Quote:
Originally Posted by Resolute 14
Normally I don't respond to questions asked to dodge answering other questions, but here's an example:
http://www.calgaryherald.com/opinion...589/story.html
As I said, the general view is that the Flames are monitoring Edmonton, and that article points out that the team hasn't gone to the City for anything as of yet.
Which leads me back to the questions you are attempting to dodge. I am curious to see you show me where something that has not happen as of yet could backfire. |
That article does not pass your own ridiculous burden of proof standards that you place on positions you disagree with. The author repeatedly states that these are assumptions.
Bur further, this actually could be used to further my point that King dropped the ball by taking the wait and see approach and seeing the debacle unfold in Edmonton. Maybe that's why ownership is upset because wait and see meant not getting your foot in the door for municpal money.
You see, that's the thing people are throwing around ideas. You can disagree with them but unless you know and that's not about posting articles built on a solid foundation of baseless speculation, you're just as likely to be wrong as me.