Borges -- after week 2 of 2001

[onegameatatime]

After Bledsoe went down in week 2 of the 2001 season, here's a sampling of what the supposedly great football writer had to say between week 2 and week 3:

" ... The New England Alliance of Drew Bledsoe Bashers now will get its wish. it will get to see first-hand what life without Bledsoe will be like ...

All those who have insisted he's not mobile enough or accurate enough or talented enough or brave enough will learn what should be obvious, and that's with no disrespect for his replacement, young Tom Brady.

The simple fact is, the bulk of Bledsoe's problems in recent seasons have not been caused by him; they've been caused by the people around him.

His offensive line is not good. ... [quoting an unnamed coach] 'They got no running back and you can just run through their linemen and get to Bledsoe. What's he supposed to do about that.' ...

[Bledsoe's injury] will show a lot of people just what he means to the Patriots. It's a big price to pay to make people understand his value, but he's been paying his own high price with his body for the past two years just to play at all.

Now somebody else will pay that price and the football world will see exactly what the cost of losing Bledsoe's services will be in Foxborough. The cost of playing without Drew Bledsoe will be high for the Patriots, just as the cost of playing with the Patriots has been for him for far too long."

 

[3 to be 4]

that is hysterical!

I remember that 5 minutes after watching how Brady looked in the pocket I said to myself "this kid is better than Bledsoe"

 

[BradyManny]

That's classic. Why didnt he just marry Drew?

 

[MrTibbs]

Would someone please email those quotes to that nut.

 

[Willie55]

And IMO that's the reason he hates BB so much.

 

[RayClay]

That's a riot. But, to be fair most people thought we were screwed without Drew at the time.

Remember, he was just coming off one of the largest contract extensions ever at the time.

 

[PlattsFan]

And IMO that's the reason he hates BB so much.

Without a doubt. Although I'd say it really took off later in the year when Bledsoe came back from injury and didn't get his starting job back. That's when Borges really got unrelentingly vituperative.

 

[DarrylS]

Borges is a fool, pure and simple, he got along with Parcells and was all cozy with that group...they both used each other, I think BP got the better part of the deal. When BB and SP came in they did things differently and he took it personally, he has had a vendetta since then. I can not understand how he gets so much play on the TV during the season.. he does not like this team, does not understand its philosophy, does not want to understand this team, does not like BB and is thought of as an expert. Bring on someone who at least is a professed "homer", not an adversarial guy.

 

[BradyManny]

I sent him the quotes, as well as a link to this thread. I couldn't find his email on the globe site though, do they not put it up b/c he pisses everyone off so much that he'd just get a nonstop onslaught of hatemail? I found it somewhere else, I think it's [email protected] if anyone wants to let him know we're [still] tired of his BS.

 

[Michael]

the supposedly great football writer

Whoever said he was a good never mind great writer?

" ... The New England Alliance of Drew Bledsoe Bashers now will get its wish. it will get to see first-hand what life without Bledsoe will be like

Well he was right about that.

 

[DarrylS]

I sent him the quotes, as well as a link to this thread. I couldn't find his email on the globe site though, do they not put it up b/c he pisses everyone off so much that he'd just get a nonstop onslaught of hatemail? I found it somewhere else, I think it's [email protected] if anyone wants to let him know we're [still] tired of his BS.

Have emailed him in the past and he will probably respond with a very juvenile thread, he does not to be held accountable, we got into it several years ago and I was surprised under the globe banner he said what he said.

 

[DarrylS]

Have emailed him in the past and he will probably respond with a very juvenile thread, he does not to be held accountable, we got into it several years ago and I was surprised under the globe banner he said what he said.

Another stategy is finding out the name of his editor and cc'ing that person with every email sent to Ron.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

I don't mind him being adversarial, I just mind the fact that he is wrong repeatedly, from what I see when I scan the Boston media, and from what I see here.

It doesn't seem like he has a sense of humor or history either. Well ya know what? Parcells was the messiah coach that won NE a "championship" (AFC, thanks Bill,) within 5 years, as promised.

Bill Belichick won us 3 super bowls in 5 years, within what, the 6 year span that he was in charge, as I recall.

How has Belichick fared without Parcells? How has Parcells fared without Belichick?

If Borges' arrogance is based on a wish, a prayer, or a hope that his guys - Parcells and Drew - were the heart and soul of the "real" patriots, the guys truly deserving all those wins Brady and Belichick got, he's got his chance (yet again) to see it come to fruition in Dallas. Hey, Terry Glenn's even down there.

Yah. Wouldn't hold my breath. Though a Bledsoe vs. Brady super bowl would not make for a bad Sunday in my house.

PFnV

 

[edgecy]

This is unfair don't you think? When Drew went down, most of us thought about the samething. If everybody had thought Tom Brady was going to be something big, he wouldn't have been drafted at the position he was drafted. We got extremely lucky.

