BUILT TO LAST: Reiss Sunday Article on Pioli and Team Building Approach

[I'm Ron Borges?]

I too agree that Reiss is overrated and I'll give you my reasons. He is just as bad as Borges, it's just that he's on the other end of the spectrum. He kisses the team's butt so they feed him info. We all know this goes on in Houston with John McClain and the Texans. Some of you even pointed that out when all the Givens stuff came out.

The problem I have with Reiss is he is just the team's mouthpiece. For instance, in his most recent mailbag he says that Deion Branch is a #1 receiver, even though he isn't. Then in his blog he points out the fact that Branch isn't a #1 receiver but he'll never say it because he doesn't want to go against the team. In other words, he goes out of his way to be positive the same way Borges goes out of his way to be negative.

Take training camp for instance. The guy has a blog and doesn't mention anyone he thinks that might have struggled or looked out of place. A blog is a chance to give out a little opinion instead of "Rich Musinski is wearing No. 5." Who really cares? On the other hand, Patriots.com mentioned that Warfield and the two young quarterbacks didn't look very good and their 99% positive. In other words, Reiss is more of a homer than the team's official web site. How do you think he got that useless interview with Pioli? That's pretty bad because the team web site is supposed to be the ultimate homers.

Have you ever seen him on TV? He's terrible because he has no opinion of his own. He struggles to answer questions when he doesn't have the team there telling him what to write and think.

Every city has one of these guys and in the Patriots case it's Mike Reiss. In my opinion, a reporter should be down the middle, not pro Patriots or anti-Patriots. If a reporter leans too much one way, whichever way that is, they have an agenda and Reiss certainly has an agenda. The only difference is Patriots fans like his agenda so in return, they think he's some great reporter.

Here are some examples of reporters who do just as good a job as Reiss but don't get breaking news all the time because they're not bending over for the team:

Michael Parente
Eric McHugh
Paul Perillo
Tom Curran
Albert Breer

PS I'm not really Ron Borges and I look forward to having some good discussions on this board.

 

[DaBruinz]

I'm not trying to throw Reiss to the wolves ... I said in both my posts that I actually like his stuff and think he does a reasonably good job. I just don't see why the admiration level for him in particular seems so much higher than Curran, Felger, Tomase or even the Patriots Football Weekly (Tom Casale, Andy Hart and Paul Perillo) guys. I'd add in Eric McHugh from the Patriot Ledger and Michael Parente from Rhode Island. So that's 8 ... maybe not a dozen -- my bad.

Well, first off, Reiss is truly a reporter. Not like Felger or Borges. Does Reiss have an agenda? Yes. To get readership to his paper. Reiss brings us stuff that Cafardo, Borges, and Felger don't. Reiss isn't more highly regarded than Curran, but definitely more so than the idiots like Borges, Cafardo, Felger and Tomase. Sorry, but Reiss is definitely above them.

Do these guys always write stuff I agree with?? Hell no, but they're at least as good as Reiss is at getting info. out there. Aside from what number Mel Mitchell will wear and some minor contract signings (Hochstein, for example) I don't see Reiss telling me much I don't already know ... and these kinds of things aren't all that important to me. They obviously are to you ... no big deal, just a difference of opinion.

If what you say in this previous paragraph is true, then its because you are reading Reiss last. Reiss has provided much more stuff regarding the Patriots than Cafardo, Borges or Felger have in the past 3 years. The fact that you think that Borges is better at getting info than Reiss really cuts into your credibility. Borges is usually the LAST to know anything coming from the Patriots.

 

[Patsman12]

I didn't say Borges is better at getting info. than Reiss ... and you already answered your own question. Borges isn't SUPPOSED to get more info. than Reiss. Mike is covering the team; Borges is not. It's not Borges' job to monitor the daily beat of the Patriots. Reiss chooses to do just that with his blog (and during the offseason when he's covering the laziest SOB in the business, Jerome Solomon). So to expect Borges to match a beat writer for "inside info." isn't fair.

Now, compare what Reiss gets now to what Borges has gotten during his career and it's a blowout. Borges told us stuff we didn't know ... until, of course, his hatred for Belichick so overwhelmed him that he rendered himself irrelevant. That's why I dislike Borges now, not because he didn't get good info.

And I can't sit here and document the order in which I read my Pats stories. Sometimes I read the papers first and therefore am not privy to what Mike has in his blog. I'm not what any of you would call computer savvy. I know what I have to know just to get by so constant checks with blogs isn't usually on my daily routine. The summer is here so now I'll probably have a little more time to surf around than normal because work is definitely in a downswing. But as a rule I probably read the Globe and Herald before I'm online in the morning, and I don't find a lot of stuff in Reiss that I don't already know. And I'm certainly no expert on all things Pats.

 

[T-ShirtDynasty]

The fact that you think that Borges is better at getting info than Reiss really cuts into your credibility.

Not nearly as much as the multiple usernames.

 

[Patsman12]

What does that mean??

 

[I'm Ron Borges?]

What does that mean??

They may think we are the same person because we like the Patriots but not Mike Reiss. However, they do have a point. Mike Reiss and the Patriots are pretty much the same thing since he all but gets his paycheck from Mr. Kraft.

 

[DaBruinz]

I didn't say Borges is better at getting info. than Reiss ... and you already answered your own question. Borges isn't SUPPOSED to get more info. than Reiss. Mike is covering the team; Borges is not. It's not Borges' job to monitor the daily beat of the Patriots. Reiss chooses to do just that with his blog (and during the offseason when he's covering the laziest SOB in the business, Jerome Solomon). So to expect Borges to match a beat writer for "inside info." isn't fair.

You definitely haven't been reading the Globe long. Borges has alwasy slanted his information. ALWAYS. And Borges is still covering the Patriots. Reiss is a better reporter than Borges ever was.

Now, compare what Reiss gets now to what Borges has gotten during his career and it's a blowout. Borges told us stuff we didn't know ... until, of course, his hatred for Belichick so overwhelmed him that he rendered himself irrelevant. That's why I dislike Borges now, not because he didn't get good info.

Borges told us the stuff that Drewpy Bledsoe wanted us to hear. Because Drewpy knew the truth and didn't want to lose the support of the fans. Because he knew that when he did, we see him for what he was. An egotistical gunslinger who thought he knew more than his coaches. A guy who didn't know the real meaning of leadership.

As soon as Belichick became coach, he shut down the Drewpy to Borges connection. Why? Because it was detrimental to the team. Plain and simple.

And I can't sit here and document the order in which I read my Pats stories. Sometimes I read the papers first and therefore am not privy to what Mike has in his blog. I'm not what any of you would call computer savvy. I know what I have to know just to get by so constant checks with blogs isn't usually on my daily routine. The summer is here so now I'll probably have a little more time to surf around than normal because work is definitely in a downswing. But as a rule I probably read the Globe and Herald before I'm online in the morning, and I don't find a lot of stuff in Reiss that I don't already know. And I'm certainly no expert on all things Pats.

I've stopped reading the Herald because they usually don't have much good to say. Especially since they hired Tomase from the Eagle-Tribune to replace Reiss. Reiss' blog is usually the 1st place I look for Pats information because he usually has all the recent news boiled down into quick blurbs. If I want more info, then I read the articles.

 

[I'm Ron Borges?]

You definitely haven't been reading the Globe long. Borges has alwasy slanted his information. ALWAYS. And Borges is still covering the Patriots. Reiss is a better reporter than Borges ever was.



Borges told us the stuff that Drewpy Bledsoe wanted us to hear. Because Drewpy knew the truth and didn't want to lose the support of the fans. Because he knew that when he did, we see him for what he was. An egotistical gunslinger who thought he knew more than his coaches. A guy who didn't know the real meaning of leadership.

As soon as Belichick became coach, he shut down the Drewpy to Borges connection. Why? Because it was detrimental to the team. Plain and simple.




I've stopped reading the Herald because they usually don't have much good to say. Especially since they hired Tomase from the Eagle-Tribune to replace Reiss. Reiss' blog is usually the 1st place I look for Pats information because he usually has all the recent news boiled down into quick blurbs. If I want more info, then I read the articles.

I will admit that everything in this post is accurate. I just don't think as a reporter, Mike Reiss is that much better than most other reporters, especially when I hear he doesn't have an agenda because that's just wrong. However, everything you said here is pretty much the truth. Patsman12 may argue your points but I can't. Tomase is a disgrace to both read and look at. I also don't think Bledsoe was the stand up guy that some make him out to be for the reasons you mentioned.

