Lurker Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 Gailey probably lost more respect from the players in the locker room for the benching. Players want to win, and you don't earn respect from vets and rooks for benching one of your better players for a relatively innocuous play. Gailey showed that his ego/pride is more important than winning, and that sentiment will definitely resonate with the players. And what do players make of a guy who thinks the rules don't apply to him? If Chan say's "hurt the team and your benched" and SJ goes out and pulls his stunt anyway, what does that say to the team? I can't think of a successful HC that's allowed a player to put themselves ahead the team on more than one occassion. Any suggestions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodeMonkey Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 Any celebration that by definition merits a penalty is a me-first celebration. Oh good lord. "Me First" comes from the fact that Johnson pre-planned this childish stunt (again) knowing full well it would cost his team 15 yards and give the pats good field position and he simply didn't give a !@#$. He cared only about himself by his "look at me" bull ****, not his team. Get it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 Would like to know what words were exchanged on the sideline. Those could be key too his benching, and future here. I didnt see it yet but apparently Gailey had a simple rule. Any player that costs the team a penalty for excessive celebration gets benched. He had to go through with it. Stevie said after the game he understood it and took responsibility for it. To me, because of exactly what he did, Gailey should have benched him only for a half. If he did something excessive, flaunting the rule, that would have been totally different. He clearly thought it would be ok, doing it last year and not getting any penalty. He knew he would get a fine by the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 The Bengals seemed to do OK when they didn't bother bringing back their pair of diva queens... speaking of which I didn't see much Ocho Stinko today. Ocho and TO were both well into their 30s, not 25 and just entering their prime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trader Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 My guess is that most of the players are aligned behind Stevie than behind Chan. Sure he's an immature imbecile, but he delivers on the field and that's what players care about. Wins & losses. Thanks Chan for reinforcing your reputation. Actually your wrong winning is down the list a ways. They care about their payday first, their image second, their parent(s) wives, girlfriends, cars, homes, vacations, clothes. Their friends, team and fans are somewhere on the list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurlyBurly51 Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 Oh good lord. "Me First" comes from the fact that Johnson pre-planned this childish stunt (again) knowing full well it would cost his team 15 yards and give the pats good field position and he simply didn't give a !@#$. He cared only about himself by his "look at me" bull ****, not his team. Get it? How did he "know full well" when he didn't receive a penalty last time he wrote on his undershirt? Both he and Chan acknowledged as much after the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 As another thought, if Stevie tweeted that he might get fined, he probably thought he'd just get fined for the shirt and NOT get a penalty. Lots of things in the NFL aren't called for any type of penalty but result in mid-week fines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 Ocho and TO were both well into their 30s, not 25 and just entering their prime. My point was that it is hardly "impossible" to replace a WR. Divas are dumped league wide all the time. AJ Green has more than capably filled the hole. There are plenty of WRs in NCAA that can play -- some that I think have much better ball skills than Stevie Johnson, quite frankly. Now, I'm not saying that all things being equal, the Bills should be creating yet another hole, but Johnson has shown he's an idiot and doesn't understand how to follow directions. When trying to turn around the worst franchise in the NFL, one can't rely on the unreliable to lead the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 My point was that it is hardly "impossible" to replace a WR. Divas are dumped league wide all the time. AJ Green has more than capably filled the hole. There are at plenty of WRs in NCAA that can play. Now, I'm not saying that all things being equal, the Bills should be creating yet another hole, but Johnson has shown he's an idiot and doesn't understand how to follow directions. When trying to turn around the worst franchise in the NFL, one can't rely on the unreliable to lead the way. Sweet. Lets burn the #9 pick on a WR! Its not like we have more pressing needs. Who needs linemen or defense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilson's Ears Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 Gailey probably lost more respect from the players in the locker room for the benching. Players want to win, and you don't earn respect from vets and rooks for benching one of your better players for a relatively innocuous play. Gailey showed that his ego/pride is more important than winning, and that sentiment will definitely resonate with the players. uh, actually just the opposite. gailey told his players that any further actions like this would result in disciplinary action. if he doesn't follow through, he loses his players. he just did what he said he was gonna do. doesn't matter how silly everyone thinks it is. a team rule is a team rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsForever Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 (edited) In regards to Johnson there was reference in the twitter world about celebrations and potential fines before the game. When does normal behavour AKA playing within the rules is under the presumption of getting fined? This falls all on Johnson. There should be no blame to Gailey. Remember when the Hoody benched Welker for a a few series in a playoff game last year for making references to Rex Ryan's foot fetish in the presser. He punished a lot less serious infraction with a player that had no history of problems, but it was a rule the Hoody has. You don't motivate teams with bullitin board material. Gailey has rules and Stevie crossed them. Any head coach would do what he did with the rules they set for their players. Edited January 2, 2012 by BuffaloBillsForever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurlyBurly51 Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 Sweet. Lets burn the #9 pick on a WR! Its not like we have more pressing needs. Who needs linemen or defense? Not to mention what WR is worthy of the #9 selection?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodeMonkey Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 How did he "know full well" when he didn't receive a penalty last time he wrote on his undershirt? Both he and Chan acknowledged as much after the game. Please. Because a cop lets you off for speeding one time do you think you won't get a ticket for it the next time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted January 1, 2012 Share Posted January 1, 2012 Sweet. Lets burn the #9 pick on a WR! Its not like we have more pressing needs. Who needs linemen or defense? WR is as big of a need with or without Stevie. I agree we should not create another hole, but even if he is re-signed, we have good reason to take a WR at #9. WR is definitely a bigger need than OL right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Best Player Available Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 Ocho and TO were both well into their 30s, not 25 and just entering their prime. TO started WAY before his 30's. Ask the 49ers why they got rid of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 Sweet. Lets burn the #9 pick on a WR! Its not like we have more pressing needs. Who needs linemen or defense? Or a QB above the Tarvaris Jackson rung of the ladder for that matter. I wish Stevie would "grow up" too. So far, there is little to indicate he is capable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurlyBurly51 Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 Please. Because a cop lets you off for speeding one time do you think you won't get a ticket for it the next time? Make assumptions much? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsMagic1 Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 WR is as big of a need with or without Stevie. I agree we should not create another hole, but even if he is re-signed, we have good reason to take a WR at #9. WR is definitely a bigger need than OL right now. Yeah, our WRs gave up 49 points today Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodeMonkey Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 Make assumptions much? Wear blinders much? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurlyBurly51 Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 Wear blinders much? No, but I do take a coach's opinion and NFL players opinion over some monkey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts