Felger and Reiss go at it over Welker

[jmt57]

When Reiss tossed out the "and that's reporting Mike" line, I guarantee Felger had to bite his tongue and fight the urge to say "No Mike Reiss, that's you sticking to the Patriots talking points." We all know ESPN is in bed with the NFL, and these local ESPN spin offs are reliant on carpet bombing content. Reiss isn't providing hourly updates, stories, etc because he has the time to be super reporter and writer. Not a chance....no doubt their is a mutual understanding between NE and ESPN. Reiss' tone regarding all things NEP is too conciliatory too think any differently. Felger knows how it works and basically called out Reiss.

Look at what Reiss is hinting at today....Talib may go for a 1 year "prove it" contract now. Again, no agent would ever float this but a team definitely would. Reiss' "that's reporting, Mike" was a petty comment based on the reality of how wrong he was after writing how "optimistic" both sides were regarding WW 2 weeks ago. Far from reality.....and "that's the truth, Mike."

Yeah, that Talib going for a one year "prove it" contract sure was "far from reality".

 

[RobertWeathers]

I blame Welker's agent for wrecking things a long time ago. He could've taken the above-market deal offered by the Patriots way back.

Thats the thing. With all the money being thrown around in 2012 at WRs, the cap, etc was it an above market deal? I just don't know. Now it seems great. Then not so much.

With that said, I try not to blame the agent too much as it's ultimately the player's responsibility for their careers. He damn well knows that the Pats are tough SOBs at the negotiating table. Quite frankly, I think Felger has a point...WW didn't want to fight like Mankins, Seymour and others did for their money.

 

[cmasspatsfan]

A guy at Wal-Mart broke the story first.

Reiss is the type of reporter that is missing badly today. He gets all the info and reports it and lets the readers make up their minds.

I don't want him to be biased to the team or a bomb thrower like Borges. Just give us the info without a slant or a bias, that's all I want.

Speaking of Ron Bogus doesnt his Welker should have held out article a couple weeks ago make hime look like a bigger arse than he usually does. He was under the impression Welker was vastly underpaid when he was being paid fairly or slightly above all along.

 

[BSR]

It pains me to say this, but Felger is right here. Reiss can't possibly believe that the Welker went back to the Pats looking for 3/$24, after Denver offered 2/$12. None of what he says makes any sense. The tampering period definately would have given everyone involved an idea of where the market would generally be for players. If Welker was looking for 3/$24 prior to it, he'd have known either during that period, or by the actual FA opening on Tuesday, whether or not that was realistic. Clearly it wasn't. The bottom line is that the Patriots didn't want Welker back.

Here is the biggest hole in this Felger speculation...The Patriots made Welker what turned out to be a market offer before Free Agency began. So if EVERYONE knew what the market was prior to FA then there was a realistic chance that he accepts the offer which debunks Felger's theory that they didn't want him. If they really didn't know the market then it invalidates the theory that the Welker camp wouldn't ask for 3/$24. Either way Felger is grasping at straws.

Here is the other thing to not forget. Reiss' job is as a journalist complete with a standard of ethics that I have a sense he tries to follow. Felger's job is as an entertainer. He is playing a role and nothing else. How anyone could believe Felger is more unbiased then Reiss is absolutely mystifying to me. He doesn't even believe half the stuff he says and yes I have heard him essentially say this.

 

[borg]

Yeah, that Talib going for a one year "prove it" contract sure was "far from reality".

You don't get it. Reiss' "speculation" turns into reality in 2 hours? The Pats are feeding this guy. Nothing wrong with that, that's his job. But it is becoming clearer that his opinions are steered by the organization. It's the nature of the business.
Local Boston reporters turned a blind eye during the '11 Sox melt down and it took national reporters to dig the dirt. And remember how quick local beat writers attacked the validity of Yahoo's news. Don't be naive to think the Red Sox are the only team in town to "own" local media.
Access has its advantages and limitations. It seems the "Pats do no wrong" crowd now includes Reiss under its protection, but Felger, a reporter that played the game and knows the rules gets vilified for daring to call it as he sees it.

 

[JoeSixPat]

To be fair, did anyone think Welker was only going to get 6 mill a year?

Yes, Belichick - who offered Welker slightly less than that.

Reiss' premise that Felger is unable or unwilling to understand (either way, Felger lacks credibility as a football authority) is that the Welker and his agent turned down a better offer last year and failed to properly gauge the market.

