Jordan Poyer Interview - OTAs June 2, 2021

[Malazan]

this board...lol. The people on here that are holier than thou about the Bills only having to answer questions they want to answer are the same type of people demanding the Pegulas do interviews and answer questions about the Sabres.

Edited June 3, 2021 by jeremy2020

[Hapless Bills Fan]

35 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

Yeah, I agree.   Wawrow can ask, although this is the second time he's tread there, and he should realize that people within the organization see him doing it.  

 

As to the contract issue, you've just agreed with me.   Yes, the vaccine has some football connection.  So does the contract issue.  They both have a connection.   My point was that no reporter persists in asking the contract question after the Bills have said we aren't talking about it.  Somehow, Wawrow thinks it's okay to keeping asking this other question.   That will have only one effect - to reduce the kind of access Wawrow gets.  As Sullivan's situation proved, the old adage - don't argue with someone who buys ink in 55-gallon drums - doesn't always apply.  

 

I haven't, really.   Questions about Josh's contract are asked almost every time Beane gives an interview and likewise Josh.  No one is claiming they're out of bounds because the Bills have said they aren't talking about it.  Hopeful reporters keep re-phrasing and re-packaging in the hopes of gleaning something.

 

I don't get your Sullivan thing, but that's OK.

[Shaw66]

1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I haven't, really.   Questions about Josh's contract are asked almost every time Beane gives an interview and likewise Josh.  No one is claiming they're out of bounds because the Bills have said they aren't talking about it.  Hopeful reporters keep re-phrasing and re-packaging in the hopes of gleaning something.

 

I don't get your Sullivan thing, but that's OK.

It's true that the press often ask the came comp questions of Beane and Josh, and they get the same answers each time.   What's different is that they don't start their press conference by saying "I'm not talking about my contract."   So, in those press conferences, the subject hasn't come up and hasn't been dealt with so, sure, the press take another shot at it.   But in this case, Poyer DID start his press conference with a clear statement, and within 10 minutes JW asked a question Poyer had just said he wouldn't discuss.  And when Poyer said, again, he wouldn't discuss it, JW asked AGAIN!   Nobody does that when the subject is compensation.   It may come up once, but when the press is told "we're not talking about that," the press respects it.  

 

JW just should know better.   It's journalism 101 - you respect the ground rules.   If I tell a reporter something is "not for attribution," the reporter doesn't say I'm the source.  If I tell the reporter something is for background only, the reporter knows that I'm just helping him understand the situation, without his having any authority to say a source told him these things.  Journalists who don't respect ground rules like those lose their access.   

 

Anyway, JW will do what he wants, and you and I will read what he writes, usually.  And we'll disagree about things, as we often do.  That doesn't keep me from enjoying what you have to say.  

Edited June 3, 2021 by Shaw66

[JoPoy88]

1 hour ago, Shaw66 said:

So I'll ask you the same question said Wawrow should ask himself:   What part of "we're not going to talk about it" don't you understand?  Teams and players set ground rules for press conferences all the time.   The Bills have set theirs.  

 

You and I can discuss the significance of the vaccine to football operations all day long.   I get that.  But Wawrow is being stupid if he doesn't realize that his access to the Bills is going to become more limited if he persists in pushing issues the Bills don't want to talk about.   Sullivan lost his job because he couldn't see the obvious.   Wawrow ought to know better.  

so you think any time a player (or coach, GM, or owner for that matter) tries to preemptively shut down a topic reporters should automatically cow to their wishes and not attempt to do their job? 

[Shaw66]

33 minutes ago, JoPoy88 said:

so you think any time a player (or coach, GM, or owner for that matter) tries to preemptively shut down a topic reporters should automatically cow to their wishes and not attempt to do their job? 

Of course.   The press doesn't have any greater rights than the interviewee.  The player only has to talk to the press to the extent the league requires it.  

