Stadium Wall vs Buffalo News/

[wardigital]

Football is a very popular sport, and thus subject to the admittance of lots of yahoos into the conversation, even more so on the internet. The yahoos don't really account for a greater percentage of the posting base here than at any other forum I've ever visited. I do feel like there is a greater degree of rudeness and cynicism that is allowed to go unchecked on this board.

 

I'm a relatively new poster, though I've lurked basically for a decade. Within a week of starting posting here, I was once challenged to what I guess would be some sort of "verbal duel" and a second time told my small number of posts meant my opinion didn't have any value.

 

I'm not advocating moderators here, but I will say that I consider myself a new and productive poster who has been deterred by the ****ty attitudes of some folks, not all.

 

The saying is, I'd rather be around 100 boobs before 1 !@#$. This applies to at least two scenarios in life.

 

Well good for you. But me? I'm a fan (that's short for fanatic) of the Buffalo Bills, my home town team. I do take to heart the negative comments that are made, be it nationally, locally, and even here on this site. The Bills are part of my family, and just like I would be upset if someone said negative things about one of my family members, it is the same with the Bills. Dog one of us and you dog all of us.

 

 

Good post.

 

I feel like the whole "we're not casual fans, so we don't count!" argument is sort of weird.

 

We post on a message board so we can't be considered casual fans.

 

So we talk to people at games, but people who buy tickets and go to games aren't casual fans, because they don't spend the money to do that.

 

So we talk to people who watch the games at home, but people who watch the games every week at home aren't casual fans, because they don't spend the time to do that.

 

And then you realize that its sort of a silly idea to try and measure the "casual fan". Would the "casual fan" be reading Mike Harrington's newspaper article? It doesn't seem like a very casual fan thing to do.

 

If the casual fan is comfortably disengaged with the team, then they aren't really important in terms of whether or not they care about the Miami Dolphins.

[MClem06]

I read this post and heard Bible music in my head and read it like a 70 year old reverend. Try it out... it's pretty funny. CAN I GET AN AMEN.... MMMMMMMMMHHHHHHHHHMMMMM..

 

Seriously though, Buffalo news sucks. They are a bunch of hacks and i agree that there is more information that i want to read on this board because your (all of you) opinions and facts are more interesting than someone that somehow can call themselves a true buffalonian after badmouthing the team.

[Special K]

well, if they can dish it out to sportswriters with an all-too-generalizing sweep of a brush, then i guess i'm free to respond in kind. to be fair, i did have one positive post in suggesting Bills fans have a chance to be No. 1 at something. why shoot for second?

 

jw

 

I'm not one of those people that take personal offense to anything negative that a sportswriter writes about the Bills....you guys get paid to give your opinions--that's a sweet job.

 

All I was pointing out was the fact that you are partaking in the same behavior that you are complaining about.

[notwoz]

reading some of these threads reminds me of this Monty Python skit

[Peevo]

The argument about taking negative Bills/Sabres articles personally has raged on this board for weeks.

 

I know people dont like hearing negative things, but I think Harrington makes a very fair point. They farmed out the the so called "biggest" team rivalry game to TORONTO.

 

I barely remember the Marino/Kelly games. Even the playoff game in 1998 is fuzzy, I was 11 at the time.

 

Are we gonna have News burning parties like they did when they ran the story about how a majority of the City Grill shooting victims had criminal records? The News should never have apologized for that. It's a relevant story that was important, and based in fact.

 

I'm sure it wasn't what the families' suffering wanted to hear, but it doesn't make it less true.

 

While I concede that the comparison is a bit apples/oranges, considering that News story was fact based, and Harrington's column is opinion, but I think you guys get the point.

[wardigital]

I was 11 for the 98 playoff game too. The first offensive play for the Bills was a play action bomb to Moulds that connected and he then fumbled it away, right?

That game was a roller coaster.

[Like A Mofo]

Is it just me or does anyone else think the local media should be trying to maybe drum up a little hype to help support the team instead of trying to convince people they shouldn't care?

 

 

 

Or to sell papers or have more people read their website.

 

Either way, it seems to be working.

 

Hate it? Don't buy it or click it.

[Rico]

Or to sell papers or have more people read their website.

 

Either way, it seems to be working.

 

Hate it? Don't buy it or click it.

I think they should add a Pollyanna dipsh%# just for laughs, the readers' comments would be pretty funny.

[Delete This Account]

I'm not one of those people that take personal offense to anything negative that a sportswriter writes about the Bills....you guys get paid to give your opinions--that's a sweet job.

 

All I was pointing out was the fact that you are partaking in the same behavior that you are complaining about.

i don't have any trouble with you, and i'm not referring to you here in this post, but note that i don't provide opinions. i write as objectively as anyone can in pointing out what i see.

 

the trouble i have is when some posters simply trash my colleagues for trashing's sake, and suggest that perhaps a newspaper should be shuttered. what's the point of that?

too often, some posters here believe they have free reign in discussing their opinions without being challenged. well, i've challenged them by pointing out that they are mere drivel-ridden yahoos, who think they're adding to a discussion.

if they don't like the stories, they don't have to read them. and better still, maybe write a letter to the editor. to go on anonymously bashing people that i know that work hard for a living and provide their own perspectives is pretty cowardly.

 

i know hacks, and some posters on this board don't even measure up to that standard. so, as a member of this board, isn't it fair to call them out for bringing down the discussion to the level of a pre-schooler. saying something or someone "sucks" is easy. explaining that in a well thought out post is another.

 

funny thing is, the yahoos can't see the irony that as much as they don't like the paper, they're still reading it. otherwise, why would they be posting about it.

 

jw

[gomper]

The News is a joke....Disesare might be the worst writer at a paper that's had their share....this site is light years beyond whatever the News manages to spit out...props to all who post here...you guys and girls make this place the envy of every fan site in the country.....keep up the good work...

[JohnC]

i don't have any trouble with you, and i'm not referring to you here in this post, but note that i don't provide opinions. i write as objectively as anyone can in pointing out what i see.

 

the trouble i have is when some posters simply trash my colleagues for trashing's sake, and suggest that perhaps a newspaper should be shuttered. what's the point of that?

too often, some posters here believe they have free reign in discussing their opinions without being challenged. well, i've challenged them by pointing out that they are mere drivel-ridden yahoos, who think they're adding to a discussion.

if they don't like the stories, they don't have to read them. and better still, maybe write a letter to the editor. to go on anonymously bashing people that i know that work hard for a living and provide their own perspectives is pretty cowardly.

 

i know hacks, and some posters on this board don't even measure up to that standard. so, as a member of this board, isn't it fair to call them out for bringing down the discussion to the level of a pre-schooler. saying something or someone "sucks" is easy. explaining that in a well thought out post is another.

 

funny thing is, the yahoos can't see the irony that as much as they don't like the paper, they're still reading it. otherwise, why would they be posting about it.

 

jw

 

Probably more than 90% of the NFL analysts or whatever you want to call someone who reports on the league have predicted that the Bills will have a very difficult upcoming season. The overwhelmingly, if not all, reporters have no personal axe to grind regarding this franchise. I suspect that many of the reporters/analysts do want to see the Bills finally come out of their funk and move up the ranks.

 

There are too many fans who are too emotionally tied up with the team and its performances. They are too ready to feel slighted when a negative opinion of the team and its prospects are given. They personalize criticism instead of consider the validity or non-validity of the criticisms.

 

There are some intense posters who feel that one is betraying the family when one is critical of the franchise. It is not so. Being passionate about something doesn't mean that one should respond in a mean-spirited way when disputing a position.

 

I am not going to agree with everything jw posts. And he certainly is not going to agree with everything I post. But I certainly respect his responses (even the very acerbic ones).

Even when his level of irritiation has been elevated I don't get the sense that he is being rude. I can't say the same for some other posters.

[notwoz]

Probably more than 90% of the NFL analysts or whatever you want to call someone who reports on the league have predicted that the Bills will have a very difficult upcoming season. The overwhelmingly, if not all, reporters have no personal axe to grind regarding this franchise. I suspect that many of the reporters/analysts do want to see the Bills finally come out of their funk and move up the ranks.

 

There are too many fans who are too emotionally tied up with the team and its performances. They are too ready to feel slighted when a negative opinion of the team and its prospects are given. They personalize criticism instead of consider the validity or non-validity of the criticisms.

 

There are some intense posters who feel that one is betraying the family when one is critical of the franchise. It is not so. Being passionate about something doesn't mean that one should respond in a mean-spirited way when disputing a position.

 

I am not going to agree with everything jw posts. And he certainly is not going to agree with everything I post. But I certainly respect his responses (even the very acerbic ones).

Even when his level of irritiation has been elevated I don't get the sense that he is being rude. I can't say the same for some other posters.

[Cookiemonster]

Buffalo media seems to be the only non-homer media in the league. Even Philly media can be supportive once in a while and craft credible arguments for the Sixers to be in the NBA playoffs and Kolb performing better than McNabb is his first year.

Gotta agree, my brother lives in South Florida, and he is always quoting articles from the Herald and Sun-Sentinel,

where they are gushing about their team, even when they suck. Time to get some fair and un-balanced reporting from

our dish rag.

[Kelly the Dog]

Probably more than 90% of the NFL analysts or whatever you want to call someone who reports on the league have predicted that the Bills will have a very difficult upcoming season. The overwhelmingly, if not all, reporters have no personal axe to grind regarding this franchise. I suspect that many of the reporters/analysts do want to see the Bills finally come out of their funk and move up the ranks.

 

There are too many fans who are too emotionally tied up with the team and its performances. They are too ready to feel slighted when a negative opinion of the team and its prospects are given. They personalize criticism instead of consider the validity or non-validity of the criticisms.

 

The question, to me, is the amount of homework done. It's virtually impossible for a national reporter, columnist, analyst, etc, to follow every team the way we rabid fans do. Even the best ones. So it's asking a little too much to know the nuances of why EACH team failed the past season, how they may have improved in the off season, how all of the starters looked in camp and pre-season, etc. Combine this with, the general fan in the league does not want to know anything about the Bills unless they are winning, or unless they have a star player they care about. The Bills don't have either of those.

 

If they were to spend the requisite amount of time studying the Bills and the intricacies of why they have failed and what they have done to improve it, they would be worse at their jobs according to their bosses, because Joe Public really doesn't give a crap about the Bills, unless they are winning, or have stars they care about making spectacular plays.

 

That said, if these guys are going to know nothing about the team, other than a few players, that they hired Chan Gailey a retread, and didn't address their most glaring weaknesses, and just automatically put down the team knowing nothing about them or saying nothing with any insight as to why they will continue to suck, they are not really doing anything. They are mailing in their evaluation of the rest of the league and just writing for the lowest common denominator. It's pretty easy to tell who knows something and who doesn't when they write about the Bills, whether or not they are predicting we will suck.

 

But if a columnist or writer acknowledges the changes in the culture and locker room and coaching and playcalling and yet still comes to the conclusion it was too great a hill to climb in one year and we still may be going through growing pains, that is a very legitimate and realistic stance to take. It's also very easy to separate those types from the know nothing types.

 

So if they do their homework and have good reasons to say we suck, that's cool, and cool with me. It's just a prediction anyway. That's what makes sports great, and dramatic. But if they are just going to say we suck because they know nothing about the team or what they are doing, changing, etc, they should be exposed and denigrated as frauds.

Edited September 8, 2010 by Kelly the Fair and Balanced Dog

[Delete This Account]

Probably more than 90% of the NFL analysts or whatever you want to call someone who reports on the league have predicted that the Bills will have a very difficult upcoming season. The overwhelmingly, if not all, reporters have no personal axe to grind regarding this franchise. I suspect that many of the reporters/analysts do want to see the Bills finally come out of their funk and move up the ranks.

 

There are too many fans who are too emotionally tied up with the team and its performances. They are too ready to feel slighted when a negative opinion of the team and its prospects are given. They personalize criticism instead of consider the validity or non-validity of the criticisms.

 

There are some intense posters who feel that one is betraying the family when one is critical of the franchise. It is not so. Being passionate about something doesn't mean that one should respond in a mean-spirited way when disputing a position.

 

I am not going to agree with everything jw posts. And he certainly is not going to agree with everything I post. But I certainly respect his responses (even the very acerbic ones).

