Jump to content


Manny Lawson article


  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

#1 HankBulloughMellencamp

HankBulloughMellencamp

    Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 266 posts

Posted 30 July 2013 - 01:13 PM

Not that Manny Lawson isn't a grown man who can handle himself, but I was quite taken aback by the patronizing tone of Mr. Sullivan's article in today's Buffalo News.

It starts off in classic Jerry Sullivan fashion - basically a back-handed compliment on Manny's career achievements to date, along with a comparison to none other than Chris Kelsay.  Old #90 was a whipping boy to some around here, and he may not have been a Bruce Smith or a Phil Hansen, but he was a far better pro football player than Sullivan would ever understand or even acknowledge.  And I'd bet my right arm that Sully would not have made that comparison had the highly-respected Kelsay still been around in the Bills locker room.

TBN readers get served this cynical view of Lawson just as he gets established here - in a new town with a new organization, and right after the birth of his first child - who happens to be a few thousand miles away as camp opens, no less.  A divorce and/or the death of a loved one not withstanding, Manny is now simultaneously navigating through two of the four most stressful life events we humans ever go through.

Then it seems as if Sully's credibility complex gets the best of him, and he wants us to believe that Mike Zimmer himself was consulted to help craft the next few paragraphs.  This is really where I begin to take issue with what he wrote.  According to the way Jerry presents it, the Bengals supposedly got better BECAUSE Ahmad Brooks replaced Lawson.  And Manny's 34% of snaps played had essentially zero positive effect on their fortunes last year.  Let's not forget that he all but got benched after being "torched" against the Dolphins in week 5, which stilll has me wondering how he ever got to play 34% of the snaps last year - was he at 100% until that game? Some fuzzy math to be sure, and clearly intended to be passed off by conditioned readers with maybe even a "boy, that Sully sure does his homework."

To me, a four-year deal worth $12M is hardly extravagant spending on a veteran linebacker who can rush the passer and who the new staff feels can provide some much needed leadership to the room.  "There were people rolling their eyes in Cincinnatti at that contract."  Really now, Jerry, you don't say ... care to reveal any names?  You know, people who, unlike yourself, would actually stick their neck out a little?  Sully's football mind can only process the past; he is the master at repackaging everything with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight.

"There are certainly people who believe you have something to prove, Lawson was told."  Yes sir, I'll do my best to make you proud, Coach Sully.

I can not believe TBN actually published this condescending piece of garbage.  I really hope Lawson ignores Sully in the locker room from this day forward, and makes him eat his words in 2013.

Welcome to Buffalo, Manny.  As you can now see, the Bills are not the only outfit in town with 13 years of half-assed performances on record!  Just have a look at TBN's 'You only have 10 articles left!' paywall system ... it's state of the art!

#2 3 --> 10 Connection

3 --> 10 Connection

    Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 375 posts

Posted 30 July 2013 - 01:21 PM

Part of the reason I don't touch The Buffalo News anymore.

#3 TaskersGhost

TaskersGhost

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 688 posts

Posted 30 July 2013 - 01:29 PM

Lawson was brought here for one reason, he used to play with Mario at NC State.  There is no other reason why he was selected.  He's not a starter.  The team is once again looking for lightning to strike twice.

All we need now is to bring McCargo back for the full compliment of NC State's DL draftee's that year.

Edited by TaskersGhost, 30 July 2013 - 01:29 PM.


#4 Jauronimo

Jauronimo

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,089 posts

Posted 30 July 2013 - 01:32 PM

View PostTaskersGhost, on 30 July 2013 - 01:29 PM, said:

Lawson was brought here for one reason, he used to play with Mario at NC State. There is no other reason why he was selected.  He's not a starter.  The team is once again looking for lightning to strike twice.

All we need now is to bring McCargo back for the full compliment of NC State's DL draftee's that year.
You don't think the fact that LB was one of our biggest needs had anything to do with it?

#5 jboyst62

jboyst62

    Hall of Farmer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,828 posts

Posted 30 July 2013 - 01:36 PM

No link to the article?

