Dave F's posting on 2/23 is very well thought out but implementing it in actuality would be problematic since ther are several conditions and restrictions that would be hard to follow consistently. Bob C's suggestion of Assistant Commishioner's for each leage is good but that would depend on how actively engaged each comisshioner would be in each league, and I suspect that results would vary widely. That may ultimately may be worth a try, though, to free Mike up to concentrate on system improvements and game marketing. But, could we get asst. comisshioner's for each league? Should we go this route, it may be helpful to have guidelines to follow, utilizing much of Dave F's approach, so that some basic level of "consistency of approach" could be implemented. Mike, if he thinks that would be useful, could draft some basic trade guidelines to be followed. All this being said, I have no problems with the UNM trade situation as it is now implemented. All teams and players should be made accessible for trades, and without UNM trading, that wouldn't be possible. Put yourself in Mike's shoes here. Your managing a trading system and making trade decisions that are going to be constantly questioned...and that can't be fun or comfortable for anyone. You really have to have "thick skin" for that. So, maybe, that could be spread around to asst. comisshioner's, but the overall results probably won't change much...someone(s) are always going to question and criticize UNM trading. But the UNM trade system needs to be kept around in some form. And this is coming from a guy who has never made an UNM trade. The only offers I have made were shot down as being inadequate.