jwolf02 Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 Caught the back half, but came into a conversation about "ralphing" before games. Jim then said something to the tune of "I wish I hadn't been so hungover for those super bowls, maybe we would have won one." Also said something about Joe Montana being so good, he could win with a hangover. Of course we all knew, but I never heard Jim admit that before. Anyone catch the beginning of the interview and how that came up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2003Contenders Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 No, I was listening to him on Mike and Mike this morning. The conversation there was just about the general notions of having a bye heading into the playoffs, home field advantage, resting starters, etc. As for the hangover stuff, it wouldn't surprise me considering that Kelly always had the reputation as a party animal who showed up on Sundays hurting from the night before. I've never held that against him in terms of the SB losses, since it was normal behavior for him during the regular season and the rest of the playoffs when he played well enough to get the team to the Super Bowl in the first place. The bottom line is that those Bills teams were built to compete against Marino's Dolphins, where they were asked to shut down the passing game on defense and score quickly on offense. Alas, they were not a good match for those power-run offenses and dominating defenses in the NFC East. And, as luck would have it, all four Super Bowls had to be against NFC East teams. I always thought that the Bills would have matched up much better against the 49ers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sir andrew Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 The Dan Patrick show is available through itunes as a free download. Thanks for the heads up! Big fan of the show! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 I wish I would have tuned in for Kelly. But what has become of Patrick's show? I used to listen to it years ago, and always thought it was good. I haven't been able to get it on the radio for years now, but discovered it on TV a few months ago. It's freaking TERRIBLE now. What's with all the worthless side-kicks? Now it seems like it's a Howard Stern-type show, where they talk about themselves for half the show. Patrick is talking smack about how great he is. WTF? I admit I drew these conclusions from a small sample size. But just about every time I flip it on, I'm face-to-face with "McLovin" or some other worthless regular. The only radio sports talk show I can listen to anymore is Van Pelt's (with Tirico on occasion). I don't listen that often, but when I do it seems like it is still a fairly straight-ahead show. Not some vanity gab fest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirtbag Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 (edited) it's up on dp's site and you can listen without logging in: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/danpatrick/blog/141681/index.html it's a very vomit-centric interview. also, lots of talk about something called burt sugarman's midnight special -- i guess you might know what that is if you're old. Edited January 5, 2011 by Dirtbag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 I've always blamed Jim Kelly for losing SB 25. Not so much for being hungover, though he probably was, but for not using Thurman Thomas more when it was obvious the Giants were throwing everything into pass protection. Thurman was gashing them the few times he got to carry the ball. I bet all of you remember "Wide Right" but did you know that Thurman was shoestring tackled by the last Giant defender one play earlier? Kelly wanted SB MVP and took it as a challenge to his manhood that Parcells/Bellicheck tried to stop his vaunted air attack. If he wasn't such a pompous prick and adjusted his play calling to take advantage of what the Giants were giving him, I firmly believe we would have won that game. PTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 The bottom line is that those Bills teams were built to compete against Marino's Dolphins, where they were asked to shut down the passing game on defense and score quickly on offense. Alas, they were not a good match for those power-run offenses and dominating defenses in the NFC East. And, as luck would have it, all four Super Bowls had to be against NFC East teams. I always thought that the Bills would have matched up much better against the 49ers. Good take. Those Bills teams definitely are similar to the present-day Peyton Manning Colts…an explosive quick-strike offensive attack and a slightly undersized and athletic defense that played better with the lead. The Bills won the first NFL game ever without a punt in a huge shootout at San Francisco in 1992. Kelly and company outgunned Steve Young and the Niners, 34-31 in a game where the two teams combined for 1086 yards of offense. We definitely matched up well with the Niners. Agree totally that playing NFC East teams during the Super Bowl stretch was a bit of bad luck…because of their physicality as you point out, and also because of the caliber of coaches and players on the other side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 Caught the back half, but came into a conversation about "ralphing" before games. Jim then said something to the tune of "I wish I hadn't been so hungover for those super bowls, maybe we would have won one." Also said something about Joe Montana being so good, he could win with a hangover. Of course we all knew, but I never heard Jim admit that before. Anyone catch the beginning of the interview and how that came up? Actually, Kelly did not sat that at all. He isn't the smoothest speaker (though he is much better than he used to be), but the whole interview turns, one point, to talking about being hung-over for a game, after Patrick makes the comment that people used to accuse he and some of his old ESPN partners of being drunk on the air. Patrick asks Kelly if he ever drank the night before a game...he emphatically says "no, it was hard enough having to call my own plays, with six concussions...etc etc.." Then he back-tracks a little and says the only drinking he did the night before a game was 1 glass of wine with an Italian dinner...Patrick then asks Kelly if he knew other guys who played hung-over or drunk, to which Kelly says, laughing, "yes, definitely...not naming names".... Kelly then explains his well known game day tradition of vomiting before a game, so people might have thought he was hung-over...but he insists he did that even in high school...then they ask him about some other QB's, and Patrick says "You couldn't imagine Joe Montana, Joe Cool, vomiting before a game?" Kelly laughs and says something like "knowing Joe like I do, I can imagine it...he was so good he could probably play hung-over"....after much laughter, Kelly gets a little tounge-tied (this is where I think you came in) and says "Maybe I wish I would have (not "wouldn't have") played hung-over"...inferring that it might have changed his luck in one of those big games...but, no, he never admits to playing hungover, or drunk. My own opinion, living in Buffalo during those early Kelly years, it wasn't uncommon for him to be seen at places like Mr Goodbar, with guys like Talley and Bennett, during the week...there was always the rumor that Kelly was seen loaded, the night before a big game toward the end of the 1987 season, where the Bills had to beat the Pats at home, to keep their playoff hopes alive. Kelly had one of his worst games...and the rumors about him being drunk never seemed to leave him. Personally, I don't believe he was out getting drunk the night before a Super Bowl...but once you get a rep, it is hard to live down. It always seems to me, people who hold this notion that the Bills partied too hard before Super Bowls might just want to be finding some reason, beyond that the Bills were the second best team on the field those Super Bowl nights...its' easier to have a culprit, find someone/something to blame...but the Bills weren't really as good as the Redskins or the Cowboys. I would still give them the edge over the NY Giants, but I think that was as much a case of luck, and Parcells/Bellichek outclassing our coaching staff. That Giants victory become the blueprint for any game where a defensive squad faces a potent offense...(sigh) I need a drink... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Jokeman Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 I've always blamed Jim Kelly for losing SB 25. Not so much for being hungover, though he probably was, but for not using Thurman Thomas more when it was obvious the Giants were throwing everything into pass protection. Thurman was gashing them the few times he got to carry the ball. I bet all of you remember "Wide Right" but did you know that Thurman was shoestring tackled by the last Giant defender one play earlier? Kelly wanted SB MVP and took it as a challenge to his manhood that Parcells/Bellicheck tried to stop his vaunted air attack. If he wasn't such a pompous prick and adjusted his play calling to take advantage of what the Giants were giving him, I firmly believe we would have won that game. PTR Yeah too bad Kelly couldn't handle being Scottie Pippen if so we might have had a Super Bowl championship too claim. Yet to me the worse thing about Super Bowl XXV is that two minute drill he did at the end of the game. He definitely could have done a lot better with his clock management toward the end of that game to give Scotty a better chance at that final kick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbb Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 Actually, Kelly did not sat that at all. He isn't the smoothest speaker (though he is much better than he used to be), but the whole interview turns, one point, to talking about being hung-over for a game, after Patrick makes the comment that people used to accuse he and some of his old ESPN partners of being drunk on the air. Patrick asks Kelly if he ever drank the night before a game...he emphatically says "no, it was hard enough having to call my own plays, with six concussions...etc etc.." Then he back-tracks a little and says the only drinking he did the night before a game was 1 glass of wine with an Italian dinner...Patrick then asks Kelly if he knew other guys who played hung-over or drunk, to which Kelly says, laughing, "yes, definitely...not naming names".... Kelly then explains his well known game day tradition of vomiting before a game, so people might have thought he was hung-over...but he insists he did that even in high school...then they ask him about some other QB's, and Patrick says "You couldn't imagine Joe Montana, Joe Cool, vomiting before a game?" Kelly laughs and says something like "knowing Joe like I do, I can imagine it...he was so good he could probably play hung-over"....after much laughter, Kelly gets a little tounge-tied (this is where I think you came in) and says "Maybe I wish I would have (not "wouldn't have") played hung-over"...inferring that it might have changed his luck in one of those big games...but, no, he never admits to playing hungover, or drunk. My own opinion, living in Buffalo during those early Kelly years, it wasn't uncommon for him to be seen at places like Mr Goodbar, with guys like Talley and Bennett, during the week...there was always the rumor that Kelly was seen loaded, the night before a big game toward the end of the 1987 season, where the Bills had to beat the Pats at home, to keep their playoff hopes alive. Kelly had one of his worst games...and the rumors about him being drunk never seemed to leave him. Personally, I don't believe he was out getting drunk the night before a Super Bowl...but once you get a rep, it is hard to live down. It always seems to me, people who hold this notion that the Bills partied too hard before Super Bowls might just want to be finding some reason, beyond that the Bills were the second best team on the field those Super Bowl nights...its' easier to have a culprit, find someone/something to blame...but the Bills weren't really as good as the Redskins or the Cowboys. I would still give them the edge over the NY Giants, but I think that was as much a case of luck, and Parcells/Bellichek outclassing our coaching staff. That Giants victory become the blueprint for any game where a defensive squad faces a potent offense...(sigh) I need a drink... I just listened to the whole thing for this Jimbo mea culpa, and I shouldn't have bothered since what you said is exactly how the interview went. Biscuit actually said the Bills partied too much during Super Bowl weeks, though, so I think there is some merit to it....Of course, I remember when the Raiders beat the Eagles in '80, they said it was because Vermeil had the Eagles too tight, while the Raiders were out partying! I guess it depends who wins whether it's good or bad to party! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 I just listened to the whole thing for this Jimbo mea culpa, and I shouldn't have bothered since what you said is exactly how the interview went. Biscuit actually said the Bills partied too much during Super Bowl weeks, though, so I think there is some merit to it....Of course, I remember when the Raiders beat the Eagles in '80, they said it was because Vermeil had the Eagles too tight, while the Raiders were out partying! I guess it depends who wins whether it's good or bad to party! I have no doubt that the Bills partied during those days..but they were athletes in their prime...I think them losing those Super Bowls had more to do with not being as good as their opponent than anything. As I recall, Bennett made his comment when he was with the Falcons for their Super Bowl appearance. You know how media week goes...every other story about the Falcons had something to do with the cagy old vets on the team, and everyone wanted to get Bennet's take on what it would take to win a Super Bowl. As a team leader, and respected vet, he had to say something. I remember shortly after, both Marv Levy and Andre Reed took some exception to Bennett's comments. Darryl Talley, one of the rumored hard partiers on the team at the time, agreed that the Bills partied hard during that era...but never missed curfew during the Super Bowls. I think it is only natural that Bennett would make his comments, in his position, because, like a lot of fans, it is easier to find something to blame your failure on, than it is to admit the better team won. Yeah too bad Kelly couldn't handle being Scottie Pippen if so we might have had a Super Bowl championship too claim. Yet to me the worse thing about Super Bowl XXV is that two minute drill he did at the end of the game. He definitely could have done a lot better with his clock management toward the end of that game to give Scotty a better chance at that final kick. Well, the two minute drill didn't work, but it came close...maybe the biggest mistake of that drive was McKellar making a shoe-string catch, for a 2 or 3 yard pick-up, well in bounds, the clock running...IIRC those meaningless 2 yards cost the Bills about 17 seconds on the clock. I still can't re-watch that damn thing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrags Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 I just listened to the whole thing for this Jimbo mea culpa, and I shouldn't have bothered since what you said is exactly how the interview went. Biscuit actually said the Bills partied too much during Super Bowl weeks, though, so I think there is some merit to it....Of course, I remember when the Raiders beat the Eagles in '80, they said it was because Vermeil had the Eagles too tight, while the Raiders were out partying! I guess it depends who wins whether it's good or bad to party! I definately remember Bennett in an interview while on the Falcons during their Super Bowl against the Broncos where he stressed his thoughts to the rest of his team what a big mistake he and everyone else on the Bills made by not being prepared for those games as they were often out until 6am the nights before. Personally I blame Levy for this. I know these guys were adults and athletes, and should have been able to police themselves but Levy never had these guys on ANY leash. For thier biggest games of thier careers we really needed a coach that could guide them. All Levy was for us is an old babysitter. It kinda reminds me of my grandpa watching me when I was a kid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 Well, the two minute drill didn't work, but it came close...maybe the biggest mistake of that drive was McKellar making a shoe-string catch, for a 2 or 3 yard pick-up, well in bounds, the clock running...IIRC those meaningless 2 yards cost the Bills about 17 seconds on the clock. I still can't re-watch that damn thing... It wasn't that, but the refs stopping the action to review the catch and then restarting the clock while the Bills were still in the huddle. That and All Edwards not holding his block for .5 seconds longer was the real difference in the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills_fan_in_raleigh Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 I've always blamed Jim Kelly for losing SB 25. Not so much for being hungover, though he probably was, but for not using Thurman Thomas more when it was obvious the Giants were throwing everything into pass protection. Thurman was gashing them the few times he got to carry the ball. I bet all of you remember "Wide Right" but did you know that Thurman was shoestring tackled by the last Giant defender one play earlier? Kelly wanted SB MVP and took it as a challenge to his manhood that Parcells/Bellicheck tried to stop his vaunted air attack. If he wasn't such a pompous prick and adjusted his play calling to take advantage of what the Giants were giving him, I firmly believe we would have won that game. PTR I also blame Levy for not reeling him in and taking what they gave him. Poor clock management, and a defense that