sullivan's new article

[ChasBB]

Here's a bulletin: Jackson and Lynch were injured. Maybe that's why Spiller started at RB and isn't now that Lynch and Jackson came back?

 

PTR

PTR, some posters just enjoy ranting with little regard to logic. You nailed it, though, I think. Clearly, the injuries played a factor here. Gailey wasn't comfortable going into week #1 with Jackson and Lynch seeing a ton of action given their few reps while they were injured. Once they were healthy, it made sense to change the starting roles. At this point, it doesn't mean anything anyhow. Gailey is still getting a sense for what will and won't work and how best to utilize his RB's while keeping them all fresh. It's a process -- an ever-changing one. He'll get it worked out.

[mpl6876]

mpl did get better after a while about it but I agree since this 2nd loss he has been crusading a bit. If you really feel that way though Conrad you should report it. That is the official line from SDS which he put in one of mpls threads a while ago.

That is what I did about a poster recently for exactly the same reason and poof now he is gone and the board is a better place.

I won't report mpl right now because he has made an effort to improve his dialog in the past and warning him at this point about crusading might be the best policy. Like this

 

 

Hard Rules.

Posts that contain the following material will not be tolerated and will be removed promptly (and depending on the nature of the offense - your ISP may be notified of these violations):

 

Do NOT post:

 

Personal "crusades" (posting the same information/opinion in an excessively repetitive manner. We want posters to share opinions not bludgeon others to death with them.)

 

 

and mpl his calling you a little gnat would fall under this

Courtesy is contagious - Just become someone doesn't share your opinion - doesn't make them an idiot.

Which is under

Softer Guidelines:

Activities that are frowned upon:

 

I very much respect your post. I know what I say isn't popular with many posters here. I get it I am not that close minded although i am sure many of you would beg to differ. I do believe I have been respectful of others and their opinions. I am not so sure I have been afforded the same respect.

 

I truly am a die hard Bills fan. In the end, al we really want is a great Bills football team. I love this forum and I greatly enjoy debating and discussing the Bills. IMHO, I have done nothing that warrants a ban from this forum. My opinion is just that an opinion. In fact, several here agree with many of the things I have to say. It is simple, if I rub someone the wrong way just place me on ignore. Many have already done that and I respect their decisions. I haven't found the need to ignore anyone even Hossage who abused me on a daily basis.

 

I'm not going to sit here and say I'm proud of name-calling on the board, but it is what it is. I come to this board in hopes of intelligent dialogue on relevant Bills news and this pest keeps coming around. It's like laying out a blanket for a Sunday picnic to kick back and enjoy some time with your family or friends and suddenly you're swatting at gnats for the next 30 minutes -- it's a total drag and just saps the enjoyment from the experience of posting and surfing the posts. And I don't say this because he routinely attempts to shred my credibility -- that comes with the territory in a public forum. However, the incessant crusading and repetitive nature of his posts just becomes predictable after a short while -- very gnat-like.

 

Edit: And I could even stand a little bit of crusading if it was actually for something, but he crusades against the team at every possible turn. Gailey's an idiot for starting Trent. Gailey's an idiot for benching Trent. Why can't we be like other teams and make deals and win now. We have to lose all our games and get the top pick (so I can shred the front office NEXT year for the guy they use it on). The dude has some issues. Yeah, 10+ years of losing football is no fun, but the incessant railing against the players, the coaches, the staff, the front office, the owner, the groundskeepers for all I know -- it just gets absurd after a while.

 

Stop distorting the truth.

 

Point taken, Bow. Just to clarify though, that it's not MPL's opinion that caused me to call him a gnat, it's his tactics. If you check, I don't post that often, but I'm here multiple times a day. To see nearly every thread with a 4 month/+900 posts member posting the same basic stuff in every one gets to me.

 

Why wouldn't you clarify your statement to me? You know the one you called a gnat. What kind of justification is that? An apology will be accepted.

Edited September 22, 2010 by mpl6876

[ChasBB]

For the record, I have NO ONE on ignore -- not even you, mpl. Well, the feature is kind of useless anyhow the way it works, so I find it best just to not use it.

