Buds Board Keepers League

jesus christ, the condition is now "off" ... everybody happy?

these rules are great, now instead of having documented evidence of conditions, there are dozens of "gentleman's agreements" floating around w/ no way of tracking them.

anton wroteCOLONjesus christ, the condition is now "off" ... everybody happy?

You should push for a 3rd.

Maybe you should ask for compensation?

make an otb bet based on markovs gp.
condition issue solved.

bills09 wroteCOLONmake an otb bet based on markovs gp.
condition issue solved.

isn't it a bit retarded that we need to jump through these loopholes in the first place?

I'm one person who thinks the conditions thrown around here are fucking stupid.

Whatever though

SuperMario wroteCOLON

kyuss wroteCOLON
Conditions over GP (unfortunately) have not been allowed in this league for quite a long time.

Why?

i asked the same question to CC a long time ago..
then an NHL deal went down since i joined the CC where GP were clearly stated as a condition, so i advocated for having GP back as a viable condition and that could happen soon, but no official decision has been made yet.

anton wroteCOLON these rules are great, now instead of having documented evidence of conditions, there are dozens of "gentleman's agreements" floating around w/ no way of tracking them.

agree, hope a new resolution will fix this, as far as possible at least.

kyuss wroteCOLON

SuperMario wroteCOLON

kyuss wroteCOLON
Conditions over GP (unfortunately) have not been allowed in this league for quite a long time.

Why?

i asked the same question to CC a long time ago..
then an NHL deal went down since i joined the CC where GP were clearly stated as a condition, so i advocated for having GP back as a viable condition and that could happen soon, but no official decision has been made yet.

anton wroteCOLON these rules are great, now instead of having documented evidence of conditions, there are dozens of "gentleman's agreements" floating around w/ no way of tracking them.

agree, hope a new resolution will fix this, as far as possible at least.

I can count three from the Leafs alone. Pogge, Lupul, and now Lombardi were all dealt with a GP stipulation attached to a draft pick.

hockeysense wroteCOLON
I can count three from the Leafs alone. Pogge, Lupul, and now Lombardi were all dealt with a GP stipulation attached to a draft pick.

yeah, Lombardi was the case i brought up cause happened just recently and i also had handy official link

Conditions on gp are allowed, both in the NHL, and BBKL, not sure why this would be any different than the Matthew Lombardi deal...

Mik can you link me to the rule or CC thread that states GP conditions are not allowed?

MSP4LYFE wroteCOLONConditions on gp are allowed, both in the NHL, and BBKL, not sure why this would be any different than the Matthew Lombardi deal...

GP conditions have been vetoed in BBKL for like a year (wild guess about the period).

I know because if allowed i would have used them, instead when i tried CC and admins blocked those deals and i had to reword them.

I recently brought up the Lombardi example in the CC to change that back and allowing GP as conditions again. But changements on the allowed conditions have not been approved yet.

I'm sure you realize there have been other running rules or modifications never added to the CBA..

the CC members that have no commented on the conditions issue(s) need too.

Nick wroteCOLONthe CC members that have no commented on the conditions issue(s) need too.

Just commented in CC

either way, shiv and i have a bet now that re-instates the condition.

just seems a bit silly to have to do so. why restrict conditions we can just make a bet on? the condition in itself is a bet of sorts.

^ I've been saying the same for a while now...

anton wroteCOLONnow instead of having documented evidence of conditions, there are dozens of "gentleman's agreements" floating around w/ no way of tracking them.

+1

We're enforcing rules that aren't in the CBA, so why wouldn't we ignore rules that are?

yes. the mature and well thought out option of ignoring league rules and focusing solely on your own team is what we should all do.

Other teams than just my own "should" also benefit from the waiver compensation being held back from them.

Like I said, I don't care about the compensation. What I do care about is some teams not getting it, while other teams do. The CBA states that ALL new GMs that take over a team in a certain state get compensation, it does not state that only GMs that took over after a certain point do.