Kryk: You could see the latest Bills melodrama coming

[Gugny]

 

Let me get this straight. I make a post that is perfectly germane to the topic, and without any inflammatory rhetoric, and you personally attack me with a cease and desist order followed by a repetitive crusade to protect the front office from any criticism. Well, your frothing insistence that TBN reports are all lies and anyone who believes them must be silenced is what is redundant and old at this point.

 

Look, you will not silence me. If my opinions bother you so much please put me on ignore and take a Xanax.

 

I've not attacked you in any way, shape or form.

I can't protect the front office from anything.

I'm not trying to silence you, or anyone.

I don't take mood-altering drugs.

Your opinions don't bother me; your crusading bothers me.

Your use of big words is really cute and makes you appear very smart.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

If you wouldn't make the decision, you don't think it was the right one.

 

You know, this isn't how real life works.

 

Decisions are often close calls. A decision can be a "right decision" in the sense of being correct given the information used to make it and the weight assigned to that information, even if someone else would make a different decision because they would factor in different information or weight it differently - saying "I think it was the right decision, although I wouldn't have made it" is really shorthand for this

[NoSaint]

I understand that you believe everything you say is true, and every decision you make is the right one, but most reasonable people think they could also be wrong.

or that if something is 6 of 1 or a half dozen of the other it doesnt mean you think either decision is "wrong" when forced to pick

[Hapless Bills Fan]

Very well put and informative. Thanks. Sounds like a pretty reasonable clear cut and productive structure they have in place, now if they can all just get along.

 

I have a feeling the tweets were a little overblown.

 

Thanks.

 

The tweet is really bothering me. I feel that if reporters want to use Twitter to publish breaking news, they have a journalistic responsibility to follow it up with longer explanation not possible in Twitter. And, their peers have a responsibility to follow it up, not just cite their colleague's tweet as a source.

 

Worse, Graham made his tweet impossible for Whaley or Rex or the Bills organization to refute, since the first thing he said is that the Bills organization will maintain unity when speaking publically.

 

So now we have it all over the news media that Whaley "went rogue" by cutting Jackson, without any explanation of exactly what that means - who was allegedly left out of the loop? Anyone reiterating Graham's tweet should provide clarification from him on what "going rogue" meant - who allegedly wasn't consulted or informed who should have been? and seek comment from Rex Ryan, Whaley, and the Pegulas. Then they'd have a story. Without that, they have Middle-school Girls Gossip Hour.

 

Rex has stated that the decision to cut Jackson was an organizational decision and has used the pronoun "we": "This is a really hard decision, but we felt the decision that we made, especially at the time we made it, was appropriate." Whaley has said that the Pegulas were informed (and even Graham later acknowledged this) and implied that both he and Rex were involved in communicating to Jackson

 

There has been all kinds of speculation that what "rogue" means is that Whaley acted without the Pegulas or HC knowledge, but even Graham has backpedaled on the Pegulas and as long as Rex and Whaley state that they were both in the loop, I really don't think an unnamed source and a tweet with the unexplained term "rogue" are enough grounds to question that.

 

The only further information that Graham has provided, that I've seen, is that Whaley's decision embarassed M&T bank, which it really shouldn't be, if M&T has competent ad agency

 

The problem faced by Whaley and Ryan and the Bills is that any further statement they make goes for naught in the face of Graham's tweet since, you know, they're going to maintain public unity even if they're privately screaming at each other, cuz Timmah sez that's what they'll do. Like Whaley or dislike Whaley, that's really a scummy situation to put anyone in. Golden Rule, One, Violated.

 

I think Tim Graham needs to either put up (follow up his tweet with specific information about who what when where - you know, like a journalist?) or issue a public apology to Whaley for libeling him. I think every reporter who has lazily quoted Graham without any follow-up or new information should do likewise or transfer to the gossip or horoscope section of their organization. And I think posters here who are assuming what "rogue" means without any confirmation and in the face of contrary statements from the people involved should pause and think about what they're doing.

 

I don't expect that to happen because I understand this is real life, but I think it should. OK, I'm done now.

[FireChan]

 

You know, this isn't how real life works.