 

Mpl, here's a recent exchange that we had that kind of illustrates my (and probably other's) issues with your posting tactics:

 

---

Me (responding to another poster):

+1 I already had admiration for Chan's past success as an HC, but I respect him even more now for making this tough decision so early in the season. It is so tiring to see decisions like this made TOO LATE in the season to be of any benefit. By making the move now, Chan is not throwing in the towel on this season -- he's going to fight for wins this season and not give up. Go Chan and Go Bills!

---

You (responding to me):

Give me a break. How bout holding the coach accountable for being out coached and out planned in the Miami game. How bout talking about his offensive game plan, game time adjustments, leadership qualities, and his demeanor on the sidelines. He has been nothing short of terrible in his two starts and your commending him for yanking TE.

 

UNBELIEVABLE......

---

 

You respond to me as if I don't even deserve an opinion -- that ANYONE who doesn't think Gailey should be nailed to the cross right this instant is some kind of moron. It's a public forum. I get that. I don't come here expecting unusually high levels of civility and I've been guilty of same myself, but you do this ALL THE TIME and NOT only to me, for SURE. You might have said "I disagree", but you say "Give me a break", instead -- as if I had two heads for simply respecting the fact that Gailey took the Cowboys to two straight playoff appearances as their HC. I commended Gailey for reversing his own decision to start Edwards (a decision that took COURAGE as he most certainly knew it would bring on criticism -- which it did from many) and you tell me "UNBELIEVABLE" as if I were a total ass for recognizing that the man made a courageous decision in an effort to get something positive going. You ask for people to show YOU civility?! You might consider the same when you respond to others. Now, I'm not trying to tell you HOW to post (though I suspect you will perceive this as so), but I think the above exchange pretty well speaks for itself. And we've had several such exchanges whereby I'll make a fairly innocuous observation as I see it (either right or wrong) and you'll jump in and shred it as though I were some sort of freak for even having this thought. It gets old after several exchanges like this.

 

Now, I've considered that you care about the team SO passionately and you think you know what is wrong and it just drives you absolutely nuts if someone states something that doesn't fully align with your thinking on the matter. That's fine -- I get it -- you perhaps DO care about the team, but you are but one fan amongst tens and hundreds of thousands of fans. There's no way on God's green earth we are all going to agree on how best to go about fixing the Buffalo Bills. I really do attempt to show civility to other posters. I'm not perfect. I've posted things I would have liked to have taken back upon further consideration, but I don't make bashing other posters a way of life on this board. Yeah, 10 years of losing REALLY SUCKS and everyone on this board is hungry for some frickin' WINS. But that's not an excuse for the ridiculously low levels of civility on this board. I feel like I'm wasting my time even writing this as I expect yet another "what an idiot you are" type of response from you, but I'm just laying it out as I see it.

[mpl6876]

For the record, I have NO ONE on ignore -- not even you, mpl. Well, the feature is kind of useless anyhow the way it works, so I find it best just to not use it.

 

Mpl, here's a recent exchange that we had that kind of illustrates my (and probably other's) issues with your posting tactics:

 

---

Me (responding to another poster):

+1 I already had admiration for Chan's past success as an HC, but I respect him even more now for making this tough decision so early in the season. It is so tiring to see decisions like this made TOO LATE in the season to be of any benefit. By making the move now, Chan is not throwing in the towel on this season -- he's going to fight for wins this season and not give up. Go Chan and Go Bills!

---

You (responding to me):

Give me a break. How bout holding the coach accountable for being out coached and out planned in the Miami game. How bout talking about his offensive game plan, game time adjustments, leadership qualities, and his demeanor on the sidelines. He has been nothing short of terrible in his two starts and your commending him for yanking TE.

 

UNBELIEVABLE......

---

 

You respond to me as if I don't even deserve an opinion -- that ANYONE who doesn't think Gailey should be nailed to the cross right this instant is some kind of moron. It's a public forum. I get that. I don't come here expecting unusually high levels of civility and I've been guilty of same myself, but you do this ALL THE TIME and NOT only to me, for SURE. You might have said "I disagree", but you say "Give me a break", instead -- as if I had two heads for simply respecting the fact that Gailey took the Cowboys to two straight playoff appearances as their HC. I commended Gailey for reversing his own decision to start Edwards (a decision that took COURAGE as he most certainly knew it would bring on criticism -- which it did from many) and you tell me "UNBELIEVABLE" as if I were a total ass for recognizing that the man made a courageous decision in an effort to get something positive going. You ask for people to show YOU civility?! You might consider the same when you respond to others. Now, I'm not trying to tell you HOW to post (though I suspect you will perceive this as so), but I think the above exchange pretty well speaks for itself. And we've had several such exchanges whereby I'll make a fairly innocuous observation as I see it (either right or wrong) and you'll jump in and shred it as though I were some sort of freak for even having this thought. It gets old after several exchanges like this.

