Tyler Dunne story on McDermott - 3 parts, 25 interviews, one damning conclusion

[ComradeKayAdams]

On 12/11/2023 at 8:09 PM, Rico said:

His career is in free-fall.

Buffalo News -> Bleacher Report -> Blog -> ???

 

Oh Rico, we all know how this tragic story ends: turning tricks behind parking lot dumpsters along Chippewa Street, or perhaps behind a cluster of trees in Cazenovia Park, or perhaps even behind the Buffalo Bills field house…right outside Sean McDermott’s very office window (eek!). It’s a tale as old as time itself. Like Citizen Kane, but much less cinematic.

 

A rollerball pen. A notepad. A voice recorder. A word processor. All of these are instruments that a first-rate sports journalist might use to communicate with the people.

 

Fishnet stockings. Thigh-high boots. Cherry red lipstick. Backless bodycon mini dresses. New instruments with which Tyler must soon become acquainted in order to keep those $8 increments coming. “Go Long” is about to take on an entirely new meaning in poor Tyler’s career.

 

The antagonist in this story chose to turn his back on the Western New York community that raised him, via betrayal of its football entertainment exemplar, all for an easy ride on the journalism career highway. Unfortunately for dear Dunne, he himself is soon to become the easy ride on a career highway physically manifested as, say, Route 219…going south somewhere in the Southtowns.

 

But wait…is there a happy ending to be uncovered in this story…besides, you know, the usual happy endings?? No, not really. Dunne is done in Western New York. But if you’re looking for a silver mascara-esque lining in this Greek-esque tragedy, know that most of Tyler’s Johns will be honorable and respectful and pay him the full $8 he will have each time rightfully earned. Buffalo, after all, is the “City of Good Neighbors.” Some may even take the time to help him fix that mascara running down his face before his next trick. They may carefully lean in, shape the mascara smudges into the vague form of a charging Buffalo, and whisper ever so softly into Tyler’s ear, “Go Bills.”

[Rico]

4 minutes ago, ComradeKayAdams said:

 

Oh Rico, we all know how this tragic story ends: turning tricks behind parking lot dumpsters along Chippewa Street, or perhaps behind a cluster of trees in Cazenovia Park, or perhaps even behind the Buffalo Bills field house…right outside Sean McDermott’s very office window (eek!). It’s a tale as old as time itself. Like Citizen Kane, but much less cinematic.

 

A rollerball pen. A notepad. A voice recorder. A word processor. All of these are instruments that a first-rate sports journalist might use to communicate with the people.

 

Fishnet stockings. Thigh-high boots. Cherry red lipstick. Backless bodycon mini dresses. New instruments with which Tyler must soon become acquainted in order to keep those $8 increments coming. “Go Long” is about to take on an entirely new meaning in poor Tyler’s career.

 

The antagonist in this story chose to turn his back on the Western New York community that raised him, via betrayal of its football entertainment exemplar, all for an easy ride on the journalism career highway. Unfortunately for dear Dunne, he himself is soon to become the easy ride on a career highway physically manifested as, say, Route 219…going south somewhere in the Southtowns.

 

But wait…is there a happy ending to be uncovered in this story…besides, you know, the usual happy endings?? No, not really. Dunne is done in Western New York. But if you’re looking for a silver mascara-esque lining in this Greek-esque tragedy, know that most of Tyler’s Johns will be honorable and respectful and pay him the full $8 he will have each time rightfully earned. Buffalo, after all, is the “City of Good Neighbors.” Some may even take the time to help him fix that mascara running down his face before his next trick. They may carefully lean in, shape the mascara smudges into the vague form of a charging Buffalo, and whisper ever so softly into Tyler’s ear, “Go Bills.”

 

"Heh, heh!"

[GaryPinC]

23 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

 

Hence why myself and others point out that this wasnt "personal", it was all about Sean the "Professional"

 

Juicy and scandalous a la Russ Brandon would be about that person and their character.

 

The McD piece was all about gaffs as a coach, not a person.

 

 

He definitely coached Toney to line up Offside.

 

Or maybe the article did what McD the coach couldnt do, rally and motivate his players. We've been saying "This is the loss they needed to light a fire" for 2 years. Maybe this article was it.

 

 

 

I read the free parts of Dunne's series and some of the quotes around here.  Not going to pay for that.

 

Dunne makes a point of putting in there early that he's been denied press credentials by the team, but hey no big deal.  He speaks with 25 disgruntled ex colleagues and pretends it's investigative reporting?

