Tim Graham Defends Mike Rodak. Says Bills Fans Treat Him Unfairly

[Captain Murica]

1 hour ago, mcdamit said:

they were arguing over weather the Bills tanked.   Murph said Joe b was wrong, Joe said you can say you disagree ,but to say i am wrong is condescending .  

Murpjh shot back well your wrong and they went to commercial .  

I only caught the back end of that since I tuned in late. But, it did seem weird that wouldn’t get into a discussion after being asked by a caller if the bills tanked or cleansed the roster. Only tuned in because Joe B was filling in. I normally don’t tune in and prefer to eat tree bark than listen to Murph and Tasker. 

 

That being said, I’ve heard that everyone that works with Murph thinks he’s an ####### and he just sucks in general. But, he did deliver a great line in the last game of the season, “He was wide ass open!”

Edited March 20, 2019 by Captain Murica

[junior]

6 hours ago, eball said:

 

This is pretty spot on.  I've never read something from Rodak and said, "hey, I never thought about it that way."  Nothing special about him at all.

 

Graham, while an excellent writer, is indeed a douche unless you've navigated your way into his protected circle.

 

Ding ding ding.

 

This is the best way to describe the two of them. 

[Gugny]

5 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

TBH, some of the people who were engaging with Tim G were over the top and way out of line IMHO.  I also dunno about cult, and puppies are always good regardless.

But it's also true that TG did "go off" in a taunting/troll like manner, even on people who were simply asking questions or otherwise behaving appropriately.  That's simply not compatible with an open forum on the internet.  Ijits can be ignored, but you will be expected to explain or defend what you say, and if that's not comfortable it's the wrong place for ya.

 

The people who went over the top and who got out of line should have simply been ignored.  I don't condone that crap at all.  Timmy has a problem with anyone who says anything other than, "You know what, Tim?  You are exactly right!!"  Any question or challenge is met with snark and attitude.

 

There are users who, in my opinion, go out of their way to be aholes to JW.  If he doesn't ignore them, he simply points out how they're wrong/being stupid, then moves on.  No hissy fit.  No crossing his arms and sticking out his lower lip.  Timmy is incapable of that.  That's what make him such a dick.

 

 

 

Edited March 20, 2019 by Gugny

[Buftex]

It is just sports, they are just people...love the Bills, and many of my fellow Bills fans...but as a collective, we are about as thin-skinned a group as you could imagine.  

[Hapless Bills Fan]

8 hours ago, Buftex said:

It is just sports, they are just people...love the Bills, and many of my fellow Bills fans...but as a collective, we are about as thin-skinned a group as you could imagine.  

 

*thinks about groups hap is aware of*

*thinks about thinness of skin*

 

Nah.

[Cripple Creek]

9 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

*thinks about groups hap is aware of*

*thinks about thinness of skin*

 

Nah.

You mods aren’t that thin skinned. (except @Chandler#81)

 

oh, you had other groups in mind? carry on, ignore what I said.

[Chandler#81]

3 hours ago, Cripple Creek said:

You mods aren’t that thin skinned. (except @Chandler#81)

 

oh, you had other groups in mind? carry on, ignore what I said.

You, Sir, are a Prick!

[Delete This Account]

For what it's worth, Tim's a very good friend of mine.

He left this board after being challenged -- unfairly, in my opinion -- by several posters who ganged up on him and essentially demanded he reveal a source about something, rather than taking his word for it.

The posters who went after him so much crossed the line that I believe SMS established several rules in regards to the limits of how far people could go in these cases.

 

jw

[Kelly the Dog]

16 minutes ago, john wawrow said:

For what it's worth, Tim's a very good friend of mine.

He left this board after being challenged -- unfairly, in my opinion -- by several posters who ganged up on him and essentially demanded he reveal a source about something, rather than taking his word for it.

The posters who went after him so much crossed the line that I believe SMS established several rules in regards to the limits of how far people could go in these cases.

 

jw

I, personally and professionally, like TG myself, and found his retorts to be funny as much as thin-skinned. Sure he doesn't like to be challenged or attacked (who does?) but I found his quick-trigger amusing. The people claiming he is thin-skinned are just as thin-skinned, IMO. But he is a talented professional, too. I don't see that in Rodak.

[oldmanfan]

52 minutes ago, john wawrow said:

For what it's worth, Tim's a very good friend of mine.

He left this board after being challenged -- unfairly, in my opinion -- by several posters who ganged up on him and essentially demanded he reveal a source about something, rather than taking his word for it.

The posters who went after him so much crossed the line that I believe SMS established several rules in regards to the limits of how far people could go in these cases.

 

jw

Can I get your thoughts on this?  I see many if not all reporters invite readers to correspond via email or Twitter.  Do you do that voluntarily or is it a requirement of the job?  And while I agree your respondents should keep it reasonable and not take personal shots, is the reverse also true?  I ask the latter beacuse I have tried a couple times to disagree with a columnist and have a dialog only to get back snarky coermnts like "if you don't like it don't read my stuff".  If that's the attitude, why provide contact info?

[Delete This Account]

5 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Can I get your thoughts on this?  I see many if not all reporters invite readers to correspond via email or Twitter.  Do you do that voluntarily or is it a requirement of the job?  And while I agree your respondents should keep it reasonable and not take personal shots, is the reverse also true?  I ask the latter beacuse I have tried a couple times to disagree with a columnist and have a dialog only to get back snarky coermnts like "if you don't like it don't read my stuff".  If that's the attitude, why provide contact info?

 

I mostly engage with folks on social media. And no, it's not a requirement.

It all depends on how you approach it, especially when it comes to a columnist. The person is providing his/her take, agree or disagree, but there's no point in arguing with the point. It's the columnist's point of view.

 

That's a broad overview. When it comes to specifics, that all depends on how you approached it.

 

jw

[BADOLBILZ]

40 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said:

I, personally and professionally, like TG myself, and found his retorts to be funny as much as thin-skinned. Sure he doesn't like to be challenged or attacked (who does?) but I found his quick-trigger amusing. The people claiming he is thin-skinned are just as thin-skinned, IMO. But he is a talented professional, too. I don't see that in Rodak.

 

It's best to have good, realistic conversations about football but in the absence of that whipping a few thin-skinned, un-self-aware homers into a tizzy can be very amusing.   I'm tryna' be kindler and gentler myself but it's tough to resist.

  

7 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

 

 

Por ejemplo.

[oldmanfan]

10 minutes ago, john wawrow said:

 

I mostly engage with folks on social media. And no, it's not a requirement.

It all depends on how you approach it, especially when it comes to a columnist. The person is providing his/her take, agree or disagree, but there's no point in arguing with the point. It's the columnist's point of view.

 

That's a broad overview. When it comes to specifics, that all depends on how you approached it.

 

jw

Appreciate the feedback

[Kelly the Dog]

4 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

It's best to have good, realistic conversations about football but in the absence of that whipping a few thin-skinned, un-self-aware homers into a tizzy can be very amusing.   I'm tryna' be kindler and gentler myself but it's tough to resist.

 

 

No one likes your kinder, gentler self. It's unauthentic.

[Bockeye]

Yeah, I never got the "give us your source" folks.  Once you give up your source, they are no longer a source. 

 

If someone is giving information/insight on a consistent basis and they are just blowing smoke, they will quickly find themselves on the "ignore" list of many (e.g., Dunkirk Don).

[Cripple Creek]

3 hours ago, Chandler#81 said:

You, Sir, are a Prick!

Thank you. My work here is done.?

[Hapless Bills Fan]

8 hours ago, Kelly the Dog said:

No one likes your kinder, gentler self. It's unauthentic.

 

Speak for yourself, Rainbow

 

7 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

John, great post, I saw your answer and had another totally unpointed question:

 

(expurgated SNL reference many will miss and perhaps take as an example of how to behave)

 

Ah, yes.  The kindler gentler self.  Just testing, I presume?

