Protestor
-
Posts
42 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Videos
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by Protestor
-
-
5 minutes ago, robrob74 said:
Calgary Next put it into the proposal, if I remember correctly? That could also be what kills that project, business trying to tell govt how to do their job?
Because it'd have to be done in order to build there. It'd be far worse to not include it - that'd come across as trying to hide the real costs of the project. But it's not like they're asking the city/province to pay for that part of the stadium - it's a cost they're already on the hook for.
-
I don't understand why people lump the cleanup cost into the cost of the CalgaryNEXT proposal. The cleanup needs to happen regardless, and it's the city's responsibility. So really we're just looking at the cost of the stadium itself + related amenities.
-
2 hours ago, robrob74 said:
In the grand scheme of things, he is realistically/probably better anyone else in our system. So depth isn't quite there. Is Kulak better? Maybe at times he has shown signs. They signed him so that they'd have someone to expose for the expansion draft.
Overall, I think the D has looked better with both Stone and Bartkowski. I don't think he is the long term answer. Our D is far from its final look...
I liked Jokipakka better than Bartkowski. I'm not saying we have a better choice right now, just that I don't think he's very good and I hope we find a replacement for him soon.
-
1 hour ago, Kulstad said:
What is it about him you don't like? I haven't seen anything to excessively hate on him about, and think he's right where he should be....3rd-pairing D.
He seems to be weak on both the puck and other players. Far too often I see him turn it over far too easily.
But, like with all things of this variety, I figure the Flames' staff are far better at seeing this sort of thing than I am so if there's a problem they'll deal with it.
-
I'm fairly happy with our D-core, except for Bartkowski. I hope we find a better replacement for him soon.
The Official Calgary Flames "New Arena" thread
in Flames Talk
Posted
The opportunity cost of the land is certainly a very valid thing to consider - but it doesn't make the costs of cleanup assignable to the new stadium.