 

And if a reporter wants to have access to good interviews with players, the press has to treat the players with respect.   Wawrow pisses off Poyer, the Bills will circle the wagons around Poyer and Wawrow will get bupkus when he interviews them.  

[TBBills]

Wawrow killed that interview... So awkward for him to ask that question just don't do it. ***** it's football now. You want to talk vaccine go on medical talk show.

 

I hope they don't go away for camp b.c I would rather they train at the best facility in the NFL.

Edited June 4, 2021 by TBBills

[JoPoy88]

1 hour ago, Shaw66 said:

Of course.   The press doesn't have any greater rights than the interviewee.  The player only has to talk to the press to the extent the league requires it.  

 

And if a reporter wants to have access to good interviews with players, the press has to treat the players with respect.   Wawrow pisses off Poyer, the Bills will circle the wagons around Poyer and Wawrow will get bupkus when he interviews them.  

You’re exactly right - they are on equal standing - the press can ask whatever they want and the player(s) are free to answer or decline. Journalists so beholden to their subjects that they would never dare press them don’t stay journalists for long. 

[Shaw66]

2 hours ago, JoPoy88 said:

You’re exactly right - they are on equal standing - the press can ask whatever they want and the player(s) are free to answer or decline. Journalists so beholden to their subjects that they would never dare press them don’t stay journalists for long. 

I think you seriously misunderstand the role of people who cover modern pro sports teams.   And you misunderstand the balance of power between the teams and players on one hand, and the writers, on the other.  

 

Wawrow isn't a journalist.  He is just a guy who produces content that the print or online sources use to attract readers.  He isn't an investigative journalist on some highly principled search for the truth.  He doesn't have to ask the tough questions to succeed at his job.  His bosses want him just to write something interesting about the team.  So long as readers like what he writes, Wawrow's bosses don't care at all if he's sucking up to the players and teams.  Peter King has made a fortune sucking up to Favre and Manning and Brady.   And they don't care if Wawrow is ahead of his fellow writers on a subject like the vaccine.   A scoop isn't worth very much, because all the other writers hear his questions and see what he writes, and if it has any legs, they all write it, too.  So there's no advantage to be out ahead of the other writers on an issue like this.   

 

The one way that a writer like Wawrow can make a name for himself, to set himself apart, is to have better access to the Bills than the average writer.  For example, it's a big deal for a guy like him to get a one-on-one interview with a player or players, and even better with McDermott or Beane.  A lengthy article about Poyer is worth a lot more to Wawrow's bosses than some paragraphs about the vaccine.  If Poyer is in the mood to do a one-on-one interview with someone, how likely do you think it is today that he'll give that interview to Wawrow?   Not very.   How likely is it that Frazier will choose Wawrow?  Not very, because Frazier wants to back his player.  If the players don't like you, they aren't giving you the stories.  

 

Look at Jay Skurski's interview with Trubisky in Buffalo News.  Do you think anyone on the Bills would sit down today with Wawrow to do an interview like that?

 

The plain dynamic at work here is that Wawrow needs the Bills a lot more than the Bills need Wawrow.  The sports media can always find another guy to write stories.  So when Wawrow keeps asking questions the Bills don't want to answer, when it's clear he's asking Poyer to talk about things that are not in Poyer's interest, Wawrow is putting at risk his ability to do his job.  

Edited June 4, 2021 by Shaw66

[JoPoy88]

1 hour ago, Shaw66 said:

I think you seriously misunderstand the role of people who cover modern pro sports teams.   And you misunderstand the balance of power between the teams and players on one hand, and the writers, on the other.  

