GG Posted February 1, 2014 Posted February 1, 2014 It's FAR too late for that. Why we debate the journalistic merits of Tim Graham or Jerry Sullivan on the football section of TSW is beyond me. I think there is a considerable amount of career envy in many of those critiques though. I wouldn't call it career envy. It's more of a critique of a job poorly done. Anyhow, the reason I'm discussing Tim graham is that the OP has him in the title.
jimmy10 Posted February 1, 2014 Posted February 1, 2014 Timmy, you're no Hunter S. Thompson. Try to extract yourself from the story. "Me, me, me! *I* spoke truth to power!!!" Barf.
BADOLBILZ Posted February 1, 2014 Posted February 1, 2014 I wouldn't call it career envy. It's more of a critique of a job poorly done. Anyhow, the reason I'm discussing Tim graham is that the OP has him in the title. Do you subscribe to The Buffalo News?
DJasper Probincrux III Posted February 1, 2014 Posted February 1, 2014 Do you subscribe to The Buffalo News? I did for a while but it's hard to wipe my ass with my phone/laptop so I stopped. No I don't. +1
Delete This Account Posted February 1, 2014 Posted February 1, 2014 Jim Kelly would have punched him. actually, Jim Kelly and most if not all Hall of Famers never merited being asked that question at this point in their respective careers. jw
KOKBILLS Posted February 1, 2014 Posted February 1, 2014 .And to be clear I'm not at all satisfied with EJ's rookie year. However, since we all know the Bills WON'T draft a QB in the first round the question is rendered moot and is thus trolling. Next year maybe you can legitimately ask that. This year? Nope. Some Bills fans might not be happy about it...I'm certain many will disagree...But I think you pretty much nailed it on the head... The Bills are not going to Draft a QB high and everyone knows it...They fully intend on giving EJ another year, and everyone knows that too...We can certainly argue whether or not it's smart for them to do so...And I'm sure we will...But posing the question to EJ like that was nothing more than trying to dig up something that is not there...And furthermore asking the single person who would be most opposed to Drafting a QB high, even though everyone knows they're not going to do it regardless...Well...It's just dumb...And granted that's just my opinion...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted February 1, 2014 Posted February 1, 2014 Either way, the answer to your question is NO. I'm sure his doctors who see many many patients aren't nearly as concerned about his knee as the doctors for the Buffalo Bills or the specialists they hire that are concerned with profession athletes (especially Quarterbacks). When I tore a chunk of meniscus in my knee last spring, the orthopedist I saw is one of the team doctors for the St Louis Rams, all kind of signed posters jerseys and memorabilia from pro and amateur athletes all over his walls. I would be damn p***ed if he wasn't as concerned about my knee as about the knee of one of his professional athlete patients, and it would be unethical of him to not be as concerned. I think he is ethical. That said, there is no "one size fits all" treatment - there are always judgement calls, and fitting the treatment to the circumstance. I had no time pressure to heal, so his recommendation "this is a minor tear and studies show 80% of patients with a tear like this heal with a cortisone shot, PT, and 6 months time" worked fine for me but would not be right for a pro athlete who needs to get back on the field. If that's what you mean - that pro athletes get treated more aggressively to minimize healing time and get more PT and ancillary treatment vs the 2x a week I got - sure, I agree, they get a higher level of service there. (Believe it or not, sports team doctors see many many patients other than the athletes of their team)
DJasper Probincrux III Posted February 1, 2014 Posted February 1, 2014 actually, Jim Kelly and most if not all Hall of Famers never merited being asked that question at this point in their respective careers. jw After the collapse and garbage play at the end of the 1987 season that caused the Bills to miss the playoffs it could have been asked. It wasn't but it could have been.
GG Posted February 1, 2014 Posted February 1, 2014 After the collapse and garbage play at the end of the 1987 season that caused the Bills to miss the playoffs it could have been asked. It wasn't but it could have been. Thurman asked it....
DJasper Probincrux III Posted February 1, 2014 Posted February 1, 2014 (edited) Thurman asked it.... That was 1989 - and if the Twittersphere would have existed that season there would have been apocalypse Edited February 1, 2014 by DJasper Probincrux III
Kelly the Dog Posted February 1, 2014 Posted February 1, 2014 Actually, all of our favorite Bills of all time were dicks off the field their first few years, Kelly, Thurman, Bruce, Andre. The one who wasn't? OJ.
GG Posted February 1, 2014 Posted February 1, 2014 That was 1989 - and if the Twittersphere would have existed that season there would have been apocalypse True. But for fair comparison, we should look at Kelly in 1986, when he was the most frustrating QB. You saw the flashes of potential, but he had the knack of throwing critical ints in clutch time.
