Quote:
Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan
I wouldn't characterize it like that. He read the clause, interpreted it a certain way (a way I happen to agree with). In effect, he did know how the clause worked--he may have been wrong (I suspect he probably wasn't) but that's not the same thing as "risking the pick on a technicality."
A reporter then called the league, posed what the league thought was a hypothetical, and got an off-the-cuff answer (which the league has since backed away from). He then ran with a sensational story instead of actually calling back and confirming the interpretation with the league once the stakes of it were actually clear.
It's irresponsible journalism, plain and simple. Sports journalists are seldom held to account for this sort of thing, so I don't expect that to start here, but that is bad fact checking; it just is. It's almost as though (gasp) the reporter didn't even care if the allegations were true and just wanted to stir up a controversy.
|
The only thing irresponsible here is that Feaster basically says he knew that this was the case and did it anyway. I happen to think that Feaster has done a good job so far; the team is playing a totally different style this season, and while we're not winning a ton, I can see progress.
Problem is that this is inexcusable. You can't gamble away first round picks! In all honesty if the statement was along the lines of "it's a new CBA and we simply didn't see that" it would be better than "we knew and thought we were above the law". It shows a gross negligence on the Flames part to act that foolishly.
The reason I think he should be fired though, is because this is exactly what he gets paid for. Almost anyone here on the board could give a "hockey" opinion about whether a 1st and 3rd for ROR is a good idea; some better than others. The thing that most of us can't do as well though is that business aspect. We don't always know the cap implications as well, or the specifics of the CBA/MOU. That's supposed to be what the GM does and in this instance he either failed to act properly or charted a course bound for disaster.