Kitsune
Registered User
http://www.thestar.com/Sports/article/227848
I'm sure theres bound to be plenty of thoughts on this one.
I'm sure theres bound to be plenty of thoughts on this one.
They're essentially politicians or PR people, there's no reason you should take anything they say seriously or at face value. Actions speak louder than words.
Damien Cox lives in Hamilton, so needless to say he's quite biased in favor of the idea of Hamilton getting a team. That said, he has a bit of a point. Bettman's statement "I'm not exactly sure why people are focused on the Nashville Predators being anywhere other than Nashville at this point in time" is simply ridiculous. That comment should be offensive to Nashville and Hamilton fans alike. If he doesn't want to address the situation, he should just say "no comment", not insult the intelligence of everybody interested by pretending the issue doesn't exist.
I generally think Bettman has done a good job as commissioner and find most of the arguments used to support the negative public perception silly. But whenever the guy opens his mouth to make a public statement he says stuff like this; he comes across as completely disingenuous and a liar. I can see where the hatred stems from.
I dont think its ridiculous, I think its a very calculated statement aimed at Balsillie.
Maybe this is saying the situation doesnt exist.
For those that do not know Damien Cox is a complete tool and is always writing negative stuff about hockey. If it were not for Bettman, we may have lost some Canadian franchises when the Canadian dollar was down to .65 cents.
This was a quote on the record to a newspaper columnist; the statement was aimed at the fans. If Bettman wanted to make a "calculated statement aimed at Balsillie" then what he actually made was a miscalculated statement using the wrong medium.
That's laughable. The current owner has invoked the escape clause in the lease, and the prospective owner has asked the board to vote on relocation to Hamilton. The NHL will have to address this sooner or later, by way of a board of governors vote, indeed they were *supposed* to address it yesterday but for the "incomplete paperwork" excuse. Unless Bettman's strategy is *actually* to ignore the issue and hope Balsillie goes away (insert loud guffaws), he's being disingenuous and a liar.
I've always wondered why my fellow Leafs fans hate criticism from the press so much, particularly Cox and the like. Sure he's always negative and frequently off the mark, but the funny thing is that if every article he wrote were positive everybody would love him no matter how often he was wrong.
Given that the Leafs organization has failed for the last 40 years I wouldn't mind if there wasn't a single positive word written about them, frankly.
Oh I think you are confused. There is a difference between criticism and poor journalism, which Cox, Simmons etc. are famous for. This article is representative of the skills, the integrity and the research lacking in most of Cox's writtings.
But what the hey, it is summer, the Hamilton fiasco is the flavour of the month. I was therefore not surprised to see Cox and his buddy Simmons both put out negative articles on the situation and BOTH based on absolutely NO sense of reality.
The one good thing about Damien Cox and Steve Simmons is they both made Al Strachan look good for a number of years with their poor work !!!
This was a quote on the record to a newspaper columnist; the statement was aimed at the fans. If Bettman wanted to make a "calculated statement aimed at Balsillie" then what he actually made was a miscalculated statement using the wrong medium.
Well put. It's really the fact checking research that Cox lacks that pisses me off -- he writes stuff that a 6th grade English teacher would cross out for being unsubstantiated... Steve Simmons is a bit of a different case for me, he lets himself be used by sources who want to get their spin in the press... I'm not sure Strachan has EVER looked good, but you're right, compared to these two knuckleheads he's at least merely incompetent...
Actually, its a "cure" clause, and as it was explained to me this most likely would have been invoked with or without Balsillie involved, it speaks more to losing money and having the city make up lost revenue than it does to relocation.... although that is the obvious hammer in this situation.
And we will soon see what the stategy was. Balsillies LOI expires at the end of the month, if there is no extension granted then yes, ignoring him would make him go away.
I have contended from the start of this that Balsillies actions were a blueprint of how not be approved as an owner, time will tell if this assessment was correct.
Nik, surely you do not think that businessmen do not use the media to deliver business messages. The media is used in this manner all the time. And I mean ALL THE TIME. "Aimed at the fans"? I do not think so.
Oh I think you are confused. There is a difference between criticism and poor journalism, which Cox, Simmons etc. are famous for. This article is representative of the skills, the integrity and the research lacking in most of Cox's writtings.
Nik, surely you do not think that businessmen do not use the media to deliver business messages. The media is used in this manner all the time. And I mean ALL THE TIME. "Aimed at the fans"? I do not think so.
All they had to do in 1990 (89?) was say "yeah, we'll pay your $50 million!" and they might've gotten a franchise. The money was the only consideration, and the BoG was offended by anyone who tried to get out of paying the expansion fee up front.Hamilton has already tried the opposite approach of being passive, meeting all the NHL's requirements, letting the league call the shots, and submitting a superior bid for a franchise. That approach was an utter failure. Balsillie's approach can't be any worse.
The one good thing about Damien Cox and Steve Simmons is they both made Al Strachan look good for a number of years with their poor work !!!
It is a bit of a chicken and egg scenario when discussing the relative lack of merit of Cox/Simmons/Strachan. I too would put Cox on top by default, however. As for opinion, they are columnists who are paid to write their opinion; for me it is just that professional writers try to form opinions which are substantiated, rather than pull opinions out of their ass. These guys do only the latter.Silly me. I thought it was Strachan and Simmons that made Cox seem not so bad all these years.
The point is taken though all three are hacks that write almost purely with opinion and very little to back it up. I take whatever they write with a very large grain of salt.
That being said, I did agree with Cox's perspective on Bettman in this article. Bettman was being an idiot by pretending the situation doesn't exist. He would have been better of saying something along the lines of "The issue of the potential Nashville Predators sale and/or relocation will not be discussed in any great length at this meeting. The NHL will not be commenting on this potential transaction or any hypothetical situations relating to any of our franchises. The league's position is now and has always been that we support the City of Nashville as the location of the Predators franchise and we will do everything we can to ensure that the organization is a success there."