Kgun5 Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 TD drafted Losman, who, by most accounts, is suitable for today's NFL's offenses. Unfortunately, Losman broke his leg. I find it hard to believe that Losman wouldn't be the starter next week if he were healthy. 84385[/snapback] I think Losman will be a very good QB. I also think we overpaid (Dallas) for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobblehead Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 I can understand how some could perceive him as arrogant. Since we're on the subject, I'd dare to say that Jim Kelly was also arrogant and it made him better. To say Sullivan enjoys losing is just childish. Perhaps Buffalo's troubles have made his articles easier to write or more controversial (things that one could argue would help his career,) but to say he enjoys the team he covers being a loser is dumb. In fact, if he's as critical during winning campaigns as you maintain, what difference would it make...He'd still write the same article. What Sullivan seems to not like is stupidity...Whether it's talented players doing stupid things, or management making moves that, in his opinion, hurt the team's chances. Obviously, you don't agree with him. Ok, but I do, and I think it's unfair to make assumptions about his wanting a winning football team in Buffalo or not. 84398[/snapback] Is Jerry Sullivan a beat reporter or is he a commentator? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kgun5 Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 Jerry - is that you? Are you defending yourself? Self-fellation is a talent that only few are blessed with. 84396[/snapback] Alas, I am not one of the few...And I imagine most of those given such a gift get little else done. Nay, I'm also not Jerry. It wouldn't shock me if he lurked around here, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kgun5 Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 Is Jerry Sullivan a beat reporter or is he a commentator? 84405[/snapback] I would guess that depends on whether he's writing an opinion piece or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobblehead Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 I would guess that depends on whether he's writing an opinion piece or not. 84414[/snapback] I'd rather you answered the question, but that's up to you. You know my stance, I know yours. Thanks for the debate this morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jad1 Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 I think Losman will be a very good QB. I also think we overpaid (Dallas) for him. 84402[/snapback] If Evans and Losman turn out to be bonafide NFL starters, I don't care how much TD paid for J.P. The Bills payed a lot for Cornelius Bennett, and nobody is crying about that deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kgun5 Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 I'd rather you answered the question, but that's up to you. You know my stance, I know yours. Thanks for the debate this morning. 84420[/snapback] OK...Then I'd say he's both...and I thank you as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kgun5 Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 If Evans and Losman turn out to be bonafide NFL starters, I don't care how much TD paid for J.P. The Bills payed a lot for Cornelius Bennett, and nobody is crying about that deal. 84424[/snapback] I care. Especially if one could have gotten the same or better players for less, but it's a moot point. It's really not possible to know exactly what could have been done with which teams. I just think it's irresponsible to not care what was paid, as long as the players are good. For example, I'd really love to see the Bills win a Super Bowl in person, but despite how great it may be, I wouldn't pay $200,000 a ticket to be there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jad1 Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 I care. Especially if one could have gotten the same or better players for less, but it's a moot point. It's really not possible to know exactly what could have been done with which teams. I just think it's irresponsible to not care what was paid, as long as the players are good. For example, I'd really love to see the Bills win a Super Bowl in person, but despite how great it may be, I wouldn't pay $200,000 a ticket to be there. 84445[/snapback] Not sure I get your example. If TD drafted two star players in the first this year, instead of one this year and one next, what's the difference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
34-78-83 Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 Not sure I get your example. If TD drafted two star players in the first this year, instead of one this year and one next, what's the difference? 84513[/snapback] Bingo! Exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kgun5 Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 Not sure I get your example. If TD drafted two star players in the first this year, instead of one this year and one next, what's the difference? 84513[/snapback] Allow me to edit my example...If I paid $200,000 for said tickets when I could have gotten them for $2,000, that would be a poor decision, no matter what the worth of the tickets. Relating it to the draft is obviously different since we lack the information about what was offered and to who. Still, I do know that the Steelers seem to have a stud that may have been available for a similar deal, and I also know that the QB we ended up selecting was projected to go lower. Lastly, it would seem that the pick Dallas is going to get will be quite good. That being said, my personal problem with our draft, which hasn't changed since April, is that we spent a number 13 overall, a number 45 overall, and what will probably be a top 5 overall pick on the 4th WR to be drafted in 2004, and the 4th QB to be drafted in 2004. To me, that seems like a lot to pay for two guys that weren't ranked in the top 3 in their position on most boards. I also hated that we went with a WR when we needed so much help in other areas, but that's neither nere nor there. Hopefully those guys will end as ultra studs, but I'll always feel we could have gotten them (or their equivailant) for less. Just my opinion based on incomplete information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jad1 Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 Allow me to edit my example...If I paid $200,000 for said tickets when I could have gotten them for $2,000, that would be a poor decision, no matter what the worth of the tickets. Relating it to the draft is obviously different since we lack the information about what was offered and to who. Still, I do know that the Steelers seem to have a stud that may have been available for a similar deal, and I also know that the QB we ended up selecting was projected to go lower. Lastly, it would seem that the pick Dallas is going to get will be quite good. That being said, my personal problem with our draft, which hasn't changed since April, is that we spent a number 13 overall, a number 45 overall, and what will probably be a top 5 overall pick on the 4th WR to be drafted in 2004, and the 4th QB to be drafted in 2004. To me, that seems like a lot to pay for two guys that weren't ranked in the top 3 in their position on most boards. I also hated that we went with a WR when we needed so much help in other areas, but that's neither nere nor there. Hopefully those guys will end as ultra studs, but I'll always feel we could have gotten them (or their equivailant) for less. Just my opinion based on incomplete information. 