Bill from NYC Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 Yeah, that's what I thought... but why did they call it "muddy love" ... they can't use the word "anal" anymore? I mean, i thought what they were talking about was like, pooping on each other (for lack of a more Politically correct way of saying it). . . Anyway, no, i never heard those guys with the bong. I normally listen from 8:30 - 9:30 on my ride to work. And I often get into near accidents from laughing so hard. "Hi Daddy" 71011[/snapback] Bro, what is that "Hi Daddy" thing about with High Pitched Eric on the Howard Stern show? Was he in a gay porno movie? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EndZoneCrew Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 yup...no more anal...it'ts getting ridiculous...anyways...I did enjoy them yelling at Ronie the Limo driver for an hour...did you hear the songs that they made making fun of him..."Uptown Jew" instead of "uptown girl".....classics! -"Hey, you wanna lollipop" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevestojan Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 yup...no more anal...it'ts getting ridiculous...anyways...I did enjoy them yelling at Ronie the Limo driver for an hour...did you hear the songs that they made making fun of him..."Uptown Jew" instead of "uptown girl".....classics!-"Hey, you wanna lollipop" 71031[/snapback] yeah, but I believe the words are "Uptight Jew" ... i was dying listening to that... But back to the point, they can't say "Anal Sex", but they can say "Muddy Love"? Wow, no wonder he's moving to satelite. Also, today, funnier than them ripping on Ronnie was when they tore apart the caller who called to try to tip on Ronnie. The drunk who still lived with his mom.. did you hear that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevestojan Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 Bro, what is that "Hi Daddy" thing about with High Pitched Eric on the Howard Stern show? Was he in a gay porno movie? 71025[/snapback] First of all, its funny as hell, and cracks me up every time. But, here's where its from: There is a porn "star" named "Max Hardcore", who basically defiles girls in his videos, making total wh---s out of them. He then makes them say "hi" to their parents on the video after he has had their way with them. So, they have a clip of one of the girls saying "Hi daddy", so they made highpitch do it... its too damn funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 Bro, what is that "Hi Daddy" thing about with High Pitched Eric on the Howard Stern show? Was he in a gay porno movie? 71025[/snapback] I don't get Stern anymore down here, but if memory serves wasn't it High Pitch or Fred the elephant boy that actually did do a gay porno a few years ago? Or maybe both of them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 I have to admit, as much as I like Mularkey, my respect for his approach to the team continues to go in the wrong direction. Shaw's release was so fuggin transparent...a desperate move of a desperate team to send a message that they're not going to tolerate mental mistakes. But the team's 3-season stretch of losing has already told the world that they ARE going to tolerate mental mistakes. I've run out of ammo to defend the Bills front office. We just solved a serious problem for them. They had 2 healthy receivers. Now they have 3. Watch him produce, Mike. Ridiculousl 70932[/snapback] oh no!! the patriots signed shaw!! now he will give away all of the bills' internal secrets and strategies that have enabled them to go 4-0 and establish themselves as a super bowl contend......umm, forget it. <yawn> it's really sad that you're letting something like this bother you so much. shaw meant nothing to the bills. who the hell cares if new england can get some use out of him? and if the players were shocked by the move, that's not a bad thing. the atmosphere has been too "cushy" at one bills drive for too long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nodnarb Posted October 15, 2004 Author Share Posted October 15, 2004 oh no!! the patriots signed shaw!! now he will give away all of the bills' internal secrets and strategies that have enabled them to go 4-0 and establish themselves as a super bowl contend......umm, forget it. <yawn> it's really sad that you're letting something like this bother you so much. shaw meant nothing to the bills. who the hell cares if new england can get some use out of him? and if the players were shocked by the move, that's not a bad thing. the atmosphere has been too "cushy" at one bills drive for too long. 71136[/snapback] He meant nothing? Does Josh Reed mean nothing? No? Well how do you explain the fact that Shaw has OUTPRODUCED Reed ever since he arrived in Buffalo? He meant nothing? Why were the players so obviously shocked and dismayed by his release? He meant nothing? Watch the Schitt hit the fan for this offense if we have an injury there. And watch Shaw perform well for the Pats. Bobby is an underrated receiver who is being used to send a message about missed assignments. If that was the approach the team takes with players, Bledsoe would have been released after the Raiders game. He was pathetic. I'm tired of being positive and then disappointed. As much as i like mike mularkey, he hasn't shown me anything, and this decision smacks of desperation and scapegoating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 ITEM: Even though he had the highest yds-per-catch average of any WR on Pittsburgh's roster, Shaw's touches went down in 2001 after Mularkey took over as OC. He was out the door to Jacksonville after that season. And when you read about the Steelers WRs during MM's tenure in Pgh., one consistent theme is their "physical" play. ITEM: As Shaw's agent mentioned the other day, a worried Shaw called him when MM was hired here in Buffalo, wondering if he was about to be phased out of the offense. ITEM: Whenever talking about Josh Reed, MM makes sure to mention that Reed is probably the best blocking WR on the team. ITEM: Sam Aiken has been seeing more PT lately, after starting the season mostly as a blocker on obvious running plays. Also, Aiken outweighs Shaw by 20 pounds. Given Mularkey's stated commitment to "smash-mouth football", anyone else think his problems with Shaw don't even have anything to do with the passing game? Maybe we should be rerunning tape of Shaw on RUNNING plays, and see how committed he is to blocking. Just a thought.