Trades should only be voided if there is collusion, like if one team dumps star players to another team for peanuts. Or if a veteran owner is taking advantage of a rookie owner.
I don't think either is true in this case. How can you say the trade should be voided without an explanation as to why?
Re: Completed Trade: Tampa Bay Buccaneers and Denver Broncos
This is a swap of 1st round picks by a team than has never had a winning season to a team that routinely wins 12+ games.
That's no reason to void a trade.
I need this explained. Why don't we all just give our 1st round picks to Tampa Bay with this reasoning.
I explained it in an earlier reply. Trades should only be voided if there is collusion or a new owner is being taken advantage of.
Since that's not clear enough, trades should not be voided just because someone doesn't like the compensation package. Two owners came to an agreement so who are you to tell them they can't do it?
Re: Completed Trade: Tampa Bay Buccaneers and Denver Broncos