 

Now, I've considered that you care about the team SO passionately and you think you know what is wrong and it just drives you absolutely nuts if someone states something that doesn't fully align with your thinking on the matter. That's fine -- I get it -- you perhaps DO care about the team, but you are but one fan amongst tens and hundreds of thousands of fans. There's no way on God's green earth we are all going to agree on how best to go about fixing the Buffalo Bills. I really do attempt to show civility to other posters. I'm not perfect. I've posted things I would have liked to have taken back upon further consideration, but I don't make bashing other posters a way of life on this board. Yeah, 10 years of losing REALLY SUCKS and everyone on this board is hungry for some frickin' WINS. But that's not an excuse for the ridiculously low levels of civility on this board. I feel like I'm wasting my time even writing this as I expect yet another "what an idiot you are" type of response from you, but I'm just laying it out as I see it.

 

 

I read your post.

 

In this case, I firmly believe you have overreacted. I never once implied that you don't deserve an opinion. I never implied that Gailey should be nailed to the cross. I said he should be held accountable. I never implied you were a total ass. I never implied you were an idiot. Where did any of that come from?

 

You talk about how this is a public forum and you get how people may not be as civil as they should. I used the words "give me a break" and "UNBELIEVABLE" and your offended? Either you are overly sensitive or just looking for a fight.

 

I know I rub people the wrong way but what you may not realize is that your rubbing me the wrong way too? It cuts both ways. Now that is no excuse for being uncivil. I firmly believe my post was civil. Perhaps a bit harsh but I don't feel it deserved the response you gave me. There really is no justification for what you did...Nevertheless, I will apologize to you if I offended you and I will continue to work on my shortcomings.

[mowisc]

Not sure I agree with you but I can respect your opinion and the tone of your post. Well done. Wish you would have said that in the previous post.

 

 

 

That being said maybe you should apologize not to me but the other posters for that horrendous post about Sully playing WR and putting on the pads. Borderline insulting and at least I have the "gnats" to cal you out on it. Guess you really didn't like that.

 

Horrendous post about Sully playing WR? Hell I would bet 99.9% of the people on this board would love to see Sully play WR. I would love to see him in the slot on a drag route. See if his chubby little ass can take a hit.

 

If you are trying to stay on the down low -- it ain't working Sully. You suck.

 

 

I read your post.

 

In this case, I firmly believe you have overreacted. I never once implied that you don't deserve an opinion. I never implied that Gailey should be nailed to the cross. I said he should be held accountable. I never implied you were a total ass. I never implied you were an idiot. Where did any of that come from?

 

You talk about how this is a public forum and you get how people may not be as civil as they should. I used the words "give me a break" and "UNBELIEVABLE" and your offended? Either you are overly sensitive or just looking for a fight.

 

I know I rub people the wrong way but what you may not realize is that your rubbing me the wrong way too? It cuts both ways. Now that is no excuse for being uncivil. I firmly believe my post was civil. Perhaps a bit harsh but I don't feel it deserved the response you gave me. There really is no justification for what you did...Nevertheless, I will apologize to you if I offended you and I will continue to work on my shortcomings.

 

Sully you just need to move along. You obviously suck at sports journalism. You suck even more at being a member of a football forum. Why don't you try Garbage man for a while? You might find the audience a little less hostile, and way more receptive.

Edited September 22, 2010 by mowisc

[todd]

PTR, some posters just enjoy ranting with little regard to logic. You nailed it, though, I think. Clearly, the injuries played a factor here. Gailey wasn't comfortable going into week #1 with Jackson and Lynch seeing a ton of action given their few reps while they were injured. Once they were healthy, it made sense to change the starting roles. At this point, it doesn't mean anything anyhow. Gailey is still getting a sense for what will and won't work and how best to utilize his RB's while keeping them all fresh. It's a process -- an ever-changing one. He'll get it worked out.

 

Not only that, rookie RBs aren't very good at picking up a blitz or blocking NFL players. You need an RB with more experience for that. So against the GB pass rush he clearly wanted someone in there that gave Edwards a chance not to get killed.