 

Decisions are often close calls. A decision can be a "right decision" in the sense of being correct given the information used to make it and the weight assigned to that information, even if someone else would make a different decision because they would factor in different information or weight it differently - saying "I think it was the right decision, although I wouldn't have made it" is really shorthand for this

It is though. Have you ever made a decision you thought was wrong?

[Gugny]

 

I think Tim Graham needs to either put up (follow up his tweet with specific information about who what when where - you know, like a journalist?) or issue a public apology to Whaley for libeling him. I think every reporter who has lazily quoted Graham without any follow-up or new information should do likewise or transfer to the gossip or horoscope section of their organization. And I think posters here who are assuming what "rogue" means without any confirmation and in the face of contrary statements from the people involved should pause and think about what they're doing.

 

I'm just happy knowing that, more than he ever has, Timmy showed everyone who was watching exactly what he is ... a hack.

 

He's never been good at what he tries to do; he's never been successful; he's a whiny, crybaby hack and this schitstorm couldn't have possibly been started by a bigger fool.

 

The day he took his ball and ran home from TBD was one of the finer moments this place has seen.

[TSOL]

Thanks.

 

The tweet is really bothering me. I feel that if reporters want to use Twitter to publish breaking news, they have a journalistic responsibility to follow it up with longer explanation not possible in Twitter. And, their peers have a responsibility to follow it up, not just cite their colleague's tweet as a source.

 

Worse, Graham made his tweet impossible for Whaley or Rex or the Bills organization to refute, since the first thing he said is that the Bills organization will maintain unity when speaking publically.

 

So now we have it all over the news media that Whaley "went rogue" by cutting Jackson, without any explanation of exactly what that means - who was allegedly left out of the loop? Anyone reiterating Graham's tweet should provide clarification from him on what "going rogue" meant - who allegedly wasn't consulted or informed who should have been? and seek comment from Rex Ryan, Whaley, and the Pegulas. Then they'd have a story. Without that, they have Middle-school Girls Gossip Hour.

 

Rex has stated that the decision to cut Jackson was an organizational decision and has used the pronoun "we": "This is a really hard decision, but we felt the decision that we made, especially at the time we made it, was appropriate." Whaley has said that the Pegulas were informed (and even Graham later acknowledged this) and implied that both he and Rex were involved in communicating to Jackson

 

There has been all kinds of speculation that what "rogue" means is that Whaley acted without the Pegulas or HC knowledge, but even Graham has backpedaled on the Pegulas and as long as Rex and Whaley state that they were both in the loop, I really don't think an unnamed source and a tweet with the unexplained term "rogue" are enough grounds to question that.

 

The only further information that Graham has provided, that I've seen, is that Whaley's decision embarassed M&T bank, which it really shouldn't be, if M&T has competent ad agency

 

The problem faced by Whaley and Ryan and the Bills is that any further statement they make goes for naught in the face of Graham's tweet since, you know, they're going to maintain public unity even if they're privately screaming at each other, cuz Timmah sez that's what they'll do. Like Whaley or dislike Whaley, that's really a scummy situation to put anyone in. Golden Rule, One, Violated.

 

I think Tim Graham needs to either put up (follow up his tweet with specific information about who what when where - you know, like a journalist?) or issue a public apology to Whaley for libeling him. I think every reporter who has lazily quoted Graham without any follow-up or new information should do likewise or transfer to the gossip or horoscope section of their organization. And I think posters here who are assuming what "rogue" means without any confirmation and in the face of contrary statements from the people involved should pause and think about what they're doing.

 

I don't expect that to happen because I understand this is real life, but I think it should. OK, I'm done now.

Well, a couple things I take from all this. Twitter is a horribly irresponsible form of reporting. Tim Graham was doing what we in Buffalo know he always does, stir the pot. Unfortunately with Rex's national reputation of being this big larger than life, brash personality, he is getting tons of national attention here, further blowing it out of proportion. And Whaley, as I said earlier, is put in the hot seat for numerous reasons.

 

If they work well together behind closed doors, while disagreeing on minor matters it can be a fine enough situation and no one has anything to worry about. But I think, of anyone, an unsuccessful season this year, may fall on Whaleys shoulders.

[MyHorseAteTheKid]

Not making the playoffs for 15 years makes the Bills an easy can to kick... Get back on top, win, go deep into the playoffs and all the BS will stop...

Edited September 3, 2015 by MyHorseAteTheKid

[Punching Bag]

It is not surprising that the author takes digs at the Pegulas since the Toronto Sun was unhappy that washed up musician group backed by Canada did not win costing them lots of opportunities.

 

Whenever you see/hear article in newspaper / magazine / tv / radio / internet you need to put it in context of what positions they supported in past. Media members rarely change their stripes just change the color of the stripes to fit what they said before and then point out "I/we was/were right!".

[negativo]

 

I doubt it will influence you, but that's actually not how things work. It varies from team to team, and on some teams the coach controls the 53 man roster.

 

 

The announced Bills procedure is: "Brandon said the 53-man roster will come under Whaley's responsibilities, while the 46-man roster on game day will be Ryan's. Pegula said the three would all report to him and co-owner and wife Kim Pegula. As was the case with the press conference that followed the Bills' change in ownership in October, Kim Pegula sat in the front row with other family members."

 

So:

Brandon: controls purse strings and staff which writes contracts

Whaley: controls talent acquisition and 53 man roster decisions, scouting and pro player personnel staff

Ryan: controls game-day decisions, scheme, coaching staff

All three: report directly to the Pegulas

 

In reality, the GM works to understand what type of players the coach needs to implement his schemes and acts according to player evaluation and rankings provided by the HC/coaching staff, and the GM and coach provide talent comparison/player value input to guide the football ops guys in how they write contracts.

 

Your description of how things work is factually incorrect according to the Bills announced organizational structure and rather than helping, will misinform people who take it seriously.

 

This post is provided as a service to people who want to understand how things work

 

Your link is bad, but your points are good. I looked up for myself the publicly stated roles of Whaley and Rex and found you are correct. According to Pegula, Whaley has been given authority to select the 53 man roster. Based on that, I will back off my position about Whaley overstepping his authority or boundaries.

 

That said, it's hardly following the open, consultative, unified model Pegula spoke about so passionately. If, as reported, he cut Fred unilaterally and secretly against the desires of football ops, which is headed by Ryan, it's pretty sleazy. Whaley may have final say on the 53, but that doesn't mean he's the only voice that matters.

 

Again, if the coaches disagreed with Whaley as reported, and he cut Fred without even giving Ryan the courtesy and respect of telling him first, is that good for the team? Does that build unity and trust? Why not tell them? A move like that causes turmoil and dissension, not the collaborative unity Pegula and Brandon spoke of when Ryan was hired.

 

I guess it comes down to whether you believe the unified front being put forward by the front office and Rex, or Graham's reports to the contrary. I believe Graham, but understand that you do not. Since neither of us can prove which is true, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Edited September 3, 2015 by negativo

[GunnerBill]

What is reported is "some coaches disagreed" there is nothing to suggest it was a consensus view. I don't believe Rex did not know before it happened. Not for a nanosecond. Whaley has the final say, he made the call.

[KollegeStudnet]

People last season could see Fred might NOT be on this team after last season.

 

Fan favorite?

 

Yes!

 

But, the game is a business and that business has a salary cap.

Edited September 3, 2015 by KollegeStudnet

[Malazan]

i agree the fact he got cut should not be painted as a mess. It's the leaks that followed... Throwing Whaley under the bus, staff and FO discord, etc.

 

We have no idea if any of that occurred. Since it is bad reporters giving the info. It could be "Paul the Janitor". A journalist will identify their source as closely as possible. So if it's someone from the front office, they will say "a source from the front office says". The people reporting all of this 'discord' are not journalists.

 

There's a reason it's "sources". Who are they? Are they actually privy to knowledge? We don't know. You also get the reporter circle jerk where they will talk to another reporter who has a source and then say something like "A source close to situation".

 

There's a lot of tricks used for "sources" by bad reporters. Let's keep in mind that all the debate came from a "source" that we don't know from a reporter who has an ax to grind with a very vague description of "rogue".

[Hapless Bills Fan]

Well, a couple things I take from all this. Twitter is a horribly irresponsible form of reporting. Tim Graham was doing what we in Buffalo know he always does, stir the pot. Unfortunately with Rex's national reputation of being this big larger than life, brash personality, he is getting tons of national attention here, further blowing it out of proportion. And Whaley, as I said earlier, is put in the hot seat for numerous reasons.

 

If they work well together behind closed doors, while disagreeing on minor matters it can be a fine enough situation and no one has anything to worry about. But I think, of anyone, an unsuccessful season this year, may fall on Whaleys shoulders.

 

Agreed on Twitter and on pot stirring.

 

Also agreed that the real issue is what went down between Rex and Whaley and the Pegulas. Screw the media, but the three of them and especially Rex and Whaley, need to work hand in glove.

 

If this year's season is unsuccessful, I think the question is "why?" At times, the Jets were hampered by questionable game management by Ryan, stupid assistant tricks (tripping the gunner, remember that?), and what looked like a poorly controlled locker room. I think if any of that emerges or if the defense is clearly taking a step back from last year, the blame will fall to Rex.

 

On the other hand, if Cassel is cut, added to FredEx, and then injuries or poor performance hamper the run game and Taylor/EJ don't work out, well, the roster buck falls to Whaley so he should shoulder it. OTOH, Rex does have a reputation in the NY media for making personnel decisions then deflecting responsibility onto others, so I think that aspect will be watched.

[Punching Bag]

 

We have no idea if any of that occurred. Since it is bad reporters giving the info. It could be "Paul the Janitor". A journalist will identify their source as closely as possible. So if it's someone from the front office, they will say "a source from the front office says". The people reporting all of this 'discord' are not journalists.

 

There's a reason it's "sources". Who are they? Are they actually privy to knowledge? We don't know. You also get the reporter circle jerk where they will talk to another reporter who has a source and then say something like "A source close to situation".

 

There's a lot of tricks used for "sources" by bad reporters. Let's keep in mind that all the debate came from a "source" that we don't know from a reporter who has an ax to grind with a very vague description of "rogue".

Exactly and since they are trying to generate clicks (it is their best interest until front office, coaches and players refuse to talk to them) to add melodrama and audition for the national inquirer.

 

And I do not know if Rex is telling the truth but in past he has said he does not want front office control like other head coaches have.

[FLFan]

Thanks.

 

The tweet is really bothering me. I feel that if reporters want to use Twitter to publish breaking news, they have a journalistic responsibility to follow it up with longer explanation not possible in Twitter. And, their peers have a responsibility to follow it up, not just cite their colleague's tweet as a source.

 

Worse, Graham made his tweet impossible for Whaley or Rex or the Bills organization to refute, since the first thing he said is that the Bills organization will maintain unity when speaking publically.

 

So now we have it all over the news media that Whaley "went rogue" by cutting Jackson, without any explanation of exactly what that means - who was allegedly left out of the loop? Anyone reiterating Graham's tweet should provide clarification from him on what "going rogue" meant - who allegedly wasn't consulted or informed who should have been? and seek comment from Rex Ryan, Whaley, and the Pegulas. Then they'd have a story. Without that, they have Middle-school Girls Gossip Hour.

 

Rex has stated that the decision to cut Jackson was an organizational decision and has used the pronoun "we": "This is a really hard decision, but we felt the decision that we made, especially at the time we made it, was appropriate." Whaley has said that the Pegulas were informed (and even Graham later acknowledged this) and implied that both he and Rex were involved in communicating to Jackson

 

There has been all kinds of speculation that what "rogue" means is that Whaley acted without the Pegulas or HC knowledge, but even Graham has backpedaled on the Pegulas and as long as Rex and Whaley state that they were both in the loop, I really don't think an unnamed source and a tweet with the unexplained term "rogue" are enough grounds to question that.