Felger thinks one shouldn't expect an agent to properly assess the market and maximize earnings

Reiss DOES expect an agent to properly assess the market - which is why he includes him in the blame

This is classic listening - Reiss wipes the floor with Felger, defending his own credibility and making a fool out of Felger

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

You don't get it. Reiss' "speculation" turns into reality in 2 hours? The Pats are feeding this guy. Nothing wrong with that, that's his job. But it is becoming clearer that his opinions are steered by the organization. It's the nature of the business.
Local Boston reporters turned a blind eye during the '11 Sox melt down and it took national reporters to dig the dirt. And remember how quick local beat writers attacked the validity of Yahoo's news. Don't be naive to think the Red Sox are the only team in town to "own" local media.
Access has its advantages and limitations. It seems the "Pats do no wrong" crowd now includes Reiss under its protection, but Felger, a reporter that played the game and knows the rules gets vilified for daring to call it as he sees it.

You're Maz, right?

 

[BSR]

You don't get it. Reiss' "speculation" turns into reality in 2 hours? The Pats are feeding this guy. Nothing wrong with that, that's his job. But it is becoming clearer that his opinions are steered by the organization. It's the nature of the business.
Local Boston reporters turned a blind eye during the '11 Sox melt down and it took national reporters to dig the dirt. And remember how quick local beat writers attacked the validity of Yahoo's news. Don't be naive to think the Red Sox are the only team in town to "own" local media.
Access has its advantages and limitations. It seems the "Pats do no wrong" crowd now includes Reiss under its protection, but Felger, a reporter that played the game and knows the rules gets vilified for daring to call it as he sees it.

I don't think you get it. Reporting involves obtaining both sides of the story, not just one. It would be wrong to not try to gain facts from the Patriots, just like it would be wrong if he didn't try to gain information from the players as well. Reiss works both. Only facts can be steered by the teams and player not opinion. In the end, he is beholden to the information that he is provided. Its the nature of journalism. Do you actually prefer blind speculation instead?

And you keep on operating under this assumption that Felger is a reporter. He is not. Felger does not go to Foxboro, he doesn't engage with the player or team. He is no longer an insider. He doesn't have anywhere near the access of a Reiss or Bedard. Its like the equivalent of relying on TMZ over the NY Times for your world news.

 

[The Boston Patriot]

You don't get it. Reiss' "speculation" turns into reality in 2 hours? The Pats are feeding this guy. Nothing wrong with that, that's his job. But it is becoming clearer that his opinions are steered by the organization. It's the nature of the business.
Local Boston reporters turned a blind eye during the '11 Sox melt down and it took national reporters to dig the dirt. And remember how quick local beat writers attacked the validity of Yahoo's news. Don't be naive to think the Red Sox are the only team in town to "own" local media.
Access has its advantages and limitations. It seems the "Pats do no wrong" crowd now includes Reiss under its protection, but Felger, a reporter that played the game and knows the rules gets vilified for daring to call it as he sees it.

You don't get it at all. You are clearly delusional and are binging on the hater kool-aid. Felger, a reporter? That's a joke even you can't truly believe. You are right about one thing. Felger calls it like he sees it. Unfortunately, the only view he has these days is from his fat ass sitting next to the squeaky squealing midget so his opinions are formulated from what he reads on the web, twitter, facebook, and from his toadies. For you to malign Beiss and laud Felger says all I want to know about your opinions. You're just another Patriots hater looking for some tidbit of delusional conspiracy to latch onto.

 

[mgteich]

DON'T BLAME THE TEAM

The team offered a market price last year and on Tuesday. The response was to reject both out of hand and present offers in another zip code.
========================

I'm with Reiss on this one.

The agent rejected a better deal last year.

The agent presented an offer Tuesday night that was so far off that the patriots moved on. the patriots clearly were willing to sign Welker to a contract that would give him the same money as Denver's contract.

After talking to teams for 3 days (at least) and having convinced Welker that he would get much more elsewhere, they moved on to one of the VERY FEW teams that Welker would even accept.

A) I don't know what Welker was offered when he came to Foxborough after signing with Denver. I certainly don't think that the original offer was on the table. After all, the patriot deal was likely to produce the same money as the Denver deal.

B) In a sense, the agent WAS CORRECT. Welker could have gotten $7.5M from TENN (and that was before final negotiations). I suspect that Welker might have gotten them to come up $500K if there was real interest on Welker's part. Also, perhaps other teams might have offered Welker that much. Welker rejected non-contenders out of hand.

C) The BOTTOM LINE is that the agent screwed the pooch by not accepting the deal last year, and mis-read the market after talking to Denver in the legal tampering period this year. Or, perhaps the agent presented things correctly to Welker, and Welker simply decided that he'd rather play for Denver than New England, and that he preferred Denver to other teams, regardless of the money.

Yes, Belichick - who offered Welker slightly less than that.

Reiss' premise that Felger is unable or unwilling to understand (either way, Felger lacks credibility as a football authority) is that the Welker and his agent turned down a better offer last year and failed to properly gauge the market.

