Quote:
Originally Posted by gargamel
While, with the benefit of hindsight, it sounds like the Detroit offer was better, you can't judge Feaster without knowing whether the reports were true that Detroit was insisting that we retain salary but the Flames weren't willing to.
Just because Burke says that the Flames' owners have authorized him to retain salary doesn't mean that they'd given Feaster that same green light. Maybe that was one of Burke's conditions for taking the job. Or maybe ownership feels differently now that our payroll is among the lowest in the league. Or maybe Feaster really did have that option available to him. None of us know which of those scenarios is true, so turning this into "evidence" that Feaster sucked is unfair. Though that's never stopped some of you before, so carry on I guess.
|
Feaster and Burke have said in separate occasions that ownership is willing to spend money in any scenario if it makes the flames better. I highly doubt for one week they went back on their word. Feaster said he did not want to retain salary so he could use the cap space with buy outs and teams needing cap space during the summer. His theory failed.
Glad he is gone. I'm not even sure Feaster would have taken the 2nd for Berra.