 

The only further information that Graham has provided, that I've seen, is that Whaley's decision embarassed M&T bank, which it really shouldn't be, if M&T has competent ad agency

 

The problem faced by Whaley and Ryan and the Bills is that any further statement they make goes for naught in the face of Graham's tweet since, you know, they're going to maintain public unity even if they're privately screaming at each other, cuz Timmah sez that's what they'll do. Like Whaley or dislike Whaley, that's really a scummy situation to put anyone in. Golden Rule, One, Violated.

 

I think Tim Graham needs to either put up (follow up his tweet with specific information about who what when where - you know, like a journalist?) or issue a public apology to Whaley for libeling him. I think every reporter who has lazily quoted Graham without any follow-up or new information should do likewise or transfer to the gossip or horoscope section of their organization. And I think posters here who are assuming what "rogue" means without any confirmation and in the face of contrary statements from the people involved should pause and think about what they're doing.

 

I don't expect that to happen because I understand this is real life, but I think it should. OK, I'm done now.

Well stated and a very accurate portrayal. This is typical Graham. It also does not surprise me that other so called journalists would spin what amounts to speculation into a much bigger story, based on a tweet. Great journalistic integrity there. The whole thing is BS and people should not be dragged into the dirt with Timmy and his minions.

[TSOL]

Your link is bad, but your points are good. I looked up for myself the publicly stated roles of Whaley and Rex and found you are correct. According to Pegula, Whaley has been given authority to select the 53 man roster. Based on that, I will back off my position about Whaley overstepping his authority or boundaries.

 

That said, it's hardly following the open, consultative, unified model Pegula spoke about so passionately. If, as reported, he cut Fred unilaterally and secretly against the desires of football ops, which is headed by Ryan, it's pretty sleazy. Whaley may have final say on the 53, but that doesn't mean he's the only voice that matters.

 

Again, if the coaches disagreed with Whaley as reported, and he cut Fred without even giving Ryan the courtesy and respect of telling him first, is that good for the team? Does that build unity and trust? Why not tell them? A move like that causes turmoil and dissension, not the collaborative unity Pegula and Brandon spoke of when Ryan was hired.

 

I guess it comes down to whether you believe the unified front being put forward by the front office and Rex, or Graham's reports to the contrary. I believe Graham, but understand that you do not. Since neither of us can prove which is true, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

[Gugny]

 

Your link is bad, but your points are good. I looked up for myself the publicly stated roles of Whaley and Rex and found you are correct. According to Pegula, Whaley has been given authority to select the 53 man roster. Based on that, I will back off my position about Whaley overstepping his authority or boundaries.

 

That said, it's hardly following the open, consultative, unified model Pegula spoke about so passionately. If, as reported, he cut Fred unilaterally and secretly against the desires of football ops, which is headed by Ryan, it's pretty sleazy. Whaley may have final say on the 53, but that doesn't mean he's the only voice that matters.

 

Again, if the coaches disagreed with Whaley as reported, and he cut Fred without even giving Ryan the courtesy and respect of telling him first, is that good for the team? Does that build unity and trust? Why not tell them? A move like that causes turmoil and dissension, not the collaborative unity Pegula and Brandon spoke of when Ryan was hired.

 

I guess it comes down to whether you believe the unified front being put forward by the front office and Rex, or Graham's reports to the contrary. I believe Graham, but understand that you do not. Since neither of us can prove which is true, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

 

 

So are you saying that Whaley did not, in fact, go rogue?

[Lurker]

 

If, as reported, he cut Fred unilaterally and secretly against the desires of football ops, which is headed by Ryan, it's pretty sleazy.

Ryan does not head football ops.

 

 

Per page 7 of the Bills media guide: http://prod.static.bills.clubs.nfl.com/assets/docs/Buffalo-Bills-Media-Guide.pdf

 

 

FOOTBALL ADMINISTRATION

 

Kevin Meganck Director of Football Operations

Don Purdy Director of Football Administration

Michael Lyons Director of Analytics

Casey Weidl Manager of Football Operations

Peter Linton System Analyst

[John from Riverside]

The problem with all this is when a media person like a reporter does this....they are not really held accountable for what they say......we simply move on from it

 

When someone like Doug Whaley says the wrong thing....even if he didnt mean to....he will be held accountable by that to the fans for like.....ever