I was one who thought he should have gotten paid for his performance and still hope this is just his way of decompressing in honor of his success. I hope he can take the coaching coming from the New regime and move on to greatness. If not, I'm thinking he'll see so much bench time he'll beg to be traded.
I was one who thought he should have gotten paid for his performance and still hope this is just his way of decompressing in honor of his success. I hope he can take the coaching coming from the New regime and move on to greatness. If not, I'm thinking he'll see so much bench time he'll beg to be traded.
I was one who thought he should have gotten paid for his performance and still hope this is just his way of decompressing in honor of his success. I hope he can take the coaching coming from the New regime and move on to greatness. If not, I'm thinking he'll see so much bench time he'll beg to be traded.
The Times mentioned the Williams house party not just because of the suggestion his partying impacted his play in ONE game, but also because planning to HOST a massive house party on the Friday before a Sunday road game suggests he is not focused on football. Sure the partying probably impacted his play BUT its the overall lack of focus that is the issue in the article. . . . . unless he watched fil while the house party was going on? lol
The Times mentioned the Williams house party not just because of the suggestion his partying impacted his play in ONE game, but also because planning to HOST a massive house party on the Friday before a Sunday road game suggests he is not focused on football. Sure the partying probably impacted his play BUT its the overall lack of focus that is the issue in the article. . . . . unless he watched fil while the house party was going on? lol
The Times mentioned the Williams house party not just because of the suggestion his partying impacted his play in ONE game, but also because planning to HOST a massive house party on the Friday before a Sunday road game suggests he is not focused on football. Sure the partying probably impacted his play BUT its the overall lack of focus that is the issue in the article. . . . . unless he watched fil while the house party was going on? lol
Many were critical including a TON of our competitors and radio hosts. But I was there when we were told all the details. We knew we were right, but just couldn't share who told us or all the details. But we knew the truth would come out. And we still hope Mike gets his head on straight.
#validation
Many were critical including a TON of our competitors and radio hosts. But I was there when we were told all the details. We knew we were right, but just couldn't share who told us or all the details. But we knew the truth would come out. And we still hope Mike gets his head on straight.
#validation
Many were critical including a TON of our competitors and radio hosts. But I was there when we were told all the details. We knew we were right, but just couldn't share who told us or all the details. But we knew the truth would come out. And we still hope Mike gets his head on straight.
#validation
The Times mentioned the Williams house party not just because of the suggestion his partying impacted his play in ONE game, but also because planning to HOST a massive house party on the Friday before a Sunday road game suggests he is not focused on football. Sure the partying probably impacted his play BUT its the overall lack of focus that is the issue in the article. . . . . unless he watched fil while the house party was going on? lol
A fairly bad attempt at spin on the good Counselor's part. From the article:There was a catch, however. That Sept. 21 was the Friday night before a Bucs road game at Dallas, in Greg Schiano's first season as head coach.Williams would match a season low with two catches in that game, and the Bucs would muster just 166 yards of offense in a 16-10 loss, their lowest total in Schiano's two seasons. It is unclear whether any of Williams' teammates attended the party.As been discussed already in this thread, players all over the league party on Friday nights. And Williams was the teams' leading receiver. Unless the entire offense attended this party, including the coaches, it's a joke for the reporters to bring this up. I can see why someone who foolishly latched onto it would want to spin it.
The Times mentioned the Williams house party not just because of the suggestion his partying impacted his play in ONE game, but also because planning to HOST a massive house party on the Friday before a Sunday road game suggests he is not focused on football. Sure the partying probably impacted his play BUT its the overall lack of focus that is the issue in the article. . . . . unless he watched fil while the house party was going on? lol
A fairly bad attempt at spin on the good Counselor's part. From the article:There was a catch, however. That Sept. 21 was the Friday night before a Bucs road game at Dallas, in Greg Schiano's first season as head coach.Williams would match a season low with two catches in that game, and the Bucs would muster just 166 yards of offense in a 16-10 loss, their lowest total in Schiano's two seasons. It is unclear whether any of Williams' teammates attended the party.As been discussed already in this thread, players all over the league party on Friday nights. And Williams was the teams' leading receiver. Unless the entire offense attended this party, including the coaches, it's a joke for the reporters to bring this up. I can see why someone who foolishly latched onto it would want to spin it.
