Risin Posted August 9, 2006 Posted August 9, 2006 Banks Shots 1. We're not expecting Bills head coach Dick Jauron to come out and declare a winner just yet, but the dots are starting to get connected in favor of quarterback J.P. Losman. Losman could still jeopardize his standing with shaky performances in the first two preseason games, but the former first-round pick has turned in mostly solid showings in practice, while veteran Kelly Holcomb has struggled mightily at times. In a Tuesday night practice, Holcomb was 16 of 22, but threw three ugly interceptions, fumbled once and was sacked twice. Losman was 15-of-23 during the same practice, but did not have a turnover. Losman winning the job is the best good development Buffalo could hope for. The Bills need to find out one way or another this year what they have in him before they can move forward as an organization. Having Holcomb, a 10th-year veteran, as the starter would be applying a band-aid to the position. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writ...ills/index.html Take it, for what it's worth...
true_blue_bill Posted August 9, 2006 Posted August 9, 2006 Banks Shots1. We're not expecting Bills head coach Dick Jauron to come out and declare a winner just yet, but the dots are starting to get connected in favor of quarterback J.P. Losman. Losman could still jeopardize his standing with shaky performances in the first two preseason games, but the former first-round pick has turned in mostly solid showings in practice, while veteran Kelly Holcomb has struggled mightily at times. In a Tuesday night practice, Holcomb was 16 of 22, but threw three ugly interceptions, fumbled once and was sacked twice. Losman was 15-of-23 during the same practice, but did not have a turnover. Losman winning the job is the best good development Buffalo could hope for. The Bills need to find out one way or another this year what they have in him before they can move forward as an organization. Having Holcomb, a 10th-year veteran, as the starter would be applying a band-aid to the position. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writ...ills/index.html Take it, for what it's worth... 739516[/snapback] If that new guy Marv signed is any good at all, I bet Holcomb is cut by the end of camp
Dawgg Posted August 9, 2006 Posted August 9, 2006 Smart plan.... NOT If that new guy Marv signed is any good at all, I bet Holcomb is cut by the end of camp 739522[/snapback]
Albany,n.y. Posted August 9, 2006 Posted August 9, 2006 If that new guy Marv signed is any good at all, I bet Holcomb is cut by the end of camp 739522[/snapback] Why cut a guy when we can get an 8th round pick for him?
Nanker Posted August 9, 2006 Posted August 9, 2006 Hi. My name is Nanker. I'm new to the board. I'm a big Helly Kolcum fan too. I hope there's no truth to your vischious ruemor. Ssssst Sssst Sssst
Kelly the Dog Posted August 10, 2006 Posted August 10, 2006 I guess I wouldn't put my stock in this article and analysis, this morning the headline to that piece is "Sweet and Losman". I guess in order to accurately know the abilities of a player, you need to accurately know how to pronounce his name. Granted, there are likely headline writers there. But still, where are the editors. That's simply embarrassing. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/...s/preview/2006/
UnionAMG Posted August 10, 2006 Posted August 10, 2006 I guess I wouldn't put my stock in this article and analysis, this morning the headline to that piece is "Sweet and Losman". I guess in order to accurately know the abilities of a player, you need to accurately know how to pronounce his name. Granted, there are likely headline writers there. But still, where are the editors. That's simply embarrassing. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/...s/preview/2006/ 739842[/snapback] In all honesty I don't know if the correct pronunciation has ever been decided on. I seem to remember when he was first drafted, BB.com putting out the story on him with a specific comment on how to pronounce it correctly (that way being low-sman... in the way you would say sweet and low). But a lot of analysts persisted to call him loss-man, perhaps with the negative connotation included purposely. Anyways, pronouncing a players name one way or another (though infuriating to some fans) doesn't prevent someone from giving a proper analysis of their talent.
Dan Gross Posted August 10, 2006 Posted August 10, 2006 In all honesty I don't know if the correct pronunciation has ever been decided on. I seem to remember when he was first drafted, BB.com putting out the story on him with a specific comment on how to pronounce it correctly (that way being low-sman... in the way you would say sweet and low). But a lot of analysts persisted to call him loss-man, perhaps with the negative connotation included purposely. Anyways, pronouncing a players name one way or another (though infuriating to some fans) doesn't prevent someone from giving a proper analysis of their talent. 739948[/snapback] Ask stevestojan. he knows.... BTW, it is officially Loss-man, AFAIK.
Kelly the Dog Posted August 10, 2006 Posted August 10, 2006 In all honesty I don't know if the correct pronunciation has ever been decided on. I seem to remember when he was first drafted, BB.com putting out the story on him with a specific comment on how to pronounce it correctly (that way being low-sman... in the way you would say sweet and low). But a lot of analysts persisted to call him loss-man, perhaps with the negative connotation included purposely. Anyways, pronouncing a players name one way or another (though infuriating to some fans) doesn't prevent someone from giving a proper analysis of their talent. 739948[/snapback] It's Loss-man. It always has been. He should know. And by now, all decent reporters should, too.
