Jerry Sullivan on our podcast: Anecdote about McDermott

[swimtoga]

I’m going to go out on a limb here and say Billy Ocean did “No Woman No Cry” better than Bob Marley.

[LABILLBACKER]

10 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

Having been on the receiving end of a coach who didn't like something that I had reported.... because it was true.... I have some sympathy for Fairbairn if this happened. 

 

Think the more interesting bit of what Jerry says is about the Special Teams coaching. For all that everyone hated Crossman I don't think it has been any better at all under the Carolina fella. 

Farwell is no better than Crossman,  which isn't saying much. ST this year has been just as bad as last year. 

[Seasons1992]

7 hours ago, Nextmanup said:

Sure, McDermott recently acted like a giant douche bag to a youngish reporter, getting in his face in an attempt at physical intimidation, dropping F bombs like nuts on him, and asking him "Are you on the team or not?!" 

 

This was at a press conference.  Presumably because McDouche didn't like a question or two, and apparently actually thinks the media is supposed to bolster the team as though it is part of the Bills P/R department.

 

Not many people heard about this because Pegula controls the media in WNY now either directly or indirectly. 

 

Quite an interesting little story.

 

McDouche = psycho

 

 

 

 

 

 

[aceman_16]

6 hours ago, dave mcbride said:

Who is “we”?

OUR multiple personality. Is this NOT a safe site for such posters?

[BritBill]

7 hours ago, Nextmanup said:

Sure, McDermott recently acted like a giant douche bag to a youngish reporter, getting in his face in an attempt at physical intimidation, dropping F bombs like nuts on him, and asking him "Are you on the team or not?!" 

 

This was at a press conference.  Presumably because McDouche didn't like a question or two, and apparently actually thinks the media is supposed to bolster the team as though it is part of the Bills P/R department.

 

Not many people heard about this because Pegula controls the media in WNY now either directly or indirectly. 

 

Quite an interesting little story.

 

McDouche = psycho

 

 

 

 

Are you alright?

[GreggTX]

I miss Sully's candor. I couldn't care less what others think about him. He tells it like it is. Sorry if you get buthurt about it. It's not Sully's fault if you can't handle the truth.

[gomper]

4 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Gomper, I don't think sarcasm is a correct descriptor for what that is.  It's an analogy, using hyperbole to emphasize the intended point.

 

The problem is the hyperbole is so over the top exaggerated that it actually detracts from the credibility of the actual account.

 

I hear it and I think, "if those guys believe that comparison to actual totalitarian state's secret police force is an apt analogy for treatment of the media by the Pegulas and the Bills FO, that is just so obviously exaggerated that I have to consider any story they tell might be equally subject to exaggeration"

 

Edit: oldmanfan said something less polite, but more concise

Fair enough. 

 

[folz]

First of all, we all know that McDermott is a "control freak" to a certain extent. He'd probably admit that himself. So no news there. I bet there aren't too many head coaches in the NFL who weren't. You don't get to that position (or at least you don't succeed at that position) without trying to control every detail of your operation. There are so many coaches who fail, not because they don't know their Xs and Os,, but because they can't juggle all of the tasks of a head coach. You need someone who is a bit of a detail-oriented, control freak. 

 

Secondly, to take one incident and try to portray that as who the person "really" is, is so disingenuous. Like we have had a completely false picture of McDermott this whole time, and he's actually a douche, as one poster ranted. Does one outburst or moment where he may have lost his cool (for good reasons or not) erase all of the other moments of this man's life? The fact that his players love him, that he's respectful to everyone in the building, all the way down to the food servers and janitors? That he's always good with fans, that he is a good family man, etc., etc. Ridiculous. And for anyone to compare it to Marrone seems wrong too. There were so many rumors and stories of Marrone being disrespectful to players, media, and people in the building, and he was never really warm with fans either. That has not been the case with McDermott at all. In this day and age of social media, if people were really disgruntled or McDermott was really a dick, it would slip out here and there from players or staff...just look at the Jets this year. But, when you listen to the players talk about McDermott, it is always with a lot of positive emotion. There is no way they are all that good of actors to be faking it. And to portray the reason we don't know about it as being Terry Pegula has every single person in the organization and the media lying and hiding things is so over the top. I'm not saying they don't try to manage the image of the team and organization, every company (and person for that matter) does to a certain extent. It's called public relations and people get paid a lot of money to do so. But to make it seem as if Terry is controlling the media, etc. like a mob boss or dictator, just sounds like sour grapes to me from Sullivan. No offense, but that guy should have been off the Bills beat many, many years before he was finally let go.

 

Third, I think there are some great journalists across the different fields of journalism, including sports coverage. But let's not kid ourselves, there are some bad ones too and there are some with huge egos themselves (so it is funny to me when they call out someone they are reporting on as being a huge ego). And some of them act like they are uncovering Watergate. It's a game. It's sports. It's entertainment. They're not saving the world or stopping rings of corruption here. I am constantly annoyed by questions at pressers. Some can't even form a coherent question. Some ask ridiculous questions. Some ask things that really aren't nice. Some ask things trying to prove an angle that they wrote about to prove they're right. The same question gets repeated over and over because I want my own sound bite directed at me. I can understand coaches and players getting annoyed with those types of bad reporters at times. (I'm not saying Fairburn is one of those bad reporters, honestly I don't know enough about him to say one way or the other.)

 

If the incident is true as reported, then I'm not saying maybe McDermott should have handled it differently, but I'm trying to think why Fairburn would even report that they were practicing fake punts. What does that really bring to your readers or listeners? First of all, maybe they practice that every week, but usually during the nonmedia portion of practice, in which case it is not news. Or maybe it is for this week specifically, in which case, you are giving a disadvantage to the team you report on and want access from. So, why even report it? No one really cares about that information, except the opposing team of course. It seems more to me like a young reporter trying to find something else others aren't reporting on, so he had something different to say or write, in the hopes of more clicks/readers/listeners. They have to understand that their audience is almost all Bills fans. We don't really want you reporting things that could be detrimental to the team, if it isn't something that needs to be reported (meaning a bigger story of more import, you know, a real news item). Let's say a reporter is in the locker room and a player has left their playbook open on a bench. Should that reporter read that and then publish a story talking about what's in the playbook? It may be interesting, but I'd rather that not be in the press to create any disadvantage for the team. And I would completely understand anyone in the organization being upset about that and feeling as if that reporter had betrayed their trust. Now I'm not saying what Fairburn did was to that level or even wrong necessarily, but I can see McDermott feeling like it was the same type of breach of trust. People in the NFL are ultra-competitive people. I can understand getting upset if you think someone is giving away your secrets after you've invited them into your house. 

 

This "story" doesn't change my positive image of McDermott in the least.

 

 

[stosh64]

13 minutes ago, folz said:

First of all, we all know that McDermott is a "control freak" to a certain extent. He'd probably admit that himself. So no news there. I bet there aren't too many head coaches in the NFL who weren't. You don't get to that position (or at least you don't succeed at that position) without trying to control every detail of your operation. There are so many coaches who fail, not because they don't know their Xs and Os,, but because they can't juggle all of the tasks of a head coach. You need someone who is a bit of a detail-oriented, control freak. 

 

Secondly, to take one incident and try to portray that as who the person "really" is, is so disingenuous. Like we have had a completely false picture of McDermott this whole time, and he's actually a douche, as one poster ranted. Does one outburst or moment where he may have lost his cool (for good reasons or not) erase all of the other moments of this man's life? The fact that his players love him, that he's respectful to everyone in the building, all the way down to the food servers and janitors? That he's always good with fans, that he is a good family man, etc., etc. Ridiculous. And for anyone to compare it to Marrone seems wrong too. There were so many rumors and stories of Marrone being disrespectful to players, media, and people in the building, and he was never really warm with fans either. That has not been the case with McDermott at all. In this day and age of social media, if people were really disgruntled or McDermott was really a dick, it would slip out here and there from players or staff...just look at the Jets this year. But, when you listen to the players talk about McDermott, it is always with a lot of positive emotion. There is no way they are all that good of actors to be faking it. And to portray the reason we don't know about it as being Terry Pegula has every single person in the organization and the media lying and hiding things is so over the top. I'm not saying they don't try to manage the image of the team and organization, every company (and person for that matter) does to a certain extent. It's called public relations and people get paid a lot of money to do so. But to make it seem as if Terry is controlling the media, etc. like a mob boss or dictator, just sounds like sour grapes to me from Sullivan. No offense, but that guy should have been off the Bills beat many, many years before he was finally let go.

