Felger struggles to stay positive about the Pats...but fails in the end

[DarrylS]

Felger starts off positive entitling this draft as huger than huge, but in the end he seems to forget our wheeling and dealing on the Moss trade...

Michael Felger | The Mailbag: This Draft Is Huger Than Huge For Patriots

So the pressure is on for next week. With six selections in the top 97 and a class that is said to be the deepest in years, Belichick has the opportunity to restock his defense in a heartbeat. If the non-Mayo elements of 2008 pan out and some more legit talent comes in April 25-26, then the Pats are in business. They will have covered for the failures of 2006 and 2007 with hauls in 2008 and 2009. But if Wheatley and Wilhite turn out to be Scott and Reid redux, or if next weekend is spent taking skill position players who can't play, forget it. The Pats will continue to peter and sputter on defense, and it won't matter how many yards Tom Brady throws for. The Pats won't be able to stop anybody when it counts, and that will doom their chances just as it has for four years running.

 

[fair catch fryar]

Felger starts off positive entitling this draft as huger than huge, but in the end he seems to forget our wheeling and dealing on the Moss trade...

Michael Felger | The Mailbag: This Draft Is Huger Than Huge For Patriots

It's Felger.....what did you expect?

 

[Rob0729]

I don't have any problem with what he wrote. He is giving both the best and worst case scenario. If Mike Reiss wrote this (and he has written similiar things), no one would bat an eye.

 

[Pats726]

It's Felger.....what did you expect?

I mean once a turd always a turd....why would u expect all of a sudden a change? He's a total embarrassment..a smug a***** what would u expect?? That is why I never bother to read him..waste of time.

 

[The Boston Patriot]

I don't have any problem with what he wrote. He is giving both the best and worst case scenario. If Mike Reiss wrote this (and he has written similiar things), no one would bat an eye.

This is absolutely the truth. I'm not a Felger fan but how could anyone possibly
have a problem with his statement?

 

[italian pat patriot]

I don't have any problem with what he wrote. He is giving both the best and worst case scenario. If Mike Reiss wrote this (and he has written similiar things), no one would bat an eye.

i agree with you; i read always him with interest

 

[spacecrime]

I don't have any problem with what he wrote. He is giving both the best and worst case scenario. If Mike Reiss wrote this (and he has written similiar things), no one would bat an eye.

Yeah, we would. We'd wonder what happened with Reiss. You can writer critically without distorting facts and presenting only negative info and pretending that we had not chances for the last four years. At some point Felger has to recognize that 2007 was a good year.

His defination that the teams sucks and the drafting sucked because they haven't won a superbowl in four years is silly.

Yeah, they weren't the best of the best, but they were damn good over that 4 year stretch, and to say that there utilitization of draft picks is poor is to ignore the fact that they have been consistently one of the best.

It is easy to point to this or that pick as "proof" that they can't draft well, but there are not many teams who have done better the past few years, at drafting or at winning.

It isn't about only taking sure bets. It is also about taking flyers, balancing ceilings vs floors.

He certainly is entitled to say whatever he wants, but let's not pretend he is in any way merely reporting or analyzing. He is painting a bleak picture deliberately. He hates to be called a homer, calls those who think the Pats are a good team homers (like a few here), and goes out of his way to focus on any less-than-perfect aspect of the Pats and blow it up into an indictment of them, and write as though they were the Detroit Lions of the decade.

Bah to Felger and his disciples.

 

[tanked_as_usual]

This is absolutely the truth. I'm not a Felger fan but how could anyone possibly
have a problem with his statement?

uuhhhhh......either they will win or they will lose......

 

[Jackson 2]

I don't have any problem with what he wrote. He is giving both the best and worst case scenario. If Mike Reiss wrote this (and he has written similiar things), no one would bat an eye.

For me, the difference is that a little voice inside keeps telling me that Felger, in his heart of hearts, ferevently hopes the worst case scenario becomes the reality.