 

McDermott has no relationship with his offensive personnel.  Mitch answered that and so did Josh Allen todayhttps://buffalonews.com/sports/bills/buffalo-bills-josh-allen-sean-mcdermott-relationship-nfl/article_116e7cea-99ee-11ee-8eee-db5236d329df.html

 

For starters.

 

I suspect all of Dunne's sources and incidents are from 2017 and 2019 and there was no investigation, just talking to ex-personnel, taking quotes and treating them as gospel.  No opposing point of view. 

For those who paid for the articles, was there an opposing point of view, quotes or evidence?  We already know some of the accusations are completely false.  

 

 

McDermott has changed a lot since the early years.  Nate Peterman.  Never going for it on fourth down.  And this year taking more chances on defense late in the game.  He still needs to develop that, but he's doing it.  That for me means everything.  Growth.  He had never been a head coach before this job. He's made mistakes but I'm cutting him the slack.  Especially since his current team is standing up for him.

 

[DrDawkinstein]

29 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I'm not sure I totally agree with that. I think it was critical of his character. Most of the anonymous sources weren't, they were about him the coach. But some of Dunne's language was definitely personal.

 

I know many people dont agree with that take. That's fine. I'm not going to rehash the same arguments of the last 120 pages. I was just pointing to a reason why some folks hold a certain opinion.

[Beck Water]

3 hours ago, DrDawkinstein said:

Hence why myself and others point out that this wasnt "personal", it was all about Sean the "Professional"

 

It was pointed out in a response to you that you are using "personal" in a different sense of the term than others who say "it was personal".

 

You are using "personal" in the sense of "involving my life and character outside my job setting" (kids, wife, church, home, dog)

 

Others are using "personal" in the sense that behavior in the workplace can be described impersonally (by focusing on the situation, behavior, and what was said).  If the behavior in the workplace is instead described by using pop-psychology labels, ascribing personal motivations, making generalized claims about the person's abilities to relate to others - then it is said to be "personal" or a "character attack".

 

The latter is commonly described as "making it personal" or "attacking someone's character", even if it is 100% about their profession  or workplace.

 

I'm kind of surprised that you allude to having taken various workplace trainings about how to "not take things personally" but you were never introduced to this distinction because usually these trainings about "don't take things personally" (on the job) include "don't make it personal" (when dealing with issues on the job).

 

But anyway, it really isn't debatable that some of the sources quoted in Dunne's article did, in fact, make it personal - according to the second definition.  We had "he has zero relationship with any of the offensive players, zero".  We had "he's jealous".  We had "he's insecure".  We had "he's mentally, psychologically, and physically incapable of relationships with the players".

 

It's so blatant that one could practically use it as a training exercise for a workplace class on the topic of how to address problem behaviors without making it personal - on the "don't do this" side of the ledger.

Edited December 14, 2023 by Beck Water

[Beck Water]

40 minutes ago, GaryPinC said:

I suspect all of Dunne's sources and incidents are from 2017 and 2019 and there was no investigation, just talking to ex-personnel, taking quotes and treating them as gospel.  No opposing point of view. 

For those who paid for the articles, was there an opposing point of view, quotes or evidence?  We already know some of the accusations are completely false. 

 

Some of the incidents discussed in the article are clearly from 2020 (the WR Christmas gift of a truck to Chad Hall and McDermott's reaction to that gift) or 2021 (13 seconds).  These were described up thread.

 

There were on the record quotes positive to McDermott from several players including Lee Smith, Pat DiMarco, Isaiah McKenzie, and a couple others - this was described up thread.  So there were positive points of view presented.

 

What there didn't seem to be in the excerpts that have been made available, is the direct juxtaposition of opposing interpretations or viewpoints on the same incidents which anonymous sources blasted.

 

Example: 'According to a Bills assistant, McDermott would express his frustrations about Newton [ruining Carolina] in offensive staff meetings, creating an uncomfortable atmosphere, especially for Ken Dorsey, Newton's former coach and the man credited with his rise.'   Put that way, it kind of makes McDermott sound 'stuck in the past' or even unhinged (why TF is he ranting about Newton and Carolina now, with the Bills?), and certainly insensitive to the feelings of former Carolina coaches who developed Newton. 

