Rule Clarification: Over Budget

Commo_Soldier · 10-13-2008, 12:07 PM

I just have a question on this. I remember prior that it was said any team that was negative for the year would face disciplinary actions. I am just curious if this is still going to be the case?

Alan T · 10-13-2008, 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Commo_Soldier

I just have a question on this. I remember prior that it was said any team that was negative for the year would face disciplinary actions. I am just curious if this is still going to be the case?

Yes, this is still the case, and the board of directors are working on detailing exactly what that punishment will be.

kaosfere · 10-13-2008, 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alan T

Yes, this is still the case, and the board of directors are working on detailing exactly what that punishment will be.

Forced relocation to Detroit.

Alan T · 10-13-2008, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kaosfere

Forced relocation to Detroit.

In the past, that is what we used Canada for

kaosfere · 10-13-2008, 12:43 PM

Tasan · 10-13-2008, 02:04 PM

Did someone go negative this year?

Young Drachma · 10-13-2008, 02:14 PM

Yes, Chicago did.

But per this was the main catalyst. And conversely, a desire to ensure that the new regime didn't have to deal with the Payton contract. That was my albatross and there was too much history involved in it to try to make someone else shoulder the burden.

That's what they're referring to.

And no, it has nothing to do with why I'm leaving. At all, actually. Not because I thought anyone would think that, but just in case someone wants to inject that into the conversation...they're not related even a little bit.

Tasan · 10-13-2008, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alan T

Yes, this is still the case, and the board of directors are working on detailing exactly what that punishment will be.

Whatever it is, it'll follow the previous owner, right? Because it seems harsh to levy a penalty on the new owner who had nothing to do with it. I like ya DC, but it should really stick on you.

10-13-2008, 12:43 PM	#5
kaosfere College Prospect Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Chicagoland	__________________ FOOL: Toronto Osprey (1973-1988) 1161 - 1149 -- 1981 FOOL Champions, 1975 CL Champions Toronto Osprey (2001) 89-73 -- 2001 CL Champions SBL: Charlotte Monarchs (1992-1994) 237 - 186

10-13-2008, 02:04 PM	#6
Tasan College Starter Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Houston, or there about	Did someone go negative this year? __________________ FOOLX: Spring Lions FOOL: Colorado Rancheros 2011 Golden Scribes winner for best Interactive Dynasty

10-13-2008, 02:14 PM	#7
Young Drachma Dark Cloud Join Date: Apr 2001	Yes, Chicago did. But per this was the main catalyst. And conversely, a desire to ensure that the new regime didn't have to deal with the Payton contract. That was my albatross and there was too much history involved in it to try to make someone else shoulder the burden. That's what they're referring to. And no, it has nothing to do with why I'm leaving. At all, actually. Not because I thought anyone would think that, but just in case someone wants to inject that into the conversation...they're not related even a little bit. Last edited by Young Drachma : 10-13-2008 at 02:15 PM.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)