Borges - good and bad

[ironwasp]

Reading Borges this morning, and for the second week in a row I'm starting to think the guy's making some sense, with this opening to this week's On Football piece:

By Ron Borges | December 4, 2006

FOXBOROUGH -- The alarming part is not that they made mistakes. The alarming part is that they worked all week to correct those mistakes and then went out and repeated them.

But then I get down a little further and come across this little nugget of nonsense:

Is this a year when fumbles are not fumbles and field goals cut through blizzard conditions like a rolling ball of butcher knives?

Is this a year when things go right even when they go wrong?

I think not, but then again, thus far one has to think so.

So you think so, Ron? Or you don't? Which is it?

You have an editing strike going on over there at the Globe?

But all in all, there's a lot of sense in what Borges writes this week, and it marks him out as a guy that understands the game and understands how sportsmen's minds work.

His central thesis - that the Patriots won't get away with the sloppy crap from last Sunday when they play the Ravens or Chargers - is as obvious as it is correct.

But his analysis that, however much the Pats guard against it, there is a constant danger of complacency and a small degree of inevitability about it setting in is spot on:

It is easy enough for a team that has had as much success as the Patriots over the past five years to slip into this kind of mind-set. They look at their recent faux pas and acknowledge they cannot continue, yet they then skip quickly along to the fact that they won anyway. The bane of existence for coaches of such teams is to hear his players say, as so many Patriots did yesterday, "We made the plays when we had to."

We'll see again what the frame of mind is when we hit Miami next week, and then perhaps even more so, if we win in Miami, what we get in a supposedly straightforward game against the Texans.

Because at the moment something - something intangible - is not quite right, and it needs sorting quickly.

 

[DarrylS]

Seems that Borges has written two favorable columns in a row, but I still do not trust him just a matter of time before he spews his venom towards BB.

 

[PatsMyBoyz!]

Borges has had so much negative press about himself that he arguably has no choice but to start trying to appear fair at least,probably in hopes that people will actually start reading him again. Some of his crapola made Felger look like a cheerleader

For the record though,at least Felger has admitted when he's wrong and some of his stuff,though negative and controversial, has been somewhat fair at times, and despite it all I somehow still get the impression he's a fan. I have never gotten that impression from Borges.

FWIW,no doubt Borges thrives on the fact the Pats have struggles-he's in his glory now and can easily afford to take a gentler approach. I don't trust his motivations.He's one I believe would truly enjoy seeing the BB/Pats regime tank.

 

[ironwasp]

While I'm in a charitable mood with the Boston sports media, a word of encouragement for everyone's favourite, Dan Shaughnessy, who got through an entire report on the Pats without feeling the need to compare their struggles to those of the 2006 Sox. Well done Dan.

Of course, his piece was overwhelmingly negative (but there weren't many positives to latch onto even for those of the most optimistic bent), and he couldn't resist one sly dig at BB, but hey, you can't have everything.

 

[patchick]

I thought this was a clever and insightful line...

...they need to understand that for football teams, like for mutual fund offers, prior performance is no guarantee of future returns.

I think all of us do this to a certain extent: "They're the Patriots, eventually they'll start looking like the Patriots." "He's Tom Brady, eventually he'll start playing (consistently) like Tom Brady." And it's not unreasonable -- Brady, BB and crew have surely earned the beneft of the doubt. But we're now in the stretch of the season where I was assuming that the offense in particular would have cohered. I'd feel a lot better if we could see two real "Patriots" performances in a row.

 

[waspie (UK)]

In all the "sloppy football" reporting after the Bears game, I thought Borges was on the button with his report. He'd enjoyed the defensive hits in that game as much as I had, but it was only when watching the game during the week that I realised how

From the first quarter to the last, both defenses did(make big plays). The offenses weren't sloppy. They were slapped silly.

 

[MDD]

I tend to believe Bill Simmons' take on Borges.

I lot of the stuff he writes is tongue-in-cheek, mixed in with a little residual bitterness from 2002 / Bledsoe being shipped out.

Borges is not a Belichick hater as much as he was a Bledsoe lover (Mannix was the Belichick hater).

 

[patfanken]

I tend to believe Bill Simmons' take on Borges.

I lot of the stuff he writes is tongue-in-cheek, mixed in with a little residual bitterness from 2002 / Bledsoe being shipped out.

Borges is not a Belichick hater as much as he was a Bledsoe lover (Mannix was the Belichick hater).

Nice catch on Mannix, MDD. Its been a while since I have heard that name, and ya know.... I haven't missed it.

Borges is certainly a dichotomy. He is an excellent writer. In fact it could be argued he is THE BEST boxing writer in the country. Even when his bias is showing on the Pats, he is an excellent writer. I too applauded his column on the Bears game. He was the ONLY writer to 'get it'. In otherwords, he was the only writer to note that most of the game's turn overs were the result of GOOD defensive play and not offensive mistakes. He also noted the fierce intensity of the hitting.

HOWEVER, I thought he went a little far in the post Detroit game column. Clearly TO's are a problem for the Pats right now, BUT turning a correctable hiccup into a malignant terminal desease was a bit much. . I guess Ron couldn't help himself. He doesn't get much chance to rip the Pats, so he tends to overdo it when those rare opportunities arise.

 

[kolbitr]

I tend to believe Bill Simmons' take on Borges.

I lot of the stuff he writes is tongue-in-cheek, mixed in with a little residual bitterness from 2002 / Bledsoe being shipped out.

Borges is not a Belichick hater as much as he was a Bledsoe lover (Mannix was the Belichick hater).

That would require taking an awful lot of what Borges writes and says with enough salt to kill a normal man. Borges would have to have more tongues in more cheeks than...well, maybe one of the resident movie exxxperts can enlighten us.

There is a method to his mania, and much of it seems to be extraordinarily bitter and/or hateful toward BB. One doesn't write an anti-Belichick column the day or two after the death of the man's father for the purpose of tweaking the guy.

 

[shmessy]

I tend to believe Bill Simmons' take on Borges.

I lot of the stuff he writes is tongue-in-cheek, mixed in with a little residual bitterness from 2002 / Bledsoe being shipped out.

Borges is not a Belichick hater as much as he was a Bledsoe lover (Mannix was the Belichick hater).

No, Borges hates BB.

All you have to do is go over to Bostonsportsmedia.com and read the quotes from him about how BB was the kid who got his lunch money stolen everyday at school.....and how Borges himself would've been the one doing it, or about how much dirt he really has on BB but that he wouldn't "want to divulge it in public" of course, AFTER putting it out there.

There's a list a mile long - he hates BB and it's intense.

 

[Mike the Brit]

(Hears voice in ear)

VOICE: Step away from the keyboard, Mike. It's another Borges thread. You've been here before. Don't you remember, you thought Patsfans.com could bring Borges back from the Dark Side? Don't you know it's hopeless?

ME: But people are going down that route again. I have to show them it's hopeless. As soon as they start to think "ah, Borges is not so bad" he will come back and write something unbelievably mean. Don't they see that he only writes a reasonable article when there are negative things to say about the Patriots? When things are going well, he's sour and bitter.

VOICE: Well, you won't convince anybody but this is the Internet -- go ahead and post ...

 

[Art_Vandelay421]

No, Borges hates BB.

All you have to do is go over to Bostonsportsmedia.com and read the quotes from him about how BB was the kid who got his lunch money stolen everyday at school.....and how Borges himself would've been the one doing it, or about how much dirt he really has on BB but that he wouldn't "want to divulge it in public" of course, AFTER putting it out there.

There's a list a mile long - he hates BB and it's intense.

Totally agree...on Borges. Look, everyone knows he is a de facto PR person for the Oakland Raiders. According to him, they can do no wrong. But, if you examine the history of the Raiders, their "commitment to excellence" is BS. The game has passed them by. Funny, for all their "success" the Pats have been to the SuperBowl just as many times and won 3 like they have. Plus, until they won that first one in 76 they had a reputation as a "choke" team that couldn't win the big one.

Borges admittedly is a good writer but he should just come clean on his negativity and biases - just mention Dillon or BB to him and you can see/hear his facial expressions go beserk...Plus his hurumphinng...speech pattern drives me bonkers!

 

[5 Rings for Brady!!]

I thought this was a clever and insightful line...

...they need to understand that for football teams, like for mutual fund offers, prior performance is no guarantee of future returns.

I think all of us do this to a certain extent: "They're the Patriots, eventually they'll start looking like the Patriots." "He's Tom Brady, eventually he'll start playing (consistently) like Tom Brady." And it's not unreasonable -- Brady, BB and crew have surely earned the beneft of the doubt. But we're now in the stretch of the season where I was assuming that the offense in particular would have cohered. I'd feel a lot better if we could see two real "Patriots" performances in a row.

I could not agree more. This is why I am just as tired of threads saying a win is a win because of what happened in 2003, and any win is good, as I am of the fanboy threads.

I don't care much about how a random win or loss was played, I am looking for a trend towards an IMPROVING team. I am looking for a HUNGRY team. I am looking for a CONSISTENT team that improves on their performance week by week.

I don't rate any win as super, or any loss as devastating, unless I see trends that repeat themselves over several weeks. The only trends I have seen with this team are a confused and inconsistent offensive attack with a ton of turn overs, and on the other hand, a pretty stable defense that needs to get back to the big play trend in our recent superbowl runs.

I think that most fans who are living in reality, and not trying to stake out their fighting ground at one extreme or the other, will view our team as needing to play better than they have been, more consistently and with less fumbles on the offense.

Talking about 2003 or how great a win against the Lions was doesn't do much for me. I just would like to see a more consistent performance each Sunday before I start worrying about what seed we will be. We can be the #1 seed and lose to the Jets, Broncos or Colts given our current level of play, or we could be the #6 seed and beat all if we play a lot more consistently. I don't know yet how it is gonna go down.

 

[fgssand]

I could not agree more. This is why I am just as tired of threads saying a win is a win because of what happened in 2003, and any win is good, as I am of the fanboy threads.

I don't care much about how a random win or loss was played, I am looking for a trend towards an IMPROVING team. I am looking for a HUNGRY team. I am looking for a CONSISTENT team that improves on their performance week by week.

I don't rate any win as super, or any loss as devastating, unless I see trends that repeat themselves over several weeks. The only trends I have seen with this team are a confused and inconsistent offensive attack with a ton of turn overs, and on the other hand, a pretty stable defense that needs to get back to the big play trend in our recent superbowl runs.

I think that most fans who are living in reality, and not trying to stake out their fighting ground at one extreme or the other, will view our team as needing to play better than they have been, more consistently and with less fumbles on the offense.

Talking about 2003 or how great a win against the Lions was doesn't do much for me. I just would like to see a more consistent performance each Sunday before I start worrying about what seed we will be. We can be the #1 seed and lose to the Jets, Broncos or Colts given our current level of play, or we could be the #6 seed and beat all if we play a lot more consistently. I don't know yet how it is gonna go down.

You keep worrying and criticizing like this you won't live long enough to see #4 never mind the 5th ring for Brady.

All you really need to understand - again - is we have Tom Brady. As he leads this team into the playoffs, is there really a team or a player you would rather have than Tom Brady and this team, right now, this year, as is?

 

[5 Rings for Brady!!]

You keep worrying and criticizing like this you won't live long enough to see #4 never mind the 5th ring for Brady.

All you really need to understand - again - is we have Tom Brady. As he leads this team into the playoffs, is there really a team or a player you would rather have than Tom Brady and this team, right now, this year, as is?

Worrying and criticizing? Perhaps, in your world, objectively observing that the team needs to be improving, more consistent, and hungry heading into the playoffs is worrying? Whatever.

I don't get too high when we win or too low when we lose, I just look for the trends on where we are going. So far, we haven't shown that we are going to be a diverse and relatively mistake free offense. Perhaps that will turn around in the next month.

I said clearly that I am not worried about a particular win or loss, and that I am not even worried about which playoff seed we end up with. I clearly said that I am not worried about what happened in 2003, or whether beating the Lions was a good win or not. I am simply looking to see areas that we improve in.

Perhaps you need to become more literate or something? I don't know, but it would help if you can comprehend a post before spouting off a response which is off base.

Do you think it will be difficult for a team like the Ravens, Chargers or even the Jets, who already have done it, to double cover Caldwell and steal balls from Watson? And if we like to use the exact same blocking schemes over and over, why not just blitz the run like the Colts and Denver did. That stuff is a reality until something improves. A reality.

Maybe some of you ought not be so worried about which seed we are going to be and who we play first, and instead look at the big picture of where the team will need to improve in the next month since we have shown fairly slow signs of improvement to date on offense.

I haven't said a thing differently all season, since the first game of the year. I've talked about the same areas that need improving and I still see the same weaknesses. Consistent play on offense. A simple fact.

I will leave the random worrying to you guys that need a certain seed to feel good about the playoffs. I will feel good if we are playing good as a team and as an offense. Brady can't do everything himself. That is a cop out. Turnovers and bad blocking will hurt the team like it has since 2005 unless something changes for the better.

And the other big theme around here is criticizing our opponents as also weak and flawed. Let's give respect to other teams that are just as solid as we are. We will be playing several in the playoffs. It is a cop out to sit around and say 'well, this other team isn't perfect either.' Hopefully the Patriots are smart enough to respect the teams we will be facing, because a lot of fans don't seem to be.

 

[AzPatsFan]

I feel sorry for those fans who can't find the happy side of any victory. A freind NEM, is exactly like that. Just remember there were plenty of ugly wins in 2001, 2003, and 2004, and plaenty of ugly losses in years before that even in Patriot "good years".

In the cap era, no team can be a combination of the '85 Bears on Defense and an Air Coryell team on Offense. As a matter of fact, in any era there never has been such a team.

Enjoy the winning seasons. These ARE the GOOD OLDE DAYS !:singing:

As for Borges. "He is what he is", to paraphrase a commomn quotation in Patriotland.

 

[patchick]

I feel sorry for those fans who can't find the happy side of any victory. A freind NEM, is exactly like that. Just remember there were plenty of ugly wins in 2001, 2003, and 2004, and plaenty of ugly losses in years before that even in Patriot "good years".

