I was talking purely about the responsibility of approving trades. If you want to see my beliefs on the business, go down several threads.

All I know is that if Mike approves an unbalanced trade he looks at the possibility of having 18 or so managers beating down his down complaining of "colusion" or "stocking" - if I were in his shoes and I see a trade that is OBVIOUSLY lop-sided I will not approve it until I hear reasoning from both people as to WHY they want to make the trade.

If both sides speak the reasons why they see benefit, then fine - I'll let it go because

A) I now understand why the trade makes sense
B) When the complaints come in, I can defend the trade

Think about it, I mean REALLY think about it. If you read a trade and it obivously raises a red flag in your mind, wouldn't you do the same?

Yes, those two owners making the trade are paying customers - BUT so are the other 18 or so managers in the league.