[BADOLBILZ]

4 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Speak for yourself, Rainbow

 

 

Ah, yes.  The kindler gentler self.  Just testing, I presume?

 

 

Referee Pittman show?  John Goodman?  Bills v Oilers 89'?   Any Bills fans here?

 

 

[John from Riverside]

10 hours ago, john wawrow said:

For what it's worth, Tim's a very good friend of mine.

He left this board after being challenged -- unfairly, in my opinion -- by several posters who ganged up on him and essentially demanded he reveal a source about something, rather than taking his word for it.

The posters who went after him so much crossed the line that I believe SMS established several rules in regards to the limits of how far people could go in these cases.

 

jw

Never did understand going after the journalists that tried to post here.....and REALLY dont understand why ppl felt they needed to know their sources.

 

If they are right......the truth will bear out.

 

We have driven off some good posters from this board (Lori for instance) but I am seeing changes to the board where it is becoming a much better place to exchange ideas without attacks.  Perhaps we can invite some ppl back?

[Jauronimo]

I don't think Rodak has been particularly insightful on his Bills coverage, but hes an ESPN AFCE beat guy.  When the Bills are relevant again in the division maybe he'll catch up.  I don't read his stuff.  Most of the Rodak media I digest is Rodak diatribes on TBD, reddit, and twitter.

 

Can we talk about how dumb Bills reddit is? 

[Peace Frog]

Tim Graham was okay as the occasional poster here but he kind of reminds me of someone who was a former coworker that is now a manager.  They kind of want to hang out with the other workers but really can't because they're on the next level up.  Mike Rodak, on the other hand, definitely has a Pats slant to his articles.  He's like the guy that wants to be in Bills Mafia but would never jump on a table.  He'd only talk about how they don't do stuff like that in Boston.

[Thurman#1]

On 3/20/2019 at 7:00 AM, The Red King said:

Mike Rodak, this guy, right?  With this preseason article? http://www.espn.com/blog/buffalo-bills/post/_/id/28518/bills-set-up-tyrod-taylor-to-fail-blow-up-2017-season-with-shocking-trades , with the headline "Bills set up Tyrod Taylor to fail, blowing up 2017 season with shocking trades" and opens with this wonderfully ironic line "BUFFALO -- Turn out the lights on the Buffalo Bills' 2017 season, because it is over before it started."?  This kind of deep, insightful take?  The season the Bills broke a seventeen year playoff drought was over before it started?  ?

 

As stated by multiple posters prior, Rodak is disliked because all of his Bills' coverage is negative.  Even in the Bills' brightest moments, he finds any spot of tarnish, real of imagined to throw shade at the team.  Compare this to his coverage of the Patriots, where everything is positive, even if it's negative.  If his reporting style was consistant with both teams, most people would be fine.  Yes, there would be a lot more positive pieces about the Pats for obvious reasons, but it's fair and well-deserved.  But actually take a look and you will see day in and day out, article to article that according to Rodak New England can do nothing at all wrong, and Buffalo can't do anything, nothing at all right.  And that...is why he's disliked among many here.

 

 

Headlines are written by editors, not writers. Rodak is responsible for the rest of the content, but not the headline.

 

And yeah, the Bills broke the playoff drought, but they did it with the benefit of an extremely easy schedule on top of an AFC that lacked talent after the top three or so teams. When you make the playoffs with a 9-7 record, it's not because you're a very good team. This is a strong, controversial way to put it, but that was a very reasonable way to look at the trades of Watkins and Darby, IMO. They were rebuilding. He got it wrong as to the season's result, but it was a reasonable opinion.

 

And it's nonsense that all of Rodak's Bills coverage is negative. Some is negative, some is positive and some is neutral. Look at his recent tweet: "It's clear the Bills aren't messing around with their O-line rebuild," as just one quick example it took me 60 seconds or so to find. He also described Morse as a "strong signing." That took another 10 seconds.

 

I'm not a Rodak fan but he does good work and the opinion out there by Bills fans that he's anti-Bills is one that most Bills fans seem to feel about most reporters who have columns. And is also true of most fans of most teams. Fans want more positive coverage than neutrality admits. It's part of being a fan. The Bills have been mediocre to bad for a long long time. But they've made some good moves each year and Rodak has been as good as anyone else at pointing those out and lauding them.

[BADOLBILZ]

6 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

I'm not a Rodak fan but he does good work and the opinion out there by Bills fans that he's anti-Bills is one that most Bills fans seem to feel about most reporters who have columns. And is also true of most fans of most teams. Fans want more positive coverage than neutrality admits. It's part of being a fan. The Bills have been mediocre to bad for a long long time. But they've made some good moves each year and Rodak has been as good as anyone else at pointing those out and lauding them.

 

Excellent take and my sentiments exactly wrt Mike Rodak.

 

Only part I disagree with is that "fans" in general want more positive coverage............what the vast majority want is just a better team.......which will lead to better coverage.......but that's just a byproduct.

 

The reality is that the people who hate neutral, objective or perceived negative members of the media are just a very small but very vocal minority.   

 

And a good portion of those people don't actually want unjustified positive coverage.............they just want to have cause to be agitated.

 

Our most vocal anti-Sully member here spent most of two decades trying to rally support to pressure TBN to fire Jerry Sullivan.................now that same dude goes out of his way to listen to Sully and Bucky's radio show.     The heart wants what it wants.

 

 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

11 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

Excellent take and my sentiments exactly wrt Mike Rodak.

 

Only part I disagree with is that "fans" in general want more positive coverage............what the vast majority want is just a better team.......which will lead to better coverage.......but that's just a byproduct.

 

The reality is that the people who hate neutral, objective or perceived negative members of the media are just a very small but very vocal minority.   

 

And a good portion of those people don't actually want unjustified positive coverage.............they just want to have cause to be agitated.

 

Our most vocal anti-Sully member here spent most of two decades trying to rally support to pressure TBN to fire Jerry Sullivan.................now that same dude goes out of his way to listen to Sully and Bucky's radio show.     The heart wants what it wants.

 

I'm not sure who you're referencing as "our most vocal anti-Sully member ...who now goes out of his way to listen to Sully" but that's neither here nor there.

 

It's a great point that what fans really want a better team. 

But there are folks who never saw a Bills move that wasn't bad, and some of them write for the media.

 

Sully lost me when he wrote several columns in early fall 2011, while Fitzpatrick was hot hot hot and the Bills were 4-1 then 5-2, about the short-sightedness of the Bills FO not wrapping him up long term.  He wrote about the contract that it was fair to both sides.  Then when Fitzpatrick tanked the rest of the season, Sully wrote about how stupid the Bills were to prematurely give him that contract.  Clearly the Bills were stupid to him no matter what they did.  That stuck in my mind (and craw).

 

I think Tim Graham is a good writer, especially some of his feature pieces were great.

 

It is part of our TOS " If you post breaking news - reference your sources! "   I think most here understand that sources can't always be named, and generally, when someone says "I do have a source within the Bills, but I can't out him here" that's OK with most for a while (until the guy is proven BSer).

 

 

 

[oldmanfan]

It is worth note that Rodak and Graham have different jobs.  Rodak is a beat reporter assigned to the Bills.  He should report on what's going on, and not editorialize and offer opinions.  That is more the role of a columnist, which Graham is.

[Doc]

6 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

It is worth note that Rodak and Graham have different jobs.  Rodak is a beat reporter assigned to the Bills.  He should report on what's going on, and not editorialize and offer opinions.  That is more the role of a columnist, which Graham is.

Exactly.  Mikey should report the news and keep his opinions to himself.  Oh yeah, and get a tissue.

[BADOLBILZ]

2 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I'm not sure who you're referencing as "our most vocal anti-Sully member ...who now goes out of his way to listen to Sully" but that's neither here nor there.

 

It's a great point that what fans really want a better team. 

But there are folks who never saw a Bills move that wasn't bad, and some of them write for the media.

 

Sully lost me when he wrote several columns in early fall 2011, while Fitzpatrick was hot hot hot and the Bills were 4-1 then 5-2, about the short-sightedness of the Bills FO not wrapping him up long term.  He wrote about the contract that it was fair to both sides.  Then when Fitzpatrick tanked the rest of the season, Sully wrote about how stupid the Bills were to prematurely give him that contract.  Clearly the Bills were stupid to him no matter what they did.  That stuck in my mind (and craw).

 

I think Tim Graham is a good writer, especially some of his feature pieces were great.

 

It is part of our TOS " If you post breaking news - reference your sources! "   I think most here understand that sources can't always be named, and generally, when someone says "I do have a source within the Bills, but I can't out him here" that's OK with most for a while (until the guy is proven BSer).

 

 

 

 

 

Look......Sully provided the more skeptical viewpoint.    Most papers have/had one who does this.   It's formulaic.   The thing is........the team isn't supposed to stay bad forever.    It has more impact when it's nuanced.   Like Wallace Matthews complaining that "the Yanks gotta' find a good 5th starting pitcher" when the team is 4 games up in first place.    When a team is missing the playoffs for the 16th straight year.........there just ain't much to work with.

 

 

[K-9]

20 hours ago, john wawrow said:

For what it's worth, Tim's a very good friend of mine.

He left this board after being challenged -- unfairly, in my opinion -- by several posters who ganged up on him and essentially demanded he reveal a source about something, rather than taking his word for it.

The posters who went after him so much crossed the line that I believe SMS established several rules in regards to the limits of how far people could go in these cases.

 

jw

Does Tim ever unfairly “challenge” followers on social media? Does he ever “cross a line” in civility while engaged in public discourse? 

 

He’s a terrific writer. Should probably stick to features, imo. But, and while I’ve never engaged him here or elsewhere, he can be just as big of a troll.

[Chuck Wagon]

19 hours ago, oldmanfan said:

Can I get your thoughts on this?  I see many if not all reporters invite readers to correspond via email or Twitter.  Do you do that voluntarily or is it a requirement of the job?  And while I agree your respondents should keep it reasonable and not take personal shots, is the reverse also true?  I ask the latter beacuse I have tried a couple times to disagree with a columnist and have a dialog only to get back snarky coermnts like "if you don't like it don't read my stuff".  If that's the attitude, why provide contact info?

 

 

I've seen plenty of "professionals" responding to comments pointing out how many followers the commentor has...

[Chuck Wagon]

39 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

It is worth note that Rodak and Graham have different jobs.  Rodak is a beat reporter assigned to the Bills.  He should report on what's going on, and not editorialize and offer opinions.  That is more the role of a columnist, which Graham is.

 

 

Problem is in 2018 there's very little value add in the traditional "beat reporter" role.  Someone is almost always going to beat you to a "scoop" on twitter.  And ESPN doesn't treat him as a traditional beat reporter, they use the staff in those roles for all kinds of "editoralized" content for season previews, draft reviews, whatever else.  More often than not ESPN's take on something the Bills have done is negative, and he's the voice in the room as the representative.  In fairness to Mike, the team has made it very easy to be negative.

[K-9]

4 minutes ago, Chuck Wagon said:

 

 

Problem is in 2018 there's very little value add in the traditional "beat reporter" role.  Someone is almost always going to beat you to a "scoop" on twitter.  And ESPN doesn't treat him as a traditional beat reporter, they use the staff in those roles for all kinds of "editoralized" content for season previews, draft reviews, whatever else.  More often than not ESPN's take on something the Bills have done is negative, and he's the voice in the room as the representative.  In fairness to Mike, the team has made it very easy to be negative.

I can only imagine how much worse it will be when 2019 gets here.?

[Chuck Wagon]

Just now, K-9 said:

I can only imagine how much worse it will be when 2019 gets here.?

 

 

I do taxes.  It's 2018 until April 15th.

[oldmanfan]

5 minutes ago, Chuck Wagon said:

 

 

Problem is in 2018 there's very little value add in the traditional "beat reporter" role.  Someone is almost always going to beat you to a "scoop" on twitter.  And ESPN doesn't treat him as a traditional beat reporter, they use the staff in those roles for all kinds of "editoralized" content for season previews, draft reviews, whatever else.  More often than not ESPN's take on something the Bills have done is negative, and he's the voice in the room as the representative.  In fairness to Mike, the team has made it very easy to be negative.

I said above I don't have much problem with Rodak, probably because I don't read his stuff very much. I can understand some thinking he puts negative spins on things, I just try to  ignore that myself.  The problem I have with guys like Graham is they provide opinions, open themselves to feedback because they publish their emails and Twitter feeds looking for comment, then act like jerks when someone comments.

 

With respect to scooping, etc., granted I am old fashioned but this is where the social media, 24/7 thing screws up journalism.  In the haste to try and be first, there is no more true investigation and confirmation of things before posting,

[Chuck Wagon]

3 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

I said above I don't have much problem with Rodak, probably because I don't read his stuff very much. I can understand some thinking he puts negative spins on things, I just try to  ignore that myself.  The problem I have with guys like Graham is they provide opinions, open themselves to feedback because they publish their emails and Twitter feeds looking for comment, then act like jerks when someone comments.

 

With respect to scooping, etc., granted I am old fashioned but this is where the social media, 24/7 thing screws up journalism.  In the haste to try and be first, there is no more true investigation and confirmation of things before posting,

 

 

I disagree on the last point.  Schefter, usually Rappaport, in NBA Woj, etc do a tremendous job on confirmation.  There's a reason they can be believed 99.9% of the time.  It's pretty clear Rappaport got some bad intel on the Antonio Brown thing, but that situation could easily be explained as a source thought the deal was done, once the Bills talked to AB they pulled out and the spin is it never got that far.

 

 

[cba fan]

100% agree no one should tell him to kill himself.

But Rodak and his media supporters needs to toughen up.

 

This is normal when a fan of your biggest rival(NE Cheatriots) gets assigned to be your beat writer. WTH did they all expect.

[nedboy7]

Social media is so classy. 

[TheBeane]

If I remember it correctly, he kind of asked for it on here though.  He created a post where he said "I am Tim G.  I'll post in here on occasion, let me know how you feel and if you have any questions."  Then got all upset when people actually started to post comments that weren't compliments.  

[Rico]

1 hour ago, TheBeane said:

If I remember it correctly, he kind of asked for it on here though.  He created a post where he said "I am Tim G.  I'll post in here on occasion, let me know how you feel and if you have any questions."  Then got all upset when people actually started to post comments that weren't compliments.  

If I remember right, the nitwits who went after him weren’t exactly highly respected on this board. He should’ve just put that snark to good use and slam the hell of them more than he did.

[Jauronimo]

1 hour ago, K-9 said:

Does Tim ever unfairly “challenge” followers on social media? Does he ever “cross a line” in civility while engaged in public discourse? 

 

He’s a terrific writer. Should probably stick to features, imo. But, and while I’ve never engaged him here or elsewhere, he can be just as big of a troll.

Tim should've taken Leonidis' sage advice and told all his colleagues at ESPN to STFU then none of this would have ever happened.

[LSHMEAB]

1 hour ago, Chuck Wagon said:

 

 

I disagree on the last point.  Schefter, usually Rappaport, in NBA Woj, etc do a tremendous job on confirmation.  There's a reason they can be believed 99.9% of the time.  It's pretty clear Rappaport got some bad intel on the Antonio Brown thing, but that situation could easily be explained as a source thought the deal was done, once the Bills talked to AB they pulled out and the spin is it never got that far.

 

 

In fairness to Rap, his error wasn't so much what he said but what he DIDN'T say. My take is that the deal WAS finalized between the Bills and Steelers. Rap should have added a disclaimer regarding the trade hinging on AB's willingness to report/Bills willingness to bump his pay.

Edited March 21, 2019 by LSHMEAB