 

[PATSNUTme]

They may think we are the same person because we like the Patriots but not Mike Reiss. However, they do have a point. Mike Reiss and the Patriots are pretty much the same thing since he all but gets his paycheck from Mr. Kraft.

T-shirt has a way of finding those things out, so he might alread know before he posted.

Now, I have no trouble with your post - don't agree - but no trouble with what you have said.

However, I am curious, and maybe others are too, what's the deal with your sig???

 

[I'm Ron Borges?]

T-shirt has a way of finding those things out, so he might alread know before he posted.

Now, I have no trouble with your post - don't agree - but no trouble with what you have said.

However, I am curious, and maybe others are too, what's the deal with your sig???

The character in the movie Anchorman is supposed to be a joke. Much like Borges is a joke to the journalism industry so it just clicked. My sig is not something I would say but something Borges would say once he left the Globe to all the Patriots fans. It's purely meant to be a slam on Borges for being a buffoon.

 

[Patsman12]

I didn't sign on so I could convince people to take my side. I started reading you guys recently and I got caught a bit off guard with the Reiss love-fest and started wondering why. Again, I think Reiss is solid ... just not the spectacular Pulitzer Prize winner you guys think.

But as far as me and Borges being the same person ... that's just offensive. I only have one username, sorry to disappoint you guys.

 

[I'm Ron Borges?]

Also, I can assure you that I'm not patsman12. We joined at the same time and I just happened to agree with him on Mike Reiss but some of the other things he pointed out I think reeks of stupidity.

 

[PATSNUTme]

The character in the movie Anchorman is supposed to be a joke. Much like Borges is a joke to the journalism industry so it just clicked. My sig is not something I would say but something Borges would say once he left the Globe to all the Patriots fans. It's purely meant to be a slam on Borges for being a buffoon.

OK. I'm cool with it now. Other might not be but that's their problem.

Getting back to Riess, I don't care if he'll never be an award winning journalist. I just want a guy who will get the info that I need and pass it on.

Too many so called journalist write for themselves and their elitist friends. And, the way that they can get attention is to go negitive. They will slant their opinions that way without much information or fact to back them up.

That is why I like Curran most of the time and Reiss most of the time.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

I too agree that Reiss is overrated and I'll give you my reasons. He is just as bad as Borges, it's just that he's on the other end of the spectrum. He kisses the team's butt so they feed him info. We all know this goes on in Houston with John McClain and the Texans. Some of you even pointed that out when all the Givens stuff came out.

The problem I have with Reiss is he is just the team's mouthpiece. For instance, in his most recent mailbag he says that Deion Branch is a #1 receiver, even though he isn't. Then in his blog he points out the fact that Branch isn't a #1 receiver but he'll never say it because he doesn't want to go against the team. In other words, he goes out of his way to be positive the same way Borges goes out of his way to be negative.

Take training camp for instance. The guy has a blog and doesn't mention anyone he thinks that might have struggled or looked out of place. A blog is a chance to give out a little opinion instead of "Rich Musinski is wearing No. 5." Who really cares? On the other hand, Patriots.com mentioned that Warfield and the two young quarterbacks didn't look very good and their 99% positive. In other words, Reiss is more of a homer than the team's official web site. How do you think he got that useless interview with Pioli? That's pretty bad because the team web site is supposed to be the ultimate homers.

Have you ever seen him on TV? He's terrible because he has no opinion of his own. He struggles to answer questions when he doesn't have the team there telling him what to write and think.

Every city has one of these guys and in the Patriots case it's Mike Reiss. In my opinion, a reporter should be down the middle, not pro Patriots or anti-Patriots. If a reporter leans too much one way, whichever way that is, they have an agenda and Reiss certainly has an agenda. The only difference is Patriots fans like his agenda so in return, they think he's some great reporter.

Here are some examples of reporters who do just as good a job as Reiss but don't get breaking news all the time because they're not bending over for the team:

Michael Parente
Eric McHugh
Paul Perillo
Tom Curran
Albert Breer

PS I'm not really Ron Borges and I look forward to having some good discussions on this board.