#6 nucci

nucci

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,791 posts

Posted 30 July 2013 - 01:41 PM

View PostJauronimo, on 30 July 2013 - 01:32 PM, said:

You don't think the fact that LB was one of our biggest needs had anything to do with it?
Of course not! We are going to start bringing in college teammates of all our best players.

Edited by nucci, 30 July 2013 - 01:42 PM.


#7 HankBulloughMellencamp

HankBulloughMellencamp

    Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 266 posts

Posted 30 July 2013 - 01:46 PM

View Postjboyst62, on 30 July 2013 - 01:36 PM, said:

No link to the article?

Sorry,

http://www.buffalone...ills-drive-1004

(it's also on the TBD mainpage at left)

#8 TaskersGhost

TaskersGhost

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 688 posts

Posted 30 July 2013 - 01:52 PM

View PostJauronimo, on 30 July 2013 - 01:32 PM, said:

You don't think the fact that LB was one of our biggest needs had anything to do with it?

No.  LB is our single biggest need as a unit.  But if Lawson is the answer, I think we've answered our Whaley/coaching questions, don't you?

You don't fill glaring needs by getting depth players.

Here's one for you, why did they release Barnett?  Seems to me he was by far and away the best LB.  I know, I know, he didn't fit the scheme.  I guess all of the other mediocre talent fits it better.

The trend continues.

You'd have an argument if they'd signed Ellerbe, Wheeler, or any other of a handful of solid starters that were FAs.

Lawson is just more of what we've had.

View Postnucci, on 30 July 2013 - 01:41 PM, said:

Of course not! We are going to start bringing in college teammates of all our best players.

Lawson's barely getting starting money.  He won't even be here in two more seasons despite his four year contract.  It wouldn't surprise me if he's not here next season either

#9 Jauronimo

Jauronimo

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,089 posts

Posted 30 July 2013 - 01:56 PM

View PostTaskersGhost, on 30 July 2013 - 01:52 PM, said:

No.  LB is our single biggest need as a unit.  But if Lawson is the answer, I think we've answered our Whaley/coaching questions, don't you?

You don't fill glaring needs by getting depth players.

Here's one for you, why did they release Barnett?  Seems to me he was by far and away the best LB.  I know, I know, he didn't fit the scheme.  I guess all of the other mediocre talent fits it better.

The trend continues.

You'd have an argument if they'd signed Ellerbe, Wheeler, or any other of a handful of solid starters that were FAs.

Lawson is just more of what we've had.



Lawson's barely getting starting money.  He won't even be here in two more seasons despite his four year contract.  It wouldn't surprise me if he's not here next season either
No, I wouldn't agree with anything you've said.

Barnett was miserable last year which is probably why he isn't in the league right now.

Your questions about other personnel decisions and predictions regarding Lawson's future are irrelevant.  There is absolutely no reason to think that Lawson was signed because 7 years ago he played college ball with Mario.  None.

#10 stony

stony

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,822 posts

Posted 30 July 2013 - 02:05 PM

View PostTaskersGhost, on 30 July 2013 - 01:52 PM, said:

No.  LB is our single biggest need as a unit.  But if Lawson is the answer, I think we've answered our Whaley/coaching questions, don't you?

You don't fill glaring needs by getting depth players.

Here's one for you, why did they release Barnett?  Seems to me he was by far and away the best LB.  I know, I know, he didn't fit the scheme.  I guess all of the other mediocre talent fits it better.

The trend continues.

You'd have an argument if they'd signed Ellerbe, Wheeler, or any other of a handful of solid starters that were FAs.

Lawson is just more of what we've had.



Lawson's barely getting starting money.  He won't even be here in two more seasons despite his four year contract.  It wouldn't surprise me if he's not here next season either

Before we jump to conclusions, Lawson will be in an entirely different scheme here. I'd like to think Whaley and Pettine talked this through and made a sound judgment for that side of the ball.

Also, Barnett was cool and even good the year before but his play dropped off considerably as the season wore on.

#11 Gugny

Gugny

    Beerball Brings Crudite to Football Parties

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,033 posts

Posted 30 July 2013 - 02:06 PM

Isn't Lawson's 4 year contract really only for 14 months?

#12 Wayne Cubed

Wayne Cubed

    TBD's Local Shell Fish

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,264 posts

Posted 30 July 2013 - 02:07 PM

Look I made a jump to conclusions mat...

Posted Image

#13 eball

eball

    Omar Sly

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,996 posts

Posted 30 July 2013 - 02:14 PM

LOL at anyone responding to TaskersGhost at this point in time.

#14 zonabb

zonabb

    Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,175 posts

Posted 30 July 2013 - 02:18 PM

not sure why anyone reads opinion columns. Sullivan, like every other "journalist" who is given column inches has two things... the means and the no credibility. Why should anyone ever take this guys opinion seriously? He has a column so that's instant credibility? The irony that thios guy slams the Bills as a half rate organization yet he works in a third rate media market for the only paper in town, that has a declining readership and writes nothing of substance. He should look in the mirror when insinuating someone is mediocre. He's nothing but a mediocre crank whose dream of writing for a Boston paper failed miserable. Moral of the story is stop reading the guy and the other hacks in this town. Watch games, form your own opinions, read some non-biased (aka no axe to grind) national writers who are good, and enjoy football. Reading this joke and his cohorts in this town is bringing down your intellect.

#15 TaskersGhost

TaskersGhost

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 688 posts

Posted 30 July 2013 - 02:35 PM

View PostJauronimo, on 30 July 2013 - 01:56 PM, said:

No, I wouldn't agree with anything you've said.

Barnett was miserable last year which is probably why he isn't in the league right now.

Your questions about other personnel decisions and predictions regarding Lawson's future are irrelevant.  There is absolutely no reason to think that Lawson was signed because 7 years ago he played college ball with Mario.  None.

LOL

Barnett may have been miserable, but he led the team in tackles.

And for as bad as you say he was I'm glad that you view Lawson, Scott, White, Hughes, Brown, Bradham, and Pough as better.  Or the rookies.

You don't see any humor there?

Can you even confidently say which of the current players slotted as LBs will be starting in the LB spots?  If you can then you know more than anyone else.  I don't think they know one LB starter yet besides Bradham but only out of necessity.  He's certainly not earned anything if we're going to talk about earning spots.

View Poststony, on 30 July 2013 - 02:05 PM, said:

Before we jump to conclusions, Lawson will be in an entirely different scheme here. I'd like to think Whaley and Pettine talked this through and made a sound judgment for that side of the ball.

Also, Barnett was cool and even good the year before but his play dropped off considerably as the season wore on.

Yeah, we haven't heard that one before or anything.

At least we know who continues to support the elements of the team that continually lose or underperform the majority of the league.  These threads make that pretty clear.

#16 Jauronimo

Jauronimo

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,089 posts

Posted 30 July 2013 - 02:46 PM

View PostFleaMoulds98, on 30 July 2013 - 02:35 PM, said:

LOL

Barnett may have been miserable, but he led the team in tackles.

And for as bad as you say he was I'm glad that you view Lawson, Scott, White, Hughes, Brown, Bradham, and Pough as better.  Or the rookies.

You don't see any humor there?

Can you even confidently say which of the current players slotted as LBs will be starting in the LB spots?  If you can then you know more than anyone else.  I don't think they know one LB starter yet besides Bradham but only out of necessity.  He's certainly not earned anything if we're going to talk about earning spots.
I see a total non-sequitur of a response, but very little humor.  What does any of this have to do with your original assertion that the Lawson move was purely to reunite Manny with his former college teammate and recapture some form of static electricity?

Also, do you know how a conversation works?

#17 OldTimer1960

OldTimer1960

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,607 posts

Posted 30 July 2013 - 02:52 PM

View PostHankBulloughMellencamp, on 30 July 2013 - 01:13 PM, said:

Not that Manny Lawson isn't a grown man who can handle himself, but I was quite taken aback by the patronizing tone of Mr. Sullivan's article in today's Buffalo News.

It starts off in classic Jerry Sullivan fashion - basically a back-handed compliment on Manny's career achievements to date, along with a comparison to none other than Chris Kelsay.  Old #90 was a whipping boy to some around here, and he may not have been a Bruce Smith or a Phil Hansen, but he was a far better pro football player than Sullivan would ever understand or even acknowledge.  And I'd bet my right arm that Sully would not have made that comparison had the highly-respected Kelsay still been around in the Bills locker room.