Even when his level of irritiation has been elevated I don't get the sense that he is being rude. I can't say the same for some other posters.

well put, JohnC.

 

jw

[JohnC]

The question, to me, is the amount of homework done. It's virtually impossible for a national reporter, columnist, analyst, etc, to follow every team the way we rabid fans do. Even the best ones. So it's asking a little too much to know the nuances of why EACH team failed the past season, how they may have improved in the off season, how all of the starters looked in camp and pre-season, etc. Combine this with, the general fan in the league does not want to know anything about the Bills unless they are winning, or unless they have a star player they care about. The Bills don't have either of those.

 

If they were to spend the requisite amount of time studying the Bills and the intricacies of why they have failed and what they have done to improve it, they would be worse at their jobs according to their bosses, because Joe Public really doesn't give a crap about the Bills, unless they are winning, or have stars they care about making spectacular plays.

 

That said, if these guys are going to know nothing about the team, other than a few players, that they hired Chan Gailey a retread, and didn't address their most glaring weaknesses, and just automatically put down the team knowing nothing about them or saying nothing with any insight as to why they will continue to suck, they are not really doing anything. They are mailing in their evaluation of the rest of the league and just writing for the lowest common denominator. It's pretty easy to tell who knows something and who doesn't when they write about the Bills, whether or not they are predicting we will suck.

 

But if a columnist or writer acknowledges the changes in the culture and locker room and coaching and playcalling and yet still comes to the conclusion it was too great a hill to climb in one year and we still may be going through growing pains, that is a very legitimate and realistic stance to take. It's also very easy to separate those types from the know nothing types.

 

So if they do their homework and have good reasons to say we suck, that's cool, and cool with me. It's just a prediction anyway. That's what makes sports great, and dramatic. But if they are just going to say we suck because they know nothing about the team or what they are doing, changing, etc, they should be exposed and denigrated as frauds.

 

You make a terrific point that you can accept criticism if it is based on actual research and examination by the respective critics. The reality of the NFL and the media operatives is that more attention is going to be paid and more effort is going to be put into the more relevant and competitive teams. That is a fact of life in all sports. The Lakers are going to get more coverage and scrutiny than the Milwaukee Bucks. Miami with the addition of LeBron is certainly going to get more attention and commentary than Sacramento.

 

The Bills are not going to be examined solely on this year. The Bills have been in a shambles for a decade. When assessing a team the past, especially the near past, is part of the evaluation equation. NFL analysts look at teams and consider not only what is presently being done to the team but where the team is at and how far do they have to go.

 

When the Bills were very good and fun to watch during the Polian years and the four consecutive SB run they did receive a lot of national coverage and scrutiny. During that period of time I was in Moscow and saw a teenager in a Jim Kelly and Buffalo Bills jersey. That wouldn't happen now because the Bills are at this point a very non-descript team.

 

In general, I think Nix/Gailey are on track. But they are starting at a very low point. No matter how loyal a fan one is you can't fairly say that they are a team at the stage of playoff consideration. Maybe in a couple of years if the front office smartly manages this franchise the team will receive the attention it deserves. Right now we are where we are.

Edited September 8, 2010 by JohnC

[flomoe]

For what it's worth, Harrington has been with the News since the '80s, so he's not new to this rivalry.

 

Thanks. I didn't know because I honestly don't remember him when I was living up there. Regardless, he is still a moron. I swear, from what I read around here, that some of the local media in Buffalo could care less if there is a football team there or not.

 

 

 

BTW, I was just talking to a few friends down here in Florida about the Bills game you mention in your signature. It was a pretty vivid memory for me. Very interesting weather to say the least.

[Ramius]

The question, to me, is the amount of homework done. It's virtually impossible for a national reporter, columnist, analyst, etc, to follow every team the way we rabid fans do. Even the best ones. So it's asking a little too much to know the nuances of why EACH team failed the past season, how they may have improved in the off season, how all of the starters looked in camp and pre-season, etc. Combine this with, the general fan in the league does not want to know anything about the Bills unless they are winning, or unless they have a star player they care about. The Bills don't have either of those.