could not stop the run is why we lost along with those phantom injuries those Giants defenders kept getting only to be back in game on the very next play that slowed down the KGun( Billycheat at work ). Folks want a franchise QB but forget a journeyman QB won that SB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJ (not THAT RJ) Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 I definately remember Bennett in an interview while on the Falcons during their Super Bowl against the Broncos where he stressed his thoughts to the rest of his team what a big mistake he and everyone else on the Bills made by not being prepared for those games as they were often out until 6am the nights before. Personally I blame Levy for this. I know these guys were adults and athletes, and should have been able to police themselves but Levy never had these guys on ANY leash. For thier biggest games of thier careers we really needed a coach that could guide them. All Levy was for us is an old babysitter. It kinda reminds me of my grandpa watching me when I was a kid. I find all of this retrospective blaming of the Bills for partying to be misplaced at best. When the Raiders won Super Bowl XV over Philly, everyone talked about how great it was that Matuszak and company partied like crazy while the Iggles under Vermeil were too tight. It all comes down to how the game was played. I also think that the complaint that Kelly did not hand off enough is only partially true. Sure, TT could have run more, but that was also a function of how few plays the Bills ran. The tackling problems we all know about. If Andre Reed holds onto a third down pass after the safety, the Bills would have had more TOP, more plays, and probably more carries. In the end, it came down to one point and two feet. That's the way it goes.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jack_spikes Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 No, I was listening to him on Mike and Mike this morning. The conversation there was just about the general notions of having a bye heading into the playoffs, home field advantage, resting starters, etc. As for the hangover stuff, it wouldn't surprise me considering that Kelly always had the reputation as a party animal who showed up on Sundays hurting from the night before. I've never held that against him in terms of the SB losses, since it was normal behavior for him during the regular season and the rest of the playoffs when he played well enough to get the team to the Super Bowl in the first place. The bottom line is that those Bills teams were built to compete against Marino's Dolphins, where they were asked to shut down the passing game on defense and score quickly on offense. Alas, they were not a good match for those power-run offenses and dominating defenses in the NFC East. And, as luck would have it, all four Super Bowls had to be against NFC East teams. I always thought that the Bills would have matched up much better against the 49ers. ...and yet those Bills teams were very successful against NFC East opponents during the regular season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbb Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 I find all of this retrospective blaming of the Bills for partying to be misplaced at best. When the Raiders won Super Bowl XV over Philly, everyone talked about how great it was that Matuszak and company partied like crazy while the Iggles under Vermeil were too tight. It all comes down to how the game was played. I also think that the complaint that Kelly did not hand off enough is only partially true. Sure, TT could have run more, but that was also a function of how few plays the Bills ran. The tackling problems we all know about. If Andre Reed holds onto a third down pass after the safety, the Bills would have had more TOP, more plays, and probably more carries. In the end, it came down to one point and two feet. That's the way it goes.... I couldn't have said it better myself. In fact, I tried to about three posts before yours: Of course, I remember when the Raiders beat the Eagles in '80, they said it was because Vermeil had the Eagles too tight, while the Raiders were out partying! I guess it depends who wins whether it's good or bad to party! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flmike Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 No, I was listening to him on Mike and Mike this morning. The conversation there was just about the general notions of having a bye heading into the playoffs, home field advantage, resting starters, etc. As for the hangover stuff, it wouldn't surprise me considering that Kelly always had the reputation as a party animal who showed up on Sundays hurting from the night before. I've never held that against him in terms of the SB losses, since it was normal behavior for him during the regular season and the rest of the playoffs when he played well enough to get the team to the Super Bowl in the first place. The bottom line is that those Bills teams were built to compete against Marino's Dolphins, where they were asked to shut down the passing game on defense and score quickly on offense. Alas, they were not a good match for those power-run offenses and dominating defenses in the NFC East. And, as luck would have it, all four Super Bowls had to be against NFC East teams. I always thought that the Bills would have matched up much better against the 49ers. Yes, do you remember the no-punt game? Kelly finally outscored Montana in the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbb Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 Yes, do you remember the no-punt game? Kelly finally outscored Montana in the end. It was actually Steve Young and not Montana. Not disagreeing with what you guys are saying, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 It was actually Steve Young and not Montana. Not disagreeing with what you guys are saying, though. A rematch of their "classic" USFL game! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts