ACor58 Posted August 20, 2009 Posted August 20, 2009 Sal doesn't sound a whole lot different from anyone on this board. I would have a hard time arguing with anyone of the points he has made. FWIW I enjoy his cloumns.
Dr. Trooth Posted August 20, 2009 Posted August 20, 2009 I'd have liked a little bit more optimism. Would you rather Sal sugar coat it or tell the truth? "Captain checkdown"? Is that not an accurate and true description of Trent? This team, in no way resembles either the Bills of 63-66, 79-82, or 88-95..... that's what it takes to get to the playoffs. The Bills go as far as Trent takes them. Until Trent proves otherwise, he is a good backup QB filling a starters role until the Bills get a real starting QB.
Mr. WEO Posted August 20, 2009 Posted August 20, 2009 I like Sal. What's the big deal? He's telling you what he sees and how he feels about camp. Does anybody really want to read the same tired (puff) pieces about the "antics" of players in training camp?? These guys hate camp--it's strictly for the fans. Why else would they put on this show every year, when their real training facility is in OP? Pitoniak wasn't a reporter for some time, no? Before they let him go, he had an occasional column as I recall--certainly not a regular beat.
1billsfan Posted August 20, 2009 Posted August 20, 2009 Ignoring him is the best option, IMO. What?! Guess you'd rather have Bills' beat writers blowing sunshine up your butt. I say bravo Sal, and welcome to the real world! This was the first time I felt a Bills beat writer was being flat out honest without the fake obligatory pre-season optimism. He nails every one of those guys to the wall with very true criticisms. It's up to the players and coaches to prove him wrong. Sal just got his "street cred" for writing that beautifully put, and brutally honest piece. My favorite was the "Captain Checkdown" comment, if Trent can't throw touchdowns this year then he's as good as gone.
Mr. WEO Posted August 20, 2009 Posted August 20, 2009 What?! Guess you'd rather have Bills' beat writers blowing sunshine up your butt. I say bravo Sal, and welcome to the real world! This was the first time I felt a Bills beat writer was being flat out honest without the fake obligatory pre-season optimism. He nails every one of those guys to the wall with very true criticisms. It's up to the players and coaches to prove him wrong. Sal just got his "street cred" for writing that beautifully put, and brutally honest piece. My favorite was the "Captain Checkdown" comment, if Trent can't throw touchdowns this year then he's as good as gone. If he did not have the "ignore" option, he would have to spend a lot of time with his fingers in his ears saying "nahnahnahnahnahnah" when people were saying bad things.
The Dean Posted August 20, 2009 Posted August 20, 2009 What?! Guess you'd rather have Bills' beat writers blowing sunshine up your butt. Nope. Just don't care to read accounts from a guy who writes as if he hates what he does, and who manages to only file a report once a week. (Yes, I guess he Twitters quite a bit. Whatever.) You may call this report "realistic" but I call it "acerbic". Some might call it "curmudgeonly", but I don't think Sal has the gravitas for that label. I don't want, or expect, a WNY sports reporter to blow "sunshine up my butt", but some balance in the reporting might be nice. I'd also like to believe the reporter actually LIKES the sport he/she is covering, to some degree. TJ Simers was (maybe still is) the lead NFL writer for the LA Times. The guy HATES the NFL, or so it seems. He has said as much, and it comes out in his writing. Same with the Buffalo New columnist, Jerry Sullivan. He may not be a beat writer, but when he chooses to write about football (and specifically the Bills) I usually get the sense he really doesn't like the sport, or team, very much. It's hard to read an account of something from someone who has no love for what they cover, IMO.
nucci Posted August 20, 2009 Posted August 20, 2009 Nope. Just don't care to read accounts from a guy who writes as if he hates what he does, and who manages to only file a report once a week. (Yes, I guess he Twitters quite a bit. Whatever.) You may call this report "realistic" but I call it "acerbic". Some might call it "curmudgeonly", but I don't think Sal has the gravitas for that label. I don't want, or expect, a WNY sports reporter to blow "sunshine up my butt", but some balance in the reporting might be nice. I'd also like to believe the reporter actually LIKES the sport he/she is covering, to some degree. TJ Simers was (maybe still is) the lead NFL writer for the LA Times. The guy HATES the NFL, or so it seems. He has said as much, and it comes out in his writing. Same with the Buffalo New columnist, Jerry Sullivan. He may not be a beat writer, but when he chooses to write about football (and specifically the Bills) I usually get the sense he really doesn't like the sport, or team, very much. It's hard to read an account of something from someone who has no love for what they cover, IMO.