TBN readers get served this cynical view of Lawson just as he gets established here - in a new town with a new organization, and right after the birth of his first child - who happens to be a few thousand miles away as camp opens, no less.  A divorce and/or the death of a loved one not withstanding, Manny is now simultaneously navigating through two of the four most stressful life events we humans ever go through.

Then it seems as if Sully's credibility complex gets the best of him, and he wants us to believe that Mike Zimmer himself was consulted to help craft the next few paragraphs.  This is really where I begin to take issue with what he wrote.  According to the way Jerry presents it, the Bengals supposedly got better BECAUSE Ahmad Brooks replaced Lawson.  And Manny's 34% of snaps played had essentially zero positive effect on their fortunes last year.  Let's not forget that he all but got benched after being "torched" against the Dolphins in week 5, which stilll has me wondering how he ever got to play 34% of the snaps last year - was he at 100% until that game? Some fuzzy math to be sure, and clearly intended to be passed off by conditioned readers with maybe even a "boy, that Sully sure does his homework."

To me, a four-year deal worth $12M is hardly extravagant spending on a veteran linebacker who can rush the passer and who the new staff feels can provide some much needed leadership to the room.  "There were people rolling their eyes in Cincinnatti at that contract."  Really now, Jerry, you don't say ... care to reveal any names?  You know, people who, unlike yourself, would actually stick their neck out a little?  Sully's football mind can only process the past; he is the master at repackaging everything with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight.

"There are certainly people who believe you have something to prove, Lawson was told."  Yes sir, I'll do my best to make you proud, Coach Sully.

I can not believe TBN actually published this condescending piece of garbage.  I really hope Lawson ignores Sully in the locker room from this day forward, and makes him eat his words in 2013.

Welcome to Buffalo, Manny.  As you can now see, the Bills are not the only outfit in town with 13 years of half-assed performances on record!  Just have a look at TBN's 'You only have 10 articles left!' paywall system ... it's state of the art!

Thank you, I could not have said it better myself.

Sullivan should be arrested for stealing from the News.  He writes the same negative drivel repeatedly changing only to target the Bills or the Sabres at his whim.  "Reporters" like him pass off their lack of knowledge and their incredible disregard for being remotely polite in any situation as "hard reporting" - "if they can't stand the heat, they shouldn't be pro athletes", but really absolutely NOTHING qualifies Sullivan to have any better opinion than any person who watches football on TV.

What was the purpose of this pathetic article?  Manny Lawson is a professional athlete that is working hard on maintaining his career to the best of his ability.  The Bills signed him to a reasonable contract offer for a guy who has a chance to compete for a starting position.  They did not pay him $8M/year.  

I don't read many of Sullivan's articles and when he is on WGR, I almost always change the station after 1 minute and scream at the radio "Shut the F**k up A**hole!"

#18 NewEra

NewEra

    I don't "know", I "think"

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,550 posts

Posted 30 July 2013 - 03:01 PM

View PostTaskersGhost, on 30 July 2013 - 01:29 PM, said:

Lawson was brought here for one reason, he used to play with Mario at NC State.  There is no other reason why he was selected.  He's not a starter.  The team is once again looking for lightning to strike twice.

All we need now is to bring McCargo back for the full compliment of NC State's DL draftee's that year.

He was brought in because he is versatile.  He can rush the passer, defend the run and the pass.  He fits our scheme.  I think your reasoning is ridiculous.

#19 Dorkington

Dorkington

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts

Posted 30 July 2013 - 03:17 PM

Lawson, from what I know, is more a depth player than a full time starter, which I think is the point of some of the complaints.

Personally, I'll just play the "wait and see" game, because I'm not an expert on his past.

#20 uncle flap

uncle flap

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,533 posts

Posted 30 July 2013 - 03:34 PM

View PostTaskersGhost, on 30 July 2013 - 02:35 PM, said:

At least we know who continues to support the elements of the team that continually lose or underperform.

Speaking of which, it's nice to keep track of the Nick Barnett supporters. :nana: