Due to the difficulty in creating a reliable and flexible trade approval program, I have always approved trades manually for all PB leagues.

At various times I have taken a lot of heat from both sides of this issue: 1. the guys who want no interference and 2. the guys who think too many bad trades get approved. 3. The guys in my leagues who rightly feel I should not approve trades in those leagues (I tried a committee apporach for this one a few years back, but it was too difficult to manage even when I was not on the road 9 days out of 14...)

To properly frame this discussion I should point out the fact that the "bad" trade YOU see has often been "re-worked". The methodology is the following: I message both managers and ask both to comment on my concerns or questions about the trade. Lately and in the interests of time I have had to speed up the process by occasionally rejecting the deal outright without messaging or mrssaging both managers and rejecting the deal with the understanding that I would accept the same deal if it were re-submitted with a good explanation.

This method often yields trades I still do not feel are very good but if both managers insist they want to do soemthign even after my involvement it gets very difficult to swim against that strong a tide.

I am at the point where I really do not have the time or energy to fight this battle any longer, but my quandry is that I might be one of the first to quit a league where one manager is able to create a super team for the next decade with a a few well timed robberies of a new and or unaware manager.
One of my primary problems with mail leagues and other SIM experiences before CSN/PB was the LACK of any trade supervision...

How do you guys feel about this?
Please post comments below this post.

Mike Bravard (PB)