cvanvol

I think Sully and Bucky are doing their own show on some other station. Plus it is pretty apparent that Jeremy hates Sully or at the least dislikes him.

It was already researched and posted it isn't a matter of opinion. He said to resign johnson, now he is saying that he didnt say that.

Are you taking crazy pills or am I? Dude the articles have been linked countless times and the direct quotes have been pulled from each. He wrote an entire article advocating to resign Johnson. He then says two years later that they should have let him walk and that he advocated for stevie to be run out of town. You can say FOR SURE that he is lying, I am sure there is another article out there with a little blurb about cutting stevie. I know that because this is what Sullivan does ALL THE TIME. Play both sides of the issue and then when it pans out say that you called it all along. The dudes picture belongs in the dictionary next to Historical Revisionist.

"Two years ago, when I advocated not re-signing Johnson" Maybe you need to read it again....

What??? He directly said in one article that you need to sing him. NO matter if he said he wasnt a true number one he still said that you should resign him. Then the bills did resign him to a nearly identical contract that sully proposed in his article. Now he is saying that he NEVER said that.

I think the lack of optimism directly changes his writing style. All of his articles read like this, exactly the same. Even when the team is good he puts that negativity out there. Just like his constant Mario bashing, if you follow his twitter he bashes mario at least once a game. Then if the team or mario is playing good he will write a mostly positive article with a little cop out worked in that way no matter what happens he can write his inevitable "I told you so" column.

This is exactly how he does it! He states a black and whit opinion and then he adds a line saying "but it could go in the completely opposite direction". Then he is covered either way to say I was right! That is the thing that annoys me the most.

He didnt admit that at all..... did you even read the article?

This is why I dislike Sully. He does this all the time.

Yeah the browns are pretty much in shambles again. They will also likely lose a bunch of those guys off the defensive side of the ball plus they have absolutely no RB play to speak of. They will probably take QB and RB in round one with their two pick and hope that those guys pan out.

anyone got a vid of him in action today?

Would be great for special teams, need a lot of practice and pre season to get a feel for the game

I am all for giving up the Preseason games all over the region.

Nothing. If they wanna see the bills they can drive here. It isnt very far. I would wager to say more Canadians come to games at the Ralph during the season than go to that abomination in Toronto. Why would anyone want to go to that, just because it is close? Maybe, but people like NFL games for the gameday experience which they will never get there

I didnt say that. However I do think that Tomlins punishment should be worse. That Jets S and C coach lost his job. True the NFL didnt do that but I think the 100,000 dollar fine is fitting. I think it would have been more fitting to suspend him for a game though. The talk of losing draft picks is silly though. You shouldnt punish the team directly, but I am fine with suspending the coach a game because that is directly punishing him while indirectly hurting the team.

I can understand that, I think we are in agreement for the most part. I think it was a really good read and it should have been a really good touchdown but Tuel got antsy. I like the call, I love the read and I hate the execution. I still think Hackett is a pretty good OC with an even better OC as our head coach.

Those guys technically had a right to be there, but not to try and trip someone. Tomlin did not have a right to be where he was and in my opinion did interfere with the play.

So you dont think Peyton Manning and Tom Brady are calling entirely different plays at the line? What about when they change the formation entirely or empty the back field?

An audible has no input from the OC because the mic is turned off to the QBs helmet. In this case Jeff was told to run the ball and if he saw a scenario to pass out of the same formation. That is not an audible. An audible would have been Jeff changing the OCs playcall. It wasnt changed.

I dont think it really matters..... The OC gave him the ability to do what he saw after the Mic in the helmet was turned off. Jeff made the right read in both situations as he should have. However I would argue that this is not an audible as it was laid out for him before the mic was turned off. In a true audible situation the OC has no input whatsoever and the QB must make the choice to change to another play without the input of the OC. If the OC says hey run the ball and throw it if you see this I would not consider that to be an audible.

I agree with your last statement. It was a read. He made the right read to pass the ball. But then in your first paragraph you said it wasn't a read and react decision for the QB..... when it most definitely was. I agree with this

I cant tell if this post is actually sarcastic or not.... if it is I am sorry for letting it go way over my head What???? It was quoted in the articles that you mentioned that the play had that option!

http://www.hogshaven.com/2012/10/23/3544066/evolution-of-the-east-coast-offense-run-pass-option Guys it wasnt a called run or a called pass. It is a run pass option! It allows the QB to read the defense and make the proper judgement! Yes! That is exactly what I am saying! Pay attention to football and you would see that a lot of teams at every single level are doing this.

However if a play can be a run or a pass based off of a pre-snap read it is not an audible.

Huh? Bandits article points that it isn't an audible......