Dr. Trooth Posted August 8, 2010 Share Posted August 8, 2010 Jerry Sullivan gave a good summary of the Bills state on offense in today's BN. He states the Bills D looks dominant... but then brings us back to reality that they're, in fact, playing against one of the NFLs worst offenses and offensive lnes. Seems we've been in rebuild mode for a decade. Kinda like building a house that never seems to get finished. Let's just hope that the toughr practices and the constant defensive pressure the defense is heaping on the offense makes the offense a lot better. 6 wins would be a big surprise. Personally, I have a difficult time acknowledging they can put 5 in the W column. New day, hopefully a different team. And hopefully, perhaps give Sully some things to 'take back'. For now, though... not much argument with what he's writing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. K Posted August 8, 2010 Share Posted August 8, 2010 Jerry Sullivan, right or wrong, is and has always been a horse's ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
first_and_ten Posted August 8, 2010 Share Posted August 8, 2010 Jerry Sullivan, right or wrong, is and has always been a horse's ass. who's the front half? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Trooth Posted August 8, 2010 Author Share Posted August 8, 2010 Jerry Sullivan, right or wrong, is and has always been a horse's ass. Alas.... "the human mind is not a dignified organ". He's rough, gruff, cold, bold, and above all, brutally honest. He won't piss on your leg and tell you it's raining. But, he will rain on you and piss you off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted August 8, 2010 Share Posted August 8, 2010 Alas.... "the human mind is not a dignified organ". He's rough, gruff, cold, bold, and above all, brutally honest. He won't piss on your leg and tell you it's raining. But, he will rain on you and piss you off. He plays to the lowest common denominator, adds nothing of substance, and charges $2.00 for his "services." If I want half-baked analysis presented in a pejorative/unctuous manner, I'll come to TSW...for free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hplarrm Posted August 8, 2010 Share Posted August 8, 2010 who's the front half? I do not think you give Sully enough credit, as a writer he is not only a horse's ass but also a horse's front end as well. As a writer he comes off like the dog in the Beggin strip commercial, full of sound and fury, but ultimately he cannot get the job done because of his particular fundamental failing on having no hands. Sully seems to hands (of stone likely) but his writing style and radio persona seems all about fundamental failings as an analyst. He simply emotes the word pathetic with virtually every rant he makes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted August 8, 2010 Share Posted August 8, 2010 Alas.... "the human mind is not a dignified organ". He's rough, gruff, cold, bold, and above all, brutally honest. He won't piss on your leg and tell you it's raining. But, he will rain on you and piss you off. Honesty has nothing to do with Sully's articles. He might get hit with a drop of water from a neighbor's sprinkler and write about it as if it were a thunderstorm. He is a practitioner of conflict journalism. He'll find conflict or negativity even if there isn't any. And, it's fairly clear from his articles, the guy doesn't get or even like football, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malazan Posted August 8, 2010 Share Posted August 8, 2010 Honest...Writer...ROFL..he's neither of those. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted August 8, 2010 Share Posted August 8, 2010 He plays to the lowest common denominator, adds nothing of substance, and charges $2.00 for his "services." If I want half-baked analysis presented in a pejorative/unctuous manner, I'll come to TSW...for free. Exactly. He writes for the miserable, bitter guys who drink at a bar to avoid their families types. The ones who have to come on here and tell you how bad the Bills are. If I want a writer to depress, I'll read a good writer like Charles Bukowski. Sullivan sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnychemo Posted August 8, 2010 Share Posted August 8, 2010 In reality, he's doing his job. You guys are reading him and talking about his column. The value of that column in a literal sense is irrelevant, but it has served its purpose. Personally I find him contentious for the sake of being contentious and predictable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted August 8, 2010 Share Posted August 8, 2010 In reality, he's doing his job. You guys are reading him and talking about his column. The value of that column in a literal sense is irrelevant, but it has served its purpose. Personally I find him contentious for the sake of being contentious and predictable. I don't read his columns but I get your point. It jsut amazes how many people would just want to read negative garbage all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted August 8, 2010 Share Posted August 8, 2010 Sadly, Sully writes for his audience...bitter woe-is-me types that thrive on being the victim. PTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seannc Posted August 8, 2010 Share Posted August 8, 2010 Content aside, his writing is awful. What's with the two word sentences? Does he think he's Ernest Hemingway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted August 8, 2010 Share Posted August 8, 2010 "Can't argue Sully's article much" Speak for yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted August 8, 2010 Share Posted August 8, 2010 it has served its purpose. So does a suppository, but it doesn't mean I'd enjoy one... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted August 8, 2010 Share Posted August 8, 2010 If I want a writer to depress, I'll read a good writer like Charles Bukowski. Sullivan sucks. Gotta love the Buk. But I usually find myself laughing too hard to be depressed when reading the tales of Henry Chinaski. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hossage Posted August 8, 2010 Share Posted August 8, 2010 I think Sully is a fairly talented writer and I have enjoyed some of his stories. I just object to his role as an agitator. I normally dont read his articles because they are uninformative and trollish. I think he detracts from the product the Buffalo News puts out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drewfla Posted August 8, 2010 Share Posted August 8, 2010 It's hard to criticize him for being negative the last decade. What occasion has been positive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Trooth Posted August 8, 2010 Author Share Posted August 8, 2010 "Can't argue Sully's article much" Speak for yourself. Ok... what's your argument? What specifically in the column do you take issue with? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transient Posted August 8, 2010 Share Posted August 8, 2010 "Can't argue aruge Sully's article much" Speak for yourself. I looked it up on the internet. I think he was trying to say that in addition to Sullivan being a whiney, Wheaties pissing, glass is half empty boil on the ass of society, he is also dyslexic (according to the Urban dictionary). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts