Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Root
Why do so many fans equate the opening day roster with the entire season's roster?
Every. Single. Year.
And every single year, the roster changes for game 2 (and again for game 3, and so on).
Jankowski will be back on the team ASAP. Quite possibly as quickly as game #2.
The hyperbole over this issue is ridiculous. Especially the 'always earned, never given' whine. Always earned doesn't necessarily have to apply to game #1 in the absolute.
Jankowski has earned a spot on the team. And he will have it. As soon as they can make it happen. Likely by game #2 or 3, I would bet.
Scratching him off Calder candidacy lists because he is going to miss game 1? lol
|
Part of my problem with this discussion is you had the same tone in the Tanner Glass thread calling anyone who didn't like it out for whining about the "earned never given" thing, concretely concluding Glass's four pre-season games
proved he should get a contract.
I'm not overly upset about it (it's a league minimum easily demotable if it doesn't work) but I don't agree. He did throw a lot of hits and didn't look bad, but to me it was a tiny sample size for a guy who has a huge sample size of being a non-factor.
Putting that aside, you can't talk people down telling them to accept it because Glass earned it and then turn around and tell people not to be upset when Jankowski didn't (for now).
He has earned it and then some. In a much more meaningful and impactful way.
I said a page ago, I don't like it at all, but I understand this may be a paper transaction and he may not even leave Calgary this week. I'm sure he'll be back.
Still, the optics suck, and I can see why people are upset with the notion. Until we know he'll be back (and how soon), people have every right to be upset that our most talented prospect (who earned a spot) has been demoted on paper because we offered a one-way contract to guy who was awful in the AHL last year.