup, and if I did, which I can vaguely recall having done in the past (not this year), I made note of it on the lineup submission form.
 
Quote:
Further, to void the trade is ridiculous.

 
Why?  On its face, it is an invalid trade, period.
 
Quote:
I think the best way to go is to just drop another player.  Clearly, it would have to be someone who did not play for me this week, so it would not effect any games.

 
A real fan of "logic" I see!  Don't you get it!  NO TRANSACTIONS, TRADES, FREE-AGENT PICKUPS OR DROPS, CAN BE SUBMITTED AFTER THE GAMES HAVE STARTED.  Of course, such a circumstance can "affect games"... future games... by your having a player on your roster you might not have had had you had to make the drop before the games were played.
« Last Edit: Nov 4th, 2002, 9:58pm by Stegfucius » Logged
Stegfucius
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

*****




I love ''the Gridiron''!

   
View Profile WWW Email

Posts: 18971

Back to top

Re: trade
« Reply #11 on: Oct 31st, 2002, 3:11am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

on Oct 30th, 2002, 8:51pm, Fiedlers Choice wrote:
...logic need not apply.

 
Logged
DOLFAN
Red Zone Master
GBRFLer
*****
# 25




I love ''the Gridiron''!

    jomrfootbl@aol
View Profile Email

Posts: 1343

Back to top

Re: trade
« Reply #12 on: Nov 5th, 2002, 8:38pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

WOW, i missed all this. Hmm and to think Joey Porter was looking pretty good on Feder's roster.  
Logged

GO TONY, GO TONY, GO TONY!
Stegfucius
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

*****




I love ''the Gridiron''!

   
View Profile WWW Email

Posts: 18971

Back to top

Re: trade
« Reply #13 on: Nov 5th, 2002, 8:56pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

on Nov 5th, 2002, 8:38pm, DOLFAN wrote:
WOW, i missed all this. Hmm and to think Joey Porter was looking pretty good on Feder's roster.  

 
Thank God for a little levity! I have been a bitch the last couple weeks!
Logged
Pages: 1  Reply Reply Notify of replies Notify of replies Send Topic Send Topic Print Print

Previous topic|Next topic

Fantasyfootballer.com's Gridiron » Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.1!
YaBB © 2000-2002,
Xnull. All Rights Reserved.

Most smilies provided by "MySmilies.com", "Jason's Smiley Collection" or "Clicksmilies.com".
"the Gridiron" Copyright © 2002-2016 - Product of FantasyFootballer.com. All rights reserved.