But maybe there's some missing context or a missing alternate POV?  Maybe McDermott's point was that Cam Newton, as the Franchise QB in whom CAR invested a 5 year, $104M contract (huge for that time), was reckless of his body in his play (like Allen is now) and when injuries accumulated, Newton put CAR in the tank because they were paying a guy who could no longer perform up to his contract.  If that's the case, it can be argued McDermott could have a point, especially if he's using it to illustrate why 1) he wants a plan to run the ball that doesn't involve Allen as the primary RB 2) wants Allen coached harder to give himself up, get out of bounds, or slide when he runs. [to be clear, the above is my speculation]

 

That's the kind of direct juxtaposition of different interpretations that seemed to be missing from the excerpts presented. 

 

But there were positive quotes, some have been shared here.

Edited December 14, 2023 by Beck Water

[JohnNord]

8 hours ago, Beck Water said:

 

Some of the incidents discussed in the article are clearly from 2020 (the WR Christmas gift of a truck to Chad Hall and McDermott's reaction to that gift) or 2021 (13 seconds).  These were described up thread.

 

There were on the record quotes positive to McDermott from several players including Lee Smith, Pat DiMarco, Isaiah McKenzie, and a couple others - this was described up thread.  So there were positive points of view presented.

 

What there didn't seem to be in the excerpts that have been made available, is the direct juxtaposition of opposing interpretations or viewpoints on the same incidents which anonymous sources blasted.

 

Example: 'According to a Bills assistant, McDermott would express his frustrations about Newton [ruining Carolina] in offensive staff meetings, creating an uncomfortable atmosphere, especially for Ken Dorsey, Newton's former coach and the man credited with his rise.'   Put that way, it kind of makes McDermott sound 'stuck in the past' or even unhinged (why TF is he ranting about Newton and Carolina now, with the Bills?), and certainly insensitive to the feelings of former Carolina coaches who developed Newton. 

But maybe there's some missing context or a missing alternate POV?  Maybe McDermott's point was that Cam Newton, as the Franchise QB in whom CAR invested a 5 year, $104M contract (huge for that time), was reckless of his body in his play (like Allen is now) and when injuries accumulated, Newton put CAR in the tank because they were paying a guy who could no longer perform up to his contract.  If that's the case, it can be argued McDermott could have a point, especially if he's using it to illustrate why 1) he wants a plan to run the ball that doesn't involve Allen as the primary RB 2) wants Allen coached harder to give himself up, get out of bounds, or slide when he runs. [to be clear, the above is my speculation]

 

That's the kind of direct juxtaposition of different interpretations that seemed to be missing from the excerpts presented. 

 

But there were positive quotes, some have been shared here.

If you listen to the first 15 minutes of the Bruce Exclusive podcast, he does a brilliant job discussing the problem with the series.  

 

His point is that the articles were an “editorial with sources” but were not framed that way.    Instead they were framed almost like an investigative piece. 
 

Bruce said that for years, Dunne has expressed the opinion that Sean McDermott is the problem in Buffalo.  So he started writing the series with that opinion, and found evidence (through sources) to help lend credibility to his opinion.  
 

Dunne is “driving the car and steering where it goes.”  This was my main takeaway and the biggest criticism I had when people said “well he did include positive things about McDermott too.”   Bruce just did a much better job articulating what I meant to say!  
 

This was always a well-sources editorial and not a balanced news story.  I feel if people took the series as his opinion, rather than proof of McDermott as a coach - the response would have been different and Dunne could stop hiding from the angry mob on Twitter and wouldn’t have to hide his thoughts behind a wall.  
 

 

Edited December 15, 2023 by JohnNord

[Beck Water]

27 minutes ago, JohnNord said:

If you listen to the first 15 minutes of the Bruce Exclusive podcast, he does a brilliant job discussing the problem with the series.  

 

His point is that the articles were an “editorial with sources” but were not framed that way.    Instead they were framed almost like an investigative piece. 
 

Bruce said that for years, Dunne has expressed the opinion that Sean McDermott is the problem in Buffalo.  So he started writing the series with that opinion, and found evidence (through sources) to help lend credibility to his opinion.  
 

Dunne is “driving the car and steering where it goes.”  This was my main takeaway and the biggest criticism I had when people said “well he did include positive things about McDermott too.”   Bruce just did a much better job articulating what I meant to say!  
 

This was always a well-sources editorial and not a balanced news story.  I feel if people took the series as his opinion, rather than proof of McDermott as a coach - the response would have been different and Dunne could stop hiding from the angry mob on Twitter and wouldn’t have to hide his thoughts behind a wall.  
 

 

Got a link to said podcast?

 

I got a chuckle, is Dunne truly “hiding from an angry mob” on Twitter?