 

Third, I think there are some great journalists across the different fields of journalism, including sports coverage. But let's not kid ourselves, there are some bad ones too and there are some with huge egos themselves (so it is funny to me when they call out someone they are reporting on as being a huge ego). And some of them act like they are uncovering Watergate. It's a game. It's sports. It's entertainment. They're not saving the world or stopping rings of corruption here. I am constantly annoyed by questions at pressers. Some can't even form a coherent question. Some ask ridiculous questions. Some ask things that really aren't nice. Some ask things trying to prove an angle that they wrote about to prove they're right. The same question gets repeated over and over because I want my own sound bite directed at me. I can understand coaches and players getting annoyed with those types of bad reporters at times. (I'm not saying Fairburn is one of those bad reporters, honestly I don't know enough about him to say one way or the other.)

 

If the incident is true as reported, then I'm not saying maybe McDermott should have handled it differently, but I'm trying to think why Fairburn would even report that they were practicing fake punts. What does that really bring to your readers or listeners? First of all, maybe they practice that every week, but usually during the nonmedia portion of practice, in which case it is not news. Or maybe it is for this week specifically, in which case, you are giving a disadvantage to the team you report on and want access from. So, why even report it? No one really cares about that information, except the opposing team of course. It seems more to me like a young reporter trying to find something else others aren't reporting on, so he had something different to say or write, in the hopes of more clicks/readers/listeners. They have to understand that their audience is almost all Bills fans. We don't really want you reporting things that could be detrimental to the team, if it isn't something that needs to be reported (meaning a bigger story of more import, you know, a real news item). Let's say a reporter is in the locker room and a player has left their playbook open on a bench. Should that reporter read that and then publish a story talking about what's in the playbook? It may be interesting, but I'd rather that not be in the press to create any disadvantage for the team. And I would completely understand anyone in the organization being upset about that and feeling as if that reporter had betrayed their trust. Now I'm not saying what Fairburn did was to that level or even wrong necessarily, but I can see McDermott feeling like it was the same type of breach of trust. People in the NFL are ultra-competitive people. I can understand getting upset if you think someone is giving away your secrets after you've invited them into your house. 

 

This "story" doesn't change my positive image of McDermott in the least.

 

 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 hour ago, LABILLBACKER said:

Farwell is no better than Crossman,  which isn't saying much. ST this year has been just as bad as last year. 

 

It seems to me like a mixed bag?  Routine coverage better but more big plays given up?

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 hour ago, GreggTX said:

I miss Sully's candor. I couldn't care less what others think about him. He tells it like it is. Sorry if you get buthurt about it. It's not Sully's fault if you can't handle the truth.

 

That's Sarcasm, right?

 

(Two Ts.  Butt has two ts, so butthurt does too.)

3 hours ago, LSHMEAB said:

Yeah. I guess I'm in the minority, but I don't want a "nice" coach. 

Not the most flattering portrait of McD, but I'm not bothered.

 

I don't want a "nice" coach, but I want him to pick his battles and focus his energies on what he can control within his organization.

[Nextmanup]

1 hour ago, BritBill said:

 

Are you alright?

I'm fine.  How are you?

 

 

[eball]

7 hours ago, vincec said:

The context was in the overall discussion of how the media has been pressured by the Pegulas to suppress any negative reporting on the team.

 

Fairburn first reported than McDermott was unhappy that word had leaked that the Bills posted quotes from Pat Shurmer about Josh Allen around the facility the week before they played the Giants, and then when reporting on an open practice, he noted that the team was practicing fake punts. This apparently pushed McDermott over the edge and he unleashed on the Fairburn like he stole something. He asked him if he was "on the team or not", as you mention above, while berating him.

 

Sullivan noted that the media is so cowed that after this happened, not only did they not call McDermott out or ask for an apology , they didn't even report it.

And people care about this why?

[r00tabaga]

1 hour ago, GreggTX said:

I miss Sully's candor. I couldn't care less what others think about him. He tells it like it is. Sorry if you get buthurt about it. It's not Sully's fault if you can't handle the truth.

This is awful analysis. 

Was good for a laugh at least

 

[mannc]

3 hours ago, JGMcD2 said:

Except it is a privilege to have access to the team. Whether it be in the locker room, practice, on the field. It can be revoked at any time... therefore it is indeed a privilege. 

Let me change my analogy to another entertainment business... are reporters given access to the filming of movies? Behind the scenes? Are they allowed to go out and tell the general public everything that happens in the movie and spoil the details before the movie is released? 