 

[Rob0729]

I suggest people read Felger's quote again. He basically says IF Wheatley and Whilhite turn into busts AND IF the defenses players selected next weekend are busts, the Pats defense could be in trouble for years to come. You know what? He is right. It may not be a disaster, but it will be a hole that will be a challenge to dig out of.

I think any rational person would agree that if a team spends multiple higher draft picks to improve one side of the ball and most of them do not pan out, that team is facing problems.

Nowhere does Felger predict that the Pats will have a poor draft. In fact, he somewhat implies that since this is the deepest draft in years and the Pats have so many high draft picks that they probably won't. He is just laying out a possible worst case scenario.

 

[Rob0729]

For me, the difference is that a little voice inside keeps telling me that Felger, in his heart of hearts, ferevently hopes the worst case scenario becomes the reality.

See this is the problem. It isn't what was written, it was who was writing it.

As for Felger, his Borges Jr. act is just that - an act. Felger was the biggest Patriots yahoo in the media prior to him getting his own radio show. Don't people remember his on air battles between him vs. Cafardo and Borges on Sports Final during the 2001 and 2002 seasons. He became Borges Jr. to help drum up ratings for his show since no one was listening. Since he returned to WEEI, that act has been toned down quite a bit.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

I suggest people read Felger's quote again. He basically says IF Wheatley and Whilhite turn into busts AND IF the defenses players selected next weekend are busts, the Pats defense could be in trouble for years to come.

But, based on an admittedly small sample size, do you really think Wheatley and Wilhite are likely to be busts? They may never be Pro Bowlers, but at the very least I think they will be productive.

 

[Rob0729]

Yeah, we would. We'd wonder what happened with Reiss. You can writer critically without distorting facts and presenting only negative info and pretending that we had not chances for the last four years. At some point Felger has to recognize that 2007 was a good year.

His defination that the teams sucks and the drafting sucked because they haven't won a superbowl in four years is silly.

Yeah, they weren't the best of the best, but they were damn good over that 4 year stretch, and to say that there utilitization of draft picks is poor is to ignore the fact that they have been consistently one of the best.

It is easy to point to this or that pick as "proof" that they can't draft well, but there are not many teams who have done better the past few years, at drafting or at winning.

It isn't about only taking sure bets. It is also about taking flyers, balancing ceilings vs floors.

He certainly is entitled to say whatever he wants, but let's not pretend he is in any way merely reporting or analyzing. He is painting a bleak picture deliberately. He hates to be called a homer, calls those who think the Pats are a good team homers (like a few here), and goes out of his way to focus on any less-than-perfect aspect of the Pats and blow it up into an indictment of them, and write as though they were the Detroit Lions of the decade.

Bah to Felger and his disciples.

First, I didn't see anywhere that Felger said that the Pats sucked at drafting in recent years because they haven't won a Super Bowl. In fact here is what he wrote:

Depending on which pundit you listen to, the Patriots are either the very best team in the league when it comes to the draft, or they're the absolute worst.

The truth, of course, is that they're neither. They don't suck, obviously. But they also haven't quite lived up to their lofty standards recently, either.

Not a glowing endorsement, but not what you claim either. As for the quote posted by the original poster, he spent almost as many words in that paragraph stating how this draft is an opportunity to make this defense strong again "in a heartbeat" as he saying it could be a disaster.

 

[Rob0729]

But, based on an admittedly small sample size, do you really think Wheatley and Wilhite are likely to be busts? They may never be Pro Bowlers, but at the very least I think they will be productive.

It's called a worst case scenario. He never suggested they were busts. Only stating what if the worst case scenario happens. Actually, comparing them to Scott and Reid aren't that unfair. Scott was a guy with a lot of potential who never got a chance to develop it because of injuries. With Wheatley's injury history, there is at least a chance that he may see the same fate. Reid was fairly productive in a partical role for a limited time span, but nothing special. Not a bust, but just a JAG. Whilhite could end up around that level.

 

[Jackson 2]

See this is the problem. It isn't what was written, it was who was writing it.

