Solomon Grundy Posted August 28, 2015 Posted August 28, 2015 THINK first Metz. WHAT IF - EJ leads the O to 2 or more TD's and the other 2 don't with the 1's? what then ? Screw the guy who performed best with the starting O (as it is barring injury) against the Steelers #1 team?bye bye charade Also, what message would it send to rest of team if EJ is excelling!! EJ has a lot of members on the team rooting for him to succeed. Sammy already said "EJs my guy". FredEx has spoken for EJ. Even newly acquired Charles Clay has endorsed EJ.
LB3 Posted August 28, 2015 Posted August 28, 2015 Also, what message would it send to rest of team if EJ is excelling!! EJ has a lot of members on the team rooting for him to succeed. Sammy already said "EJs my guy". FredEx has spoken for EJ. Even newly acquired Charles Clay has endorsed EJ. In fairness, Fred spoke pretty highly of TT as well.
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted August 28, 2015 Posted August 28, 2015 Honestly, you're probably right. But I think you're a little mislead if you think that this game on Saturday is for all the marbles and it's a "may the best man win" scenario. They have days worth of film that they've watched on all three of these guys. The decision is made based on their whole body of work. Don't you guys watch Hard Knocks? I never said it was for all the marbles. It solidifies what was said that there will be a QB rotation and that Rex told the truth. My thoughts however are contrary to your "EJ has ZERO chance of being the starter" vs Indy.
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted August 28, 2015 Posted August 28, 2015 Appreciate your insight. You already put out there that your source can confirm that Manuel is not starting week 1. So, that it putting it on the line, esp. if Manuel goes in and lights up the PIT D (which could happen. That is not a great D anymore). Just ignore the haters I don't know about Seattle's pick being "lucky." That should be our QB if we didn't take TJ. Terrible move by the FO passing over Wilson, who had every skill you want in a QB sans being taller than 6'0''. Right, but being small is at the top of the list of potential detriments to pocket passers. So being short is a VERY BIG DEAL for NFL Qbr. He was projected as a late round pick, quality back up with a shot at being a starter someday. He surpassed his projections in everyday. Seattle took a flyer with "their guy" acquired as a veteran.... And then wilson proceeded to blow away expectations
vincec Posted August 28, 2015 Posted August 28, 2015 (edited) That was not the headline of the story that moved on the AP wire. These were the only two headlines that moved: the short one: Manuel confident he can succeed in Buffalo or somewhere else and the extended one: Slipping in QB competition, Manuel confident he can succeed in Buffalo or 'somewhere else' again, he was asked a question and he responded. rather than rush out with a story based on his initial comment "somewhere else," he was asked a follow up question and provided a mixed response, which was fully quoted in the story. it seems that you are attempting to manufacture something with this ambitiously worded post. jw You are correct. That exact headline was posted on your Twitter account, linked in the OP to this thread. So it is an exact quote by you despite your attempt to subtly imply otherwise in your response above. Again... Misleading the reader. The only quote by Manuel in your article regarding playing "somewhere else" is what I quoted in my original response. It in no way indicates to me that he thinks "his days in Buffalo are numbered". That angle is completely fabricated by you. It's basically a National Enquirer style headline. But they sell right? Edited August 28, 2015 by vincec
Delete This Account Posted August 28, 2015 Posted August 28, 2015 John, this thread started with a tweet apparently from you: @john_wawrow More to come: Speaking to AP, #Bills QB Manuel doesn't dispute possibility his days in Buffalo might be numbered. pro32.ap.org/article/manuel… http://twitter.com/j...385878967177217 Thus that wording would appear to be strongly associated with you. Was that not, in fact your tweet? If it is, transmuting the actual EJM quote into "doesn't dispute possibility his days in Buffalo might be numbered" does appear to be fluffing up a bit of controversy from a pragmatic sentence. i believe i've already answered this question. jw You are correct. That exact headline was posted on your Twitter account, linked in the OP to this thread. So it is an exact quote by you despite your attempt to subtly imply otherwise in your response above. Again... Misleading the reader. The only quote by Manuel in your article regarding playing "somewhere else" is what I quoted in my original response. It in no way indicates to me that he thinks "his days in Buffalo are numbered". That angle is completely fabricated by you. It's basically a National Enquirer style headline. But they sell right? odd, when he was asked if his days were numbered, he provided that response, which included the phrase "somewhere else." not sure how this is fabricated, as this is what he said to a direct question. and having never said "somewhere else" before, this was an indication that he was finally wondering whether his days in Buffalo were, in fact, numbered. also, it seems that EJ didn't take any issue with how this story was written, and how he was quoted, when i finally had a chance to meet with him again in the locker room yesterday. seems odd -- and/or predictable -- that you're pounding this drum without any perspective of what was said. but please, proceed in this fascinating exchange of what you think you know as opposed to what you don't. jw
3rdand12 Posted August 28, 2015 Posted August 28, 2015 i believe i've already answered this question. jw odd, when he was asked if his days were numbered, he provided that response, which included the phrase "somewhere else." not sure how this is fabricated, as this is what he said to a direct question. and having never said "somewhere else" before, this was an indication that he was finally wondering whether his days in Buffalo were, in fact, numbered. also, it seems that EJ didn't take any issue with how this story was written, and how he was quoted, when i finally had a chance to meet with him again in the locker room yesterday. seems odd -- and/or predictable -- that you're pounding this drum without any perspective of what was said. but please, proceed in this fascinating exchange of what you think you know as opposed to what you don't. jw I would be surprised a Man of integrity and character ( thanks gosh some young 'uns are still raised up proper) would take you to task. Or any other actually. I dont have a dog in this fight but its sure seems like folks including you Mr Warrow , have a burr in the proverbial saddle. Much like the whole Buffalo Bills QB dialogue seems to bring out some pent up irritation towards the world from folks. Isn't irritation how pearls are formed though
vincec Posted August 29, 2015 Posted August 29, 2015 i believe i've already answered this question. jw odd, when he was asked if his days were numbered, he provided that response, which included the phrase "somewhere else." not sure how this is fabricated, as this is what he said to a direct question. and having never said "somewhere else" before, this was an indication that he was finally wondering whether his days in Buffalo were, in fact, numbered. also, it seems that EJ didn't take any issue with how this story was written, and how he was quoted, when i finally had a chance to meet with him again in the locker room yesterday. seems odd -- and/or predictable -- that you're pounding this drum without any perspective of what was said. but please, proceed in this fascinating exchange of what you think you know as opposed to what you don't. jw If you have additional information from other meetings with EJ that is not in your article then you should report it. If the article omits important details or context then it's bad reporting. Your tweet doesn't follow from your article. Plain and simple. Just come out and say it's your opinion or theory. Everyone has an opinion about EJ.
norton20 Posted August 29, 2015 Posted August 29, 2015 I think TT will start against Indy. Tyrodossaurus-Rex! I for one certainly hope so.
A Dog Named Kelso Posted August 29, 2015 Posted August 29, 2015 i believe i've already answered this question. jw odd, when he was asked if his days were numbered, he provided that response, which included the phrase "somewhere else." not sure how this is fabricated, as this is what he said to a direct question. and having never said "somewhere else" before, this was an indication that he was finally wondering whether his days in Buffalo were, in fact, numbered. also, it seems that EJ didn't take any issue with how this story was written, and how he was quoted, when i finally had a chance to meet with him again in the locker room yesterday. seems odd -- and/or predictable -- that you're pounding this drum without any perspective of what was said. but please, proceed in this fascinating exchange of what you think you know as opposed to what you don't. jw I am not sure that asking a leading question then him parroting that back in part of his statement is him "seeing the writing on the wall"; especially, when his first statement was that he hadn't. Does he now that the press planted a seed, perhaps, but that is a little tail wagging the dog isn't it? Asked if he's considered the possibility of playing somewhere else, Manuel gave a mixed response. "I haven't..."
FireChan Posted August 29, 2015 Posted August 29, 2015 (edited) If you have additional information from other meetings with EJ that is not in your article then you should report it. If the article omits important details or context then it's bad reporting. Your tweet doesn't follow from your article. Plain and simple. Just come out and say it's your opinion or theory. Everyone has an opinion about EJ. Maybe we shouldn't try to chase away everybody who actually have a reputation. Edited August 29, 2015 by FireChan
Hapless Bills Fan Posted August 29, 2015 Posted August 29, 2015 (edited) i believe i've already answered this question. jw It would take fewer words to respond - Yes it is or No it isn't, would do. That IS your tweet, from your twitter account, correct? (I don't believe you did answer this question) I don't know newswire procedures but "That was not the headline of the story that moved on the AP wire." would seem to be saying that wasn't your choice of headline, and imply perhaps you can't control what headline a paper runs with. Fair enough. My point is if your tweet of that headline associates you with it in the minds of the Gentle Readers - so we aren't exactly manufacturing anything I really don't have a dog in this fight, but I do want to see fairness - ack'ing that it was your tweet, it wasn't the headline you wrote for the story, would seem fair. Edited August 29, 2015 by Hopeful
A Dog Named Kelso Posted August 29, 2015 Posted August 29, 2015 Maybe we shouldn't try to chase away everybody who actually have a reputation. Its a sad state if someone feels chased away and defensive because someone people ask question about their writing. There is nothing wrong with JW tweet what he did as long as he states it as opinion. I really do not understand the need to to hide opinions and state them as fact and then defend them as if they are. Introspection is what is required when questions are raised about a work productt running away or getting defensive. I get questioned all the time at my place of employment, sometimes I may have made an error, I discuss the matter, do what it takes to remedy the issue for the inquisitor and then move on. I know we all hate to admit it but knowing everything and always being correct is a rarity I think few of us actually obtain.