Lori Posted August 10, 2006 Posted August 10, 2006 It's Loss-man. It always has been. He should know. And by now, all decent reporters should, too. 739972[/snapback] Correct. I mean, c'mon - there's a pronunciation guide in last year's media guide, as well as in every single weekly game release. (Then again, considering the number of mistakes found in last year's media guide, maybe that isn't the most trustworthy point of reference... ) Addendum: the official pronunciation, direct from this week's press release, is "LAAS-man (like Los Angeles)".
Kelly the Dog Posted August 10, 2006 Posted August 10, 2006 Correct. I mean, c'mon - there's a pronunciation guide in last year's media guide, as well as in every single weekly game release. (Then again, considering the number of mistakes found in last year's media guide, maybe that isn't the most trustworthy point of reference... ) 739976[/snapback] Of course, apparently Henrik Talleender and Toni Luhdman changed their own names this year.
yall Posted August 10, 2006 Posted August 10, 2006 I'm just happy the writer recognized the fact that the Bills get no love from the league.
UnionAMG Posted August 10, 2006 Posted August 10, 2006 Of course, apparently Henrik Talleender and Toni Luhdman changed their own names this year. 739982[/snapback] Finally found a Draft Profile for JP on the Tulane website. All the way at the bottom of the pdf document. It is Loss-men. http://graphics.fansonly.com/photos/school...n-draft-bio.pdf Like I said, I thought at one point, people were calling him Lows-men... so I just didn't know what was correct. Bad headline for the article, but it still doesn't discredit what is written about him. Chances are Banks didn't even write the headline.
Kelly the Dog Posted August 10, 2006 Posted August 10, 2006 Finally found a Draft Profile for JP on the Tulane website. All the way at the bottom of the pdf document. It is Loss-men. http://graphics.fansonly.com/photos/school...n-draft-bio.pdf Like I said, I thought at one point, people were calling him Lows-men... so I just didn't know what was correct. Bad headline for the article, but it still doesn't discredit what is written about him. Chances are Banks didn't even write the headline. 739989[/snapback] True. And I agree with the article myself, as well as stated in the original post there are probably headline writers at the site. Still, it's just plain bad. Also, when I wrote Loss-man, it should have been men like you wrote/linked, that's what I meant and the correct way to pronounce it (like "human" is usually sounded "humen").
Pyrite Gal Posted August 10, 2006 Posted August 10, 2006 Correct. I mean, c'mon - there's a pronunciation guide in last year's media guide, as well as in every single weekly game release. (Then again, considering the number of mistakes found in last year's media guide, maybe that isn't the most trustworthy point of reference... ) Addendum: the official pronunciation, direct from this week's press release, is "LAAS-man (like Los Angeles)". 739976[/snapback] Even knowing the correct pronunciation it seems easily close enough to me to write a headline that is a play on words or pronunciation. In fact, since the practice at many newspapers is to have the headline writing and the articile writing being separate functions, holding this faux pas against the writers seems like going way overboard to me. We may want to lighten up a little bit here.
eball Posted August 10, 2006 Posted August 10, 2006 Even knowing the correct pronunciation it seems easily close enough to me to write a headline that is a play on words or pronunciation. In fact, since the practice at many newspapers is to have the headline writing and the articile writing being separate functions, holding this faux pas against the writers seems like going way overboard to me. We may want to lighten up a little bit here. 740020[/snapback] I agree; who the hell cares about accuracy? I just hope JP Lozenge is a great QB for the Bills this year.
Risin Posted August 10, 2006 Author Posted August 10, 2006 I agree; who the hell cares about accuracy? I just hope JP Lozenge is a great QB for the Bills this year. 740024[/snapback]
RunTheBall Posted August 10, 2006 Posted August 10, 2006 I always find it interesting when these columnists for national magazine come to camp for a day and then have to write an article about it. For people who follow their team, it becomes immediately obvious that these guys don't know jack **** about the team they're visiting. Case in point, besides all the obvious declarations in Banks' article, doesn't he also refer to Josh Reed as the definitive #2 receiver on this team? Anyone with a passing knowledge of the Bills will know what Josh has gone through over the past few years and understand that calling him the #2 at this point is just ridiculous. I'm surprised Don didn't refer to Coy Wire as the #1 safety on the team. RTB
generaLee83 Posted August 11, 2006 Posted August 11, 2006 Hi.My name is Nanker. I'm new to the board. I'm a big Helly Kolcum fan too. I hope there's no truth to your vischious ruemor. Ssssst Sssst Sssst 739567[/snapback] Weird, totally weird.
Shamrock Posted August 11, 2006 Posted August 11, 2006 True. And I agree with the article myself, as well as stated in the original post there are probably headline writers at the site. Still, it's just plain bad. Also, when I wrote Loss-man, it should have been men like you wrote/linked, that's what I meant and the correct way to pronounce it (like "human" is usually sounded "humen"). 740010[/snapback] This thread sounds an awful lot like you're trying to speak "Aussie"
Recommended Posts