dwight in philly Posted June 24, 2018 Posted June 24, 2018 2 hours ago, TPS said: Buffalo Rumblings has a good piece on "what happened". https://www.buffalorumblings.com/2018/6/22/17488972/what-really-happened-buffalo-news-sports-2018-tim-graham-jerry-sullivan-bucky-gleason-john-vogl Thanks.. good read 1
stony Posted June 24, 2018 Posted June 24, 2018 My biggest takeaway from this piece is how does Connelly still have a job? Seems he misread multiple situations which led to this "perfect storm" of departures. 1
Hapless Bills Fan Posted June 24, 2018 Posted June 24, 2018 1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said: He decided to take a buyout, that's why he's unemployed. He could have stayed there without the column. There was external pressure for the BN to take away his column--that's why he lost his column. You know this how? From reading the article, they reassigned a number of people - assistant sports editor to news, another assistant sports editor to part time sports, part time reporter. They may have decided they didn't want to support full-time columnists and he needed to hit the sports news beat. They may have decided, based on a survey quoted in the article, that readers didn't like Sully's column. Or they may have succumbed to external pressure. But from the article, I don't think there's evidence to conclude that. There was a Fredonia journalism professor who concluded thus and then in a later piece more or less retracted that take - I suck with remembering names. Elmer Ploetz, that's it.
dpberr Posted June 24, 2018 Posted June 24, 2018 The irony is that in depth exploration of the last days of the sports desk at the news is content I'd pay for. It was unique content, full of detail. Excellent writing.
Foxx Posted June 24, 2018 Posted June 24, 2018 they may not have liked the direction management was taking but they don't have too. the writing has been on the wall for some time now, i give the Buff News credit for at least trying something different before they are completely irrelevant. it probably won't work but at least they are trying.
Freddie's Dead Posted June 24, 2018 Posted June 24, 2018 When even your good writers take the buyout, the writing is on the wall. 1
eball Posted June 24, 2018 Posted June 24, 2018 2 hours ago, Mr. WEO said: And yet you read every Sully BS column...as did thousands of others--simply so they could rage at him and start threads about his latest takes. Looks like the people who run the BN don't understand much about selling newspapers. At least one of their clients (FSE) will be pleased. Actually, I haven’t read a Sully column in at least a couple of years, and yet I still knew what he was writing. That’s the definition of “tired.” 1
4th&long Posted June 24, 2018 Posted June 24, 2018 2 hours ago, billsfanmiami(oh) said: I think many people stopped reading a long time ago. Hence why he’s unemployed. At least Timmah would put out some original, well written articles. I have zero problem with a dissenting opinion, but Sully’s garbage was just lazy. If you read that article it said sully was still one of the most read columnists at the paper. Bland and boring is what people want and that is what you will get. Some of the worst sports teams in pro sports over the years. Chris Brown fluff is what pse wanted and that is what they will get. Weather people agreed with all the articles or not the buffalo news had a great sports section, especially for such a small market. Not anymore.
ALF Posted June 24, 2018 Posted June 24, 2018 I hope the BN hires Sal to cover the Bills. Hate to see so many jobs gone.
4th&long Posted June 24, 2018 Posted June 24, 2018 1 hour ago, Zebrastripes said: If so many people read him then why did they take his column away? Cause the pegulas pulled $250,000 worth of business from the paper. It was in the article if you read it. 1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: You know this how? From reading the article, they reassigned a number of people - assistant sports editor to news, another assistant sports editor to part time sports, part time reporter. They may have decided they didn't want to support full-time columnists and he needed to hit the sports news beat. They may have decided, based on a survey quoted in the article, that readers didn't like Sully's column. Or they may have succumbed to external pressure. But from the article, I don't think there's evidence to conclude that. There was a Fredonia journalism professor who concluded thus and then in a later piece more or less retracted that take - I suck with remembering names. Elmer Ploetz, that's it. That was in the article. 1
Zebrastripes Posted June 24, 2018 Posted June 24, 2018 (edited) 45 minutes ago, 4th&long said: Cause the pegulas pulled $250,000 worth of business from the paper. It was in the article if you read it. I did read it and also read the part where an independent consulting firm polled people and said a number of them would not subscribe if Sullivan and Gleason continued to write for them. The idea Pegula pulled 250k from the paper because of Sullivan is just pure speculation. Edited June 24, 2018 by Zebrastripes
Mr. WEO Posted June 24, 2018 Posted June 24, 2018 3 hours ago, Bobby Hooks said: The opinion part. His opinion was always negative? That’s not a very nuanced villain. The best villains always have a redeemable quality. Sully was instantly negative about everything. That’s not opinion, that’s schtick. People saw right through it and were bored of it. Why does that upset upset you so much? You said yourself you didn’t read it, so it’s good enough for us but not for you? Why do you get a say, how do you even have an opinion on articles you didn’t read? I'm not the one who is upset. I'm commenting on your poor argument. It should be clear even to a casual visitor such as you that, on this site, Sullivan was heavily read and hotly debated--after nearly every column. 2 hours ago, Zebrastripes said: If so many people read him then why did they take his column away? I think it was one way of getting rid of one of their most expensive staffers. As you know, a lot of the staff was offered a buyout, to slash costs. It gets easier to make a guy choose a buyout when you take away a large part of his job. 2 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: You know this how? From reading the article, they reassigned a number of people - assistant sports editor to news, another assistant sports editor to part time sports, part time reporter. They may have decided they didn't want to support full-time columnists and he needed to hit the sports news beat. They may have decided, based on a survey quoted in the article, that readers didn't like Sully's column. Or they may have succumbed to external pressure. But from the article, I don't think there's evidence to conclude that. There was a Fredonia journalism professor who concluded thus and then in a later piece more or less retracted that take - I suck with remembering names. Elmer Ploetz, that's it. Possibly from the owners of the teams he kept bashing. A guy from Buffalo Rumblings this week said on local ESPN that the BN also runs a commercial printing shop and that the Pegulas let it be known that their $250,000 per year contract with the BN printing shop (for Bills printed material) could be pulled..... 1 hour ago, eball said: Actually, I haven’t read a Sully column in at least a couple of years, and yet I still knew what he was writing. That’s the definition of “tired.” You knew about it because so many here couldn't stop reading or talking about him. 1
Zebrastripes Posted June 24, 2018 Posted June 24, 2018 4 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: I think it was one way of getting rid of one of their most expensive staffers. As you know, a lot of the staff was offered a buyout, to slash costs. It gets easier to make a guy choose a buyout when you take away a large part of his job I get what your saying. It's just so hard to speculate anything without knowing the complete details.
4th&long Posted June 24, 2018 Posted June 24, 2018 44 minutes ago, Zebrastripes said: I did read it and also read the part where an independent consulting firm polled people and said a number of them would not subscribe if Sullivan and Gleason continued to write for them. The idea Pegula pulled 250k from the paper because of Sullivan is just pure speculation. So you also read where sully was one of the most read columnists at tbn.
Zebrastripes Posted June 24, 2018 Posted June 24, 2018 (edited) 19 minutes ago, 4th&long said: So you also read where sully was one of the most read columnists at tbn. Just because he was one of the most read at TBN doesn't mean alot of people were reading his content. TBN did their research and realized they were losing subscriptions by having his column published. If he was making TBN money they wouldn't have cut his column. He clearly wasn't making them money nor were the others. Hence the overhaul at TBN. Edited June 24, 2018 by Zebrastripes
Rock'em Sock'em Posted June 24, 2018 Posted June 24, 2018 I just bookmarked https://www.buffalorumblings.com/authors/matt-warren.
transient Posted June 24, 2018 Posted June 24, 2018 What I took from that is Kimberly Martin was the biggest loss.
PastaJoe Posted June 24, 2018 Posted June 24, 2018 17 minutes ago, Zebrastripes said: Just because he was one of the most read at TBN doesn't mean alot of people were reading his content. TBN did their research and realized they were losing subscriptions by having his column published. If he was making TBN money they wouldn't have cut his column. He clearly wasn't making them money nor were the others. Hence the overhaul at TBN. So he was one of the most read, but not a lot of people were reading his content? That means there are other areas of TBN that are doing worse, and he was doing the best job of getting people to read. And if an estimated 200 subscribers left because of one columnist, it’s more likely they don’t like the paper in general and are using that as an excuse. There’s so much more to a paper’s content than one sports columnist.
Big Turk Posted June 24, 2018 Posted June 24, 2018 3 hours ago, stony said: My biggest takeaway from this piece is how does Connelly still have a job? Seems he misread multiple situations which led to this "perfect storm" of departures. My question is where did the money they made over the past 40 years go?? How can they have so little saved this is such a problem?
boater Posted June 24, 2018 Posted June 24, 2018 Implied by the article read as a whole: Sully lost his column because Sully's negative tone did not fit the new business model where most revenue comes from reader subscriptions. The consultants probably made that point very strongly. He was not exactly fired. He just lost his column. Sully is gone by his choice; he accepted the buy out. Admittedly, maybe shaming him into a buyout by killing off his column was the master plan. I wonder what duties they planned for him had he stayed: a new restaurant reviewer? Per the article: the BN was surprised by the number of people taking buy outs. But they stood by their word that buyouts were available to all. Good read from Buffalo Rumbling.
Recommended Posts