No more Jerry Sullivan radio show (but now Podcast!)

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 hour ago, AlCowlingsTaxiService said:

Incorrect. He was let go because king Terry took exception to his critiques of the bills and threatened financial retribution to theBN.  Now, if you’re cool with wealthy owners influencing media coverage, then you do you.. I’ll pass on that.

 

We had a long contentious thread on this point at the time with a lot of hot (and a lot of bad) takes.  I have to say, this looks like one of the latter.

 

It seems to be a verifiable fact that the loss of Sabres program-printing and other outside printing income controlled by the Pegulas preceded TBN mass "buyout" offer in time, and the printing income did not return afterwards.  I assume that's what you're referring to.  Income that's gone, and won't return, makes a poor "threat of financial retribution".  Fredonia journalism professor Elmer Ploetz fed the "fired" and "wealthy owners influencing" narrative with an opinion piece in The Daily Public.  One day later, he had to "walk that back":    In the previous column about the News, I brought up the possibility of outside pressure having an effect on the sports decisions. Sources from inside the paper have told me that isn’t the case; the News had the printing contract for Sabres programs and lost it (and the hundreds of thousands of dollars of income it brought each year) in the past few years. That isn’t expected to be coming back.

 

To make a definitive statement about "threatened financial retribution" that's been debunked by people in the know seems irresponsible.  It's also fact that Gleason and Sullivan weren't actually fired (the union would prevent this).  At that same time, many TBN employees were reassigned to other roles and/or offered buyouts.  Gleason and Sullivan were asked to accept reassignment to different roles; they didn't wish to accept those roles and give up their columns so they took buyouts.  Their choice.   I've been there myself: employer is reorganizing, I'm offered a new role that better meets my employer's new priorities but is less desirable to me personally (maybe even seen as a demotion): I can choose to take it, or to resign.  That's life.

 

The fact is: print media around the country is struggling to adapt to the Online Age.  My parents read the paper morning and evening.  I won't have a print newspaper in the house - it's a tree-killing recycling problem to me.   I do subscribe to online publications I value, on the theory that if I'm not paying for product, I AM the product.

 

A side effect of the Online Age is the wealth of feedback available to editors, especially where the reader must log in.  The Athletic can tell that I read articles by certain reporters more often, and more often rate them "excellent" or "solid", while others I rate "solid" or "meh".  If a clear pattern emerges, the editor will undoubtedly provide that feedback to the reporters, try to drill into the basis, and perhaps move the publication in a different direction - due to that reader feedback or market research.  The Buffalo News, Same.

 

One can't exclude the idea that the Pegulas exerted some form of pressure, but one also can't exclude the possibility that the reason Sullivan and Gleason had their columns canceled is exactly as stated: feedback from the desired customer base (online subscribers) or market research about potential online customers indicated lack of interest in their point of view which IMO had degraded to hackneyed negativity of a quality epitomized by Sullivan's quickly debunked "lousy press box breakfast" tweet.

 

There is an old-time news viewpoint that has truth to it: that media have a duty to the public to present a balanced point of view, even if unpopular at the moment.  Intrinsically, it casts the writers, editors, and publishers in a parental role, with the readers as children who should be fed the Spinach of truth, even if they prefer sugar.  Clearly facts and truth are important to present in issues pertaining to the public good: spending of public money, domestic and foreign policy, infrastructure, political corruption.  This is a problem for the online age where editorial decisions may be driven far more directly by subscriber feedback than was once the case, and it's yet to be solved.

 

But to imply that standard should be applied to journalists writing opinion columns in general, and sports opinion columns in particular, seems like a looooooong stretch.  Furthermore, if it were true as Ploetz stated in link above that "as newspeople, they know that for every person complaining about Sully, there were probably five more waiting to hear what he had to say after every Bills game and to either agree or disagree with it" one would expect that those "five more" people would have flocked to the Niagara Gazette and his show on 1270 The Fan and made them successful.

 

If that had happened, this thread wouldn't exist.

 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 hour ago, AlCowlingsTaxiService said:

Unfortunately, I think many”fans” would prefer a program where the hosts and callers say nothing but “”GO BILLS WOOHOO” and discuss their face painting techniques and which jersey they should wear on game day ... 

 

You're undoubtedly correct, many would.  Undoubtedly many fans would also prefer a program where there is nothing but criticism.  Apparently enough of these latter did not patronize the Sully show, therefore it met its demise.

