Quote:
Originally Posted by brdempsey69
(A) I'll be frank with you......all you're telling anyone with that is you were obviously raised on Milk of Magnesia, because you're totally full of crap. It's not surprising that you would try to spin the false narrative of "if they didn’t set the money aside, they would not have been able to build the stadium" since you Donks homers live in a world of delusion & false spin.
If you really believe that false narrative, then I've got the Brooklyn Bridge for sale to offer to you. Ain't nobody else buying into that.
(B) You must really believe that fans of other teams are as dumb as both Bowlen and Elway look, as evidenced by the fact that you've already had it pointed out to you that such an expense was non-existant until Nov. 3, 1998.
(C) Nice try with bold-faced lie of "presenting no evidence" but you fail. It isn't "my claim" that they violated the cap in such a way as to have extra or better players than they could’ve had otherwise -- it's a provable fact and as I said the evidence has been put forth in this thread repeatedly.
|
You’re all hat, no cattle. Your first point is entirely hyperbolic rhetoric without a single intelligible factual point.
And why are you focusing on whether the stadium would be built if they didn’t set aside money. Your claim was that there’s no way they would set aside cash in case the referendum didn’t pass. What was the problem you thought would occur in that case. As I mentioned, and you ignored, having extra cash would not have been a problem.
Let’s try it in reverse. The Broncos had to come up with around 100 million to build the stadium, over and above their usual cash flow. Where do you suppose that money came from?
Furthermore, if it’s a proven fact why is it so hard for you to reference the evidence? You obviously think I’m very, very dumb, so help a brother out.
To be clear about what I’m asking, there are two scenarios in contention.
Scenario (1) let’s say for simplicity sake that Davis was paid 5 million for 1997. Davis was counted as 5 million against the cap, but he was actually paid 2.5 million in 1997 and another 2.5 million in a later year. That’s a cap violation.
Scenario (2) Davis was counted as 2.5 million against the cap in 1997 but actually was paid 5 million by a later payment. That also is a cap violation, and substantially more egregious.
Where is the evidence that scenario 2 is actually what happened.