airmail Posted July 8, 2004 Posted July 8, 2004 The question I'd ask is: Why is it so important for the source of this information to remain anonymous? If the decision has already been made to name Hakstol as the new coach, it could be said that RT did not follow university hiring procedure. He very well could have informally told him the job was his, of course this is against the rules. And now, of course, we get the damage control. Anyway... to answer the question: If I broke that information, I wouldn't give my name either. I don't know anyone who wants to be named as "the person who leaked the UND hockey hiring information which led to Roger Thomas getting his ass in a sling." Even more so if this person is a respected community leader and someone with close ties to the university.
deeks pizza Posted July 8, 2004 Posted July 8, 2004 Foss used an anonymous source when he broke the story about Dean leaving for the Blue Jackets. he was right that time. why do you people not believe foss, when he just proved an anonymous source to be correct.
PCM Posted July 8, 2004 Author Posted July 8, 2004 why do you people not believe foss, when he just proved an anonymous source to be correct. I think Virg accurately reported what his source told him. The question is whether the source actually knew what he/she was talking about. That's where I'm skeptical.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now