Dan Posted August 20, 2009 Posted August 20, 2009 Heh. When I first talked about applying for credentials, one of the veterans on the beat -- not Sal, by the way -- thought it was a grand idea. He told me, "Why should you be spared the boredom of watching practice?" Caught up to him after one of last week's sessions; when he saw me, he shook his head, chuckled, and said, "You really need to find something better to do with your free time." Not sure very many of them are thrilled about hanging out in Pittsford (or making the drive there) to watch camp fodder. Some just hide it better than Sal does ... A little background: not only is he the lone man on the beat (other than Leo's columns for home games), he also gets to join the Twitter revolution. Over 250 employer-mandated tweets since the beginning of June, most of them since camp opened, including a running commentary during the Bears game. (To compare, BuffNews normally has Gaughan, Wilson, a columnist, and at least one other guy in the box at the Ralph.) I saw him on three separate occasions at SJF, and every single time, he was headed to the workroom to take care of that -- not supposed to tweet from the sideline -- before writing his stories. Blog's way down that list. Which begs the question... how much is too much? So you're hired to write articles. Then the news goes 24/7. So now you're writing an article every day. How much research and editing can be done in less than a day anyway? Then the internet age comes to fruition and you have blogs in between the daily articles. Because someone decided we need to hear people's informal thoughts in between the daily articles they're writing. Now, you have the tweets. Why? Because I have to know every waking thought in someone's head? What's next a direct live feed to a writer's brain? Am I the only one that would prefer fewer, better written/researched articles over daily useless tweets that have little redeeming value whatsoever?
Wagon Circler Posted August 20, 2009 Posted August 20, 2009 Love the "Captain Checkdown" line. There is only one stat that counts for quarterbacks- touchdowns. Let's see if Trent can score some.
KD in CA Posted August 20, 2009 Posted August 20, 2009 including a moronic tweeting requirement... sigh. I know I don't have to tell you how terrible that is. It horrifies me that anyone over the age of 15 would consider 'twitter' to be a usable form of communication. It is honestly the most pointless invention I have ever seen.
RJ (not THAT RJ) Posted August 20, 2009 Posted August 20, 2009 It horrifies me that anyone over the age of 15 would consider 'twitter' to be a usable form of communication. It is honestly the most pointless invention I have ever seen. Amen amen, and amen!!!!
The Dean Posted August 20, 2009 Posted August 20, 2009 Which begs the question... how much is too much? So you're hired to write articles. Then the news goes 24/7. So now you're writing an article every day. How much research and editing can be done in less than a day anyway? Then the internet age comes to fruition and you have blogs in between the daily articles. Because someone decided we need to hear people's informal thoughts in between the daily articles they're writing. Now, you have the tweets. Why? Because I have to know every waking thought in someone's head? What's next a direct live feed to a writer's brain? Am I the only one that would prefer fewer, better written/researched articles over daily useless tweets that have little redeeming value whatsoever? Why not simply tweet random sentences from an article he is working on? Well, maybe they don't have to be completely random, but if he is spending time composing tweets, he is wasting his time.
Dan Posted August 20, 2009 Posted August 20, 2009 Why not simply tweet random sentences from an article he is working on? Well, maybe they don't have to be completely random, but if he is spending time composing tweets, he is wasting his time. Point taken. But, what's the point then? I finally read the article and I've already read half of it in his twit/blog page. Not to mention how much time does it take to think of all those creative ways to say something as opposed to just typing the actual word.
The Dean Posted August 20, 2009 Posted August 20, 2009 Point taken. But, what's the point then? I finally read the article and I've already read half of it in his twit/blog page. Not to mention how much time does it take to think of all those creative ways to say something as opposed to just typing the actual word. No, I'm with you on the tweeting nonsense. I just figure if they make him tweet, why should he sweat it? Of course, I'm guessing his bosses probably don't see it my way. This is yet another example of how traditional media doesn't quite get the new media. They were behind for so long, and are in such trouble, they are now just flailing away (like a desperate boxer hoping for a late round knock out).
Buffalonian-at-Heart Posted August 20, 2009 Posted August 20, 2009 This really irks me. If Sal's so effing cranky at his job, I'd be glad to take it. What say you, Sal? Sal, you are a Pinhead.
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted August 20, 2009 Posted August 20, 2009 It horrifies me that anyone over the age of 15 would consider 'twitter' to be a usable form of communication. It is honestly the most pointless invention I have ever seen. Unless you're using it for marketing, I would agree.
stuckincincy Posted August 20, 2009 Posted August 20, 2009 A little background: not only is he the lone man on the beat (other than Leo's columns for home games), he also gets to join the Twitter revolution. Over 250 employer-mandated tweets since the beginning of June, most of them since camp opened, including a running commentary during the Bears game. Cripes... Several years back, The Reds and WLW radio demanded that "drop-in" ads be voiced during a game. Things like "That was a Procter & Gamble put-out at 1st", or "Another Ford Dealers foul tip." It reminded me of Ralphie and his Ovaltine Little Orphan Annie decoder - "A crummy commercial. Son of a B*tch!". I don't remember if it happened with other clubs. After a couple of weeks, announcers Marty Brennerman and the late Joe Nuxhall threatened to walk out if they didn't stop the BS. So it stopped.
1billsfan Posted August 20, 2009 Posted August 20, 2009 Nope. Just don't care to read accounts from a guy who writes as if he hates what he does, and who manages to only file a report once a week. (Yes, I guess he Twitters quite a bit. Whatever.) You may call this report "realistic" but I call it "acerbic". Some might call it "curmudgeonly", but I don't think Sal has the gravitas for that label. I don't want, or expect, a WNY sports reporter to blow "sunshine up my butt", but some balance in the reporting might be nice. I'd also like to believe the reporter actually LIKES the sport he/she is covering, to some degree. TJ Simers was (maybe still is) the lead NFL writer for the LA Times. The guy HATES the NFL, or so it seems. He has said as much, and it comes out in his writing. Same with the Buffalo New columnist, Jerry Sullivan. He may not be a beat writer, but when he chooses to write about football (and specifically the Bills) I usually get the sense he really doesn't like the sport, or team, very much. It's hard to read an account of something from someone who has no love for what they cover, IMO. I didn't take it that way at all. I took it as a guy who loves the Bills so much that he's no longer going to pull any punches, locker room interviews be damned. After witnessing the successes of the Bills' Superbowl teams of the early 90s, and then having to endure this last decade worth of miserable playoffless Bills teams (with the last three being the most mind-numbingly painfully dull teams to watch), the level of frayed nerves is at an all-time high. Sal's piece is just a reflection of that anger bubbling under the surface. To me, this is real, unfiltered talk about my team and I love to read it, good or bad. BTW, maybe if the Bills had more "live" contact during training camp they wouldn't look like a bunch of p_ssies when facing the good NFL teams.
qwksilver Posted August 20, 2009 Posted August 20, 2009 sal's getting grumpier by the day Made me think about Airplane! "and Leon's getting larger"
LABills08 Posted August 20, 2009 Posted August 20, 2009 I didn't take it that way at all. I took it as a guy who loves the Bills so much that he's no longer going to pull any punches, locker room interviews be damned. After the witnessing the successes of the Bills' Superbowl teams of the early 90s, and then having to endure this last decade worth of miserable playoffless Bills teams (with the last three being the most mind-numbingly painfully dull teams to watch), the level of frayed nerves is at an all-time high. Sal's piece is just a reflection of that anger bubbling under the surface. To me, this is real, unfiltered talk about my team and I love to read it, good or bad. BTW, maybe if the Bills had more "live" contact during training camp they wouldn't look like a bunch of p_ssies when facing the good NFL teams. Agreed. I have to be honest, when I look at our roster and its potential, I get really excited heading into this season. But, you read some of these reports, and they are not extremely positive. 3 main points have stuck out to me from all who have watched the Bills training camp 1) Langston and Butler might get Edwards killed 2) Keith Ellison should not be on the field and it is a crime that Brandon didn't try to add some more depth at linebacker 3) Edwards still needs to break out of "check down" mode. And it is going to be that much harder for him to do that when Langston is getting burned and Butler is falling down.
Recommended Posts