Kelly the Dog Posted August 29, 2015 Posted August 29, 2015 It would take fewer words to respond - Yes it is or No it isn't, would do. That IS your tweet, from your twitter account, correct? (I don't believe you did answer this question) I don't know newswire procedures but "That was not the headline of the story that moved on the AP wire." would seem to be saying that wasn't your choice of headline, and imply perhaps you can't control what headline a paper runs with. Fair enough. My point is if your tweet of that headline associates you with it in the minds of the Gentle Readers - so we aren't exactly manufacturing anything I really don't have a dog in this fight, but I do want to see fairness - ack'ing that it was your tweet, it wasn't the headline you wrote for the story, would seem fair. jw was responding to a post and poster who claimed his headline was "Manuel doesn't dispute..." When that wasn't the headline at all. Then jw provided the headline that was actually on the story. Then someone said, okay, so it wasn't your headline but it was your tweet. Then jw provided what he actually tweeted, three tweets in a row, that was very fair to EJ. How exactly is he wrong here. Vince said it was a headline when it wasn't.
Big Gun Posted August 29, 2015 Posted August 29, 2015 If you have additional information from other meetings with EJ that is not in your article then you should report it. If the article omits important details or context then it's bad reporting. Your tweet doesn't follow from your article. Plain and simple. Just come out and say it's your opinion or theory. Everyone has an opinion about EJ. Can't handle the truth because it doesn't fit your narrative, so attack the source. Way to go! Stooping to a new low of questioning and discrediting someone who is actually an insider getting direct quotes from the players themselves. OMG EJ fanboys never cease to amaze.
Delete This Account Posted August 29, 2015 Posted August 29, 2015 (edited) If you have additional information from other meetings with EJ that is not in your article then you should report it. If the article omits important details or context then it's bad reporting. Your tweet doesn't follow from your article. Plain and simple. Just come out and say it's your opinion or theory. Everyone has an opinion about EJ. yours is a very extremely convenient argument to make. i don't answer to you. jw I am not sure that asking a leading question then him parroting that back in part of his statement is him "seeing the writing on the wall"; especially, when his first statement was that he hadn't. Does he now that the press planted a seed, perhaps, but that is a little tail wagging the dog isn't it? that's just it. he didn't parrot it. he acknowledged it and then spoke in his own words, which were telling. no seed was planted. it's a fair question and one that's been asked of him and on this board for months. ... years? and you conveniently fail to forget that a follow up question was asked and he provided a mixed response, saying no, but then acknowledging that this is a business. believe it or don't. it's what he said, and the first time he's said it. that it doesn't fit what you think is his state of mind, that's not my problem. and if those who just happen to have read the story, the first line is more than fair, before the second paragraph gets into the details of what he said. jw jw was responding to a post and poster who claimed his headline was "Manuel doesn't dispute..." When that wasn't the headline at all. Then jw provided the headline that was actually on the story. Then someone said, okay, so it wasn't your headline but it was your tweet. Then jw provided what he actually tweeted, three tweets in a row, that was very fair to EJ. How exactly is he wrong here. Vince said it was a headline when it wasn't. thanks. jw Edited August 29, 2015 by john wawrow
FireChan Posted August 29, 2015 Posted August 29, 2015 Its a sad state if someone feels chased away and defensive because someone people ask question about their writing. There is nothing wrong with JW tweet what he did as long as he states it as opinion. I really do not understand the need to to hide opinions and state them as fact and then defend them as if they are. Introspection is what is required when questions are raised about a work productt running away or getting defensive. I get questioned all the time at my place of employment, sometimes I may have made an error, I discuss the matter, do what it takes to remedy the issue for the inquisitor and then move on. I know we all hate to admit it but knowing everything and always being correct is a rarity I think few of us actually obtain. That's crap. Vince is not "asking questions," he's coming at him. And jw has answered the question already.
Big Hurt Posted August 29, 2015 Posted August 29, 2015 I trust Rex to make the right choice. I maybe the only one that is sick of talking about the QBs. So far, it proves that nobody has any inside information on the whole thing. Not AP, and certainly not anyone from WGR for sure. Everyone are just guessing. Except some people like to make their predictions sound like they know something. I think any QB Rex put out there will have a logical reason. By the way, if you like one quarterback, that doesn't mean you have to automatically hate the other two or talk them down. I am the only one here that like all three of them because they all bring something to the table and they are all still part of the Bills. And I will not talk any of them down or wish anyone of them to fail.
Maury Ballstein Posted August 29, 2015 Posted August 29, 2015 Can't handle the truth because it doesn't fit your narrative, so attack the source. Way to go! Stooping to a new low of questioning and discrediting someone who is actually an insider getting direct quotes from the players themselves. OMG EJ fanboys never cease to amaze. Is he a documented "fanboy" ? How serious is his case ?
TSOL Posted August 29, 2015 Posted August 29, 2015 Anyone who types the word fanboy, over the age of 15, should have their internet privileges suspended for 6 months to reflect on themselves.
Recommended Posts