In the cap era, no team can be a combination of the '85 Bears on Defense and an Air Coryell team on Offense. As a matter of fact, in any era there never has been such a team.

Enjoy the winning seasons. These ARE the GOOD OLDE DAYS !:singing:

As for Borges. "He is what he is", to paraphrase a commomn quotation in Patriotland.

Personally, I'm delighted with the victories. I thought the Bears game was a good, hard-fought victory and that the Lions game was a solid example of finding a way to win on a day when you don't bring your best game.

BUT as 5 Rings said nicely, what concerns me is that I'm not seeing the kind of overall improvement that I expected in the second half of the season--particularly on offense. We started out looking at this offense and saying "ok, lots of interesting new talent, will need some time to gel." Well heading into week 14 it's Jell-O time now, boys!

 

[MDD]

Borges admittedly is a good writer but he should just come clean on his negativity and biases

Why? I could see it if he were the Pats beat writer but he's a columnist. He SHOULD have biases.

There's a certain enjoyment to reading a Borges column and cursing at him. It's like cursing at the villain in some super hero movie.

Whether it be unabashed homers like Fred Smerlas or pricks like Borges, it's a part of what makes sports media entertaining. If you want the black-and-white then read Tomase.

 

[5 Rings for Brady!!]

Personally, I'm delighted with the victories. I thought the Bears game was a good, hard-fought victory and that the Lions game was a solid example of finding a way to win on a day when you don't bring your best game.

BUT as 5 Rings said nicely, what concerns me is that I'm not seeing the kind of overall improvement that I expected in the second half of the season--particularly on offense. We started out looking at this offense and saying "ok, lots of interesting new talent, will need some time to gel." Well heading into week 14 it's Jell-O time now, boys!

It would be sad to be a fan and not enjoy the victories. Seems like a lot of people around here are confusing a lot of issues and not thinking very clearly at all.

I always enjoy a victory. I hate to lose games, especially in the current era of Belichick/Brady, because we are getting a rare shot at being a real dynasty. Nowadays, I hope for us to do something more even in the playoffs, because our window of opportunity will end soon enough. Therefore, realistically I would like to see the team improving as we head into the playoffs on offense. I haven't seen anything come out of this season so far on offense except the emergence of Caldwell, who can be double teamed, and Watson. These guys are going to need help in spreading the field, or our offense will become one dimensional in the playoffs. We have four weeks to become a more efficient offense, and our schedule is tougher than it looks, so we will soon enough find out if the Pats are going into the playoffs with a full head of steam.

It seems like a lot of people who are quick to criticise a rational view on the team are expecting that everything will instantly be well in the playoffs and that we will without any doubt win the superbowl no matter how we play. Otherwise, why would people be so quick to misunderstand a very straightforward message: We need to play better. Period.

 

[fgssand]

Worrying and criticizing? Perhaps, in your world, objectively observing that the team needs to be improving, more consistent, and hungry heading into the playoffs is worrying? Whatever.

I don't get too high when we win or too low when we lose, I just look for the trends on where we are going. So far, we haven't shown that we are going to be a diverse and relatively mistake free offense. Perhaps that will turn around in the next month.

I said clearly that I am not worried about a particular win or loss, and that I am not even worried about which playoff seed we end up with. I clearly said that I am not worried about what happened in 2003, or whether beating the Lions was a good win or not. I am simply looking to see areas that we improve in.

Perhaps you need to become more literate or something? I don't know, but it would help if you can comprehend a post before spouting off a response which is off base.

Do you think it will be difficult for a team like the Ravens, Chargers or even the Jets, who already have done it, to double cover Caldwell and steal balls from Watson? And if we like to use the exact same blocking schemes over and over, why not just blitz the run like the Colts and Denver did. That stuff is a reality until something improves. A reality.

Maybe some of you ought not be so worried about which seed we are going to be and who we play first, and instead look at the big picture of where the team will need to improve in the next month since we have shown fairly slow signs of improvement to date on offense.

I haven't said a thing differently all season, since the first game of the year. I've talked about the same areas that need improving and I still see the same weaknesses. Consistent play on offense. A simple fact.

I will leave the random worrying to you guys that need a certain seed to feel good about the playoffs. I will feel good if we are playing good as a team and as an offense. Brady can't do everything himself. That is a cop out. Turnovers and bad blocking will hurt the team like it has since 2005 unless something changes for the better.

And the other big theme around here is criticizing our opponents as also weak and flawed. Let's give respect to other teams that are just as solid as we are. We will be playing several in the playoffs. It is a cop out to sit around and say 'well, this other team isn't perfect either.' Hopefully the Patriots are smart enough to respect the teams we will be facing, because a lot of fans don't seem to be.

All those meaningless words of yours and you could not even answer my simple question.