Jump to content


Photo

Mr Sunshine Sully Sullivan at it again


  • Please log in to reply
88 replies to this topic

#41 Shaw66

Shaw66

    Practice Squad

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 247 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 01:56 PM

Nice job by Sully.   At least he's recognizing that he's always negative.   

 

Here's something he said that bothers me, not so much about Sully but about everyone who comments on the Bills, including us here:

 

"I'm a little confused about the structure," I said. "McDermott and Beane both answer to Pegula, but the new Sabres coach will answer to Botterill. Can't the Pegulas pick a model and stick with it? They make it up as they go along."

 

That's just a lot of BS.   We all seem to think we're qualified to criticize every aspect of the Bills organization.   Look, teams organize themselves in all different ways.  Most of the teams don't win the Super Bowl.   Teams that DO win the Super Bowl are organized in different ways.   Sully, and others who question this kind of stuff, never coached a football team, never was a GM, never owned a team, never did ANYTHING that would make his opinion about the management structure meaningful.  It's just BS. 

 

Listen to the Peter King interview on the John Murphy show.   For about five minutes he stumbles around talking about whether the McDermott/Beane combination will result in breaking the playoff drought.   He struggles to say something meaningful and all he says is "how the hell do I know?"   He says different combinations have worked or not worked in different settings.   No one knows.   He likes that McD and Beane worked together, but that doesn't mean anything in terms of wins when the season starts.   McD was a great hire or a bad one, Beane was a great hire or a bad one, the reporting structure is a great one or a bad one.   

 

No one knows. 



#42 ndirish1978

ndirish1978

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,372 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 01:58 PM

Please don't link to his articles. I make it a point specifically to never click on his stuff. If you don't like his stuff, don't support him being employed by TBN by not adding to his click count 



#43 ScottLaw

ScottLaw

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,965 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 02:00 PM

I think the point about Sully is; he constantly writes the same theme in his articles - over & over & over.
99% of us want a fresh approach to a Sports Columnist in Buffalo.
His shtick is just negative & boring. He might be right about some stuff with the Bills & Sabres, but how obvious is that!
Just because he gets clicks because we hate is guts, doesn't mean he's a good writer. WAKE UP BFLO NEWS!


It really wasn't that negative.

His point was wait and see how this plays out. It's a good approach after years of constant losing. How is it negative?

"It's got to the point where base competence looks like genius to Buffalo fans."
 
 
He's not wrong.


No he's not.

And he's not wrong about Bills fans buying whatever the Bills sell them.

#44 bbb

bbb

    UDFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,348 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 02:04 PM

http://buffalonews.c...t-bills-sabres/

 

 

Old reliable is back.  He is advocating a retread to run the team.  If they had hired a retread he would advocate fresh blood.  I don't know how his editor doesn't hand him back this article and tell him to try a fresh approach. 

after all the Editor keeps buying the same trash

 

I know Rex Carr.  Decent guy..
 



#45 PromoTheRobot

PromoTheRobot

    Gug, you're #1 in my book.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,739 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 02:06 PM

No he's not.

And he's not wrong about Bills fans buying whatever the Bills sell them.

 

It's a snarky way of referring to fan support. Everyone isn't a sourpuss like him.



#46 QCity

QCity

    GM

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,011 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 02:11 PM

Please don't link to his articles. I make it a point specifically to never click on his stuff. If you don't like his stuff, don't support him being employed by TBN by not adding to his click count 

 

I just want to point out that TBN works on a subscription based model. While they do have ads, whether you click on articles or not isn't going to impact a TBN writer in the least. It's not going to change his salary, this isn't Bleacher Report.



#47 PromoTheRobot

PromoTheRobot

    Gug, you're #1 in my book.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,739 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 02:13 PM

 

I just want to point out that TBN works on a subscription based model. While they do have ads, whether you click on articles or not isn't going to impact a TBN writer in the least. It's not going to change his salary, this isn't Bleacher Report.

 

I swore the Buffalo News ages ago. The only way I even know anything about them is when a thread appears at TBD.



#48 QCity

QCity

    GM

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,011 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 02:16 PM

 

I swore the Buffalo News ages ago. The only way I even know anything about them is when a thread appears at TBD.

 

I'm pretty sure if you don't have a sub you can't read the articles anyway. Maybe they give you the first 10 for free or something? But yeah, if you want to voice your displeasure then cancel your subscription. The whole "I'm not going to click on the articles" thing is just silly in this case. 



#49 PromoTheRobot

PromoTheRobot

    Gug, you're #1 in my book.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,739 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 02:18 PM

 

I'm pretty sure if you don't have a sub you can't read the articles anyway. Maybe they give you the first 10 for free or something? But yeah, if you want to voice your displeasure then cancel your subscription. The whole "I'm not going to click on the articles" thing is just silly in this case. 

 

It's 10 free/month, but you get a fresh 10 if you use a different device. Like I said, I don't bother anymore.



#50 ndirish1978

ndirish1978

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,372 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 02:18 PM

 

I just want to point out that TBN works on a subscription based model. While they do have ads, whether you click on articles or not isn't going to impact a TBN writer in the least. It's not going to change his salary, this isn't Bleacher Report.

 

You can absolutely read his articles without a subscription and you're kidding yourself if you think they don't take views into account when evaluating writers; it's half the reason why half of their writers just make ridiculous whiny comments on twitter, to drive traffic to their pages. 



#51 QCity

QCity

    GM

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,011 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 02:47 PM

 

You can absolutely read his articles without a subscription and you're kidding yourself if you think they don't take views into account when evaluating writers; it's half the reason why half of their writers just make ridiculous whiny comments on twitter, to drive traffic to their pages. 

 

Lack of views isn't going to change his salary. He's not going to lose his job and he's certainly not going to change his tone. Again, it's not going to impact him at all. You want to get their attention? Start cancelling subscriptions en masse. 



#52 oldmanfan

oldmanfan

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 815 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 02:51 PM

 
Lack of views isn't going to change his salary. He's not going to lose his job and he's certainly not going to change his tone. Again, it's not going to impact him at all. You want to get their attention? Start cancelling subscriptions en masse. 


You really want their attention contact advertisers and tell them you won't use their products

#53 4_kidd_4

4_kidd_4

    Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 402 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 02:56 PM

"Yeah hello, Northtown Subaru?? Yes, hi, I will NEVER buy a car from you so long as Jerry Sullivan works for the Buffalo News!!"

lollercoaster ensues.

maybe even a lolcano.

"And consider yourself ON NOTICE Andersen's Custard!!"

Edited by 4_kidd_4, 17 May 2017 - 02:57 PM.


#54 LABillzFan

LABillzFan

    Plan Ahea!!!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 35,393 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 03:14 PM

The most annoying trend you see from people like Sully and Timmah! Graham any more is their need to insert themselves into their articles.

 

It's no longer a story about the Bills, but rather a story about them talking about the Bills. Timmah posted an article early this week that was written specifically to get people to say one of two things: either "Timmah doesn't know what he's talking about" or "You just don't understand Timmah."

 

He's like the Donald Trump of sports writers. You know what he's supposed to be doing, but then the words come out, you shake your head and wonder "How long does the body survive after that ego is put to death?"
 



#55 Sandy McFiddish

Sandy McFiddish

    Practice Squad

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 138 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 03:26 PM

I refused to read the article but that comment Rex made to him was on of my favorite Rex one liners, those I will miss. 



#56 Stormin Norman

Stormin Norman

    Practice Squad

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 107 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 03:54 PM

Help me understand this obsession with beating up on Sully.

 

The Bills in particular have been pathetic as an organization for almost two decades.  For those of us who remember the Bills of, say, 1988 through 1996, we know what a well-run organization looks like - from front office to coaching to players.  Over the last 17 years we have witnessed bumbling and stumbling of epoch proportions including a coach quitting and getting a $4 million golden parachute, firing an offensive coordinator the week of the season opener, half the team acquired via free agency, horrific drafts and draft decisions, and poor to mediocre won-loss records as reliable as the sun coming up.

 

Sullivan expresses skepticism at nearly every decision the organization makes because the Bills have EARNED it.  (And so have the Sabres for a shorter period of time.)  In this article, he has basically said the recent hires look GOOD ON PAPER - but they have collectively proven nothing.  That's wrong?

 

For those of you wanting to put lipstick on this pig, it's been 17 YEARS!  The most relevant example of the word "inept" that I can think of.  Criticize Sullivan when they are winning and he is still critical.  He hasn't had the opportunity to do that in almost 20 years.

 

 



#57 billsfanmiami(oh)

billsfanmiami(oh)

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,990 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 04:09 PM

Amazing that he gets paid for this "work". Quit reading about 1/3 of the way in not because I disagree with his point, but because it was just a terrible attempt at something different.

#58 ScottLaw

ScottLaw

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,965 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 04:11 PM

Help me understand this obsession with beating up on Sully.
 
The Bills in particular have been pathetic as an organization for almost two decades.  For those of us who remember the Bills of, say, 1988 through 1996, we know what a well-run organization looks like - from front office to coaching to players.  Over the last 17 years we have witnessed bumbling and stumbling of epoch proportions including a coach quitting and getting a $4 million golden parachute, firing an offensive coordinator the week of the season opener, half the team acquired via free agency, horrific drafts and draft decisions, and poor to mediocre won-loss records as reliable as the sun coming up.
 
Sullivan expresses skepticism at nearly every decision the organization makes because the Bills have EARNED it.  (And so have the Sabres for a shorter period of time.)  In this article, he has basically said the recent hires look GOOD ON PAPER - but they have collectively proven nothing.  That's wrong?
 
For those of you wanting to put lipstick on this pig, it's been 17 YEARS!  The most relevant example of the word "inept" that I can think of.  Criticize Sullivan when they are winning and he is still critical.  He hasn't had the opportunity to do that in almost 20 years.
 
 


Well said.

#59 teef

teef

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 891 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 04:19 PM

meh.  it's easy to be negative about the bills.  any d-bag can do it.  i don't care about sully one way or the other, but i honestly almost never, ever read him.



#60 notwoz

notwoz

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 772 posts

Posted 17 May 2017 - 04:40 PM

Sullivan's schtick is to be a contrarian: You say it's sunny, he says we need the rain. As another poster said, he picked on the new hires because they're inexperienced. If the Bills (and Sabres) had picked a retread, he would have said the team needs new blood. As a former journalist, I know his shite works, because it stirs up controversy and people complain about everything he writes. It's a time-tested tradition.
 
Granted, he's had a fertile field to harvest for so many years, given all the missteps and bad hires and stupid drafts/trades, but I also realize that it's a very lazy way to do his job. He doesn't care because he collects a (probably more-than-decent) salary. The News doesn't care because he generates clicks. But the sad truth is he isn't going away anytime soon, because if he was so good, he would have been hired by a big market publication. So we are stuck with him.
 
I'll end here because I need another glass of wine.