Now that it looks like the whole "No Crawford to the Yankees" thing has been shown to be a misunderstanding of the contract language, can we take out the Yankee-Red Sox element and discuss the concept?
It strikes me that if in one of my fantasy leagues I agreed to trade Carl Crawford to Team X with the side agreement that at no time could they trade him to Team Y and the rest of the league found out we'd be having a rather large and heated discussion about just what constitutes collusion.
Thoughts? If it is collusion for the purposes of fantasy (is it?), then is it legit at the MLB level? Is it bad/good/neutral for the game? Would it limit competition?
It strikes me that if in one of my fantasy leagues I agreed to trade Carl Crawford to Team X with the side agreement that at no time could they trade him to Team Y and the rest of the league found out we'd be having a rather large and heated discussion about just what constitutes collusion.
Thoughts? If it is collusion for the purposes of fantasy (is it?), then is it legit at the MLB level? Is it bad/good/neutral for the game? Would it limit competition?
Comment