apuszczalowski Posted January 16, 2007 Posted January 16, 2007 Nothing can divert attention away from the "I hate the Pats" posts like Willis bashing. There are "I hate the Pats" posts? I'll I have seen are ones crowning them winners of the SB and talking about how we should all be Pats fans because they are a team we should all strive to be like.
MRW Posted January 16, 2007 Posted January 16, 2007 Peter/Ramius/Willis Apologists, Nobody would be saying anything about Willis if he simply was a "productive" running back. Antonwain Smith was by no means a good RB here but at least he was consistent. Travis Henry had his shortcomings, but at least he laid it out on the field everytime he went out there... and those are the types of players that this town identifies with. Perhaps the slams on Willis' intelligence are harsh and/or unjustified... but if his production came close to matching the hype and if he played hard on a consistent basis, nobody would be bringing up the ticky tac things going on in his personal life. Yeah, it's not like anyone ever ripped on Travis Henry or Antowain Smith in unreasonable ways. Oh wait, they were drummed out of town in pretty much the same way that Willis is. Strange. Well everyone, enjoy another two-minute hate! Who's next on the list after Willis?
generaLee83 Posted January 16, 2007 Posted January 16, 2007 Nice of jerry to pass judgement and make the claim that people who have kids out of wedlock are low-lifes. I think he was more slamming Willis in that he had to go through a paternity suit before he would acknowledge that the children in question were actually his. 3 kids 3 different mothers is usually an indicator that something is wrong, especially when you're 25 years old. who cares about the whole marriage thing, it's the sheer numbers that Willis puts out that are baffling.
generaLee83 Posted January 16, 2007 Posted January 16, 2007 Yeah, it's not like anyone ever ripped on Travis Henry or Antowain Smith in unreasonable ways. Oh wait, they were drummed out of town in pretty much the same way that Willis is. Strange. Well everyone, enjoy another two-minute hate! Who's next on the list after Willis? While I agree that Smith received some uneccesary hatin, TH and WM both deserve(d) it greatly. Willis took the one major concern on every true fans mind (relocation) and slammed it back into our faces.
DrDawkinstein Posted January 16, 2007 Posted January 16, 2007 im not reading this whole thread, nor am i reading the whole Jerry Sullivan article. i dont know whats worse: the fact that most posters here are now no better than jerry sullivan or the fact that jerry sullivan is basically a long-winded, paid, message board poster either way at least we're not talking about how great a team the pats are edit: ok, i went back and read the article, figuring it was the only fair thing to do... that was pitiful. ive read better written posts on here about the same thing. im pretty sure Sullivan just drudges this place for material and doesnt even bother thinking about it.
The Big Cat Posted January 16, 2007 Posted January 16, 2007 jerry sullivan is basically a long-winded, paid, message board poster yeah...he's a journalist.
DrDawkinstein Posted January 16, 2007 Posted January 16, 2007 but he should be better at it, is my point
generaLee83 Posted January 16, 2007 Posted January 16, 2007 either way at least we're not talking about how great a team the pats are you make a fine point Doctor Cannabis
bbills17 Posted January 16, 2007 Posted January 16, 2007 That is great. I am doing the same. Yet, I am not going to pass judgment on this situation -- especially given that I have only heard one side of it. I am sure that you and the others (including Sullivan) are without sin and are able to pass moral judgments on Willis. As best as I can tell, Willis had sex with women to whom he is not married. What percentage of the people on this board have had sex with someone to whom they are not married? What percentage of the Buffalo Bills or any other team in any professional league has? Willis did not use protection. Should he have? Of course, he should have -- especially given his situation. I know I would have. Yet, I wonder what percentage of the guys on this board have had sex at least once in their lives without a condom? Why didn't the mothers of these kids use protection or insist that WM use protection? Should Willis spend time with his kids? How do we know that he does not? Well, from at least July through the end of December, we know that he is in Buffalo. As for the rest of the year, we know that he does not live with the mothers. As for the rest of the time, all I can say is that the most enjoyable and rewarding time that I have on this earth is with my wife and son and family. I would recommend that he do the same. As I said in another post, he who is without sin should cast the first stone. It is comforting to know that we have so many posters on this board (and at least one columnist) that are without sin. Quick story. I have a friend who went out with this smoking hot 20 year old girl. At the time, he was about 40. She told him that her OB/GYN told her that she was incapable of having children. Fast forward a few months. She tells him that she is pregant. He responds: what is the name of the OB/GYN who told you that you could not have kids? She has no response. You talk about everyone else's ulterior motives. What are yours? What is with your constant love affair with Willis? As I've said for the last 18 months, Willis is as average as you get as far as SKILLS go. Come on, take all the responsibilities of a RB and grade Willis, if you still think Willis is a top-5 RB and it's all our line, you really need to watch football a little closer. The guy is far worse than multiple rookies from this year, and is easily in the bottom half of the league. Why everyone else can see it (including Ralph), but you can't, is beyond me. Let's not even start on how much of a moron WM is to boot.