Except it's really not.  NFL teams really don't have the option of keeping reporters out of the locker room and practice facility, much as some coaches would like to.  Reporters who are there aren't there because they're privileged; they're there because they are doing their jobs.

 

I don't know much about how Hollywood operates, but if you think studios don't give tons of access to reporters and publicists, you're badly mistaken.  Letting them run around the set is another matter, but then again, local reporters aren't running around the field during NFL games, either.  We're talking about access to players and coaches before and after--not during---games.    

[Hapless Bills Fan]

5 hours ago, mannc said:

And of course, most Fortune 500 companies aren’t in the entertainment business and wouldn’t benefit in any way by providing reporters broad access to their boardrooms and headquarters, so they don’t do it.  Terrible analogy.

 

Not boardrooms or headquarters, but a couple different Fortune 500 companies I've been involved with have had PR events where media were invited to tour facilities.

 

The reporters had to sign a confidentiality agreement AND the employees were given clear instructions what to put away or cover up.

[Punching Bag]

2 hours ago, BritBill said:

 

Are you alright?

 

Obviously not.

[JGMcD2]

12 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Not boardrooms or headquarters, but a couple different Fortune 500 companies I've been involved with have had PR events where media were invited to tour facilities.

 

The reporters had to sign a confidentiality agreement AND the employees were given clear instructions what to put away or cover up.

 

Thanks! I’m the idiot though... it was a bad analogy.

 

18 minutes ago, mannc said:

Except it's really not.  NFL teams really don't have the option of keeping reporters out of the locker room and practice facility, much as some coaches would like to.  Reporters who are there aren't there because they're privileged; they're there because they are doing their jobs.

 

I don't know much about how Hollywood operates, but if you think studios don't give tons of access to reporters and publicists, you're badly mistaken.  Letting them run around the set is another matter, but then again, local reporters aren't running around the field during NFL games, either.  We're talking about access to players and coaches before and after--not during---games.    

 

I’m aware of how it all works... I work with players and have an office in the locker room during the season. 

 

The team can deny credentials or revoke them... I’m pretty sure people were all up in arms about the Bills failing to give the guy from Cover 2 a press pass. Privilege...

[Hapless Bills Fan]

6 minutes ago, JGMcD2 said:

Thanks! I’m the idiot though... it was a bad analogy.

 

We're all there sometimes...and it pales before the depth of bad take drawing a parallel between the Bills/Pegulas and the Stazi.  SMH....

 

6 minutes ago, JGMcD2 said:

I’m aware of how it all works... I work with players and have an office in the locker room during the season. 

 

The team can deny credentials or revoke them... I’m pretty sure people were all up in arms about the Bills failing to give the guy from Cover 2 a press pass. Privilege...

 

Cover1? 

[JGMcD2]

1 minute ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

We're all there sometimes...and it pales before the depth of bad take drawing a parallel between the Bills/Pegulas and the Stazi.  SMH....

 

 

Cover1? 

Yes, Cover1. Thanks for catching that... I knew I screwed something up there! haha

 

 

[Arkady Renko]

I have felt like Matthew Fairburn has become increasingly negative about the organization.  Might just be a coincidence.  

[Bad Things]

C'mon now... why the heck are we now seeing these threads about Jerry?  That guy was the absolute worst for many years on end. 

Jerry... is that you posting these?

[mannc]

1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Not boardrooms or headquarters, but a couple different Fortune 500 companies I've been involved with have had PR events where media were invited to tour facilities.

 

The reporters had to sign a confidentiality agreement AND the employees were given clear instructions what to put away or cover up.

Which proves my point: The Bills are a fundamentally different type of business than your typical Fortune 500 company.  They allow (and encourage) daily media access to their players, coaches and facilities, without requiring confidentiality agreements, etc.  They do this because they want fans to follow the team, and doing so helps sell merchandise, put fannies in the seats and eyeballs on the TV screens.

Edited November 23, 2019 by mannc

[mannc]

1 hour ago, JGMcD2 said:

 

Thanks! I’m the idiot though... it was a bad analogy.

 

 

I’m aware of how it all works... I work with players and have an office in the locker room during the season. 

 

The team can deny credentials or revoke them... I’m pretty sure people were all up in arms about the Bills failing to give the guy from Cover 2 a press pass. Privilege...

The team might be able to deny credentials to someone like Cover 1, who's not part of the mainstream media, but they sure as hell aren't going to deny credentials to the Buffalo News, ESPN, or other similar media outlets.  They need the media coverage at least as much as the media needs them. 

 

And no one said you're an idiot.  You just made a bad analogy.

 

 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

15 minutes ago, mannc said:

Which proves my point: The Bills are a fundamentally different type of business than your typical Fortune 500 company.  They allow (and encourage) daily media access to their players, coaches and facilities, without requiring confidentiality agreements, etc.  They do this because they want fans to follow the team, and doing so helps put fannies in the seats and eyeballs on the TV screens.

 

Is what you say actually true though?

 

There's a weekly media schedule.  It specifies certain days and times when certain coaches and players will be available, and when there will be locker room access.  It's not daily, and it's not all the time - it's restricted.  It's supposed to balance the league and team's need for PR with the players and coaches need for privacy and for preparation time.

 

It's also  known they don't allow any member of the media into the facility.  Media allowed in must be credentialed -- do you know just what the credentialing process includes?

 

I don't.  But I wouldn't bet the rent money against some aspect of a confidentiality or non-disclosure in exchange for access being part of it unless someone who has gone through it (or has credentialed people) can tell me it doesn't.

 

10 minutes ago, mannc said:

The team might be able to deny credentials to someone like Cover 1, who's not part of the mainstream media, but they sure as hell aren't going to deny credentials to the Buffalo News, ESPN, or other similar media outlets.  They need the media coverage at least as much as the media needs them.

 

Erik Turner (the Cover1 guy) writes for The Athletic, "the new standard of Sports Journalism", a subscription-based sports website that provides ad-free national and local coverage in 47 North American cities as well as the United Kingdom. 

 

A lot of good reporters from other media have turned up working there - Joe Buscaglia, Tim Graham, Matt Fairburn - pretty sure they're all credentialed by the Bills.  So while it's not print media, it's not exactly "not part of the mainstream media" either.

 

 

 

 

[mannc]

12 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Is what you say actually true though?

 

There's a weekly media schedule.  It specifies certain days and times when certain coaches and players will be available, and when there will be locker room access.  It's not daily, and it's not all the time - it's restricted.  It's supposed to balance the league and team's need for PR with the players and coaches need for privacy and for preparation time.

 

It's also  known they don't allow any member of the media into the facility.  Media allowed in must be credentialed -- do you know just what the credentialing process includes?

 

I don't.  But I wouldn't bet the rent money against some aspect of a confidentiality or non-disclosure in exchange for access being part of it unless someone who has gone through it (or has credentialed people) can tell me it doesn't.

 

 

Erik Turner (the Cover1 guy) writes for The Athletic, "the new standard of Sports Journalism", a subscription-based sports website that provides ad-free national and local coverage in 47 North American cities as well as the United Kingdom. 

 

A lot of good reporters from other media have turned up working there - Joe Buscaglia, Tim Graham, Matt Fairburn - pretty sure they're all credentialed by the Bills.  So while it's not print media, it's not exactly "not part of the mainstream media" either.

 

 

 

 

I certainly didn’t meant to take a shot at Erik; he does really good work.

[kota]

I could care what Sullivan says.  Every week he goes on a rant when asking a question to McD but never asks an actual question.  

[BillsVet]

There's a lot to unpack from that podcast and not enough space here to adequately discuss.  

 

I'll say this.  If McD did to Fairburn what Sullivan said, he's inconsistent with the persona he seeks to impress on the public.  It's one thing to become angry at the media, but to physically intimidate and drop F bombs is another level.  I'm not asking for the HC to be a choir boy, but he's crafted an image that says he is.

 

And then there's McD's "play fearless" message Josh Allen told Chris Brown the HC gave them after the Cleveland game.  Anyone who thinks McD doesn't have his hand on the PR aspect of this team is deluding themselves and that was the narrative the team (i.e. McD) wanted getting out the public.  Remember, this happened after the HC and his staff were rightly criticized for not trying to win at the end.  In this way, McD flipped the narrative off him and the staff.  

 

It's what one thing to want pro-team coverage.  It's another for McD or anyone to expect complete loyalty to the team and no criticism from the media.  That borders on megalomania.  

Edited November 24, 2019 by BillsVet

[Dopey]

10 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Sullivan admits he didn't actually see it though and if you had listened Jerry says it did not happen at a press conference but at the open portion of practice. He does say he checked with others who were there and they confirmed. I didn't mean that phrase as casting any doubt that Jerry was reporting what he was told happened. But in my experience as, you know, an actual journalist, I tend to prefer first hand account before I say something definitely happened the way econd hand account says it did. 

 

None of which is a defense of McDermott either. As I said in my original post in this topic - I have had that experience with a coach (one much more famous and more successful than Sean McDermott might I add) for reporting a story that was true but that he didn't want reporting and it was thoroughly unpleasant and completely lacking in any decency. 

 

So, is nextmanup talking out the side of his neck when he says it happened at a press conference?

[ColoradoBills]

10 hours ago, Billsatlastin2018 said:

They’ve beaten all the stiffs & the weak sisters.

That’s good- because NO other Bills team this Millennium has done it!

But...

Therein, lies the exact issue- small increments satisfy most Bills fans.

 

Soooo, AFTER beating the Broncos (yet another lesser team), how about beating TWO, just two of the Cowgirls, Steelers, Ravens & Patsies? 
 

THAT is being better! 

 

How about waiting until the games are played?

[Hapless Bills Fan]

38 minutes ago, Dopey said:

So, is nextmanup talking out the side of his neck when he says it happened at a press conference?

 

I can not speak for the location of Nextmanups laryngial apparatus, but in saying it happened at a press conference, he is contradicting the info in the podcast.

At about 29:30 or so - Sullivan says that Pat Freeman was the only journalist who witnessed it but there were multiple people around who witnessed it (presumably, not journalists).

 

It strains credulity to think it happened at a press conference but Pat Freeman was the only journalist who witnessed it, and there has been absolutely no coverage of it.

 

 

[Richard Noggin]

Potential PROCESS-based defense of McD here:

 

Changing a 15+ year losing culture extends well beyond the building, as they say. Maybe cleaning house also meant, to McD and PSE, marginalizing the relentlessly negative narrators who are partly responsible for "our" collective obsession with past blunders and anticipating future failures? It's easy to stoke BBFS fan frustration to generate clicks/readership, and on one hand fully deserved. However, if a regime is dedicated to on-field success AND overcoming that regional, culturally-conditioned losing attitude/expectation, then maybe journalistic turnover is useful alongside roster changes.

 

Beyond any defense: all that being said, I don't love any organizational meddling in the machinations of who reports the news and how. These billion-dollar organizations are too influential locally and regionally to pretend that they don't carry immense influence over the media; therefore, they should not seek to apply pressure or influence on members of the press.

 

Personally, however: I grew tired of Sullivan's perspective long ago.  

[GunnerBill]

8 hours ago, Dopey said:

So, is nextmanup talking out the side of his neck when he says it happened at a press conference?

 

I don't know but Jerry in the podcast clearly says it happened at the open portion of practice. 

[downunderbill]

21 hours ago, Nextmanup said:

This happened.  That is beyond questioning.

It happened in a large room filled with people and Sullivan confirmed it with multiple sources, b/c he is, you know, an actual journalist.

 

 

I felt the same about you and your comment! 

 

Believe it or not, you are free to not participate in threads you aren't interested in, or which you have a personal dislike for.

 

See how it works?

 

 

 

That seems to be Buffalo Bills for you. 

[eball]

17 hours ago, GreggTX said:

I miss Sully's candor. I couldn't care less what others think about him. He tells it like it is. Sorry if you get buthurt about it. It's not Sully's fault if you can't handle the truth.

 

If you believe Sullivan is all about getting the "truth" out there and what he publishes/says/tweets is "candor" you're a pretty naive dude.  First of all, he's not a reporter -- he's a columnist.  That means his job isn't to report facts but to give his opinion.  In reality, he is no different than any number of posters on this forum who focus more on the negative than the positive.

 

I don't know the man personally but he strikes me as someone I wouldn't care to spend more than about 30 seconds of my recreational time with, and the next time he comes up with an original or novel take on something will be the first.

 

Sullivan has been marginalized professionally and he's grasping for any way to make himself relevant.  He asks inane questions at press conferences and you can tell McD is disgusted with him.

 

As for this "story" -- and I haven't even bothered to listen to the clip because I don't care -- Matt Fairburn is a big boy and can handle himself.  It's just a little bit curious that we've heard nothing of this until Sully decided to "break news" but regardless, it's a non-story.

 

 

[Cripple Creek]

17 hours ago, GreggTX said:

I miss Sully's candor. I couldn't care less what others think about him. He tells it like it is. Sorry if you get buthurt about it. It's not Sully's fault if you can't handle the truth.

A quick review of your posting history makes one wonder if you two are in some way related?  You can look at something and find the positives and be factual or you can find the negatives and be factual.  Your negative slant has Jerry written all over it.

[Big C]

Well it sure sounds like McD has been rubbing off on us. Remember how mad we all got when bb.com posted a video of Josh running the speed option in practice??

[4merper4mer]

13 hours ago, BillsVet said:

There's a lot to unpack from that podcast and not enough space here to adequately discuss.  

 

I'll say this.  If McD did to Fairburn what Sullivan said, he's inconsistent with the persona he seeks to impress on the public.  It's one thing to become angry at the media, but to physically intimidate and drop F bombs is another level.  I'm not asking for the HC to be a choir boy, but he's crafted an image that says he is.

 

And then there's McD's "play fearless" message Josh Allen told Chris Brown the HC gave them after the Cleveland game.  Anyone who thinks McD doesn't have his hand on the PR aspect of this team is deluding themselves and that was the narrative the team (i.e. McD) wanted getting out the public.  Remember, this happened after the HC and his staff were rightly criticized for not trying to win at the end.  In this way, McD flipped the narrative off him and the staff.  

 

It's what one thing to want pro-team coverage.  It's another for McD or anyone to expect complete loyalty to the team and no criticism from the media.  That borders on megalomania.  

I see it as having 4 possibilities:

 

Everything happened EXACTLY how Sullivan said and there was no spin

Nothing happened at all, completely false

It happened but was exaggerated

It happened but Sullivan soft pedaled it

 

Which seems most realistic?  

 

Whatever happened everyone has bad days.  I doubt McD has been100% nice to every person he has met in his life every time he has encountered them. If the in your face described were McD's true personality, wouldn't we have heard at least a few more stories?  OTOH, there are about 3,648,216 stories where Jerry Sullivan has spun things negatively.  I'll go with Occum's Shaver here.  Also the term physical intimidation can be subjective and I'm guessing the 5'8" 114 pound Sullivan's threshold is low.

 

The other thing I wonder about is whether the "relatively young" reporter that "grizzled vet" Sullivan is seemingly trying to protect/defend appreciates his name getting flung around like this solely for the benefit of Sullivan's gadfly street cred.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

On 11/23/2019 at 3:24 AM, Buffalo Barbarian said:

 

What coach isnt a control freak. However its clear to see that he is flexible and listens to everyone involved and makes the necessary changes.

 

Sullivan is a tool and is mike Dopp 's dad.

 

 

 

...understand what're you're saying about HC control freak....however, if McDermott's forte' is defense and he's an offensive lightweight neophyte, doesn't the offense suffer if he sees the need to be "in control"?....hell scrap your OC and call the plays (COUGH)...cannot subscribe to it.....

Edited November 24, 2019 by OldTimeAFLGuy

[Hapless Bills Fan]

4 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

I see it as having 4 possibilities:

 

Everything happened EXACTLY how Sullivan said and there was no spin

Nothing happened at all, completely false

It happened but was exaggerated

It happened but Sullivan soft pedaled it

 

Which seems most realistic?  

 

Whatever happened everyone has bad days.  I doubt McD has been100% nice to every person he has met in his life every time he has encountered them. If the in your face described were McD's true personality, wouldn't we have heard at least a few more stories?  OTOH, there are about 3,648,216 stories where Jerry Sullivan has spun things negatively.  I'll go with Occum's Shaver here.  Also the term physical intimidation can be subjective and I'm guessing the 5'8" 114 pound Sullivan's threshold is low.

 

The other thing I wonder about is whether the "relatively young" reporter that "grizzled vet" Sullivan is seemingly trying to protect/defend appreciates his name getting flung around like this solely for the benefit of Sullivan's gadfly street cred.

 

Good post.  I vote for what's behind Door #3.

 

It's probably worth pointing out that Matt Fairburn has been afforded previous opportunities involving trust by the Bills.  For example, he was allowed to shadow Beane on a college scouting trip where obviously they trusted him not to provide "tells" to the Bills draft interest in players, beyond publicly discoverable stuff like what colleges they visited. 

 

So even if it's Door #1, it might be considered that Fairburn, having been given such opportunities, might have different expectations from McD than the general press.  He and McDermott may also have settled the matter between themselves at a later time.