DC Tom Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 I guess that's the answer I was looking for. I appreciate the candor. I just don't understand that type of thought process. I can't think of a downside reading something I may or certainly will disagree with. It's not the "reading," it's the "validating with clicks." I'll read his bull ****, but I don't necessarily want the News to know I'm reading it, lest they encourage him to be even more of a prick. You still don't understand that is what they pay him to do. How many opinion piece writers have ever written anything "groundbreaking"? Zero point zero. Nor will any of them....well, ever. Why read anyone if you only read those who agree with your point of view? Why would you need to? And you don't seem to understand what he actually does. He writes opinion pieces, but he tries to be an investigative reporter without having anything resembling the necessary skills for it (for example: his asinine behavior at the SB press conference.) He desperately wants to be John Wawrow, or even Tim Graham. But he doesn't realize that Jerry Sullivan is all he's ever going to be.
Billsmovinup Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 Just became bigger fan of Cam Newton. If he's that cool during the Superbowl Denver has no chance. Typical Buffalo News reporter with his miserable attitude.
eball Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 You still don't understand that is what they pay him to do. How many opinion piece writers have ever written anything "groundbreaking"? Zero point zero. Nor will any of them....well, ever. Why read anyone if you only read those who agree with your point of view? Why would you need to? So you cherry-pick "groundbreaking" but ignore "inspiring" and "noteworthy?" It's impossible to have a discussion with you because you don't listen. We all know Sully's point of view -- he's been writing the same editorials in cyclical fashion for 15 years, and he thinks he's something he's not. Explain how I'm closed-minded when I've already read it, but just don't want to keep being beaten over the head with it?
Mr. WEO Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 It's not the "reading," it's the "validating with clicks." I'll read his bull ****, but I don't necessarily want the News to know I'm reading it, lest they encourage him to be even more of a prick. And you don't seem to understand what he actually does. He writes opinion pieces, but he tries to be an investigative reporter without having anything resembling the necessary skills for it (for example: his asinine behavior at the SB press conference.) He desperately wants to be John Wawrow, or even Tim Graham. But he doesn't realize that Jerry Sullivan is all he's ever going to be. Well then he's playing perfectly the role of the bloviator, isn't he? Is his job, and his editor's job, not to stir passion in his readers? The BN was paying him to do exactly this well before there were any clicks to click, so that argument ("clickbait") is not persuasive. They aren't paying him to get cliched locker room quotes or to rewrite verbatim quotes given to everyone in a press conference. Clicks haven't change Sully. So you cherry-pick "groundbreaking" but ignore "inspiring" and "noteworthy?" It's impossible to have a discussion with you because you don't listen. We all know Sully's point of view -- he's been writing the same editorials in cyclical fashion for 15 years, and he thinks he's something he's not. Explain how I'm closed-minded when I've already read it, but just don't want to keep being beaten over the head with it? Sorry, my bad---throw in "inspiring" or "noteworthy" Can you only be inspired "positively", in other words by something you fondly agree with? If that was the goal of an Op-Ed page, they wouldn't exist because no one but a few here (no doubt) would read only such pieces.
Beerball Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 Not the same as Campanis's comments. The ones in that clip anyway... I quoted what you feel Sullivan's line of questioning was getting at. If you or he believe that black quarterbacks don't throw over the middle because they prefer to run then I'd invite you both to watch the games.
Deranged Rhino Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 So you cherry-pick "groundbreaking" but ignore "inspiring" and "noteworthy?" It's impossible to have a discussion with you because you don't listen. We all know Sully's point of view -- he's been writing the same editorials in cyclical fashion for 15 years, and he thinks he's something he's not. Explain how I'm closed-minded when I've already read it, but just don't want to keep being beaten over the head with it? He listens. His mo is to shift the goal posts the moment he begins to lose an argument. He's been doing it for years.
WotAGuy Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 (edited) If Sully ever had a truly inspiring thought, perhaps your comments would make sense. He hasn't written anything groundbreaking or particularly noteworthy in...well, ever. And he consistently embarrasses himself with ridiculous "takes" such as when he called for Dareus to be cut after the car racing incident. There's an old saying with which I'm sure you're familiar -- fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me. The fact that he has a 9-page thread of mostly people that hate him talking about him suggests his current work is "noteworthy". I actually enjoy most of Sully's work. It's interesting. If all there was to read were Chris Brown puff pieces, the Bills' world would be very boring. Sully used to be on WGR's morning pregame show with Jeremy White and it was great - Jerry was always at odds with Jeremy or the caller or both and it made for great radio on the drive in from Syracuse. It's much the same with this board - the posters who have the more provocative opinions are interesting to read and make the exchange of views more fun to read......even if they aren't always sane. Edited February 4, 2016 by WotAGuy
ToGoGo Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 (edited) I don't defend bullsh##t --like manufactured outrage. Sometimes you should attack "the Man". Always you should think for yourself, though... You think for yourself? And I don't think anybody is outraged, just annoyed at Sullivan for being a drag on the national stage. I think Sullivan's question to Cam was more trying to manufacture outrage than anything else. It was also stale and boring. "Cam, would you consider yourself to be a narcissist" is a much more interesting question, if you want to be provocative. "Cam, many people including MusicHunch feel you're a completely disingenuous person and this give football to kids thing is an act, what do you have to say to these people?" Edited February 4, 2016 by musichunch
KollegeStudnet Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 Is it me or does the aging Jerry Sullivan look more like Smeagol?
Saxum Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 Is it me or does the aging Jerry Sullivan look more like Smeagol? No Smeagol looks like Sully but has a better attitude.
FireChan Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 You think for yourself? And I don't think anybody is outraged, just annoyed at Sullivan for being a drag on the national stage. I think Sullivan's question to Cam was more trying to manufacture outrage than anything else. It was also stale and boring. "Cam, would you consider yourself to be a narcissist" is a much more interesting question, if you want to be provocative. "Cam, many people including MusicHunch feel you're a completely disingenuous person and this give football to kids thing is an act, what do you have to say to these people?" What about the posters calling for him to be fired? Sounds like outrage to me.
PromoTheRobot Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 No Smeagol looks like Sully but has a better attitude. Smeagol smells better than Sully and has better posture.
Acantha Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 It's much the same with this board - the posters who have the more provocative opinions are interesting to read and make the exchange of views more fun to read......even if they aren't always sane.I think this is true when it's not artificially generated. Posters having different points of view is what makes this forum great. Posters that get off on having a contrarian point of view no matter what the topic are tiresome; just like Sully.
Beerball Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 What about the posters calling for him to be fired? Sounds like outrage to me. Righteous indignation maybe...but that wouldn't fit your narrative.
FireChan Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 (edited) Righteous indignation maybe...but that wouldn't fit your narrative. Righteous indignation that's unwarranted is what makes it outrage. Edited February 4, 2016 by FireChan
Mr. WEO Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 I quoted what you feel Sullivan's line of questioning was getting at. If you or he believe that black quarterbacks don't throw over the middle because they prefer to run then I'd invite you both to watch the games. Ha! Nice try Beerball. I think his question was pretty lame. My point is that it's not in league with what Campanis was implying. This is all contrived theater and everyone is playing their part---Sully the old crackpot asking predictable clichéd question, Cam pretending that "America" really has a problem with his infectious infectiousness because we've never seen a QB like him before (completely ridiculous), talking heads commenting seriously over this whole scenario that their producers have created (if not scripted). It's how 24 hours of sport networking is filled--for 2 weeks.
WotAGuy Posted February 5, 2016 Posted February 5, 2016 (edited) I think this is true when it's not artificially generated. Posters having different points of view is what makes this forum great. Posters that get off on having a contrarian point of view no matter what the topic are tiresome; just like Sully. There's always the "ignore" feature. And we need some contrarian viewpoints to stimulate discussion, even if it's fabricated. 9 pages of "Sully is a tool" gets pretty old. BTW - Some of the artificially generated stuff on this board is the best! Try Fergy's numbers thread! Edited February 5, 2016 by WotAGuy
3rdand12 Posted February 5, 2016 Posted February 5, 2016 In this instance or in general? There is more than one poster who says they will never read the guy's articles. One poster actually said "he's garbage" while admitting he never reads Sully. Why not read him...even if you generally disagree with him? Are posters afraid they may actually agree with something he says or are they so set in their way, that they cannot tolerate even seeing an article? The mind gets smaller when you only expose it to like minded thoughts. This where we can find something to discuss. Every bit of information we take the time to ingest gets stored inside our pointy , but cute, little heads. One can consciously push away from concepts and thoughts that they do not prefer but they are still stored in the ole bucket. There is nothing wrong with picking and choosing what one considers value to put in the mental digestive tract. Much like intestinal health, one learns what makes them sick after time. And hopefully stops ingesting such material. Unless you are just into diarrhea and an unhealthy stool. Brain is the same thing. Open minded is good. Trying things is good. Repeating bad behaviour borders on stupid. You are welcome to my serving of Sullivan Mr Weo. Something tastes offal about him. notice my witty wording in the last sentence. Lotsa roughage for me. keeping it clean and scraping the edges for 54 years
DrDawkinstein Posted February 5, 2016 Posted February 5, 2016 Sully is a hack, and I will not only never read any of his articles again, but I try not to give the BN any clicks on any articles as long as he in employed there. There is nothing in the BN that I cant get somewhere else. That isnt because he "says stuff I disagree with". There are plenty of posters here who say things I disagree with, but who also have informed and well crafted opinions. I hate to name names, but for example, posters like Badol, Billsvet, and even GG... I would NEVER put those posters on ignore and I often enjoy their posts even though I rarely agree with what they are saying. At least I can tell they are interested in the team, that they care, and that they know what they are talking about (as much as any of us here can). I would rather any of them (and plenty of other posters) work for the BN. Most of Badol's threads are better crafted than Sully's articles. Even when he is on one of his campaigns ( ). Sullivan doesnt care about the team, or its fans, and most likely doesnt even care about the city. And it shows. It's an old and tired schtick in this day and age where we have access to almost limitless amounts of media. I dont need him.
baskingridgebillsfan Posted February 5, 2016 Posted February 5, 2016 Sully is a lot like Schoop . Both think they are more intelligent then you , both find negativity in everything and both are almost always wrong
Recommended Posts