DrDawkinstein Posted January 16, 2007 Posted January 16, 2007 You talk about everyone else's ulterior motives. What are yours? What is with your constant love affair with Willis? As I've said for the last 18 months, Willis is as average as you get as far as SKILLS go. Come on, take all the responsibilities of a RB and grade Willis, if you still think Willis is a top-5 RB and it's all our line, you really need to watch football a little closer. The guy is far worse than multiple rookies from this year, and is easily in the bottom half of the league. Why everyone else can see it (including Ralph), but you can't, is beyond me. Let's not even start on how much of a moron WM is to boot. the problem is youre arguing about his onfield performance which is what we SHOULD be talking about. peter is just saying that everyone should mind their own PERSONAL business. i dont need to know about Willis' 3 kids to know i dont want him on the team. nor should his 3 kids matter to ANYONE here. the fact that he failed to reach 1000 yards should completely overshadow this whole child thing. but in todays day and age people cant see the difference between celebrity gossip and real news.
Ramius Posted January 16, 2007 Posted January 16, 2007 Peter/Ramius/Willis Apologists, Nobody would be saying anything about Willis if he simply was a "productive" running back. Antonwain Smith was by no means a good RB here but at least he was consistent. Travis Henry had his shortcomings, but at least he laid it out on the field everytime he went out there... and those are the types of players that this town identifies with. Perhaps the slams on Willis' intelligence are harsh and/or unjustified... but if his production came close to matching the hype and if he played hard on a consistent basis, nobody would be bringing up the ticky tac things going on in his personal life. And theres the whole problem right there. When people argue against willis and dislike him because his football ability (or lack thereof), thats fine. I may argue the point, but it makes sense. When you argue that willis doesnt hit holes hard enough and thats why you want him gone, thats a perfectly logical arguement. The problem i have is that people now want willis gone because he knocked up a few chicks. Its a double standard. If willis had just run for 1500 yards and 12 TD's, we'd be seeing posts like "Damn willis can keep on knocking out kids if he keeps running like that" Why does someone's views on willis' off the field issues change with his on the field performance?
tennesseeboy Posted January 16, 2007 Posted January 16, 2007 And theres the whole problem right there. When people argue against willis and dislike him because his football ability (or lack thereof), thats fine. I may argue the point, but it makes sense. When you argue that willis doesnt hit holes hard enough and thats why you want him gone, thats a perfectly logical arguement. The problem i have is that people now want willis gone because he knocked up a few chicks. Its a double standard. If willis had just run for 1500 yards and 12 TD's, we'd be seeing posts like "Damn willis can keep on knocking out kids if he keeps running like that" Why does someone's views on willis' off the field issues change with his on the field performance? I want willis gone because he isn't a very good running back. I think I've been saying that all freakin season. Good football players are not always nice people (OJ, anyone?) On the other hand...being a football player doesn't isolate a person from criticism. The willis jock sniffers have a tough enough time convincing the rational among us that we should keep a very average running back whining through his agent about his contract. They don't have to attempt to justify the guy's off the field foibles as well.