[BillsVet]

The Redskins were in almost the exact same boat as the Buffalo Bills in every aspect, changing from a 4-3 to a 3-4 all new coaches, new schemes. I have much more faith in the Redskins righting the ship long before the Bills do simply because they have made the proper moves THIS YEAR!

 

Both Nix and Gailey made me very skeptical about the future of this team with their off season moves(or lack of), the GM stating he is going to get some sleep as free agency begins and then brings in Cornell Green for 3 mil....not many seem to be bothered by this.

 

I <3 the Bills and want to see them win asap and not thru some ""long brutal process"", its been 10 years of rebuilding as the entire decade has been wasted by hiring bums that shouldn't have been hired as head coaches. Bad GM no GM old GM

 

Maybe its getting old and I'm getting on others nerves if so... I apologize. I just want to win now and can't wrap my head around why this should take three years or this should be a 'throw away season" Apparently Gailey wants to win now also or he wouldn't have benched Edwards

 

When you bring in a "rock star" HC immediately fans demand to win. For as much as people rip on Dan Snyder, he's done what RW in 50 years never could: delegate football responsibility to football people. Every NFL owner is going to have a say, but it's proven time and again that owners who get into personnel end up causing major problems. And RW has done that quite frequently.

 

The reason Buffalo ends up with Nix/Gailey while Washington gets Shanahan/Allen is because RW has destroyed the good reputation of the team forged in the late eighties through late nineties. I have no doubt word has gotten around the league that you don't go to Buffalo, and thus the Bills had issues even getting HC interviews. The GM job wasn't even open to anyone from outside the organization. That's not how to run a first rate team in this era.

 

I want them to win now, but realize they've got to bottom out and stop riding the mediocrity train they've been on for the past 5 seasons. Gailey may want to win now, but going 0-16 or 1-15 is out of the question. They're not going to play younger guys just to give them PT. It's like Fewell at the end of last season. NFL HC's are on a short leash and they're the first ones to go when things get bad.

[offsides#76FredSmerlas]

If you keep Owens you progress the WR's that can actually beat him out. Those are the ones you want starting on your team. Handing the job to Stevie Johnson will not improve the team.

I don't understand your logic at all. Your team does improve by letting Johnson or any other player play more and get more reps in practice "in the long run". If we were a team on the cusp of making the playoffs then I could see keeping Owens. What does Owens give you, 2 wins maybe, a lower draft pick, and probably an attitude if he didn't get the ball more than he did last season. Why would you keep Owens when you are looking at a 2 or 3 year rebuild? By cutting Reed and not re-signing Owens you are allowing players like Parrish, Nelson, Johnson, and Jones to get more playing time. No brainer!!!

[JohnC]

 

The reason Buffalo ends up with Nix/Gailey while Washington gets Shanahan/Allen is because RW has destroyed the good reputation of the team forged in the late eighties through late nineties. I have no doubt word has gotten around the league that you don't go to Buffalo, and thus the Bills had issues even getting HC interviews. The GM job wasn't even open to anyone from outside the organization. That's not how to run a first rate team in this era.

 

 

Ralph Wilson is the owner of the team. It is his toy to play with. As long as it continues to be his cash cow and it affords him an opportunity to dabble in its operation he is more than satisified. Ralph Wilson is a dinasaur of another era. He is very insular and not tuned in to the changing business climate of the NFL.

 

Turning to Marv Levy to bail out his struggling franchise after the Donahoe stint was asinine. Then elevating Russ Brandon, his talented marketing specialist, to preside over the football operations of a divided front office structure was peculiar. As you noted, the hiring of Buddy Nix was not the real issue demonstrating the owner's incompetence. It was the third rate search process of not seriously looking outward for someone to lead your billion dollar business.

 

As long as Ralph is the owner nothing materially is going to change because at this stage of his life he is not going to change. The longer he clings to the franchise the greater the odds are that the franchise will not survive in the region. There are some long term issues with its new owner finances and stadium inadequacies that need to be addressed sooner rather than later. They won't be addressed while he owns the team.

[Sisyphean Bills]

Why is this coach getting a pass already, I don't get it?

Well, I hardly expected to be accused of giving anyone "a free pass". But, if that's what you took away from what I wrote...

 

FWIW, I am definitely not giving him a free pass. I think Gailey is in over his head, was overly confident and optimistic, and is now grasping at straws as is his buddy Nix. I can't fault Gailey for the condition of the roster Jauron left him though. Nor can I fault him for the lack of significant activity on the part of Nix. As a result, I'm not going to call for his firing and head on a pike after two games: two games I knew they'd lose months ago.

 

Edit: How is it not going to be a long and brutal process? Do you think Gailey will find the right magic with the talent he has? Are any of these QBs going to shine behind this line and with these receivers? (Gailey said himself that he doesn't have the answers.) Meanwhile, Nix is building the team the "old-fashioned way" and that is to say through the draft. He came through the door on day 1 and said exactly what he was going to do and that is what he is doing. Still, on a weak team, his first draft yielded zero starters. Since the current scouting department under Modrak got to Buffalo, the Bills draft record is abysmal and has netted on average little more than 1 mediocre starter a draft. The draft is only 7 rounds (btw, it could be potentially shorter in the future), so if you're grand strategy is a "back to the 1960s" build only through the draft, missing on 5 or 6 picks a draft is nothing short of a guarantee that your franchise will toil away in futility at the bottom, because ultimately football is the ultimate team game and it takes 11 players on offense and defense that can do their jobs to win and win championships. And, that's the point of playing the game in the end: to win a championship. (Though I understand that some folks are happy with mere existence.)

Edited September 22, 2010 by Sisyphean Bills

[offsides#76FredSmerlas]

Ralph Wilson is the owner of the team. It is his toy to play with. As long as it continues to be his cash cow and it affords him an opportunity to dabble in its operation he is more than satisified. Ralph Wilson is a dinasaur of another era. He is very insular and not tuned in to the changing business climate of the NFL.

 

Turning to Marv Levy to bail out his struggling franchise after the Donahoe stint was asinine. Then elevating Russ Brandon, his talented marketing specialist, to preside over the football operations of a divided front office structure was peculiar. As you noted, the hiring of Buddy Nix was not the real issue demonstrating the owner's incompetence. It was the third rate search process of not seriously looking outward for someone to lead your billion dollar business.

 

As long as Ralph is the owner nothing materially is going to change because at this stage of his life he is not going to change. The longer he clings to the franchise the greater the odds are that the franchise will not survive in the region. There are some long term issues with its new owner finances and stadium inadequacies that need to be addressed sooner rather than later. They won't be addressed while he owns the team.

[offsides#76FredSmerlas]

Ralph Wilson is the owner of the team. It is his toy to play with. As long as it continues to be his cash cow and it affords him an opportunity to dabble in its operation he is more than satisified. Ralph Wilson is a dinasaur of another era. He is very insular and not tuned in to the changing business climate of the NFL.

 

Turning to Marv Levy to bail out his struggling franchise after the Donahoe stint was asinine. Then elevating Russ Brandon, his talented marketing specialist, to preside over the football operations of a divided front office structure was peculiar. As you noted, the hiring of Buddy Nix was not the real issue demonstrating the owner's incompetence. It was the third rate search process of not seriously looking outward for someone to lead your billion dollar business.

 

As long as Ralph is the owner nothing materially is going to change because at this stage of his life he is not going to change. The longer he clings to the franchise the greater the odds are that the franchise will not survive in the region. There are some long term issues with its new owner finances and stadium inadequacies that need to be addressed sooner rather than later. They won't be addressed while he owns the team.

The bottom line is that the good coaches want to go where there's something to work with and they also want to know that when they move their famalies they're not going to have to relocate after one season which could be the case if Buffalo loses their franchise. Third, if Ralph isn't the owner then they have to think their time could be up even if they're doing a good job as coach. If new ownership comes in they will probably hire their own people. Why would any head coach put themselves in that kind of situation where there's not a lot of stability.

.

Edited September 22, 2010 by offsides#76FredSmerlas

[ChasBB]

I read your post.

 

In this case, I firmly believe you have overreacted. I never once implied that you don't deserve an opinion. I never implied that Gailey should be nailed to the cross. I said he should be held accountable. I never implied you were a total ass. I never implied you were an idiot. Where did any of that come from?

 

You talk about how this is a public forum and you get how people may not be as civil as they should. I used the words "give me a break" and "UNBELIEVABLE" and your offended? Either you are overly sensitive or just looking for a fight.

 

I know I rub people the wrong way but what you may not realize is that your rubbing me the wrong way too? It cuts both ways. Now that is no excuse for being uncivil. I firmly believe my post was civil. Perhaps a bit harsh but I don't feel it deserved the response you gave me. There really is no justification for what you did...Nevertheless, I will apologize to you if I offended you and I will continue to work on my shortcomings.

As Nix is fond of saying, it is the "body of work" that ultimately prevails. If the particular exchange between us that I referenced were the exception instead of the rule, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Taken by itself, it was not in the extreme on the offensive scale (if there were such a thing). But it was also much less-than-cordial, also. Now, I'm OK with less-than-cordial for the most part when it is the exception instead of the rule. I can chalk that up to someone being on edge and/or having a bad day or just being in a very opinionated mood, or whatever. However, when this less-than-cordial tone is the norm -- almost to the point of being a near constant, well that's where you lose me (and based on multiple posters general disdain for your posting tactics, I suspect lose many others, as well). I could dig through the archives over the past few months and find several such instances, but I just can't be bothered, so I instead pulled up the most recent one that came to mind as an example.

 

It'd be like if you and I happened to work in the same office together. I might come in and say "Good morning, Mpl", and your response would be "What the hell are you talking about? It's raining outside. Are you nuts or something?". The next day I'd come in and say "Good morning, Mpl", and you'd say "Give me a break. The boss is an idiot. How can it possibly EVER be a good morning around this place? Cut this 'good morning' crap out, would you?!" and on and on it might go like this for several weeks (or even months as has been the case on this board). Well, guess what? Eventually, I'm just going to stop saying "Good morning" and probably end up being a lot less-than-cordial myself. Maybe some people enjoy constant abrasive banter, but not me. I like to have real dialogue with genuine give-and-take, but hey, maybe that's just me.

[whodat]

You ever see a comedian live? Did you know that if you saw that person the next night he/she does mostly the same act? Why limit your best work to one venue?

 

PTR

 

OK Robot aka H.K. Like your material. Sully needs an occasional kick in the pants. Maybe I’ll catch your next venue at Comics. Until then stage right exit left.

[mpl6876]

As Nix is fond of saying, it is the "body of work" that ultimately prevails. If the particular exchange between us that I referenced were the exception instead of the rule, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Taken by itself, it was not in the extreme on the offensive scale (if there were such a thing). But it was also much less-than-cordial, also. Now, I'm OK with less-than-cordial for the most part when it is the exception instead of the rule. I can chalk that up to someone being on edge and/or having a bad day or just being in a very opinionated mood, or whatever. However, when this less-than-cordial tone is the norm -- almost to the point of being a near constant, well that's where you lose me (and based on multiple posters general disdain for your posting tactics, I suspect lose many others, as well). I could dig through the archives over the past few months and find several such instances, but I just can't be bothered, so I instead pulled up the most recent one that came to mind as an example.

 

It'd be like if you and I happened to work in the same office together. I might come in and say "Good morning, Mpl", and your response would be "What the hell are you talking about? It's raining outside. Are you nuts or something?". The next day I'd come in and say "Good morning, Mpl", and you'd say "Give me a break. The boss is an idiot. How can it possibly EVER be a good morning around this place? Cut this 'good morning' crap out, would you?!" and on and on it might go like this for several weeks (or even months as has been the case on this board). Well, guess what? Eventually, I'm just going to stop saying "Good morning" and probably end up being a lot less-than-cordial myself. Maybe some people enjoy constant abrasive banter, but not me. I like to have real dialogue with genuine give-and-take, but hey, maybe that's just me.

 

Spin it anyway you want. Not that it matters but I have lost all respect for you. I offered a genuine apology when you were clearly out of line. I have never never never resorting to immature name calling. In return you give a ranting spin in your defense. Classless Mr. Chase... Stop embarrassing yourself.

[CardinalScotts]

The only thing wishy washy is Sullivan's writing, if you want to call it writing.

 

I'm going to call out Sullivan on this one.....Here kitty kitty kitty

 

 

I read Gauhans stuff and Gleason and Allen Wilson Sullivan I skip like hints from Heloise

[13player]

Let me wrap up the facts for the bills this season;

 

-Trent sucked before the season started

-CJ has only played 2 games in the NFL, go easy here, he is the future

-its still way to early to call the chan era a flop

-Fitzy sucks

-Poz is made of Glass

-Cornell Green is not a long term solution at RT

-We have NO #2 reciever

-Hangartner is bad

-2011 first pick for buffalo a QB

 

this season a wast of time

[MikeSpeed]

Let me wrap up the facts for the bills this season;

 

-Trent sucked before the season started (+1)

-CJ has only played 2 games in the NFL, go easy here, he is the future (First round draft choices should be starting)

-its still way to early to call the chan era a flop (+1)

-Fitzy sucks (+1)

-Poz is made of Glass (+1)

-Cornell Green is not a long term solution at RT (Or even the short term solution)

-We have NO #2 reciever (I'm in the group that believes we have no #1 WR)

-Hangartner is bad (++1)

-2011 first pick for buffalo a QB (++++1)

 

this season a wast of time

Edited September 22, 2010 by MikeSpeed

[Deadstroke]

I thought it was a very well written.

 

 

(2) "They watched the game films. What compelled them to hand Edwards the job after he had failed miserably twice in the last two seasons? Edwards looked the part in practice and preseason, but jobs are won and lost in real games." How can one debate this statement. Then he goes on to talk about how the players rallied around Fitz last year. I can only assume Gailey's ego led him to believe he could make TE a solid NFL QB. His ego blinded him from looking at the facts. The fact is most of us knew TE didn't have it despite his preseason successs. Now, he yanks him after two games and some fans here are praising him for that. Amazing...

 

(5) Sully writes "Gailey anointed C.J. Spiller as his featured back." Then he benches him for ML. Also. he hardly uses him in the Miami game. IMHO, it appears that Gailey doesn't know how to utilize three backs effectively or better yet maybe having 3 staring RB is problematic. Either way or disagree with me, it is hard to understand what the hell Gailey is doing with CJ after two games.

 

(6) Lastly, he says "the guy had six months to coach 'em up and get the offense fixed. Sure did. I remember reading how this was going to happen. I remember all those delusional posts. In fact, I was even starting to believe them. It only took me two games to what up back to reality. Sully goes on to say "instead, it seems like he's making things up as he goes along." Sure does and nothing is more evident by the starting and benching of TE after two games. So much for the confidence factor...

 

 

I just copied your statements which I either take the most issue with, or the one(1)which I agree with.

 

(2) Gailey apparently figured that Trent has more of an upside than Fitz, and Brohm is not yet ready. He gave them all somewhat of a shot early (granted Edwards more than the others) Edwards looked good in training camp and pre-season and thus was annointed the starter. He obviously sucked in 2 starts and to Gaily's credit it didn't take him long to pull the plug.

 

(5) I agree with you on Gailey's misuse of RB's. I don't know your opinion exactly but if it were me I'd FIND a trade for SOMEBODY, and share carries with Spiller and the one who is left.

 

(6) 6 months ain't doo doo in the NFL until you get in real live game situations and have to then evaluate what you have and what you need to do....as Gailey is doing now! Heck, I don't know if what he will do will eventually work out or not, but the shambles that this team is in will take at least until mid season to figure out if he and the Bills are are the right course.

[ChasBB]

Spin it anyway you want. Not that it matters but I have lost all respect for you. I offered a genuine apology when you were clearly out of line. I have never never never resorting to immature name calling. In return you give a ranting spin in your defense. Classless Mr. Chase... Stop embarrassing yourself.

Dude, the only embarrassment I might feel right now is even TRYING to have a sensible dialogue with you. You don't get it and you never will. Oh, nice job trying to bait Gailey with your "Oh, but the fans care" remark. As usual, Chan put you in your proper place.

[ChasBB]

OK Robot aka H.K. Like your material. Sully needs an occasional kick in the pants. Maybe I’ll catch your next venue at Comics. Until then stage right exit left.

Yeah, that was some good stuff about the weathervane and the wind -- oh so very true. Sully is the type of guy where if you tell him it is day at noon, he'll say it is night and vice-versa -- truly being disagreeable for the sole sake of being disagreeable. It really reaches pathetic lows at times.

[Malazan]

What the heck did you expect from the guy? Stop reading his stuff and posting links to it so he'll lose his job and a real writer can take his place.

[TheChimp]

Strange, I read the article and agreed with everything Sully said. Thanks for the link!