Edited December 15, 2023 by Beck Water

[Big Turk]

10 hours ago, Beck Water said:

 

It was pointed out in a response to you that you are using "personal" in a different sense of the term than others who say "it was personal".

 

You are using "personal" in the sense of "involving my life and character outside my job setting" (kids, wife, church, home, dog)

 

Others are using "personal" in the sense that behavior in the workplace can be described impersonally (by focusing on the situation, behavior, and what was said).  If the behavior in the workplace is instead described by using pop-psychology labels, ascribing personal motivations, making generalized claims about the person's abilities to relate to others - then it is said to be "personal" or a "character attack".

 

The latter is commonly described as "making it personal" or "attacking someone's character", even if it is 100% about their profession  or workplace.

 

I'm kind of surprised that you allude to having taken various workplace trainings about how to "not take things personally" but you were never introduced to this distinction because usually these trainings about "don't take things personally" (on the job) include "don't make it personal" (when dealing with issues on the job).

 

But anyway, it really isn't debatable that some of the sources quoted in Dunne's article did, in fact, make it personal - according to the second definition.  We had "he has zero relationship with any of the offensive players, zero".  We had "he's jealous".  We had "he's insecure".  We had "he's mentally, psychologically, and physically incapable of relationships with the players".

 

It's so blatant that one could practically use it as a training exercise for a workplace class on the topic of how to address problem behaviors without making it personal - on the "don't do this" side of the ledger.

 

I have a hard time believing that players who a coach has "no relationship with" would be extremely forceful in their support for him and give very very strong opinions of what they think of him, with almost all of it being positive.  Almost no chance this would happen...if that was true their support would be tepid, in this case the players almost acted as if they took it as an attack on themselves as well and took it personal.  That's not the sign of a coach that has no relationship with his players, that is the sign of a coach that has a great relationship with his players.

 

Actions speak far louder than stories or words written down...and their actions spoke volumes.  And them going Ape Sh** in the locker room when McD was given a game ball is pretty much all you need to know about what they thought about that article...oh yeah, their play on the field kinda summed it up also.  They coulda folded on him and instead they fought for him.

Edited December 15, 2023 by Big Turk

[Scott7975]

2 minutes ago, Big Turk said:

 

I have a hard time believing that players who a coach has "no relationship with" would be extremely forceful in their support for him and give very very strong opinions of what they think of him, with almost all of it being positive.  Almost no chance this would happen...if that was true their support would be tepid, in this case the players almost acted as if they took it as an attack on themselves as well and took it personal.  That's not the sign of a coach that has no relationship with his players, that is the sign of a coach that has a great relationship with his players.

 

Actions speak far louder than stories or words written down...and their actions spoke volumes.

 

I said this before but... When you are a guy that is in charge of that many people for that many years, there are going to be conflicting personalities.  There will be people that like you and people that don't.  It's just human.

[Big Turk]

6 minutes ago, Scott7975 said:

 

I said this before but... When you are a guy that is in charge of that many people for that many years, there are going to be conflicting personalities.  There will be people that like you and people that don't.  It's just human.

 

Of course...anyone in any type of management role anywhere will have that happen.  But the current players took that article personally and took it as an attack on them as well and they pretty much to a man voiced their strong support of McD when they didn't have to. They could have just gone the route of not saying much about it speak volumes of their actual thoughts. Instead they came out and strongly disagreed with the article.  That doesn't happen unless they actually mean it...there was real emotion behind that.

 

Their actions when McD got the game ball when they went bonkers in the locker room after the game tells you all you need to know...actions speak a lot louder than a reporters articles.  And their play on the field, fighting for a coach they could have just as easily folded on if it was true also spoke volumes.

Edited December 15, 2023 by Big Turk

[JohnNord]

2 hours ago, Beck Water said:

Got a link to said podcast?

 

I got a chuckle, is Dunne truly “hiding from an angry mob” on Twitter?

I added the link…

 

As far as Dunne he’s definitely keeping a low profile on Twitter.  He released two new GoLong podcasts - neither of he promoted on Twitter.  It’s a far contrast from his own Substack site where he issued a scathing response to the controversy.

 

Like the podcast mentioned, had the article simply been framed differently the response likely wouldn’t have been as negative 

[GunnerBill]

3 hours ago, Scott7975 said:

 

I said this before but... When you are a guy that is in charge of that many people for that many years, there are going to be conflicting personalities.  There will be people that like you and people that don't.  It's just human.

