View Single Post
11-19-2003, 12:24 PM
Registered User
discostu's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Nomadville
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,419
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by BigDaddyMeatWhistle
How was that statement proven false?

Do you think that Colorado trading for Roy and Dallas signing Belfour and Hull proves that false? If so that proves the opposite, that a performance advantage leads to an economic advantage. That teams in medium sized American markets playing in outdated rinks can pay for players just demonstrates that being if you're elite then you can spend. It doesn't prove that if you can spend, you can become elite.
Deal with the scenario that I provided (Flames and Rangers). If that scenario would occur under this CBA, then it proves your statement false

You claim that richer teams will not have an easier time building an elite team than a poorer team. I have provided a scenario where a team with a more lucrative market is more likely to build a winning team than a poorer team. This proves your assertation false.

You can keep trying to divert the conversation, but it doesn't change the fact that you are wrong. Either prove that scenario as false, or retract your claim.

discostu is offline