 

[Willie55]

This is unfair don't you think? When Drew went down, most of us thought about the samething. If everybody had thought Tom Brady was going to be something big, he wouldn't have been drafted at the position he was drafted. We got extremely lucky.

I doesn't have to do with Brady. It has to do with how wrong Borges was about Bledsoe. Borges' judgment was clouded by the fact he Bledsoe was his binky and when Blesdoe was 'wronged' by BB he set out on a public smear campaign which continues today.

 

[godef]

Without a doubt. Although I'd say it really took off later in the year when Bledsoe came back from injury and didn't get his starting job back. That's when Borges really got unrelentingly vituperative.

My that's a fancy word.

 

[3 to be 4]

obviously, im not going to claim i knew that Tom Brady was the next Joe Montana. But I remember thinking DURING the Jets game "we are screwed because it'll never get better this guy at QB. And he just signed a 103 million contract. our only hope is he gets hurt"
then it happened! and within 5 minutes of watching Brady work in the pocket i knew he was better. to be honest, when Drew went down i was interested in seeing how good the team really was. I was sold on Brady from how he responded to the Miami loss, leading them over San Diego. At that point i never wanted him out of the lineup. Some felt that way after his very first game vs the Colts (Sheppard and Smerlas were right, and i was intrigued)

what i couldnt believe were all the people wanting Drew back when he was healthy. Brady had taken them from 0-2 to 5-5 and I loved what i saw. Fate was on Brady and Belichicks side though i must admit. Had they not gone all the way and won the Super Bowl it would have been much hardder to trade Drew. Although with BB's track record at Cleveland, he probably would have done it anyway.
After what Brady did leading them to the title, and on that last drive, it stunned me how some people STILL felt Drew was better.

 

[Willie55]

obviously, im not going to claim i knew that Tom Brady was the next Joe Montana. But I remember thinking DURING the Jets game "we are screwed because it'll never get better this guy at QB. And he just signed a 103 million contract. our only hope is he gets hurt"
then it happened! and within 5 minutes of watching Brady work in the pocket i knew he was better. to be honest, when Drew went down i was interested in seeing how good the team really was. I was sold on Brady from how he responded to the Miami loss, leading them over San Diego. At that point i never wanted him out of the lineup. Some felt that way after his very first game vs the Colts (Sheppard and Smerlas were right, and i was intrigued)

what i couldnt believe were all the people wanting Drew back when he was healthy. Brady had taken them from 0-2 to 5-5 and I loved what i saw. Fate was on Brady and Belichicks side though i must admit. Had they not gone all the way and won the Super Bowl it would have been much hardder to trade Drew. Although with BB's track record at Cleveland, he probably would have done it anyway.
After what Brady did leading them to the title, and on that last drive, it stunned me how some people STILL felt Drew was better.

I have actually heard it said by the media that by all indications BB was only a couple weeks away from benching Bledsoe in favor of Brady because of his play.

 

[BradyManny]

Another stategy is finding out the name of his editor and cc'ing that person with every email sent to Ron.

Is the Globe finally phasing Ron out? I rarely ever see articles by him and I couldn't even find an email to him on the Globe's site.

I'm not surprised Ron would stoop to juvenile tactics. It's one thing when a reporter is an idiot, there are plenty. It's another when they go out of their way to be a complete jerk lacking objectivity. I just don't understand how these reporters end up turning into complete jacka**es. Like Shaugnessy.

 

[onegameatatime]

He and the Globe like the criticism. They can say it shows he is "controversial" and "edgy," rather than "wrong" and "lets individual personal biases get in the way of analysis."

Being wrong, per se, is not the worst thing -- there are predictions that get made on the available facts that sometimes do not turn out. What is wrong is thinking in terms of "friends" and "enemies" that clouds judgment and analysis. Any player that criticises BB must be right; anyone who wronged Bledsoe must be wrong; any agent who makes a deal with BB that looks good for the Pats is a sell-out (e.g., Pass deal, where Borges did not even talk to the agent); players who get cut or move in free agency are mistreated if it's done by the Pats (even though it's the same everywhere); Al Davis is always right; anything Flutie did was wrong (I never understood that animosity)

Have you seen all the comments from Borges about how "it's not the Xs and Os, it's the Jimmys and Joes?" (a Fairbanks line about how it's about players, not coaches). Hmmmm. Then how come all the fawning over Parcells over the years, all the trashing of Pete Carroll (much of it unfair in my opinion), but when it comes to BB, it's all about the players and not the coaching? And how can it not be about the coaching, when we were told in 2001 how bad the players were on offense?

I assume the Globe would never put up with this in other departments, but there's a different standard in sportswriting.