[closed]Do Jerry Sullivan hate the Bills that much?

[Gugny]

I don't know if he be hatin' on him furreal, but he may do be hate him and schit. Feel me?

[Turk71]

I don't know if he be hatin' on him furreal, but he may do be hate him and schit. Feel me?

Don t be such a shiznit goony.😂

[Straight Hucklebuck]

I have no problem with Sullivan. He pays attention. He remembers the decisions of the FO and holds them accountable.

 

Like Schopp, he goes back many years.

 

I like the negative first style. It's on the Bills to prove they can end The Drought and win something.

[Boatdrinks]

He do

[uticaclub]

He covers a team that hasn't made the playoffs in 17 years, it's hard not to be negative. He is well informed and sadly is often right. He tells it how it is.

[bmur66]

Sully is the kind of person I don't like to have around when I am watching a Bills game

[eball]

I have no problem with Sullivan. He pays attention. He remembers the decisions of the FO and holds them accountable.

 

Like Schopp, he goes back many years.

 

I like the negative first style. It's on the Bills to prove they can end The Drought and win something.

 

 

He covers a team that hasn't made the playoffs in 17 years, it's hard not to be negative. He is well informed and sadly is often right. He tells it how it is.

 

I'll go on record that you are likely two people I wouldn't enjoy spending a whole lot of time with (and I'm sure that doesn't bother you one bit).

 

Life is too short to focus on negativity. Sports are a fun pastime. And if you go back and analyze all of Sully's "recommendations" over the years he likely has a worse record than even the Bills' GMs. For covering football all these years he is remarkably ill-informed.

[xsoldier54]

He has to be actually trying.....

You guys are just nick picking.

[May Day 10]

He covers a team that hasn't made the playoffs in 17 years, it's hard not to be negative. He is well informed and sadly is often right. He tells it how it is.

I agree.... should we expect him to title his article "greatest team on turf"? We have seen this movie before... if its week 4 and they are 4-0 and he is a wet blanket, then there is an issue. I recall him changing his tune during the past hot starts.

[LTarmy]

Sullivan calls out the BS that has occurred in the FO for years. Despite what fans want to believe, he has been more right than wrong.

 

Sullivan didn't get lost in the win against the Jets. Throughout the preseason, these WRs struggle to gain separation and while targeting Shady McCoy and Clay worked against the Jets, eventually these WRs are going to need to show of the can step up in crunch time.

 

I don't mind Sully at all. He asks the hard questions and fans hate him because he doesn't buy into all the nonsense that the FO has tried to sell us (Levy as a GM, Nix as a GM, the Jauron no huddle offense, Brandon as a GM, Rex as a HC, etc). He calls them out.

 

 

 

I'll go on record that you are likely two people I wouldn't enjoy spending a whole lot of time with (and I'm sure that doesn't bother you one bit).

 

Life is too short to focus on negativity. Sports are a fun pastime. And if you go back and analyze all of Sully's "recommendations" over the years he likely has a worse record than even the Bills' GMs. For covering football all these years he is remarkably ill-informed.

How is he misinformed? He has been more right than wrong over the last 17 years. And while sports is suppose to be fun, this crap over the last 17 years has been nothing short of a joke.

[May Day 10]

 

And if you go back and analyze all of Sully's "recommendations" over the years he likely has a worse record than even the Bills' GMs. For covering football all these years he is remarkably ill-informed.

His number one recommendation is for the bills and pegula to hire an experienced, outside president or at least a consultant to get this chronically inept franchise on track... i agree 100%. This team has had a management lineage that has carried on from the late donahoe days through whaley.... despite how the bills spun all the "new" changes, it was nothing but a continuum.

 

Im hoping that mcdermott/beane is that role, but i still have doubts/trepidation. Building an organization from the 1st year head coach on up is kind of risky... but their actions have been different from the past 17 years, so its encouraging

Edited September 12, 2017 by May Day 10

[outsidethebox]

Sometimes he sounds like a harsh critic out of concern and then there's times when it sounds as if he's just not to big of a fan of the Bills. A lot of his articles on yesterday's game is nothing but a lot of negatives and a bunch of nick picking.

 

I won't read that much into the win but a lot of the changes from years past was noticeable. To start when games are that close the Bills find a way to get in their own way. That could be a start. However if you read Sullivan's articles without Watching the game you would've thought the Bills lost a game they should've won.

 

Why do he even cover the Bills? Why are they now charging to read his articles? And I would love to know is it possible for him to cover a team that he wouldn't mind supporting?

True dat my brotha!!!

[oldmanfan]

Criticism is one thing, and I have no problem with that. But deliberate snarkiness is another. Like in his article, he brings up something McDermott said about the building, referring to New era. So what does he do? Sullivan writes "building" (in quote) and throws in how he doesn't think of it as a building.

 

So my question is: What exactly does that add to a column? Does it add anything to the critique of the game? Does it add anything at all? Or it is just sophomoric? I would argue the latter.

 

Go ahead and be critical. God knows over the years the Bills management has earned their share of criticism. But leave the dumb childish, look how smart I am nonsense out.

[Straight Hucklebuck]

 

 

 

I'll go on record that you are likely two people I wouldn't enjoy spending a whole lot of time with (and I'm sure that doesn't bother you one bit).

 

Life is too short to focus on negativity. Sports are a fun pastime. And if you go back and analyze all of Sully's "recommendations" over the years he likely has a worse record than even the Bills' GMs. For covering football all these years he is remarkably ill-informed.

Sorry eball I learn a lot more from these questions, than Chris Brown option question or John Murphy's useless soft ball questions.

 

Jerry Sullivan: Are you concerned that the WRs only had 4 completions on the day?

 

You just said it was a group decision, now you're saying it was a business decision, which is it?

 

Matt Fairburn: What can you do to generate a pass rush, only 1 sack on the day?

 

Rather than...

 

Chris Brown: How are you going to celebrate this win, go home with family or start film study with Coaches?

 

John Murphy: Coach can you describe how magical it was to run out there as the Bills Coach?

 

I don't learn anything with the company parrots lobbing in their softball questions.

 

You get better when you have to think about problems, when things go wrong. That's how you discover the thought process behind these decisions.

Edited September 12, 2017 by Straight Hucklebuck

[PolishDave]

Sometimes he sounds like a harsh critic out of concern and then there's times when it sounds as if he's just not to big of a fan of the Bills. A lot of his articles on yesterday's game is nothing but a lot of negatives and a bunch of nick picking.

 

I won't read that much into the win but a lot of the changes from years past was noticeable. To start when games are that close the Bills find a way to get in their own way. That could be a start. However if you read Sullivan's articles without Watching the game you would've thought the Bills lost a game they should've won.

 

Why do he even cover the Bills? Why are they now charging to read his articles? And I would love to know is it possible for him to cover a team that he wouldn't mind supporting?

 

 

Do the pope be Catholic?

[Tenhigh]

I don't know if he be hatin' on him furreal, but he may do be hate him and schit. Feel me?

I does

[mjt328]

Sorry eball I learn a lot more from these questions, than Chris Brown option question or John Murphy's useless soft ball questions.

 

Jerry Sullivan: Are you concerned that the WRs only had 4 completions on the day?

 

You just said it was a group decision, now you're saying it was a business decision, which is it?

 

Matt Fairburn: What can you do to generate a pass rush, only 1 sack on the day?

 

Rather than...

 

Chris Brown: How are you going to celebrate this win, go home with family or start film study with Coaches?

 

John Murphy: Coach can you describe how magical it was to run out there as the Bills Coach?

 

I don't learn anything with the company parrots lobbing in their softball questions.

 

You get better when you have to think about problems, when things go wrong. That's how you discover the thought process behind these decisions.

 

This is the problem with modern reporting in general (and not just in the sports world). These guys have less interest in finding out facts, and more interest in finding ammunition to support the article they were already planning to write.

 

Chris Brown and John Murphy are basically employed by the team. You should already know what to expect when you listen to Murphy's show or read Brown's articles. There may be some interesting observations, but not a lot of critical pessimism.

 

Jerry Sullivan's agenda is the opposite. He's made a name by attacking and criticizing everything Buffalo Bills. Even if the Bills turn it around and start winning, this will not change (ask anyone who read his stuff before the playoff drought). If the Bills had done everything perfect Sunday and won 70-0, he would have still written a negative article about how we played a weak opponent. Sullivan apparently went into yesterday's game with plans on ripping the Bills for lack of talent at wide receiver. Based on everything he's put out publicly since kickoff Sunday, it's pretty clear that was his goal. He expected the passing game to struggle badly. So when it didn't, he decided to criticize the lack of receiver targets.

 

I have no problem with Sullivan asking the question about "balance." But both McDermott and Taylor gave the same answer -- an answer that made lots of sense -- and he still decided to pinpoint the lack of receiver targets in his article. It was ridiculous. It's fair to question the strength of the Jets as an opponent, or point out the places Buffalo struggled on Sunday. But I prefer reporters like Joe Buscaglia, who seems to just tell fans what he sees and observes, instead of starting with an agenda.

Edited September 12, 2017 by mjt328

[4_kidd_4]

Snark Patrol!

 

Lolzzz at this thread again. And again. And again.

 

 

Sully for GM.

[Seasons1992]

I think he do

 

Correct answer. Beat me to it.

[Chandler#81]

[This is an automated response]<br /><br />This subject matter is being currently being discussed or has already been discussed in a previous thread. <br /><br />Please consider using the "search" function before starting new topics. <br /><br />Thank you.