 

If they were to spend the requisite amount of time studying the Bills and the intricacies of why they have failed and what they have done to improve it, they would be worse at their jobs according to their bosses, because Joe Public really doesn't give a crap about the Bills, unless they are winning, or have stars they care about making spectacular plays.

 

That said, if these guys are going to know nothing about the team, other than a few players, that they hired Chan Gailey a retread, and didn't address their most glaring weaknesses, and just automatically put down the team knowing nothing about them or saying nothing with any insight as to why they will continue to suck, they are not really doing anything. They are mailing in their evaluation of the rest of the league and just writing for the lowest common denominator. It's pretty easy to tell who knows something and who doesn't when they write about the Bills, whether or not they are predicting we will suck.

 

But if a columnist or writer acknowledges the changes in the culture and locker room and coaching and playcalling and yet still comes to the conclusion it was too great a hill to climb in one year and we still may be going through growing pains, that is a very legitimate and realistic stance to take. It's also very easy to separate those types from the know nothing types.

 

So if they do their homework and have good reasons to say we suck, that's cool, and cool with me. It's just a prediction anyway. That's what makes sports great, and dramatic. But if they are just going to say we suck because they know nothing about the team or what they are doing, changing, etc, they should be exposed and denigrated as frauds.

 

Great post. What irks me are the pot shots that a lot of "reporters" take at the team. Its things like that which wear me thin. As you stated, its fairly easy to distinguish between the guys who actually tried to put in some time and the guys who merely glossed over, saw we didn't draft a LT or QB with our #1 pick, and predict us to go 1-15. But there are an awful lot of sports types who simply take cheap shots for no good reason.

 

A good example was on NFL network last night during their 4 downs segment. They were talking about Spiller being named #1, and one guy predicted Spiller would win ROY. Another guy stated that if Spiller won ROY, he should win the offensive player of the year, because it would take a hell of an effort to put up huge numbers running behind our line. That was a fair assessment. But them Jaime Dukes pipes in something to the effect of, "Even if Spiller runs for 1600 yards, the Bills are still going to go 3-16 (yes he said 3-16) because that team is so terrible." I mean, really? Is that type of pot shot necessary from a supposed league analyst?

 

The dearth of posts from some of the original and older (not agewise) posters is indicative of this. Everyone has a right to be a fan, but you can't make an objective point about the team without a subjective homer fan railing on them for not being a true fan. I think this is going to be a long season.

 

What about guys who simply spend every single post stating how the Bills are terrible, everything they do is wrong, and that Ralph and "Smithers" suck? Or thats right, they laughably call themselves, "realists".

[Delete This Account]

Thanks. I didn't know because I honestly don't remember him when I was living up there. Regardless, he is still a moron.

an example of what i find wrong with this board.

 

Great post. What irks me are the pot shots that a lot of "reporters" take at the team. Its things like that which wear me thin. As you stated, its fairly easy to distinguish between the guys who actually tried to put in some time and the guys who merely glossed over, saw we didn't draft a LT or QB with our #1 pick, and predict us to go 1-15. But there are an awful lot of sports types who simply take cheap shots for no good reason.

 

A good example was on NFL network last night during their 4 downs segment. They were talking about Spiller being named #1, and one guy predicted Spiller would win ROY. Another guy stated that if Spiller won ROY, he should win the offensive player of the year, because it would take a hell of an effort to put up huge numbers running behind our line. That was a fair assessment. But them Jaime Dukes pipes in something to the effect of, "Even if Spiller runs for 1600 yards, the Bills are still going to go 3-16 (yes he said 3-16) because that team is so terrible." I mean, really? Is that type of pot shot necessary from a supposed league analyst?

 

 

 

What about guys who simply spend every single post stating how the Bills are terrible, everything they do is wrong, and that Ralph and "Smithers" suck? Or thats right, they laughably call themselves, "realists".

and an example of what's right, how Ramius and KTFBD, took it upon it themselves to actually steer this into a sensible discussion.

 

jw

Edited September 8, 2010 by john wawrow

[bills44]

 

and an example of what's right, how Ramius and KTFBD, took it upon it themselves to actually steer this into a sensible discussion.

 

jw

 

you should go back and re-read some of your posts in this thread. bit hypocritical, IMO

 

b44