The Times mentioned the Williams house party not just because of the suggestion his partying impacted his play in ONE game, but also because planning to HOST a massive house party on the Friday before a Sunday road game suggests he is not focused on football. Sure the partying probably impacted his play BUT its the overall lack of focus that is the issue in the article. . . . . unless he watched fil while the house party was going on? lol
A fairly bad attempt at spin on the good Counselor's part. From the article:There was a catch, however. That Sept. 21 was the Friday night before a Bucs road game at Dallas, in Greg Schiano's first season as head coach.Williams would match a season low with two catches in that game, and the Bucs would muster just 166 yards of offense in a 16-10 loss, their lowest total in Schiano's two seasons. It is unclear whether any of Williams' teammates attended the party.As been discussed already in this thread, players all over the league party on Friday nights. And Williams was the teams' leading receiver. Unless the entire offense attended this party, including the coaches, it's a joke for the reporters to bring this up. I can see why someone who foolishly latched onto it would want to spin it.
The Times mentioned the Williams house party not just because of the suggestion his partying impacted his play in ONE game, but also because planning to HOST a massive house party on the Friday before a Sunday road game suggests he is not focused on football. Sure the partying probably impacted his play BUT its the overall lack of focus that is the issue in the article. . . . . unless he watched fil while the house party was going on? lol
A fairly bad attempt at spin on the good Counselor's part. From the article:There was a catch, however. That Sept. 21 was the Friday night before a Bucs road game at Dallas, in Greg Schiano's first season as head coach.Williams would match a season low with two catches in that game, and the Bucs would muster just 166 yards of offense in a 16-10 loss, their lowest total in Schiano's two seasons. It is unclear whether any of Williams' teammates attended the party.As been discussed already in this thread, players all over the league party on Friday nights. And Williams was the teams' leading receiver. Unless the entire offense attended this party, including the coaches, it's a joke for the reporters to bring this up. I can see why someone who foolishly latched onto it would want to spin it.
Lol, Buggsy . . . that is silly, look at this comment you typed:"Unless the entire offense attended this party, including the coaches, it's a joke for the reporters to bring this up.."Buggsy . . . . the conduct and commitment of the "entire offense" and the "coaches" are not being question in the article, right? The SUBJECT of the article is Williams, right? Its Williams' commitment and conduct that are in question, right? Yeesh . . . of course the reporter is going to bring it up.A reporter researching the story ABOUT WILLIAMS . .(not the "entire offense" and the "coaches") . . comes across the FACT that Williams HOSTED a massive house party . . he did not just go out and "party" he HOSTED a massive party the day be fore travel . . bringing in people from across the country. . the reporter researching whether Williams (not the "entire offense" and the "coaches") notes the FACT that Williams played poorly in the game that followed. How can that be "a joke" That is the REASONABLE connection a reporter would make when the premise of the reporter's article is that Williams (not the "entire offense" and the "coaches") is NOT FOCUSED ON FOOTBALL.Now, I don't know, did the article say he did not do well in the Cowboys game because he was hung-over or partied too hard? I don't recall seeing that? The article does not say the Bucs lost to Dallas because of Williams, it suggested that he underperformed . . . how is that even controversial?(btw, I don't work for the Times so why would I "spin" anything? Just because I agree with the premise of the article? Buggsy, you might be trying too hard to be a bad Internet bully, ya think? Are you focused on me or the truth about Williams? Oh . . wait . . scratch that . . . we know the answer on that one . . .lol)
The Times mentioned the Williams house party not just because of the suggestion his partying impacted his play in ONE game, but also because planning to HOST a massive house party on the Friday before a Sunday road game suggests he is not focused on football. Sure the partying probably impacted his play BUT its the overall lack of focus that is the issue in the article. . . . . unless he watched fil while the house party was going on? lol
A fairly bad attempt at spin on the good Counselor's part. From the article:There was a catch, however. That Sept. 21 was the Friday night before a Bucs road game at Dallas, in Greg Schiano's first season as head coach.Williams would match a season low with two catches in that game, and the Bucs would muster just 166 yards of offense in a 16-10 loss, their lowest total in Schiano's two seasons. It is unclear whether any of Williams' teammates attended the party.As been discussed already in this thread, players all over the league party on Friday nights. And Williams was the teams' leading receiver. Unless the entire offense attended this party, including the coaches, it's a joke for the reporters to bring this up. I can see why someone who foolishly latched onto it would want to spin it.
Lol, Buggsy . . . that is silly, look at this comment you typed:"Unless the entire offense attended this party, including the coaches, it's a joke for the reporters to bring this up.."Buggsy . . . . the conduct and commitment of the "entire offense" and the "coaches" are not being question in the article, right? The SUBJECT of the article is Williams, right? Its Williams' commitment and conduct that are in question, right? Yeesh . . . of course the reporter is going to bring it up.A reporter researching the story ABOUT WILLIAMS . .(not the "entire offense" and the "coaches") . . comes across the FACT that Williams HOSTED a massive house party . . he did not just go out and "party" he HOSTED a massive party the day be fore travel . . bringing in people from across the country. . the reporter researching whether Williams (not the "entire offense" and the "coaches") notes the FACT that Williams played poorly in the game that followed. How can that be "a joke" That is the REASONABLE connection a reporter would make when the premise of the reporter's article is that Williams (not the "entire offense" and the "coaches") is NOT FOCUSED ON FOOTBALL.Now, I don't know, did the article say he did not do well in the Cowboys game because he was hung-over or partied too hard? I don't recall seeing that? The article does not say the Bucs lost to Dallas because of Williams, it suggested that he underperformed . . . how is that even controversial?(btw, I don't work for the Times so why would I "spin" anything? Just because I agree with the premise of the article? Buggsy, you might be trying too hard to be a bad Internet bully, ya think? Are you focused on me or the truth about Williams? Oh . . wait . . scratch that . . . we know the answer on that one . . .lol)
The Times mentioned the Williams house party not just because of the suggestion his partying impacted his play in ONE game, but also because planning to HOST a massive house party on the Friday before a Sunday road game suggests he is not focused on football. Sure the partying probably impacted his play BUT its the overall lack of focus that is the issue in the article. . . . . unless he watched fil while the house party was going on? lol
A fairly bad attempt at spin on the good Counselor's part. From the article:There was a catch, however. That Sept. 21 was the Friday night before a Bucs road game at Dallas, in Greg Schiano's first season as head coach.Williams would match a season low with two catches in that game, and the Bucs would muster just 166 yards of offense in a 16-10 loss, their lowest total in Schiano's two seasons. It is unclear whether any of Williams' teammates attended the party.As been discussed already in this thread, players all over the league party on Friday nights. And Williams was the teams' leading receiver. Unless the entire offense attended this party, including the coaches, it's a joke for the reporters to bring this up. I can see why someone who foolishly latched onto it would want to spin it.
Lol, Buggsy . . . that is silly, look at this comment you typed:"Unless the entire offense attended this party, including the coaches, it's a joke for the reporters to bring this up.."Buggsy . . . . the conduct and commitment of the "entire offense" and the "coaches" are not being question in the article, right? The SUBJECT of the article is Williams, right? Its Williams' commitment and conduct that are in question, right? Yeesh . . . of course the reporter is going to bring it up.A reporter researching the story ABOUT WILLIAMS . .(not the "entire offense" and the "coaches") . . comes across the FACT that Williams HOSTED a massive house party . . he did not just go out and "party" he HOSTED a massive party the day be fore travel . . bringing in people from across the country. . the reporter researching whether Williams (not the "entire offense" and the "coaches") notes the FACT that Williams played poorly in the game that followed. How can that be "a joke" That is the REASONABLE connection a reporter would make when the premise of the reporter's article is that Williams (not the "entire offense" and the "coaches") is NOT FOCUSED ON FOOTBALL.Now, I don't know, did the article say he did not do well in the Cowboys game because he was hung-over or partied too hard? I don't recall seeing that? The article does not say the Bucs lost to Dallas because of Williams, it suggested that he underperformed . . . how is that even controversial?(btw, I don't work for the Times so why would I "spin" anything? Just because I agree with the premise of the article? Buggsy, you might be trying too hard to be a bad Internet bully, ya think? Are you focused on me or the truth about Williams? Oh . . wait . . scratch that . . . we know the answer on that one . . .lol)