DrDawkinstein Posted January 16, 2007 Posted January 16, 2007 I want willis gone because he isn't a very good running back. I think I've been saying that all freakin season. Good football players are not always nice people (OJ, anyone?) On the other hand...being a football player doesn't isolate a person from criticism. The willis jock sniffers have a tough enough time convincing the rational among us that we should keep a very average running back whining through his agent about his contract. They don't have to attempt to justify the guy's off the field foibles as well. his "off field foibles" shouldnt even be talked about. he didnt kill anyone, he didnt steal anything, no crimes have been committed. its NOT news. you guys need to stop watching E! television.
truth on hold Posted January 16, 2007 Posted January 16, 2007 Excellent...and I mean EXCELLENT slam of Willis. http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20070...?tbd1066004.asp this sullivan guy needs to get off willis' nuts. there was a very noticeable drop off when you went from willis (above average back) to anthony thomas (below average back) ... the last thing this fragile offense needs is to lose a run game. and his value goes beyong pure yardage stats ... he is clearly one of the best blockers in the league at his position. remember when he pancacked minnesota's 300+ pound NT wlliams? (i'm still chapped by the way that didn't show up on "jacked up.") you really want to take away this support from a fragile pass blocking Oline? willis has another year here and he will play hard knowing that at the end he can score big in free agency if he performs. when willis tries hard he goes from above average to one of the best (e.g. the game against Jets in New Jersey when he was trying to show up his buddy Vilma.) if you get interviewed often enough like willis of course you will say something thats either taken out of context, wish you hadnt said or would have said differently if you had more time to consider. sullivan acts like he and everyone he knows is some little angel that never had an indiscretion. there was no reason for him to get personal about a 25 year old kid like willis who's been through hell with the knee injury. i mean does this clown really think willis is the only nfl player with a kid out of wedlock .... ever hear of matt leinart, brian urlacher, etc etc? hello! sullivan should go write columns for "church weekly" or something about how high and mighty he is, while all the while he's getting altar boys drunk on church wine and hitting on them.
Cornerville Posted January 16, 2007 Posted January 16, 2007 And theres the whole problem right there. When people argue against willis and dislike him because his football ability (or lack thereof), thats fine. I may argue the point, but it makes sense. When you argue that willis doesnt hit holes hard enough and thats why you want him gone, thats a perfectly logical arguement. The problem i have is that people now want willis gone because he knocked up a few chicks. Its a double standard. If willis had just run for 1500 yards and 12 TD's, we'd be seeing posts like "Damn willis can keep on knocking out kids if he keeps running like that" Why does someone's views on willis' off the field issues change with his on the field performance? Bingo. if Willis was let's say, performing like LT....I bet this thread would be much different now. Seems that as long as NFL players are performing...not many people care of they take roids or whatever. With other sports like baseball, it is a different standard. Bottom line: lack of production coupled with issues off the field are a bad mix, especially for a team who had attendence issues and have not made the playoffs in 7 years. I see Willis getting traded to the Giants.
sweetbaboo Posted January 16, 2007 Posted January 16, 2007 stevestojan, I'm not happy with Willis but Jerry Sullivan turned into Michael Moore in that piece he wrote
DrDawkinstein Posted January 16, 2007 Posted January 16, 2007 id say hes more of a ken starr. so obsessed with personal stuff that doesnt matter, he's missing all the good stuff to argue about
keepthefaith Posted January 16, 2007 Posted January 16, 2007 stevestojan, I'm not happy with Willis but Jerry Sullivan turned into Michael Moore in that piece he wrote I would expect Allen Wilson (or is it Alan) to write the rebuttal column any day now.
Adam Posted January 16, 2007 Posted January 16, 2007 wouldn't break my heart to trade him and draft Bush or Irons
BuffaloWings Posted January 16, 2007 Posted January 16, 2007 I'm commenting on the general story, since I don't have time to read through the entire thread... Sullivan is right in that Marv can't have it both ways. We want a stud RB, but one that shows professionalism and class in everything he does. Let's keep in mind that is a rare combination. His most recent comments/actions aside, Ladanian Tomlinson has arguably exhibited the most class of any stud RB I've ever seen. That said, I'd rather have the type of guy Marv is looking for than some egocentric, free-wheeling personality who will rack up the numbers. The former is more of a team player than the latter, IMO. So, I'd agree with Jerry Sullivan. Marv would be best suited to either let Willis go after next year or find a team to which he can trade him right now. This year's class of RBs is pretty good, so I figure if Marv can get a 2nd rounder for Willis, he should jump at the chance.
Recommended Posts