Greg Schiano is a used car salesman. TBA (truth belief accountability) my white ass.
Stupid is as stupid does. This guy is too stupid to live. Dump his sorry ass and move on. I use to be a fan and was glad the Bucs gave him the opportunity. He pissed it away. This goes way beyond stupid. His priorities are just wrong. It's not like he's Jerry Rice. Throw out the trash.
No chance under Lovies guidance to see what shakes out?I'd prefer that route before the Bucs go dumping off quality talent. If MW19 cannot alter his antics and visible priorities under Lovie Smith, then he will most likely act-a-fool until the proverbial isht hits the reality fan.
Lovie needs to have a sit down with Mike man-to-man. He seems to have that disappointed father dungy-esque effect where he can guilt guys into to doing better just by showing his disappointment.If that doesn't work ? Shlt can him and draft Sammy.
weird disconnect on these boards. Glennon plays decent as a rookie and yet a bunch of the board want to throw him overboard NOW. Mike Williams was apparently so hungover from a house party that he tanked in an ACTUAL GAME . . . and the response is "give him more time?" Don't get me wrong, I am all for Lovie trying to turn MW around, but ... .
You try to trade him...if not. Cut him. Send the message. Schiano was craptastic. Dom was worse.
What kills me is how is play was affected on the field by his life style off, that's when I have issues!! 2 catches in Dallas he cost his team
Yeah, he's gone eventually.Maybe not today or tomorrow, but he'll keep screwing up until the team won't handle it anymore.And it damn sure is looking like the first slip up and lovie will fire him from a cannon.
What are the salary cap implications if MW was cut? How much $ are the BUCs on the hook for?
What kills me is how is play was affected on the field by his life style off, that's when I have issues!! 2 catches in Dallas he cost his team
+1
Regardless what a few of you drama queens might think of the source of this piece, this needed to be said and good for JBF for saying it.
Plenty Missing From Times’ Attack On WilliamsFebruary 21st, 2014Joe’s been around journalism long enough to know today’s Tampa Bay Times attack piece on Mike Williams, slapped on the front page of the print edition, is seriously lacking important substance.First, the Times wants us to believe that somehow Williams lived in a quiet, posh Lutz neighborhood where he terrorized neighbors with wild house parties for more than a year but there was no significant community uproar, or dozens of calls to police, or arrests or citations at the property, or more. The real world just doesn’t work that way.The Times implies, in a clear attempt to smear Williams, there was a big party at the house two nights before a Bucs game at Dallas in September 2012. (Gasp!) But the Times conveniently did not allege any trouble at that party, did not confirm the party happened, didn’t claim Williams was there, and only based its claim on a vague invitation on Williams’ Facebook page, one allegedly operated by him.For Joe, that stinks, and frankly is borderline malicious. Keep in mind the Times admits there were several residents of the 5,400 square-foot property, not just Williams.Additionally, the Times reported a settled dispute with Williams and his former landlord (Williams moved out last year, per the story) largely surrounding more than $40,000 in alleged damages at the house, but the damage isn’t detailed in the story. Those damages could have been as trivial as Williams ruining fancy driveway pavers. Money adds up fast when you’re talking about a posh home.The Times also seems to think it’s a knock on Williams’ character that he posted a note via Twitter looking for girls to pay $500 each for a photo shoot and video, likely for business related to his rap group that uses foul language. Really? A rap music interest and trying to hire paid workers are signs of evil? The Times failed to explain why those two things are worthy of the story. Keep in mind the Times’ print edition used a large screenshot photo of Williams’ Twitter postings where he sought to employ women. Joe could go on.Yes, Williams has been foolish and stupid. The red flags are there, but they shouldn’t be overblown and overdramatized like they are in the Times’ news story. Williams is a darn good receiver and the Bucs need him. Joe doesn’t recall anyone moaning when Williams’ contract was extended last summer.Lovie Smith will lay down his regime law in six weeks when the Buccaneers return for the 2014 season. Williams should get a clean slate if he stays out of trouble. http://www.joebucsfan.com/?p=107446#more-107446
So what do you think about PR's article and sources then? Is PR over blowing the story too???
Regardless what a few of you drama queens might think of the source of this piece, this needed to be said and good for JBF for saying it.
Plenty Missing From Times’ Attack On WilliamsFebruary 21st, 2014Joe’s been around journalism long enough to know today’s Tampa Bay Times attack piece on Mike Williams, slapped on the front page of the print edition, is seriously lacking important substance.First, the Times wants us to believe that somehow Williams lived in a quiet, posh Lutz neighborhood where he terrorized neighbors with wild house parties for more than a year but there was no significant community uproar, or dozens of calls to police, or arrests or citations at the property, or more. The real world just doesn’t work that way.The Times implies, in a clear attempt to smear Williams, there was a big party at the house two nights before a Bucs game at Dallas in September 2012. (Gasp!) But the Times conveniently did not allege any trouble at that party, did not confirm the party happened, didn’t claim Williams was there, and only based its claim on a vague invitation on Williams’ Facebook page, one allegedly operated by him.For Joe, that stinks, and frankly is borderline malicious. Keep in mind the Times admits there were several residents of the 5,400 square-foot property, not just Williams.Additionally, the Times reported a settled dispute with Williams and his former landlord (Williams moved out last year, per the story) largely surrounding more than $40,000 in alleged damages at the house, but the damage isn’t detailed in the story. Those damages could have been as trivial as Williams ruining fancy driveway pavers. Money adds up fast when you’re talking about a posh home.The Times also seems to think it’s a knock on Williams’ character that he posted a note via Twitter looking for girls to pay $500 each for a photo shoot and video, likely for business related to his rap group that uses foul language. Really? A rap music interest and trying to hire paid workers are signs of evil? The Times failed to explain why those two things are worthy of the story. Keep in mind the Times’ print edition used a large screenshot photo of Williams’ Twitter postings where he sought to employ women. Joe could go on.Yes, Williams has been foolish and stupid. The red flags are there, but they shouldn’t be overblown and overdramatized like they are in the Times’ news story. Williams is a darn good receiver and the Bucs need him. Joe doesn’t recall anyone moaning when Williams’ contract was extended last summer.Lovie Smith will lay down his regime law in six weeks when the Buccaneers return for the 2014 season. Williams should get a clean slate if he stays out of trouble. http://www.joebucsfan.com/?p=107446#more-107446
Lol, I am shocked that Durango doesn't accept the William's reporting. Durango, weren't you bashing PR when they first reported the issue? JBF covers its tracks . . . and Durango is in lock step? who would thunk it.
When I see a story that refuses to name any sources (PR) and shows no evidence of checking w/ the cops, the team or the league.I question it Comment From Guest Who are your sources on the Williams story? Why did you not name them? Have you contacted the league or the Bucs to confirm your claims of fines against Williams?And this is what SR said."The sources did not want to go on the record, thus they were not named. The Bucs will typically not officially divulge fine information that comes from the team. The league only will divulge fine info in situations where players incur fines from the NFL."
When I see a story that refuses to name any sources (PR) and shows no evidence of checking w/ the cops.I question it.
and apparently when another news outlet independently reports similar fact that include on the record statements by parties involved . . . . you don't acknowledge you were wrongno problem questioning a report with unnamed sources, but don't you have to go back after and say "well . . .kudos"?