Felger thinks one shouldn't expect an agent to properly assess the market and maximize earnings

Reiss DOES expect an agent to properly assess the market - which is why he includes him in the lame

This is classic listening - Reiss wipes the floor with Felger, defending his own credibility and making a fool out of Felger

 

[QB12]

From the 10 minutes or so I listened, sounded like Felger got the better of Reiss.

 

[jmt57]

You don't get it. Reiss' "speculation" turns into reality in 2 hours? The Pats are feeding this guy. Nothing wrong with that, that's his job. But it is becoming clearer that his opinions are steered by the organization. It's the nature of the business.

Where do you think sports reporters - any and all of them - get their information?

Am I supposed to have more belief in a reporter that has zero contacts within an organization that he covers than one that does have contacts within that same place? How does that make any sense?

Local Boston reporters turned a blind eye during the '11 Sox melt down and it took national reporters to dig the dirt. And remember how quick local beat writers attacked the validity of Yahoo's news. Don't be naive to think the Red Sox are the only team in town to "own" local media.

Your lumping the Patriots together with the Red Sox, and Pats reporters with Red Sox reporters is giving me whiplash from shaking my head.

Access has its advantages and limitations. It seems the "Pats do no wrong" crowd now includes Reiss under its protection, but Felger, a reporter that played the game and knows the rules gets vilified for daring to call it as he sees it.

If you bothered to read Reiss at all, you would have seen multiple times over this past season when he was critical of the Pats and their decisions. Same holds true for Chris Price, Greg Bedard, Jeff Howe and others that rely, among other sources, for information from people within the Pats organization. Sometimes they will write positive pieces, and other times they are critical - as they should be, in my opinion.




But then again certain forum members who have never once had a positive thought about the team that they follow wouldn't see it that way; they would be too busy reciting their favorite media members, who alike them prefer to focus strictly on the negatives.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

You don't get it. Reiss' "speculation" turns into reality in 2 hours? The Pats are feeding this guy. Nothing wrong with that, that's his job. But it is becoming clearer that his opinions are steered by the organization. It's the nature of the business.
Local Boston reporters turned a blind eye during the '11 Sox melt down and it took national reporters to dig the dirt. And remember how quick local beat writers attacked the validity of Yahoo's news. Don't be naive to think the Red Sox are the only team in town to "own" local media.
Access has its advantages and limitations. It seems the "Pats do no wrong" crowd now includes Reiss under its protection, but Felger, a reporter that played the game and knows the rules gets vilified for daring to call it as he sees it.

No offense but you're way off-base. First, this is an unfair comparison. Reiss is a reporter, Felger is a wanna-be entertainer. It's like comparing TD passes between a starting QB and a punter. Sure, they're on the same field, but they have completely different jobs.

One guy strives to get it right. One guy strives to get anyone to listen, and is willing to make **** up to make that happen.

Secondly, are you seriously taking Reiss to task for being correct? This morning's stupid rant was one thing, but even after he's proven correct, you're going to continue down this road and take him to task??? For being correct???

As for Reiss's sources, it shouldn't matter if the guy hears it from the FO, the coach, the player, or the agent. So long as they get it right. We understand every source has a bias. Sure, the FO has an agenda. So does the player, and the agent, and the owner, and the reporters themselves.

If Reiss is getting it straight from the FO's mouth, that is actually a point in his FAVOUR. It means he's actually doing some work and getting it from someone actually involved. The guy who doesn't rely on anyone else's information so he can totally make it up is not the better reporter.

It may make Reiss more "boring," but I will gladly take accurate over loud.

 

[PatsFanStnfrd]

Everyone should read Reiss's great postmortem on Welker @ 2013 NFL free agency -- If Wes Welker had read the landscape better, would he be a Denver Bronco? - ESPN Boston. Entitled "Business end bites Wes Welker" -- its is a case of first class "REPORTING" with input from all sides. More definitive than the radio call-in.

Telling line:
"When asked Thursday what Broncos executive vice president of football operations John Elway said to him to close the deal, Welker told reporters he was actually the one doing the "pitching."

In other words, Welker was pitching Elway for a contract. That's how badly his agent misjudged the market.

Reiss summs up perfectly:
"As for Welker, he ultimately found himself in a tough spot. He's a player whose expertise is reading coverages and adjusting accordingly; reading the free-agent market and relying on the professional advice of others to help guide him is something altogether different."

I don't listen to Felger except I did tune in to the link posted here. He should be ashamed when he essentially says the Pats should have wanted him regardless of the price. Stunning lack of commonsense, not to mention lack of good business sense.

 

[borg]

Where do you think sports reporters - any and all of them - get their information?

Am I supposed to have more belief in a reporter that has zero contacts within an organization that he covers than one that does have contacts within that same place? How does that make any sense?


Your lumping the Patriots together with the Red Sox, and Pats reporters with Red Sox reporters is giving me whiplash from shaking my head.


If you bothered to read Reiss at all, you would have seen multiple times over this past season when he was critical of the Pats and their decisions. Same holds true for Chris Price, Greg Bedard, Jeff Howe and others that rely, among other sources, for information from people within the Pats organization. Sometimes they will write positive pieces, and other times they are critical - as they should be, in my opinion.




But then again certain forum members who have never once had a positive thought about the team that they follow wouldn't see it that way; they would be too busy reciting their favorite media members, who alike them prefer to focus strictly on the negatives.

Sorry you don't understand the dynamics involved when a reporter is embedded with a professional sports team. There's a reason critics of any team are rarely media members that spend their working days with the teams. To think the access deals and mutually beneficial "arrangements" are isolated only to Fenway Park only is completely naive. All teams have ways to get "their side of the story" out and reporters often cringe but comply because their job depends on access. Without it, they become obsolete in a competitive industry. My wife was a news reporter for years and I am more than familiar with how the game is played. Access and deals...and some news dribbles out occasionally. The NFL home office feeds Schefter. NFL GMs feed King. Agents feed Borges. The Patriots feed Reiss. Pro sports is really just entertainment and everyone has a role and the pieces always fit together.
What's really puzzling in this pushback is the total dismissal of similar sentiments by two former embedded beat reporters that clearly know how the reporter/team game gets played. Felger called out Reiss for some homer reporting and I absolutely concur. I caught a few slanted Reiss pieces in the past few weeks and knew how un-Reiss-like the sentiments were for such a middle of the road writer. Clearly he was being steered and the extra critical types could argue he was being used.

 

[shmessy]

Look at what Reiss is hinting at today....Talib may go for a 1 year "prove it" contract now. Again, no agent would ever float this but a team definitely would. Reiss' "that's reporting, Mike" was a petty comment based on the reality of how wrong he was after writing how "optimistic" both sides were regarding WW 2 weeks ago. Far from reality.....and "that's the truth, Mike."

Please.....Stop......Embarrassing.....Yourself.......

 

[shmessy]

You don't get it. Reiss' "speculation" turns into reality in 2 hours? The Pats are feeding this guy. Nothing wrong with that, that's his job. But it is becoming clearer that his opinions are steered by the organization. It's the nature of the business.
Local Boston reporters turned a blind eye during the '11 Sox melt down and it took national reporters to dig the dirt. And remember how quick local beat writers attacked the validity of Yahoo's news. Don't be naive to think the Red Sox are the only team in town to "own" local media.
Access has its advantages and limitations. It seems the "Pats do no wrong" crowd now includes Reiss under its protection, but Felger, a reporter that played the game and knows the rules gets vilified for daring to call it as he sees it.

Again, please stop embarrassing yourself.

Some of us want to get the info. Reiss doesn't do analysis - - he reports the news.

What he does (the above is a perfect example) is USEFUL to the reader.

What Felger does, any of us can hear from our spouses the other 22 hours a day.

 

[JoeSixPat]

From the 10 minutes or so I listened, sounded like Felger got the better of Reiss.

Listen to more.

Reiss gets Felger to admit that even though he's criticized him, he hasn't actually even read Reiss' articles.

Felger later admits that he's made no attempt to get both sides of the story like Reiss did (let alone read published reports) - and Reiss gives the diplomatic slam "Well that's what reporters do!"

 

[shmessy]

Felger is all style over substance.

As Gertrude Stein said of Oakland, California: "There's no there there."

 

[Shockt327]

Sorry you don't understand the dynamics involved when a reporter is embedded with a professional sports team. There's a reason critics of any team are rarely media members that spend their working days with the teams. To think the access deals and mutually beneficial "arrangements" are isolated only to Fenway Park only is completely naive. All teams have ways to get "their side of the story" out and reporters often cringe but comply because their job depends on access. Without it, they become obsolete in a competitive industry. My wife was a news reporter for years and I am more than familiar with how the game is played. Access and deals...and some news dribbles out occasionally. The NFL home office feeds Schefter. NFL GMs feed King. Agents feed Borges. The Patriots feed Reiss. Pro sports is really just entertainment and everyone has a role and the pieces always fit together.
What's really puzzling in this pushback is the total dismissal of similar sentiments by two former embedded beat reporters that clearly know how the reporter/team game gets played. Felger called out Reiss for some homer reporting and I absolutely concur. I caught a few slanted Reiss pieces in the past few weeks and knew how un-Reiss-like the sentiments were for such a middle of the road writer. Clearly he was being steered and the extra critical types could argue he was being used.

...and you do understand, right?

Ok, Felger. Time to reveal yourself.