[Rumour] UPD: Friedman: Thinks a deal will get done between Gaudreau and the Flames in the next week

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

It's more than an opinion though. One could argue it is defamation and you are hiding behind the anonymity of a forum to make statements about a guy.

They can argue all they want you know as well as I do that is bull#### since he has no cited sources. You might be willing to believe every moron behind a keyboard, but I don't

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

It's more than an opinion though. One could argue it is defamation and you are hiding behind the anonymity of a forum to make statements about a guy.

I was the first to take issue with Alberta Beef's comments but are we really going to get that serious about it?

[spuzzum]

Francis sure did his job. Generate chatter, interest, and speculation. Bravo!

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

They can argue all they want you know as well as I do that is bull#### since he has no cited sources. You might be willing to believe every moron behind a keyboard, but I don't

Not citing insider sources is commonplace in journalism, sports journalism included.

You cite sources to your boss, not every moron behind a keyboard.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

They can argue all they want you know as well as I do that is bull#### since he has no cited sources. You might be willing to believe every moron behind a keyboard, but I don't

But no reporter has cited sources.
So they are all BS?

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

I was the first to take issue with Alberta Beef's comments but are we really going to get that serious about it?

Sure why not? I think he's way over the line.
If people don't like Francis - don't read him.
But saying he makes things up I think makes this board looks bad.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

They can argue all they want you know as well as I do that is bull#### since he has no cited sources. You might be willing to believe every moron behind a keyboard, but I don't

So you are mad at Francis for not citing sources for his info, but you argue you don't need to back up your opinion when people ask?

[wireframe]

This thread is so weird with gaudreauvertime and Alberta_beef on ignore. I can barely tell what people are talking about

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

But no reporter has cited sources.
So they are all BS?

I don't know if you're intentionally being obtuse or what but I've made it clear why I don't trust him.

But if you're going to take this defamation stance you better be consistent and defend other people like Eklund too who are "defamed" all the time on here.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by wireframe

This thread is so weird with gaudreauvertime and Alberta_beef on ignore. I can barely tell what people are talking about

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

Neither can anyone that don't have them on ignore.

[SportsJunky]

I'm not sure if this article has been posted. A comparison between Gaudreau's situation and Benn's situation a couple of years back.

Jamie Benn, graduating from an entry-level pact that featured a $670,000 salary, is itching to get paid. But the restricted free agent and Stars boss Joe Nieuwendyk cannot come to terms.

So Benn is a camp no-show.

“Yeah, it was tough,” Gulutzan, skipper of the Stars back then, recalls Monday.

Johnny Gaudreau’s case is not much different than Benn’s.

In fact, exactly like Benn, this is a star left-winger, a point-producing plum, a 23-year-old cornerstone, in desperate need of a contract. Gaudreau ain’t here now, with the regular-season’s opening faceoff barely a week away.

So when Benn’s name is brought up, maybe it only seems like the Calgary Flames’ new head coach blanches.

“Hopefully, we’re not talking about that here.”

Benn ended up skipping the opening week, but the Stars scraped by in his absence – 2-2-1. Curiously, the young man’s re-appearance, with a five-year arrangement worth $26.25 million in hand, coincided with a downslide.

The Stars managed to regain their .500 footing, but a 22-22-4 record meant no playoffs and no happy ending – Nieuwendyk and Gulutzan lost their jobs.

http://calgaryherald.com/sports/hock...s-movie-before

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Sure why not? I think he's way over the line.
If people don't like Francis - don't read him.
But saying he makes things up I think makes this board looks bad.

Then don't be a hypocrite and defend other people who are regularly accused of making things up. What's the difference? Francis is local? Or because you might know him? Seems like you're taking this way too personally

[Machiavelli]

The thread that keeps on giving.....bad things

It keeps giving bad things

[442scotty]

This forum is starting to be a real s$)@ show

[GullFoss]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

Pretty tired of this trope. Don't like the guy? Fine. The accusation of nepotism is laughable. His mom didn't land him radio and TV gigs. Hell, they worked for competing newspaper chains for about 15 years. Dianne Francis doesn't have that kind of pull in the industry.

Perhaps not true, but certainly "plausible" and definitely not "laughable."

Nepotism is real and its more widespread than you might think. I've seen my managers hire their competitors' children and their competitor hire's my managers' children. I've seen my managers hire our clients and suppliers children. Quid pro quo is arguably one of the biggest mediums of nepotism in our economy.

And even if nepotism doesn't explain success, it can still explain the initial opportunity. And a lot of very talented people are locked out of even getting a chance in some industries because a large proportion of entry level jobs are distributed based on favors rather than merit.

Just out of curiosity, Eric Francis became a Sun columnist in 1994? When did he graduate from university - did he get that gig right out of school? Where were his internships and summer jobs?

Just saying - I bet you could throw a lot of talented writers (or which Eric Francis is not) who like sports into a columnist gig and after 20 years, they too would have a large number of radio and tv gigs. I've always found it quite surprising that Calgary couldn't do better.

[taco.vidal]

The longer this goes the more likely a deal is being worked you gotta figure.
Like many situations where you have a denial and then boom the exact thing being denied happens.

[jschick88]

God Yes!

NHL Insider Darren Dreger had a brief appearance on Toronto’s TSN 1050 Tuesday morning, and near the end of the radio hit he was asked if Gaudreau and the Flames were close to a deal.

“Inching closer to a deal,” Dreger said. “I’m not going to say that it’s imminent. The timing of this is predictable, of course. It’s less about the preseason, and more about being in the lineup for the regular season.

“This is a delicate one. It has been throughout this negotiation. I’m sure Calgary would have preferred to get him under $7 million per year on an extension – a lengthy extension. I think it’s going to be 7-plus.

“But it sounds like it’s going to happen within days.”

http://www.todaysslapshot.com/from-t...n-within-days/

[Demaeon]

Originally Posted by jschick88

God Yes!



http://www.todaysslapshot.com/from-t...n-within-days/

Please stop cluttering up this thread with media bites and updates.

[Beatle17]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Francis isn't a blogger. He's a professional who works for a legitimate news organization - one that can be sued. That's why any anonymous sources are confirmed with his boss.

Francis isn't a reporter though, he is a columnist that gives his "opinion". I had a debate about this with him in the past about some of his stuff. He has no need to confirm his sources with his management any more than I do when posting opinion or rumours. All columnists get around this by saying "unnamed sources".

And I really think Francis would have a hard time sueing anyone for Defamation:
Can my opinion be defamatory?

No—but merely labeling a statement as your "opinion" does not make it so. Courts look at whether a reasonable reader or listener could understand the statement as asserting a statement of verifiable fact. (A verifiable fact is one capable of being proven true or false.) This is determined in light of the context of the statement. A few courts have said that statements made in the context of an Internet bulletin board or chat room are highly likely to be opinions or hyperbole, but they do look at the remark in context to see if it's likely to be seen as a true, even if controversial, opinion ("I really hate George Lucas' new movie") rather than an assertion of fact dressed up as an opinion ("It's my opinion that Trinity is the hacker who broke into the IRS database").

[OmegaV4]

Originally Posted by Demaeon

Please stop cluttering up this thread with media bites and updates.

Not sure if serious lol...