84563[/snapback] I disagree. In Evans and Losman, TD got exactly what he was looking for. A WR with speed and a QB with mobility. Both these guys would have been gone by their 2nd pick in the draft. I'd like to hold off on blasting TD for this trade until I see Losman play. If he looks like Boller, I'll be pissed. If he looks like Leftwich, I'll be happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kgun5 Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 I disagree. In Evans and Losman, TD got exactly what he was looking for. A WR with speed and a QB with mobility. Both these guys would have been gone by their 2nd pick in the draft. I'd like to hold off on blasting TD for this trade until I see Losman play. If he looks like Boller, I'll be pissed. If he looks like Leftwich, I'll be happy. 84666[/snapback] I liked what I saw of Losman in the preseason. I hope they're both the players we want them to be and also surrounded with what they need to succeed. I'm not a TD blaster, by the way. In fact, I think there's a lot of hypocrisy around here about the moves he's made (most of them were applauded at the time). I just tend to think differently about the 2004 draft then most. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ron Jeremy Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 Jerry - is that you? Are you defending yourself? Self-fellation is a talent that only few are blessed with. 84396[/snapback] I could do it before my stomach got in the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Days Lois & Clark Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 It appears as if he doesn't like the sports teams or the area around here. I just don't understand why he just doesn't move away from here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2003Contenders Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 I can't stand Sullivan. He's one of these people that takes a stand -- and always HAS to be right about it. He takes glee in being "right", rather than hoping for the best. His stance for the last year+ is that Donahoe needs to go. Maybe he is right, but his megalomania clouds the issue of his commentaries. No, he doesn't call it likes he sees it. He calls it the way that will best support his hypothesis. In that way, he has an agenda -- which is not a good thing for a columnist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 Sullivan calls them as he sees them. What I want to know is what you're seeing to defend the last 4 years of Bills football. 84322[/snapback] Well, he did not...As Todd pointed out, he was quiet when we won last week against our hated rival. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kgun5 Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 Well, he did not...As Todd pointed out, he was quiet when we won last weekagainst our hated rival. 85149[/snapback] Quotes from Sullivan's article, 10/18/04: "...Tom Donahoe began to look smart again" "McGahee, who got the call because of Travis Henry's injured arch, was magnificent. He rushed for 111 yards on 26 carries. He had another 31 yards on three receptions, two of them shovel passes that caught Miami off-guard. He did everything but score his first regular-season touchdown, but he'll get it in time." "McGahee has proved to be a much tougher runner than anyone imagined." "Donahoe gambled on McGahee because he was a rare combination of speed and power. He's pretty tough, too." "Donahoe invested a first-round pick in McGahee because he expected him to be great. It would be foolish for the coaches to sit him for long stretches and inhibit his development." "McGahee is the future, and based on what I saw against Miami, the future has arrived." Yeah...He really ripped into both management and the players after that one. What he did do, and I believe correctly, is warned against putting off the McGahee era by starting Henry. We already know he's worried about MM's decision making as a rookie. I'm not going to argue about whether he was right about it or not, but there's certainly nothing wrong with bringing up a possible trouble-spot. That's his job. Also, what exactly was he supposed to say after last week? We beat a winless team at home by a touchdown. The offense scored 13 points. Were backflips really in order? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 But of course all the idiots around here do is focus on the negative. But that's par for the course. 84305[/snapback] Show me a positive to focus on in a 1-5 season and I'll do my best (and don't even mention the defense, they are responsible for 2 of the 5 losses). As for idiots, I say it takes a bigger one to not see negatives in a 1-5 season than it does to find them. I guess I should just walk around with a smile on my face that the Bills have sucked for the past 5 years and are arguably the worst team in football right now. But yeah, good job TD! I thought TD was a hell of a GM before he came to Buffalo and up until this season I was giving him lots of slack and still had faith. But at some point he has to put up results, just like Bledsoe there is always some excuse for TD. You can’t run away from 1-5 in the fourth year of TD being GM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stanley Lombardi Posted October 25, 2004 Share Posted October 25, 2004 The guy was awfully silent last week after a win. This week, he can't contain his glee over a loss. Hey Sullivan - :I starred in Brokeback Mountain: - in the butt with a 2x4. 84283[/snapback] I agree. There's a guy I work with who acts like he's down about the Bills losing, but underneath it all he can't conceal his glee. Sullivan reminds me of the same. I don't think their Mommies gave them enough attention; and/or the love of his life dumped him for a jock. He's an extremely odd duck, and what is worse is that his columns are consistently tedious. Rarely do I read his bile anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts