vegas55 Posted September 16, 2014 Posted September 16, 2014 Among the dumbest things negative Nancy constantly does is refer back to Bills teams in the past as if they have any bearing on the 2014 team. Sullivan is constantly referencing "same old Bills" and the miscues of players, coaches and front office personal who are no longer associated with the team, as if there is some relevance to today's team. In today's column, in commenting on the crossing route passes thrown to Watkins, he write " weren't we screaming for "them" to throw crossing route passes to Lee Evans". Hey Jerry, who is "them"? A coaching staff that has not had anything to do with the Bills organization in years. And what in the world does that have to do with the coaches, players and front office which constitute the 2014 team. And I guess you were screaming for more crossing routes way back then based on your years of NFL experience and your extensive film studies of the games way back when.
r00tabaga Posted September 17, 2014 Posted September 17, 2014 He's boring and predictable. I didn't think anyone read his stuff anymore.
mannc Posted September 17, 2014 Posted September 17, 2014 Among the dumbest things negative Nancy constantly does is refer back to Bills teams in the past as if they have any bearing on the 2014 team. Sullivan is constantly referencing "same old Bills" and the miscues of players, coaches and front office personal who are no longer associated with the team, as if there is some relevance to today's team. In today's column, in commenting on the crossing route passes thrown to Watkins, he write " weren't we screaming for "them" to throw crossing route passes to Lee Evans". Hey Jerry, who is "them"? A coaching staff that has not had anything to do with the Bills organization in years. And what in the world does that have to do with the coaches, players and front office which constitute the 2014 team. And I guess you were screaming for more crossing routes way back then based on your years of NFL experience and your extensive film studies of the games way back when. Your point is not well taken. Sullivan never suggests in this article that "them" refers to anyone other than the Buffalo Bills of 2004-2008. Yes, he is criticizing that Bills team of that era for not throwing over the middle to Evans, and he contrasts that team (and coaching staff) with this one, which apparently is willing to throw crossing patterns to its top receiver. In other words, he is complimenting this team (and coaching staff) by comparing it favorably to the Bills of a previous era. So, you have gotten it exactly backward.
26CornerBlitz Posted September 17, 2014 Posted September 17, 2014 WGAS about him? He's an irrelevant curmudgeon.
Don Beebe Posted September 17, 2014 Posted September 17, 2014 Who is Jerry Sullivan? I never heard of him.
Gene Frenkle Posted September 17, 2014 Posted September 17, 2014 Like it or not (and most don't), he's been pretty much right for a long time. Being objective and correct is his job, no? If you're only interested in listening to people who are positive with respect to your views/wants, there are plenty of options. I'd imagine many of you agree with much of his analysis in retrospect, a few years after the fact... GO BILLS!!!
Hplarrm Posted September 17, 2014 Posted September 17, 2014 Your point is not well taken. Sullivan never suggests in this article that "them" refers to anyone other than the Buffalo Bills of 2004-2008. Yes, he is criticizing that Bills team of that era for not throwing over the middle to Evans, and he contrasts that team (and coaching staff) with this one, which apparently is willing to throw crossing patterns to its top receiver. In other words, he is complimenting this team (and coaching staff) by comparing it favorably to the Bills of a previous era. So, you have gotten it exactly backward. If readers are so confused by his words it does not sound like he writes so good If sully needs to feature a relatively minor point about the mid 200s team to make a point about today's Bills he really should take another look at how he does his job.
Fadingpain Posted September 17, 2014 Posted September 17, 2014 If readers are so confused by his words it does not sound like he writes so good If sully needs to feature a relatively minor point about the mid 200s team to make a point about today's Bills he really should take another look at how he does his job. You no write so good either.
Nanker Posted September 17, 2014 Posted September 17, 2014 Who is Jerry Sullivan? I never heard of him. Here's a picture you might recognize:
Jim in Anchorage Posted September 17, 2014 Posted September 17, 2014 Sullivan must love TBD. I would forget he exists if it where not for the sure as rain " He's a ass and I never read him" threads that pop up here after every column he writes.
jester43 Posted September 17, 2014 Posted September 17, 2014 (edited) Love it when people on this site get their panties in a wad because sully/schopp/bucky/graham/harrington are too "negative." Since those guys are all just Way. Too. Mean. ...here is a link to the type of Bills(and Sabres) coverage you all crave: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ky3Ordfqn88 ps....just pretend the unicorns are bison and it should work just fine for you. Edited September 17, 2014 by jester43
PastaJoe Posted September 17, 2014 Posted September 17, 2014 Like it or not (and most don't), he's been pretty much right for a long time. Being objective and correct is his job, no? If you're only interested in listening to people who are positive with respect to your views/wants, there are plenty of options. I'd imagine many of you agree with much of his analysis in retrospect, a few years after the fact... GO BILLS!!! Correct, he's an opinion columnist, not a cheerleading reporter. So many complaints, yet the haters continue to read his columns. The Howard Stern syndrome.
Max Fischer Posted September 17, 2014 Posted September 17, 2014 He's boring and predictable. I didn't think anyone read his stuff anymore. No one goes to that restaurant anymore, it's too crowded. - Yogi Berra
todd Posted September 17, 2014 Posted September 17, 2014 Just stop reading his stuff. He takes a negative angle so often, you can often tell his articles just by the title. Don't give him the page views, folks, and the problem will take care of itself. Nobody forces anyone to pay attention to him, so I don't understand why people subject themselves to an asshat they don't like. I don't mind objectivity, but I don't find him objective because he ALWAYS searches for the negative angle. So I don't read his stuff.
Jim in Anchorage Posted September 17, 2014 Posted September 17, 2014 No one goes to that restaurant anymore, it's too crowded. - Yogi Berra
The Wiz Posted September 17, 2014 Posted September 17, 2014 Among the dumbest things negative Nancy constantly does is refer back to Bills teams in the past as if they have any bearing on the 2014 team. Sullivan is constantly referencing "same old Bills" and the miscues of players, coaches and front office personal who are no longer associated with the team, as if there is some relevance to today's team. In today's column, in commenting on the crossing route passes thrown to Watkins, he write " weren't we screaming for "them" to throw crossing route passes to Lee Evans". Hey Jerry, who is "them"? A coaching staff that has not had anything to do with the Bills organization in years. And what in the world does that have to do with the coaches, players and front office which constitute the 2014 team. And I guess you were screaming for more crossing routes way back then based on your years of NFL experience and your extensive film studies of the games way back when. I get your point but the article was pretty positive overall so I don't really see the problem with what he wrote.
Webster Guy Posted September 17, 2014 Posted September 17, 2014 old. cynical. boring writer. he and schopp on the radio together is an automatic switch to fm tunes. if the bills win the superbowl sully's first article the next morning will be on whether they can repeat as champs, not what a great game we played.
Best Player Available Posted September 17, 2014 Posted September 17, 2014 Whats interesting about Jerry Sullivan. is his inability to even get the smallest bit of exposure on sports forums. negative or positive, you would think once in awhile someone would notice his columns? That's the true definition of fail.
Recommended Posts