09-02-2016, 05:51 PM
Quote:I still don't see this as a loophole but as a different keeper issue altogether. As I mentioned before, PcB's move comes at no one else's expense. I also don't see it as douchebaggery. I might have done the same thing PcB did had I been thinking of it--and I certainly would not see it as underhanded. I really don't understand why this would bother people. Particularly--and again I had forgotten this--since Gordon is suspended for the first four games.
But like I said earlier, I'd vote for a keeper deadline to keep this from being an issue in the future. So if there are two votes to be counted, mine are
1: PcB gets to keep Gordon
2: Starting this year, we establish a keeper deadline
I think you're debating semantics.
There's no question that we already had rules in place to deal with a similar, albeit not identical, issue (claiming IR players).
There seems to be no dispute that what PcB did is a problem that at least needs to be prevented going forward.
As far as I'm concerned that neatly fits the definition of a loophole, but I don't care if you call it such.
The point is simply that if, as is the case, there is a consensus to prevent this issue going forward and there's a way to deal with it this time without hurting PcB (beyond whether or not he can keep Gordon), I see no reason to effectively make an exception this time.
This is not some silly theory that's unsupported and deserves being mocked by photos of Xena.