As for Felger, his Borges Jr. act is just that - an act. Felger was the biggest Patriots yahoo in the media prior to him getting his own radio show. Don't people remember his on air battles between him vs. Cafardo and Borges on Sports Final during the 2001 and 2002 seasons. He became Borges Jr. to help drum up ratings for his show since no one was listening. Since he returned to WEEI, that act has been toned down quite a bit.

It's not a problem for me at all. I remember Felger's history pretty much the way you have described it. If there is a "problem", as you put it, for me it's that some of these guys have, as you put it once again, an "act." I prefer reporters who don't have an "act" (i.e. Reiss). But that's just me. Others are entitled to their preferences, as well.

 

[upstater1]

The last bit about the defense failing for 4 years running is questionable in the sense that, one, Brady wasn't the QB last year, and two, Brady and the offense lead them to a 16-0 record and a Super Bowl, one in which the defense gave up 17 points!

So, his look on the past is questionable at best.

Yes, the D couldn't get off the field last year, but Brady wasn't playing either.

 

[Rob0729]

It's not a problem for me at all. I remember Felger's history pretty much the way you have described it. If there is a "problem", as you put it, for me it's that some of these guys have, as you put it once again, an "act." I prefer reporters who don't have an "act" (i.e. Reiss). But that's just me. Others are entitled to their preferences, as well.

I don't particularly care for the act either, but I don't get outraged by it. I don't think this piece really was all that bad. I think people pick it apart because of the source though (I am not talking about you in particular).

Felger did it to himself. You create a character and people see you as this character. I just don't think it is productive just picking apart every one of his articles though just because people perceive something as bashing. Read the entire article and he is giving both sides of the argument the entire time.

BTW, Felger is a columnist and usually decides to take the contrarian point of view. I think this town needs contrarians. They are usually far more entertaining than the cheerleaders in the media. I hate Borges and most stuff he wrote, but I used to read him every Sunday. His columns are far more memorable than most of the other guys out there. People still quote him from 2001. Felger was writing positive articles back then and I guarantee you that no one can remember what he wrote back then. I think contrarians are far more entertaining to read because you love to argue with them in your mind, with friends, and here.

 

[mcsully]

Good read and Felger is 100% right on our drafting.. IT was a solid read and he makes some valid points.. Our draft has not been so hot the past few years. This is a big year for them, the draft is deep and we have a lot of early picks.. We need to hit on about 4 out of 6 of them..

 

[patsox23]

I don't have any problem with what he wrote. He is giving both the best and worst case scenario. If Mike Reiss wrote this (and he has written similiar things), no one would bat an eye.

I don't disagree. While I think the Patriots have had so-so drafts the last couple of Aprils, it's worth noting that Moss and Welker were a result of trading out of a crappy draft class, AND it's worth noting that last year's draft class is TBA ('though I don't think a trade-up for Matthew Slater in the 5TH ROUND! can ever be justified). All of that said...

Felger's criticism is fair and, more to the point, I think people are missing the "IF" he has in front of a lot of that perceived negativity. He's saying IF they don't hit on picks to the level they arguably did not in recent drafts, then that's not good for us moving forward. That's fair, imo.

 

[Deus Irae]

The last bit about the defense failing for 4 years running is questionable in the sense that, one, Brady wasn't the QB last year, and two, Brady and the offense lead them to a 16-0 record and a Super Bowl, one in which the defense gave up 17 points!

So, his look on the past is questionable at best.

Yes, the D couldn't get off the field last year, but Brady wasn't playing either.

That bit about the defenses was completely idiotic. As has been demonstrated, time and again, even the 'great' defenses of the earlier Super Bowl winners allowed the opponents big scores in critical situations. Furthermore, the Steelers' vaunted defense was played for chumps when it mattered in last year's Super Bowl, and Pittsburgh won because its offense succeeded in the clutch. Felger is either being too lazy to actually ponder what he's writing, or he's deliberately stirring up ****.

This sort of crappy writing was fine before the internet gave the common man access to all the facts and figures, but so-called journalists still think that they can just pump out a crap product and people will fall for it.

Then again, as we've seen here in this very thread, some people still do.