 

Wawrow isn't a journalist.  He is just a guy who produces content that the print or online sources use to attract readers.  He isn't an investigative journalist on some highly principled search for the truth.  He doesn't have to ask the tough questions to succeed at his job.  His bosses want him just to write something interesting about the team.  So long as readers like what he writes, Wawrow's bosses don't care at all if he's sucking up to the players and teams.  Peter King has made a fortune sucking up to Favre and Manning and Brady.   And they don't care if Wawrow is ahead of his fellow writers on a subject like the vaccine.   A scoop isn't worth very much, because all the other writers hear his questions and see what he writes, and if it has any legs, they all write it, too.  So there's no advantage to be out ahead of the other writers on an issue like this.   

 

The one way that a writer like Wawrow can make a name for himself, to set himself apart, is to have better access to the Bills than the average writer.  For example, it's a big deal for a guy like him to get a one-on-one interview with a player or players, and even better with McDermott or Beane.  A lengthy article about Poyer is worth a lot more to Wawrow's bosses than some paragraphs about the vaccine.  If Poyer is in the mood to do a one-on-one interview with someone, how likely do you think it is today that he'll give that interview to Wawrow?   Not very.   How likely is it that Frazier will choose Wawrow?  Not very, because Frazier wants to back his player.  If the players don't like you, they aren't giving you the stories.  

 

Look at Jay Skurski's interview with Trubisky in Buffalo News.  Do you think anyone on the Bills would sit down today with Wawrow to do an interview like that?

 

The plain dynamic at work here is that Wawrow needs the Bills a lot more than the Bills need Wawrow.  The sports media can always find another guy to write stories.  So when Wawrow keeps asking questions the Bills don't want to answer, when it's clear he's asking Poyer to talk about things that are not in Poyer's interest, Wawrow is putting at risk his ability to do his job.  

 

The power dynamic you talk about is real and I think it’s the media’s job to push back against it, not just accept it. 

Again you make great points and that’s why I appreciate JW asking those questions. I don’t want beat reporters turning into blatant league shills like Peter King (who I despise) or access merchants like Schefter or Rapoport. 
 

You may well be right that JW risks something pressing questions about vaccinations, but that’s a plus in my book, not a minus. I don’t want a pack of fawning local reporters puffing up this team. It’s not needed; they’re already good. And we already have that on a national level when it comes to the league with people like King whom you mentioned.

 

edit: And that imbalance in the power dynamic is exactly why local reporters should keep asking questions about it. Do you really want a cowed media feeding you only what the team and league wants you to hear? If yes, then you’re just a sheep.

Edited June 4, 2021 by JoPoy88

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 hour ago, Shaw66 said:

Wawrow isn't a journalist.

 

I'll just stop right there and say I don't know who is a journalist if John Wawrow isn't.  Unless you categorically believe no one who covers sports is a journalist.

 

1 hour ago, Shaw66 said:

Look at Jay Skurski's interview with Trubisky in Buffalo News.  Do you think anyone on the Bills would sit down today with Wawrow to do an interview like that?

 

I also think you're kind of blowing this up into more than it is.  It's not violating a confidence like quoting someone who said "off the record...." or "for background only....".  He asked a question probing if he could get some info, Poyer said "not going there", interview moved on.  Wawrow is more a news reporting guy than a feature writer, but he's been offered access and 1:1 interviews in the past and will likely be offered them in the future.  He does have a reputation built for years that goes beyond 1 question in 1 interview.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[GunnerBill]

16 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

Sure, players can talk about any issue they want, but that doesn't mean they MUST talk about any issue the press wants them to.  This coach and these players have decided they aren't talking about the vaccinations.   It's a personal issue about individuals' health and/or politics, and there is no reason they have to talk about it to the sports media.  

 

And just because some guy may not be available in October because he got COVID doesn't change anything.   If the team discovers today that the guy has a heart condition that may affect his availability in October, that doesn't mean the team tells the press.  It's a personal health decision, and it's confidential information.  

 

Might the fact that some guys on the team haven't gotten vaccinated affect the team in some way in October?   Sure.  So might any one of a hundred other decisions players make affect the team in October.   That doesn't mean that the players or the team are required to talk to the press about every one of those decisions, especially those decisions that are personal.  

