More digs at the Skins from Fatty P

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by That Guy

some players DID have to give back money cause of the 30% rule if the new cba didn't happen; that's really hard to predict someone agreeing to.

This post makes no sense. The CBA did get extended. Given that fact, everyone and their brother should have seen the standard restructures coming.

The restructures you're talking about would have gone into effect only if the CBA deal never got done. They were special circumstances, but they were void as soon as the deal was signed. Once that happened, it was back to business as usual, which included the standard restructures.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

This post makes no sense. The CBA did get extended. Given that fact, everyone and their brother should have seen the standard restructures coming.

The restructures you're talking about would have gone into effect only if the CBA deal never got done. They were special circumstances, but they were void as soon as the deal was signed. Once that happened, it was back to business as usual, which included the standard restructures.

In That Guy's defense, he was responding to my earlier post where we were discussing Pasta's assertion (prior to the CBA being approved) that the Skins would be playing 20-30 rookies if the CBA didn't go through.

I stand by my original post That Guy, it was an example of shoddy analytical journalism simply because their was no attempt to verify it from the source or even to seek the Skins' FO point of view. Rather, he went to OTHER gm's and asked them about the Skins salary issues. Does this method demonstrate a bias? IMHO - yes. Again, it is not an isolated instance, as in his latest comments, it represents a consistent lack of seeking any facts that would support the actions Skins FO actions but then reaching conclusions that would seem to require an analysis of all sides of an issue rather than just one point of view.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

This post makes no sense. The CBA did get extended. Given that fact, everyone and their brother should have seen the standard restructures coming.

The restructures you're talking about would have gone into effect only if the CBA deal never got done. They were special circumstances, but they were void as soon as the deal was signed. Once that happened, it was back to business as usual, which included the standard restructures.

i understand all that, I think you missed the part where i was responding to JR's post about one of pasta's claims (just one of the hundreds) that was somewhat true at the time.