If Parente, McHugh and Breer were all that they would probably be writing for a major market paper by now. Curren is the football beat reporter, columnist along with a couple of occasional contributors, and sports editor of the Pro Jo, as well as a regular on the WBCN pre game show and FSNE, and he tends to bend with the wind at times although not usually to excess in either direction in order to maintain his on air gigs where being opinionated is all that really matters. His work suffers because he is spread too thin, like this Sunday when the Pro-Jo football article was from a wire service. Perillo is actually the only guy mentioned thus far who actually is on the team payroll as part of the Patriots Football Weekly gang, most of whom can be pretty edgy at times for guys whose checks (for their basic gigs) Kraft signs.

Reiss is just a very diligent and earnest reporter (and according to his peers one of the hardest working guys on the beat that isn't even totally his). He has not yet confused his sports assignment with uncovering scandals as an investigative reporter. Few of these guys actually possess journalism degrees you know, just guys who are drawn to something they cannot do yet show a modicam of flair for writing or talking or ranting about it.

 

[I'm Ron Borges?]

If Parente, McHugh and Breer were all that they would probably be writing for a major market paper by now. Curren is the football beat reporter, columnist along with a couple of occasional contributors, and sports editor of the Pro Jo, as well as a regular on the WBCN pre game show and FSNE, and he tends to bend with the wind at times although not usually to excess in either direction in order to maintain his on air gigs where being opinionated is all that really matters. His work suffers because he is spread too thin, like this Sunday when the Pro-Jo football article was from a wire service. Perillo is actually the only guy mentioned thus far who actually is on the team payroll as part of the Patriots Football Weekly gang, most of whom can be pretty edgy at times for guys whose checks (for their basic gigs) Kraft signs.

Reiss is just a very diligent and earnest reporter (and according to his peers one of the hardest working guys on the beat that isn't even totally his). He has not yet confused his sports assignment with uncovering scandals as an investigative reporter. Few of these guys actually possess journalism degrees you know, just guys who are drawn to something they cannot do yet show a modicam of flair for writing or talking or ranting about it.

Do you mean scandals like the Black Sox, Watergate, The Iran Missle Crisis, point shaving in college sports? You mean those kinds of scandals? Yeah, we should really slam journalists for wasting their time breaking meaningless stories like that.

In other news, Antwain Spann switched his number to 32. Great informative reporting.

 

[5 Rings for Brady!!]

I find it disappointing that we have now hijacked two threads just to ***** about Reiss. Lets talk about the Pats a little.

 

[I'm Ron Borges?]

I find it disappointing that we have now hijacked two threads just to ***** about Reiss. Lets talk about the Pats a little.

Thank you. I joined to talk football, not Mike Reiss but people want me banned for not liking him. I'm sorry, am I the only one that finds that a bit odd?

 

[MoLewisrocks]

I find it disappointing that we have now hijacked two threads just to ***** about Reiss. Lets talk about the Pats a little.

It's par for the course here lately. some guy just started a thread about Chad Jackson potentially diminishing Branch's leverage and a guy hijacked that into an out of town Pat's fans headcount thread.

I started this thread because Reiss had a fine article about Pioli's approach to team building in the Sunday Globe. Only a couple of newbies suddenly appeared in tandem and decided to turn it into a referendum on Mike Reiss' credibility vs. his illustrious and.or infamous peers. Oh well....

 

[Patsman12]

Sorry Mo, I didn't mean to sidetrack the thread. I just didn't find the story as enlightening as you did. Maybe it's because I read the same stuff from Pioli in 2001 ... and 2002 ... and 2003 ...

And I totally understand that because I just signed up my posts won't be taken seriously. That the way it works on these message boards ...

 

[mikey]

Sorry Mo, I didn't mean to sidetrack the thread. I just didn't find the story as enlightening as you did. Maybe it's because I read the same stuff from Pioli in 2001 ... and 2002 ... and 2003 ...

And I totally understand that because I just signed up my posts won't be taken seriously. That the way it works on these message boards ...

I like Mike Reiss, but I find his writing dull and tedious.

In fact, I thought we have a few posters here who write much better than Mike. MoLewisrock and Dryheat are two posters who come to mind.


.