 

 

None of the above means the media shouldn't ask. Indeed I think it is absolutely all the more reason why they should. When something has the ability to affect the team in-season the Bills don't get to decide whether it is newsworthy or not. We know there are differences of view in that building. It is a legtimiate news story and one that the media are legitimate in continuing to go back to. At camp the Bills are not going to be able to keep this bottled up as much as they may wish to. The league regulations published last week mean that even just someone watching practice will likely be able to deduce who is and isn't vaccinated. 

3 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

I think you seriously misunderstand the role of people who cover modern pro sports teams.   And you misunderstand the balance of power between the teams and players on one hand, and the writers, on the other.  

 

Wawrow isn't a journalist. 

 

As someone who has covered a modern pro sports team I find that offensive. 

 

John Wawrow is 100% a journalist. 

[TBBills]

Wawrow just needs to stop asking questions people don't care about. He is trying to bait Bills players into saying something they don't want for news worthy content. It's a paparazzi type of journalism that is done to bring out anger and the hopeful slip up... Disgusting thing to do but it is still considered journalism.

 

No one cares about the teams vaccine talk, people want football back without needing to hear stupid ***** like that.

 

A witch hunt to find out who isn't vaccinated so they can be shamed and John can get his clicks.

Edited June 4, 2021 by TBBills

[Chandler#81]

On 6/2/2021 at 8:01 PM, Limeaid said:

 

JW is not a click bait reporter. He works for AP and is poster on TSW.

 

I believe you are reading into it what you want to or are trying to start argument here.

HA!🤣 If you’ve learned Anything in your time here, hanging around here IS’NT a good look. 

Good thing for him that he’s a PRINT journalist. He’s got the face and speech patterns for it and routinely makes a fool of himself venturing into the other areas.

[Punching Bag]

4 hours ago, Chandler#81 said:

HA!🤣 If you’ve learned Anything in your time here, hanging around here IS’NT a good look. 

Good thing for him that he’s a PRINT journalist. He’s got the face and speech patterns for it and routinely makes a fool of himself venturing into the other areas.

 

Yea when I worked in industry briefly it was important to be accurate than fast.

With current media it is important to be first, even if what you are saying is not true or coming from sketchy sources you have not double checked, so you can get credit and ignore any blowback from details you may have gotten wrong or made up (speculated).

[Malazan]

17 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

JW just should know better.   It's journalism 101 - you respect the ground rules.   If I tell a reporter something is "not for attribution," the reporter doesn't say I'm the source.  If I tell the reporter something is for background only, the reporter knows that I'm just helping him understand the situation, without his having any authority to say a source told him these things.  Journalists who don't respect ground rules like those lose their access.   

 

You have some.. inaccurate information. Teams, according to NFL Policy, can not revoke reporter access. They need approval. For example, the Jets hired a law firm to compile a dossier that it presented to the league when it wanted to revoke Manish Mehta's credentials and that guy did crazy sh*t like harassing Joe Douglas' kid at his baseball game and creating a fake burner account the he then pretended was Adam Gase. 

 

The Pro Football Writers of America (which is acknowledged by the NFL and Wawrow is a member) would certainly intervene if the Bills tried to remove access because someone asked a question the players or team said they didn't want to answer. 

 

 

The very idea that because someone says, "I don't want to answer questions about that" that they should then be immune to answering questions about it is just flat out insane. Think it through. If any public figure could do that then the only questions that would ever get asked are 'approved' questions and what would be the point? 

Edited June 4, 2021 by jeremy2020

[Hapless Bills Fan]

6 hours ago, TBBills said:

A witch hunt to find out who isn't vaccinated so they can be shamed and John can get his clicks.

 

On what planet do you feel that's at all an accurate description of the question John Wawrow asked?

 

Did you actually listen to the interview or are you just shooting your own attitudes off your fingertips, that any question about vaccination is a "witch hunt" and "shaming"?  Wait, don't tell me, I know the answer to that.