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nodnarb Posted October 15, 2004 Author Share Posted October 15, 2004 I respectfully disagree with the implied conclusions, Lori. Telling him he was #5 on the depth chart would have been enough of a "message". The fact remains that Shaw has outproduced Reed, despite having fewer opportunities. If "production" is the reason, the decision made no sense. If players are going to be cut for a lack of production, why was Bledsoe re-signed to a 3 year extension? What has he done for the Bills, I mean really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 I dunno, nod. From listening to the agent the other day, I was picking up a suggestion of a personality conflict between Shaw/MM that dates back to Pittsburgh. For all we know, maybe Mularkey's been looking for an excuse to run Shaw off ever since he took over. As previously discussed - if anyone else had looked halfway decent in camp, Shaw might not have gotten through the final cut. Do you dump a WR based solely on his ability/inability to block? Maybe not a wise move, but I just have to wonder if that had something to do with it. Just tossing it out there for discussion..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YOOOOOO Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 If the players had reacted to it in such a way that suggested there was something we don't know, I wouldn't say a word. But they were all shocked and dismayed by the move. That tells me it was a "message" move because Shaw let a hot read bounce off his back. Shaw has outplayed Reed this season, and last. Why didn't Reed get the boot? 70941[/snapback] Reed's 24 and Shaw is 30....When both are making mental mistakes and dropping balls....the older guy will always get cut and hope the younger guy comes around...Could you imagine if we cut Reed just to have him sign with the Patriots and become a solid #2 WR.... I think that would hurt alot more then having Shaw be a stop gap for a few weeks while the Pats WR's get healthy.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zow2 Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 oh no!! the patriots signed shaw!! now he will give away all of the bills' internal secrets and strategies that have enabled them to go 4-0 and establish themselves as a super bowl contend......umm, forget it. <yawn> it's really sad that you're letting something like this bother you so much. shaw meant nothing to the bills. who the hell cares if new england can get some use out of him? and if the players were shocked by the move, that's not a bad thing. the atmosphere has been too "cushy" at one bills drive for too long. 71136[/snapback] I agree. As I said in another thread, N.Eng has won 19 in a row and 2 of the last 3 Superbowls. The Bills are not really competing w/ New England at this point in time. We're competing against ourselves and other teams in our class (Miami, Cleve, Cinci, etc...) The Patriots have reached the pinnacle of their existence right now. They can't get any higher. If you really think about it, Bobby Shaw can only make them worse, not better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffalofan72 Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 He may very likely get cut when Branch gets back. 70936[/snapback] agreed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Realist Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 Reed's 24 and Shaw is 30....When both are making mental mistakes and dropping balls....the older guy will always get cut and hope the younger guy comes around...Could you imagine if we cut Reed just to have him sign with the Patriots and become a solid #2 WR.... I think that would hurt alot more then having Shaw be a stop gap for a few weeks while the Pats WR's get healthy.... 71244[/snapback] nod, you keep suggesting Reed is worse than Shaw, but what YOOOOOOOO said above is correct. If neither is producing, you keep the younger guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stussy109 Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 What really sucks the most, is that he knows the entire Bills offense for next time the Bills play the Pats. the Defense will eat us alive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 What really sucks the most, is that he knows the entire Bills offense for next time the Bills play the Pats. the Defense will eat us alive. 71290[/snapback] From what I have seen, Belichick knows our offense alot better than Shaw does. Advantage: Push Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 From what I have seen, Belichick knows our offense alot better than Shaw does. Advantage: Push 71293[/snapback] Nice, on so many levels..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 Nice, on so many levels..... 71296[/snapback] Tip you waitstaff... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
34-78-83 Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 I dunno, nod. From listening to the agent the other day, I was picking up a suggestion of a personality conflict between Shaw/MM that dates back to Pittsburgh. For all we know, maybe Mularkey's been looking for an excuse to run Shaw off ever since he took over. As previously discussed - if anyone else had looked halfway decent in camp, Shaw might not have gotten through the final cut. Do you dump a WR based solely on his ability/inability to block? Maybe not a wise move, but I just have to wonder if that had something to do with it. Just tossing it out there for discussion..... 71238[/snapback] Will either of you even consider the part (even if not the whole reason) that missed hot reads played into this decision? It's right there on tape. I feel like a broken record. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted October 15, 2004 Share Posted October 15, 2004 Will either of you even consider the part (even if not the whole reason) that missed hot reads played into this decision? It's right there on tape. I feel like a broken record. 71307[/snapback] Could trying to catch the ball with the back of his jersey have been the final straw? Absolutely. But I'll stick by the post you quoted - in my opinion MM isn't a Shaw fan, never was, and finally had seen enough to whack him. Were missed hot reads a factor in that? Most likely.... but Shaw's not the only one doing that. He just had less room for error than the high draft picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts