Chalkie Gerzowski Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 Bickering Bills Part 2 Nick Nicolau is angry. Where is Bresnahan, I want to pop him in the forehead again. :madface: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 who do you trust? john wawrow of the ap and a looooooooongtime good bills beat guy, or mort, whose only connection with buffalo is via his longtime source donohoe? i'm not saying one way or the other. just factor that in ... 523851[/snapback] Talk about wild speculation. How the hell do you know that Mort's ONLY connection with the Bills is TD. The guy is a pretty decent reporter. I am sure that he just calls up TD and just parrots everything TD says because he's his buddy. Yeah, right, sure. Clearly, everyone is trying to do one thing: Cover their own ass. MM and EM actually seem to be doing the sensible thing in a terrible situation. They are not attacking each other in the press. They are both probably at fault. EM has a legitimate gripe and is pissed. MM has made some terrible decisions but is trying to get ahold of his faltering team. Ultimately, however, under few situations should any player take himself out of a game without injury, and under no situations should a player refuse to go back when told to by a coach. Even if this is the very best player and the very worst coach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 How credible is this "Dawg" guy? Not at all. He is another in a long line of obsessed single-minded posters who only have one thing on their mind and it permeates their every single thought and action. As such they will go out of their way to spin any situation to their perspective, turn all of their wild theories into documented facts and even go so far as to make things up in an effort to convince themselves of how important and appropriate thier personal crusades are. He doesn't know any more about this than either of us and anybody that assumes they do know something is only fooling themselves. But that won't stop them from the endless histrionics and melodrama that they often rely on for attention. Cya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 Talk about wild speculation. How the hell do you know that Mort's ONLY connection with the Bills is TD. The guy is a pretty decent reporter. I am sure that he just calls up TD and just parrots everything TD says because he's his buddy. Yeah, right, sure. Clearly, everyone is trying to do one thing: Cover their own ass. MM and EM actually seem to be doing the sensible thing in a terrible situation. They are not attacking each other in the press. They are both probably at fault. EM has a legitimate gripe and is pissed. MM has made some terrible decisions but is trying to get ahold of his faltering team. Ultimately, however, under few situations should any player take himself out of a game without injury, and under no situations should a player refuse to go back when told to by a coach. Even if this is the very best player and the very worst coach. 523917[/snapback] i actually have no beef with mort - he's a good reporter. he is though, on record as buddies with TD. so it would seem to me that he'd deal with him or someone speaking for him as a source. there's nothing wrong with that, and for all i know his story about the no-show is right. who knows? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 Is the Bills' team bus a short one? 523842[/snapback] It will be once all the malcontents are suspended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 i actually have no beef with mort - he's a good reporter. he is though, on record as buddies with TD. so it would seem to me that he'd deal with him or someone speaking for him as a source. there's nothing wrong with that, and for all i know his story about the no-show is right. who knows? 523937[/snapback] Then perhaps you shouldn't be clearly implying that Mort only spoke to his buddy and no one else and that Wawrow did all the legit investigative reporting and we should listen to him and not Mort. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawgg Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 Not a fair accusation, Simon. That is all I will say. Not at all.He is another in a long line of obsessed single-minded posters who only have one thing on their mind and it permeates their every single thought and action. As such they will go out of their way to spin any situation to their perspective, turn all of their wild theories into documented facts and even go so far as to make things up in an effort to convince themselves of how important and appropriate thier personal crusades are. He doesn't know any more about this than either of us and anybody that assumes they do know something is only fooling themselves. But that won't stop them from the endless histrionics and melodrama that they often rely on for attention. Cya 523927[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 Then perhaps you shouldn't be clearly implying that Mort only spoke to his buddy and no one else and that Wawrow did all the legit investigative reporting and we should listen to him and not Mort. 523957[/snapback] well, i am still sort of implying that about mort. re wawrow, he is a good reporter. whether he's right about this i don't know. historically, he's been pretty reliable. like i said, though, who knows? the one thing i do know is that eric moulds will be playing elsewhere next year, and that losman will be throwing to evans, possibly reed, parrish, and a free agent (unless aiken becomes half-decent in the next 9 months). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2003Contenders Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 Giving MM the benefit of the doubt for just a minute, let's analyze the following scenario: 1. What if Moulds did indeed take himself out of the game because he was not being used to his satisfaction? 2. What if Moulds REFUSED to go back into the game when asked to do so? 3. What if Moulds did fail to show up to a mandatory meeting with Mularkey to hash all of this out? I'm not saying that any or all of these things did happen, since I don't know. But it is a possibility. And if it is true, then I have no problem whatsoever with Moulds being suspended. In fact, this behavior may even trump anything that TO ever did. TO's biggest sin was running his mouth and bad-mouthing his teammates, but I can't recall him ever becomming a problem on gameday and refusing to step on the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
splinter21 Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 Giving MM the benefit of the doubt for just a minute, let's analyze the following scenario: 1. What if Moulds did indeed take himself out of the game because he was not being used to his satisfaction? 2. What if Moulds REFUSED to go back into the game when asked to do so? 3. What if Moulds did fail to show up to a mandatory meeting with Mularkey to hash all of this out? I'm not saying that any or all of these things did happen, since I don't know. But it is a possibility. And if it is true, then I have no problem whatsoever with Moulds being suspended. In fact, this behavior may even trump anything that TO ever did. TO's biggest sin was running his mouth and bad-mouthing his teammates, but I can't recall him ever becomming a problem on gameday and refusing to step on the field. 524218[/snapback] this could trump TO????? AHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA THATS THE FUNNIEST **** i have heard all day!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2003Contenders Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 I could be wrong... but remind me of an instance when TO took himself out of a game -- and then refused to go back in, when no injury was involved? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
splinter21 Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 I could be wrong... but remind me of an instance when TO took himself out of a game -- and then refused to go back in, when no injury was involved? 524227[/snapback] no but to say his actions trump TO is a little over the top thats all. cause TO held out demanded more money. reportedly fought with hugh douglas so that trumps moulds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 Giving MM the benefit of the doubt for just a minute, let's analyze the following scenario: 1. What if Moulds did indeed take himself out of the game because he was not being used to his satisfaction? 2. What if Moulds REFUSED to go back into the game when asked to do so? 3. What if Moulds did fail to show up to a mandatory meeting with Mularkey to hash all of this out? I'm not saying that any or all of these things did happen, since I don't know. But it is a possibility. And if it is true, then I have no problem whatsoever with Moulds being suspended. In fact, this behavior may even trump anything that TO ever did. TO's biggest sin was running his mouth and bad-mouthing his teammates, but I can't recall him ever becomming a problem on gameday and refusing to step on the field. 524218[/snapback] You are right: refusing to help your team in the heat of battle goes beyond anything T.O. has ever done. Whatever else he was guilty of, at least T.O. always gave everything he had come gameday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsWatch Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 Not at all.He is another in a long line of obsessed single-minded posters who only have one thing on their mind and it permeates their every single thought and action. As such they will go out of their way to spin any situation to their perspective, turn all of their wild theories into documented facts and even go so far as to make things up in an effort to convince themselves of how important and appropriate thier personal crusades are. He doesn't know any more about this than either of us and anybody that assumes they do know something is only fooling themselves. But that won't stop them from the endless histrionics and melodrama that they often rely on for attention. Cya 523927[/snapback] Simon is a pretty smart guy and has football smarts as well. Maybe he should work in a front office ..... How credible is this "Dawg" guy? 523840[/snapback] About as reliable as Profootballtalk, maybe a lot less if that is possible.... Only person less reliable is Chuck Dickerson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoachChuckDickerson Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 The ESPN LINK HAS BEEN UPDATED for those interested. The player's personal adviser, Greg Johnson, told The Associated Press that Moulds is being punished over a misunderstanding that took place during Buffalo's loss at Miami on Sunday. Following Mularkey's press conference, Johnson said he was encouraged by what the coach said, adding he and Moulds were particularly happy to hear that Mularkey never used the word "suspended." Johnson said Moulds was scheduled to have a meeting with team owner Ralph Wilson on Thursday, when he hoped the dispute could be resolved. Johnson said the misunderstanding Sunday occurred when Moulds left the field after experiencing pain in his Achilles' tendon. Moulds, Johnson said, wanted to have the tendon examined by a trainer when Bills receivers coach Tyke Tolbert asked Moulds to get back out on the field. Moulds declined and was benched for most of the final three quarters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 He is . . . another in a long line of obsessed single-minded posters who only have one thing on their mind and it permeates their every single thought and action. You're making him sound like an adolescent male. Seriously, though, I've looked at Dawgg's posts. While I don't always agree with him, I've noticed he often supports his points with facts, reasoning, or observations. I also noticed he wrote about a number of themes, so I'm at a loss to understand your contention that he's obsessed with only one topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 The ESPN LINK HAS BEEN UPDATED for those interested. 524274[/snapback] Thanks. Now I'm more confused than ever. That's a good thing...I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills_fan Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 Johnson said the misunderstanding Sunday occurred when Moulds left the field after experiencing pain in his Achilles' tendon. Moulds, Johnson said, wanted to have the tendon examined by a trainer when Bills receivers coach Tyke Tolbert asked Moulds to get back out on the field. If this is actually true, I have absolutely no problem with EM's actions. He wanted it checked out prior to continuing. After what happened to TKO, and knowing he's gone after this year, no reason to risk his career for this ship of fools. He has one more contract to sign and he won't be able to do that if he tears an Achilles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 If this is actually true, I have absolutely no problem with EM's actions. He wanted it checked out prior to continuing. After what happened to TKO, and knowing he's gone after this year, no reason to risk his career for this ship of fools. He has one more contract to sign and he won't be able to do that if he tears an Achilles. 524302[/snapback] Say, there fella. Would you be interested in a vintage antique stone bridge heading to Brooklyn? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted December 8, 2005 Share Posted December 8, 2005 Say, there fella. Would you be interested in a vintage antique stone bridge heading to Brooklyn? 524307[/snapback] was "personal advisor" the giveaway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts