Vote in this poll if you actually live in Jackson county.
We've all shared our opinions in the other thread. But who gives a shit what somebody in Platte County or Johnson County or Phoenix or NYC thinks. We're all just noise. [Reply]
Originally Posted by |Zach|:
Well yea...it would not be the same.
What do you know that would be different?
Improved plans?
"Answering the tough questions?"
My point was if everything stayed the same, a KC only vote seems like it would lose again as they seemed to be the base with the biggest problem with the original plans because right now it seems like Sherman's wife sent a "you up?" text to Kansas and now the city wants to look into other options [Reply]
Originally Posted by KCUnited:
What do you know that would be different?
Improved plans?
"Answering the tough questions?"
My point was if everything stayed the same, a KC only vote seems like it would lose again as they seemed to be the base with the biggest problem with the original plans because right now it seems like Sherman's wife sent a "you up?" text to Kansas and now the city wants to look into other options
I think the idea that continued talks with a different entity would just mean "the same plan" seems silly.
But I realize people around here think we have no leverage which is another premise I disagree with. [Reply]
Originally Posted by comochiefsfan:
You voted for the Chiefs and Royals to leave the area. Not really sure what you’re doing on a Chiefs message board.
Retard who's spent years bitching about Veach telling someone that they shouldn't be posting on a Chief's message board. :-) [Reply]
Originally Posted by comochiefsfan:
You voted for the Chiefs and Royals to leave the area. Not really sure what you’re doing on a Chiefs message board.
^ Central Missouri IQ on full display. No that vote wasn't about the teams "moving" [Reply]
Originally Posted by Titty Meat:
^ Central Missouri IQ on full display. No that vote wasn't about the teams "moving"
A “no” vote was a vote to open up the possibility of the teams moving.
If the teams staying was a priority to you then you would’ve voted yes. But since you voted no you’re obviously comfortable with the idea of them leaving.
They’re going to get public money somewhere, and Kansas Citians are going to be taxed on something, no matter what. So all anyone who voted no really did was told the teams that they’re ok with them leaving.
You can keep telling yourself otherwise, but that’s the reality. [Reply]
Originally Posted by comochiefsfan:
A “no” vote was a vote to open up the possibility of the teams moving.
If the teams staying was a priority to you then you would’ve voted yes. But since you voted no you’re obviously comfortable with the idea of them leaving.
They’re going to get public money somewhere, and Kansas Citians are going to be taxed on something, no matter what. So all anyone who voted no really did was told the teams that they’re ok with them leaving.
You can keep telling yourself otherwise, but that’s the reality.
Then why did they even ask us? You are underestimating the impact of what happened. [Reply]
Originally Posted by comochiefsfan:
A “no” vote was a vote to open up the possibility of the teams moving.
If the teams staying was a priority to you then you would’ve voted yes. But since you voted no you’re obviously comfortable with the idea of them leaving.
They’re going to get public money somewhere, and Kansas Citians are going to be taxed on something, no matter what. So all anyone who voted no really did was told the teams that they’re ok with them leaving.
You can keep telling yourself otherwise, but that’s the reality.
If they wanted to leave they would have waited closer to when the leases expire and make a deal elsewhere. The vote had nothing to do with them leaving despite whatever some conspiracy theoriest from FL, a guy in Iowa, or central Missouri want to say. [Reply]
Royals are watchable again so its the right thing to do
But as soon as the deal is sealed they prolly regress to 4A ball... You know, "SMALL MARKET (!!!!) needs to count on catching lightening in a bottle"... [Reply]