 

And especially a personality like McDermott's. I totally understand how he can rub people up the wrong way and some of the sources Dunne quotes and the examples they give are totally believable in that sense. But it doesn't equate to "and that is how everyone feels." 

5 hours ago, JohnNord said:

If you listen to the first 15 minutes of the Bruce Exclusive podcast, he does a brilliant job discussing the problem with the series.  

 

His point is that the articles were an “editorial with sources” but were not framed that way.    Instead they were framed almost like an investigative piece. 
 

Bruce said that for years, Dunne has expressed the opinion that Sean McDermott is the problem in Buffalo.  So he started writing the series with that opinion, and found evidence (through sources) to help lend credibility to his opinion.  
 

Dunne is “driving the car and steering where it goes.”  This was my main takeaway and the biggest criticism I had when people said “well he did include positive things about McDermott too.”   Bruce just did a much better job articulating what I meant to say!  
 

This was always a well-sources editorial and not a balanced news story.  I feel if people took the series as his opinion, rather than proof of McDermott as a coach - the response would have been different and Dunne could stop hiding from the angry mob on Twitter and wouldn’t have to hide his thoughts behind a wall.  
 

 

 

Yea it was definitely a conclusion first then find the evidence piece rather than a true investigation into the Bills culture under McDermott. It is why I say it wasn't really a piece of journalism. If you pitched that to an editor in a proper journalistic organisation they'd veto it. You have much more freedom to do that in a blog type medium like the one Dunne uses.

[JohnNord]

3 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

And especially a personality like McDermott's. I totally understand how he can rub people up the wrong way and some of the sources Dunne quotes and the examples they give are totally believable in that sense. But it doesn't equate to "and that is how everyone feels." 

 

Yea it was definitely a conclusion first then find the evidence piece rather than a true investigation into the Bills culture under McDermott. It is why I say it wasn't really a piece of journalism. If you pitched that to an editor in a proper journalistic organisation they'd veto it. You have much more freedom to do that in a blog type medium like the one Dunne uses.

Oh yeah they would reject it in the length alone!

 

The thing is writing an editorial is a type of journalism,  but it’s not the type of unbiased reporting you’d see three long articles with anonymous sources.

 

That’s where I think the lines got blurred a bit.  It seems that rather than positing the series as his opinion, Dunne presented it almost as an investigative report that went behind closed doors.   When he went on Colin Cowherd, he didn’t say “Here’s why I think Sean is the problem.”  It was “here’s why Sean McDermott is the problem”

 

So right off the bat, fans started question his bias.  Of course, it’s an editorial so he should be biased - his mind is already made up.  
 

But that…and some of the personal shots is why I don’t think Dunne got what he was looking for from this article 

[PromoTheRobot]

31 minutes ago, JohnNord said:

 

But that…and some of the personal shots is why I don’t think Dunne got what he was looking for from this article 

 

He got $8 from me, but that's it.

[Nextmanup]

18 hours ago, Rico said:

 

"Heh, heh!"

Is it just me, or is he actively (though perhaps subconsciously) compensating for his lack of hair on the top of his head by growing that thick beard?  Certainly not the first man to go this route.

 

It looks funny to me.  Good face for writing.  LOL

[Scott7975]

4 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

And especially a personality like McDermott's. I totally understand how he can rub people up the wrong way and some of the sources Dunne quotes and the examples they give are totally believable in that sense. But it doesn't equate to "and that is how everyone feels." 

 

Yea it was definitely a conclusion first then find the evidence piece rather than a true investigation into the Bills culture under McDermott. It is why I say it wasn't really a piece of journalism. If you pitched that to an editor in a proper journalistic organisation they'd veto it. You have much more freedom to do that in a blog type medium like the one Dunne uses.

Yeah, I agree with that.

[JohnNord]

21 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

He got $8 from me, but that's it.

Me too… but I feel we are largely in the minority among Bills fans.  You can tell who read the series and who didn’t 

[Simon]

31 minutes ago, Nextmanup said:

Is it just me, or is he actively (though perhaps subconsciously) compensating for his lack of hair on the top of his head by growing that thick beard?  Certainly not the first man to go this route.

 

It looks funny to me.  Good face for writing.  LOL

 

[Rico]

34 minutes ago, Nextmanup said:

Is it just me, or is he actively (though perhaps subconsciously) compensating for his lack of hair on the top of his head by growing that thick beard?  Certainly not the first man to go this route.

 

It looks funny to me.  Good face for writing.  LOL

At least the slob got all the food out of his beard.