 

My guess is that most fans are in-between and prefer programs that are neither Murphy homer nor Sully negative, but present different viewpoints and both praise and blame as deserved.  I put this board up as evidence.  I think people come here because we are not a homer, GO BILLS WOOHOO board with nothing but positive viewpoints.  That doesn't mean we welcome overthetop, unrelenting criticism without any substance behind it, but the fact that negative points of view and criticism are allowed is part of what gives it interest.

[BADOLBILZ]

7 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I care not a jot about hockey but I have heard a couple of WGR segments the last few weeks where they have been ripping the Sabres and ripping, very directly, the Pegulas for the mess. 

 

 

The Sabres are the biggest mess in north american pro sports.......they make the NY Knicks look like they have a plan.......and trust me the response to that in recent years has been muted to say the least.

 

If you are just looking at the past two weeks...........since fans started losing their minds..........then OK......but it came to a head for a reason.

 

And that's what happens when teams can essentially decide who in the local media covers them.

 

And trust me........I don't care about hockey at this point either.........but if the other stations are on commercial and I switch over to "The Instigators" I want to hear some discussion about how to fix the problem not the lame bullsh*t they ACTUALLY talk about.

 

I get why die-hard Sabres fans are pissed...........if the Bills were this bad there would be much more in-depth discussion of the matter but the Sabres are second banana in town and if you are working in the media being appropriately critical of the Sabres has not been worth the risk of losing access to Pegula teams.

 

If you can't understand that conflict of interest then I don't know what to tell you.........I don't follow kickball so I don't know how your sports teams affect the media in GB.

 

 

[GunnerBill]

22 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

The Sabres are the biggest mess in north american pro sports.......they make the NY Knicks look like they have a plan.......and trust me the response to that in recent years has been muted to say the least.

 

If you are just looking at the past two weeks...........since fans started losing their minds..........then OK......but it came to a head for a reason.

 

And that's what happens when teams can essentially decide who in the local media covers them.

 

And trust me........I don't care about hockey at this point either.........but if the other stations are on commercial and I switch over to "The Instigators" I want to hear some discussion about how to fix the problem not the lame bullsh*t they ACTUALLY talk about.

 

I get why die-hard Sabres fans are pissed...........if the Bills were this bad there would be much more in-depth discussion of the matter but the Sabres are second banana in town and if you are working in the media being appropriately critical of the Sabres has not been worth the risk of losing access to Pegula teams.

 

If you can't understand that conflict of interest then I don't know what to tell you.........I don't follow kickball so I don't know how your sports teams affect the media in GB.

 

 

 

I was once kicked out of a Man City press conference for asking a question the manager didn't want to answer

[NewEra]

Bye Felicia!!

[Teddy KGB]

Still rooting for Cam Newton to beat his ? 

[freddyjj]

@PromoTheRobotNo more Jerry Sullivan radio show

 

You say that as if it is a bad thing.

 

Had the misfortune of meeting Jerry and playing basketball with him in late 80s early 90s.  Bad player, hack and whiner.  And those were his good traits.

 

Can't even imagine him on the golf course!  ?

 

[Lurker]

1 minute ago, MR8 said:

Lol the Niagara Gazette... That's the equivalent of the Amherst Bee... 

 

Sully wishes!    The Amherst Bee's circulation is about 27,000 while the Gazette's is 10,500...

[John in Jax]

6 hours ago, AlCowlingsTaxiService said:

Unfortunately, I think many”fans” would prefer a program where the hosts and callers say nothing but “”GO BILLS WOOHOO” and discuss their face painting techniques and which jersey they should wear on game day ... 

I had to laugh at this, because IMO there's a direct parallel to THIS FORUM, in that it's mostly like that in here too. I got suspended for a week for voicing an opinion that simply went against the blinders-wearing homers' majority. LOL

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 hour ago, John in Jax said:

I had to laugh at this, because IMO there's a direct parallel to THIS FORUM, in that it's mostly like that in here too. I got suspended for a week for voicing an opinion that simply went against the blinders-wearing homers' majority. LOL

 

Dude, when you don't tell it straight about the reason the moderator in question banned you, it kind of worries one that you weren't able to understand or accept it.

Hint: it was not for "voicing an opinion that simply went against the blinders-wearing homers' majority LOL"

 

Gentle Reminder from our TOS that doesn't apply to this post, but that did imply then:

Do NOT post Personal "crusades" (posting the same information/opinion in an excessively repetitive manner. We want posters to share opinions not bludgeon others to death with them.)

[Hapless Bills Fan]

6 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

The Sabres are the biggest mess in north american pro sports.......

 

It's actually not a subject I'm too interested in debating, but objectively, I"m not sure that's a defensible position. 

Here's one article from 3 years ago, which had the Sabres at 20 out of 30 teams.  Right now Sabres are what, #25 out of 31 teams?

 

Quote

(....)

And that's what happens when teams can essentially decide who in the local media covers them.

(....)

 if you are working in the media being appropriately critical of the Sabres has not been worth the risk of losing access to Pegula teams.

 

If you can't understand that conflict of interest then I don't know what to tell you.........

 

I guess I'm wondering what teams don't influence media access at least to some degree?

When I listen to, say, Ravens or Pitts or NE or Rams (when they were StL) I don't exactly hear a lot of hard-hitting contentiousness in the questions

In fact for most of them, my first thought was "Wow, those media guys are really well behaved and milquetoast" vs Bills pressers.

 

Also, are there actually known instances of the Pegula teams refusing to credential a media member from a legit media outlet?

I believe they refused to credential Erik Turner of Cover1 but that wasn't for being "critical"

[John in Jax]

52 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Dude, when you don't tell it straight about the reason the moderator in question banned you, it kind of worries one that you weren't able to understand or accept it.

Hint: it was not for "voicing an opinion that simply went against the blinders-wearing homers' majority LOL"

 

Gentle Reminder from our TOS that doesn't apply to this post, but that did imply then:

Do NOT post Personal "crusades" (posting the same information/opinion in an excessively repetitive manner. We want posters to share opinions not bludgeon others to death with them.)

Wow Dude, you just won't quit, will you?

 

I posted my opinion ONE TIME in a thread, but I prefaced it by saying "As I've said many times before in these forums...." I was just elaborating that I'm consistent.

 

JUST ABOUT EVERYBODY WHO POSTS IN THESE FORUMS INEVITABLY WILL POST THE "SAME" OPINION, OVER TIME, IN DIFFERENT THREADS, JUST LIKE I DID. It literally happens ALL THE TIME, every day. It was not "excessive", but rather, it was an opinion that most homers disagreed with, and one of the moderators too. That moderator also called it "spam", which was laughable and totally nonsensical.

[stuvian]

On 2/6/2020 at 5:06 PM, PromoTheRobot said:

 

You are correct. I got fooled because WHLD is on the iHeart app. But it is a Cumulus owned station.

 

I've heard the future of Cumulus is pretty cloudy ?

[BADOLBILZ]

1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

It's actually not a subject I'm too interested in debating, but objectively, I"m not sure that's a defensible position. 

Here's one article from 3 years ago, which had the Sabres at 20 out of 30 teams.  Right now Sabres are what, #25 out of 31 teams?

 

 

 

They've missed the playoffs 8 straight years in the NHL.............that's putting it kindly they have easily been the worst team in the sport over that period...........and in year 9 of their rebuild they find themselves 25th and falling while having the 3rd worst cap situation...........yeah it's a very defensible situation to call them the biggest mess in NA pro sports.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

7 hours ago, freddyjj said:

@PromoTheRobotNo more Jerry Sullivan radio show

 

You say that as if it is a bad thing.

Had the misfortune of meeting Jerry and playing basketball with him in late 80s early 90s.  Bad player, hack and whiner.  And those were his good traits.

Can't even imagine him on the golf course!  ?

 

 

Were you involved with the Buffalo Bills Charity games with TBN?  Know anything about the story Janine Talley told about Kent Hull and Darryl Talley playing Jerry Sullivan?

[freddyjj]

17 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Were you involved with the Buffalo Bills Charity games with TBN?  Know anything about the story Janine Talley told about Kent Hull and Darryl Talley playing Jerry Sullivan?

@Hapless Bills Fan sorry was not part of those.  

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 minute ago, freddyjj said:

@Hapless Bills Fan sorry was not part of those.  

 

So the story told was that in the mid-80s, Darryl Talley was incensed by Jerry Sullivan's description of him as "finally improving towards the level of mediocrity"in his post-season column. 

 

His revenge was that when the Bills played TBN for a charity basketball game, he pre-arranged with Kent Hull to set picks on him.  So he and Kent would basically work Jerry over.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

3 hours ago, John in Jax said:

Wow Dude, you just won't quit, will you?

 

Nope.  I have skepticism because I've had that claim made when I'm the mod, and it's been false.   I respectfully suggest you channel Elsa here.

[Reed83HOF]

Sorry @PromoTheRobot

 

 

http://jerrysullivanshow.com/

 

[Mr. Wonderful]

Complimentary until the end of February. LOL.  

[Hapless Bills Fan]

5 minutes ago, Reed83HOF said:

Sorry @PromoTheRobot

 

 

http://jerrysullivanshow.com/

 

 

Sorry @Reed83HOF, I know it's off-season but two Jerry Sullivan threads on the board at the same time?

 

The Mind Boggles.

 

Good for Jerry for starting a podcast.  If he's got all the fans that some have claimed, perhaps it will work and he'll monetize it successfully.

I kind of feel that ~2 1/2 weeks is probably not enough time to build up a rep that people will pay for, but good luck to him for trying.

[Lurker]

Good Lord. 

 

You mean people are now expected to PAY to hear Sully's blovations??

[Hapless Bills Fan]

3 minutes ago, Lurker said:

Good Lord. 

You mean people are now expected to PAY to hear Sully's bloviations??

 

Well, I wouldn't myself, but they say there's no disputing of tastes, and some people do defend him here.

[Reed83HOF]

15 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Sorry @Reed83HOF, I know it's off-season but two Jerry Sullivan threads on the board at the same time?

 

The Mind Boggles.

 

Good for Jerry for starting a podcast.  If he's got all the fans that some have claimed, perhaps it will work and he'll monetize it successfully.

I kind of feel that ~2 1/2 weeks is probably not enough time to build up a rep that people will pay for, but good luck to him for trying.

I figured and it makes sense - just wanted a little visibility LMAO. I also couldn't update Promo's title

Edited February 8, 2020 by Reed83HOF

[Hapless Bills Fan]

18 minutes ago, Reed83HOF said:

I figured and it makes sense - just wanted a little visibility LMAO. I also couldn't update Promo's title

 

Tying threads together, perhaps he could make it a video blog and call Jim Everett "Chris". 

[eball]

Ahh, a podcast.  Where guys not good enough to have a radio show go to broadcast their views into nothingness.  Good luck with that, Jer...

[oldmanfan]

Wow.  My dream comes true.  Sign me right up.

[PromoTheRobot]

11 hours ago, Reed83HOF said:

I figured and it makes sense - just wanted a little visibility LMAO. I also couldn't update Promo's title

 

Well I didn't update it so I assume a mod did. That's fine.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

10 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Tying threads together, perhaps he could make it a video blog and call Jim Everett "Chris". 

 

...LMAO!...that is THE all time classic....I'd have to give #2 to the 1994 draft with Kiper's hissy fit vs Colts GM Tobin on picking Alberts vs Dilfer.......to which Tobin responded regarding Kiper's rant, "who the hell is he"?.......

[PromoTheRobot]

23 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

You're undoubtedly correct, many would.  Undoubtedly many fans would also prefer a program where there is nothing but criticism.  Apparently enough of these latter did not patronize the Sully show, therefore it met its demise.

 

My guess is that most fans are in-between and prefer programs that are neither Murphy homer nor Sully negative, but present different viewpoints and both praise and blame as deserved.  I put this board up as evidence.  I think people come here because we are not a homer, GO BILLS WOOHOO board with nothing but positive viewpoints.  That doesn't mean we welcome overthetop, unrelenting criticism without any substance behind it, but the fact that negative points of view and criticism are allowed is part of what gives it interest.

 

Some people like having their anger stoked. Some, like myself, don't need to raise their blood pressure worrying about a game. 

Edited February 8, 2020 by PromoTheRobot

[Hapless Bills Fan]

3 hours ago, eball said:

Ahh, a podcast.  Where guys not good enough to have a radio show go to broadcast their views into nothingness.  Good luck with that, Jer...

 

To be fair, there are some very very interesting podcasts out there....easily better than most radio shows.  Podcasts are by their nature flexible, so people can fit them in as 2nd gigs. People can also download them and listen while commuting or exercising or traveling.

 

Unlike a live show, they can be edited to make them more entertaining.  They can be focused on a specific topic and draw in people from wide geographical areas. 

 

I don't know too much about it, but I tend to believe the monetization process usually goes something like:

1) someone makes podcast targeting specific audience

2) at this stage, podcast may partner with affiliates, promote affiliate products on podcast, and receive commission

3) podcast becomes popular, attracts large number of subscribers in specific audience group

4) advertisers interested in marketing to that specific audience group offer sponsorship and advertising

 

Even with this suggested pattern of development, conventional wisdom seems to be that it takes about a year to grow a podcast to a point where it does make money.

 

I haven't heard of a model where someone broadcasts a podcast for ~3 weeks then sells access to it successfully.   It's also not clear to me what Sullivan's specific audience is.

 

I'm a specific audience - a long time, passionate Bills football fan.  I purchase Bills Blitz from The Buffalo News and The Athletic (I'm considering premium content from Cover1) because they provide me with something I want, on a better and more regular basis than I can find it for free: expert analysis of football plays; access to and interviews with players; background information about coaches, plays, and players.  I enjoy coverage from Jim Kubiak and Mark Gaughan and sometimes Vic Carruci at TBN and Erik Turner, Matt Fairburn, and sometimes Joe Buscaglia and Tim Graham at the Athletic, and I'll continue to pay as long as that's true.  

 

If there's content out there that I regard as equal or superior and it's free, I won't pay.  I can read arbitrary letter grades for Bills players with no stated basis posted weekly right here on TBD, so why would I pay just for Joe B's apparently arbitrary and with no stated basis weekly grades?  I can find free coverage elsewhere, and sometimes it's excellent (I really like Matt Parrino, Marcel Louis-Jacques, and John Wawrow of AP) but the focus and concentration of coverage TBN and Athletic supply are worth it to me.  But there is a good bit of quality free coverage these days in various blogs etc., including a plethora of opinion pieces.

 

I don't have to pay to read or to listen to over-the-top, focused negative (or positive for that matter) opinions.  I can get them right here or at a dozen places online.  So I tend to believe that Sullivan isn't following a marketing plan that's very likely to succeed.  But whaddo I know? 

 

 

 

 

 

[BillsFan4]

12 hours ago, Reed83HOF said:

Sorry @PromoTheRobot

 

 

http://jerrysullivanshow.com/

 

This guy just can’t take a hint, can he...? ?

 

 

[US Egg]

Growing up as a sports fan here in Buffalo in the 60's & 70's, sports radio consisted of the broadcasts of the Bills, Bisons, Braves and Sabres games and not much more. The local newspapers and 5 minutes of the 6:00 p.m. local TV's sportcasts were considered the icing on the sports info cake.

 

.....and it seemed suffice.

 

Just saying.

Edited February 8, 2020 by I am the egg man

[ndirish1978]

On 2/7/2020 at 9:35 AM, AlCowlingsTaxiService said:

Incorrect. He was let go because king Terry took exception to his critiques of the bills and threatened financial retribution to theBN.  Now, if you’re cool with wealthy owners influencing media coverage, then you do you.. I’ll pass on that.

 

His column was objectively terrible. Nice attempt to move the goalposts and reframe the discussion though. Sullivan is a relic of a time where being outrageous and negative got you views. 

[Scott7975]

On 2/6/2020 at 1:17 PM, PromoTheRobot said:

 

I don't know if that also means no more Tim Graham show either.

https://buffalonews.com/2020/02/06/jerry-sullivans-radio-show-ends-its-run/

No Jerry they really don't.  Especially not yours.  Why do you think your radio station got no financial support?  I will clue you in... it's because most people are tired of you.  You are old and washed up.  Most people do not want to hear your tired and miserable opinions about our sports teams anymore.

 

The only thing I want to hear from media is the news.  Not their opinions.  I am old and educated.  I think I can form my own opinion.  I don't need people like you to tell me what it should be.  Change your schtick or continue on being an insignificant human being.

Edited February 9, 2020 by Scott7975

[Bermuda Triangle]

On 2/7/2020 at 5:33 PM, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Dude, when you don't tell it straight about the reason the moderator in question banned you, it kind of worries one that you weren't able to understand or accept it.

Hint: it was not for "voicing an opinion that simply went against the blinders-wearing homers' majority LOL"

 

Gentle Reminder from our TOS that doesn't apply to this post, but that did imply then:

Do NOT post Personal "crusades" (posting the same information/opinion in an excessively repetitive manner. We want posters to share opinions not bludgeon others to death with them.)

But isn't that what certain posters here do?  Over and over and over and over again...