DJasper Probincrux III Posted February 1, 2014 Posted February 1, 2014 True. But for fair comparison, we should look at Kelly in 1986, when he was the most frustrating QB. You saw the flashes of potential, but he had the knack of throwing critical ints in clutch time. I went 87 because the new car smell had worn off by then. In 86 everyone was still just happy he was here.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted February 1, 2014 Posted February 1, 2014 (edited) i have no issue with how Tim explained how the first part went. it's not his fault that EJ was pulled away before Tim could explain himself and bring the discussion to its logical conclusion. if EJ took offense to it without allowing time for an explanation then that's not entirely on Tim. as Tim tried to begin explaining, he said, "I do," and then attempted to begin explaining himself by saying he does because quarterback is the most important position on the team, and one that's been unfilled. (...) now sure why the media is being faulted here for asking questions and providing responses that have been raised and discussed on this board for quite some time. John, with respect, I think you're giving a fellow journalist a bit too much of a pass here. I don't hold a brief for the folks who are doling out the personal insults, I do understand where some folks are coming from though. We all know media works in sound bites. If Tim wants to inject himself and his own opinions into an interview, he needs to do so in a manner that does not require additional explanations if he wants to be productive. Lead off with "It's the most important position on the team, I think we should keep drafting until someone steps up and shows he's The Man" or something, not just "I do". The media is being faulted, by me and by some here, for providing responses - TG injecting himself into the story. I don't think that's the job of an interviewer to provide his opinions, even if his question is reflected back by the athlete. It's the interviewer's job to ask the questions. As some have pointed out, Tim could have stuck to his job by turning the question back on EJ "What do you think you need to do in this upcoming season to silence the fans who think we should pick a QB in the 1st again?" The place for inserting the writer's personal response to a question is in an op-ed or opinion piece, not an interview or news story. Just my opinion. Edited February 1, 2014 by Hopeful
DJasper Probincrux III Posted February 1, 2014 Posted February 1, 2014 (edited) As some have pointed out, Tim could have stuck to his job in the face of EJ's question by turning it back on EJ "What do you think you need to do in this upcoming season to silence the fans who think we should?" He could have, but that was never his goal in the first place. With Graham it's a pattern of behavior. When you treat people a certain way over a period of time don't be upset when they file your comments into a certain file regardless of your explanations. Edited February 1, 2014 by DJasper Probincrux III
GG Posted February 1, 2014 Posted February 1, 2014 I went 87 because the new car smell had worn off by then. In 86 everyone was still just happy he was here. Yeah but since we're trying to compare him to EJ, 1986 would be the more appropriate one, no?
Kelly the Dog Posted February 1, 2014 Posted February 1, 2014 (edited) Yeah but since we're trying to compare him to EJ, 1986 would be the more appropriate one, no? Two full years after he had already been a professional QB. Edited February 1, 2014 by Kelly the Dog
DJasper Probincrux III Posted February 1, 2014 Posted February 1, 2014 (edited) Yeah but since we're trying to compare him to EJ, 1986 would be the more appropriate one, no? I guess. The bigger point is that there were several, better, opportunities to ask Jim that question in an equally douchey way and nobody ever did. I'd pay money to watch Graham ask Kelly that question TODAY let alone in 86-87. There's a difference between asking an incisive question and making an ass of yourself. When the time finally comes to tear down the Peace Bridge they should put Graham on the job, he burns bridges like nobody else. Edited February 1, 2014 by DJasper Probincrux III
Delete This Account Posted February 1, 2014 Posted February 1, 2014 John, with respect, I think you're giving a fellow journalist a bit too much of a pass here. We all know media works in sound bites. If Tim wants to inject himself and his own opinions into an interview, he needs to do so in amanner that does not require additional explanations. "It's the most important position on the team, I think we should keep drafting until someone steps up and shows he's The Man" or something, not just "I do". The media is being faulted, by me and by some here, for providing responses. I don't think that's the job of an interviewer to provide his opinions, even if questioned. It's the interviewer's job to ask the questions. As some have pointed out, Tim could have stuck to his job in the face of EJ's question by turning it back on EJ "What do you think you need to do in this upcoming season to silence the fans who think we should?" there is nothing i can say or write here to convince many here anything different.EJ injected the media into the story by asking a question. that he didn't like the answer is not the media's fault. it's the answer that some here might have raised -- or wish they could have. and that's the trick of our jobs, being confrontational. when Alex Mogilny first got to Vancouver, i had a sitdown with him in a restaurant at training camp in whislter. we had a bland discussion that lasted 20 minutes until i ran out of questions. it was at that point, Alex looked up and asked me: "Is that all you want to hear, bull(crap)?" surprised by his bluntness, i said: "no, that's the last thing i need because i'm wasting my time and your time." and then the real interview began and Alex and I got along for the rest of his career because i understood the best way to deal with him was asking blunt questions, some so blunt even other members of the media chided me on. and yet, Alex had no difficulty answering them with a wide smile. i wish many athletes were more like Alex. many aren't. that doesn't preclude us from at times being blunt, especially when EJ has shown a sensitivity by sidestepping questions hinting at doubt. if he can't handle us non-athletic types, what's that say about oncoming defensive ends and linebackers who make far more money than I or Tim at being confrontational? jw
Recommended Posts