 

C'Mon Man.

 

1 hour ago, Limeaid said:

Yea when I worked in industry briefly it was important to be accurate than fast.

With current media it is important to be first, even if what you are saying is not true or coming from sketchy sources you have not double checked, so you can get credit and ignore any blowback from details you may have gotten wrong or made up (speculated).

 

The thing is, Wawrow is employed by one of the last holdouts to that "important to be accurate" belief, AP.  They have requirements regarding what qualifies as a direct source, needing 2 confirmatory sources etc etc.

 

As opposed to much of the rest of current coverage where Ian Rappoport or Adam Schefter can tweet out a rumor from an unnamed "source", and then NFLN and ESPN and a bunch of other media write a story about it citing Schefter's tweet as their source.

 

Which is why the animus directed at Wawrow over this is kind of puzzling to me - it wasn't a witch hunt, it wasn't an attempt to find out who is vaccinated, and he IS far better qualified to be called a journalist than many these days.

[Jerome007]

On 6/3/2021 at 8:45 AM, JoPoy88 said:

The vaccine questions aren’t directly to the game on-field, yes. But the league is clearly setting different standards for teams based on whether or not the team meets the vaccination threshold. Those standards affect things like practice, meetings, mobility within team facilities, etc. Those things DO affect the team and can indirectly affect on-field performance; Brandon Beane has admitted this himself. So it kinda is a football issue and seems like it should be okay for media to ask questions about it.

The NFL should be asked questions then for making up these standards, not players. No one should be forced to inject anything, and it is a personal decision that should be private, and this is a run around away of somewhat forcing this issue. And if the Bills do reach the NFL imposed limit, then stop bugging players that chose otherwise. 

 

As for the interview, Poyer didn't want to delve into why Bills had such high attendance, but you could tell it probably was a heated debate among players. Good that once a decision was made player wise, most chose to follow their teammates. And for those who think it's the same with injecting a vaccine, get a life and some perspective.

Edited June 4, 2021 by Jerome007

[JoPoy88]

45 minutes ago, Jerome007 said:

The NFL should be asked questions then for making up these standards, not players. No one should be forced to inject anything, and it is a personal decision that should be private, and this is a run around away of somewhat forcing this issue. And if the Bills do reach the NFL imposed limit, then stop bugging players that chose otherwise. 

 

As for the interview, Poyer didn't want to delve into why Bills had such high attendance, but you could tell it probably was a heated debate among players. Good that once a decision was made player wise, most chose to follow their teammates. And for those who think it's the same with injecting a vaccine, get a life and some perspective.

I have no problem with the league being asked how and why these standards were adopted. I also never said Poyer or any other player was wrong for declining to answer any questions about vaccinations. But reporters shouldn’t be insulted and accused of hackery just for asking. 

[Punching Bag]

10 minutes ago, JoPoy88 said:

I have no problem with the league being asked how and why these standards were adopted. I also never said Poyer or any other player was wrong for declining to answer any questions about vaccinations. But reporters shouldn’t be insulted and accused of hackery just for asking. 

 

It is more of a reflection on accuser than accused.

[JoPoy88]

12 hours ago, TBBills said:

Wawrow just needs to stop asking questions people don't care about. He is trying to bait Bills players into saying something they don't want for news worthy content. It's a paparazzi type of journalism that is done to bring out anger and the hopeful slip up... Disgusting thing to do but it is still considered journalism.

 

No one cares about the teams vaccine talk, people want football back without needing to hear stupid ***** like that.

 

A witch hunt to find out who isn't vaccinated so they can be shamed and John can get his clicks.

LOL. “No one” cares huh? Guess you better tell Beane and McDermott that then, since they both have recently commented publicly on this exact issue.

What method did you use to poll the entire football community to come to your conclusion that absolutely NO ONE cares about this?