Felger giving it to Borges...

[Bella*chick]

There was Drew, Damon Huard & Michael Bishop at the time IIRC. Couple weeks into his 2nd camp summer 2001 Brady was geting lots of reps. He'd always do well leading the O in scrimmages. Was accurate and 'looked' poised. Knew the offense and the plays. No hesitation and none of the locking onto the one guy where the ball was going. Could see him doing a couple checkdowns. Coaches were spending lots of time & attention on Brady. In retrospect what was happening was that BB was in the process of deciding that Brady, not the decent vet backup Huard, was to be his #2 QB.

OTOH, Drew was all over the place chucking the ball around deep but not moving the 1st down chains consistently like Brady was. Admitedly, I'd soured on Drew's game a couple years previously. Bishop finally got cut.

Camp at Smithfield was very up close and personal.

Thanks. It's kind of cool you were observing one of the great shifts in Patriots history (and approving it!). I went to camp in Smithfield once...in Drew's second year. I really liked that place, it did feel very up close and personal.

 

[mgcolby]

On another point -- I think the Globe's making Reiss the primary Patriots reporter was designed to offset Borges. Reiss is a Patriots lap dog who is primarily a reporter with team sources and Borges is a Patriots attack dog who is primarily a columnist and has access primarily to anti-team sources. I believe the Globe thinks as long as you have one you need the other to balance things out and make for more lively journalism.

(Oh, and I am not attacking Reiss by calling him a lap dog, I think he understands the situation and knows the Globe needs an inside team guy and he is doing what makes sense at this point in his career and what his bosses ask him to do.)

I don't believe Reiss is doing anything different than what he did at the Herald or the Metro, IMO your analysis is off base.

 

[DarrylS]

My personal experience of working in newspapers is that there is no such thing as a guaranteed job, and nor should there be. They don't necessarily need to fire him, but they can reassign him to cover the Revolution, or the zoo or just make him get Reiss coffee. (the guy seems to be carrying the entire football writing department and could probably use the help)

I am reiterating what a woman who worked for the NYT and claimed she knew the inner workings of the newspaper that this was the deal for the writers.. I do not know her veracity, but I do know that even though she did not specifically mention Borges she knew the issue.

 

[Pat_Nasty]

Ron Borges will not be fired from the Globe over his animosity towards Bill Belichick -- nor should he be.

Don't get me wrong: I think he's a bitter jackass and his agenda against Belichick is the height of pettiness.

Thing is, the guy sells newspapers. I know half the posters here claim they refuse to read him, but it's clear that they're part of the minority. Newspapers will often keep a house contrarian on staff, who attracts the interest of loyal fans who seem to enjoy reading things that piss them off, and feeding the fires of the whiners who seem to follow sports just to complain about their team's management.

For this reason alone, The Globe would be wrong to fire him. A sports columnist's job is to provide readers, and he does that very well. As many here have admitted, Borges remains a good writer and has an above-average football mind, and his columns, when not indulging in his agenda against BB, are enjoyable.

Now, as for his "agenda" -- yes, he has one against the present coach, and the ownership for its support of him. He's pretty upfront about this, as well as his reason why. As an opinion columnist, he's paid to give his opinion. He's not violating any sort of ethic by indulging in his agenda and criticising everything Belichick does -- his job is to put his slant on the things he reports. As long as his facts are verifiable, there's nothing wrong with him using them to paint as biased an opinion as he can.

After all he's an opinion columnist -- so to fire him because of his animosity for BB would be to fire him for his opinion and would be wrong.

Sports column writing is filled with a history of its practitioners indulging both their grudges against well as their friendships with the players, coaches and owners they cover. One is not more censurable than the other, really.

So for those of you who hate Borges and refuse to read the Globe because of him -- good. That's how it's supposed to work. The press is governed not by law but by the market.

 

[ironwasp]

I am reiterating what a woman who worked for the NYT and claimed she knew the inner workings of the newspaper that this was the deal for the writers.. I do not know her veracity, but I do know that even though she did not specifically mention Borges she knew the issue.

I don't dispute your point at all - I can quite believe that that would be the situation.

What I meant by my post in response to your last message was that no newspaper will ever keep a reporter they believe is damaging their reputation and credibility. DO you think the NYT would have kept Jayson Blair under the circumstances he put them in - even with a contractual guarantee. I don't think so.

As to Pat Nasty's point - I believe it is healthy that the Globe has a professional sceptic on its sporting staff who holds the Patriot organisation to account for its actions. It is good for the team, good for the paper and good for us. I am afraid that - opinion columnist or not, and trust me I understand the distinction having been the subject of legal proceedings testing this point - Borges vendetta against Belichick goes well beyond that and well beyond the boundaries of what should be acceptable on a newspaper that regards itself as respectable.

That there might be a commercial consideration at play here, I don't doubt for a moment. I believe the Globe has said in the past it regards Borges in that light, and in a cut-throat market it's difficult to dispute the logic. BUt I reiterate my belief that his behaviour and journalism damages the newspaper's integrity and no serious newspaper can afford that to continue for too long, be it on the political or sports pages.

 

[Patjew]

BB could have said "as long as it takes" meaning AS LONG AS IT TAKES FOR US TO SEE WHO DESERVES IT, with Drew (mis)interpreting that as YOU'LL HAVE AS LONG AS IT TAKES TO WIN THE JOB BACK. Seem plausible?

That's exactly how I took it. Drew had as long as it took to prove that he should get the job back, BUT he never proved it.

 

[PatsDeb]

The NFL should immediately take action and revoke Borges vote. This is no less a scandal than steroids.

I think the poster meant would Borges vote for Bledsoe for the HOF, not BB.

 

[RayClay]

On another point -- I think the Globe's making Reiss the primary Patriots reporter was designed to offset Borges. Reiss is a Patriots lap dog who is primarily a reporter with team sources and Borges is a Patriots attack dog who is primarily a columnist and has access primarily to anti-team sources. I believe the Globe thinks as long as you have one you need the other to balance things out and make for more lively journalism.

(Oh, and I am not attacking Reiss by calling him a lap dog, I think he understands the situation and knows the Globe needs an inside team guy and he is doing what makes sense at this point in his career and what his bosses ask him to do.)

I just think this is so funny. I know you're backing away from it, but i just think it's hilarious we have to make excuses for a beat writer who cultivates sources in the organization so he can write accurate stories.

Contrast this with Tomase who writes about 8 different inuendo laced stories every time there's an injury so it'll make it look like he has a scoop.

He did it today with Seymour's injury. Seymour said "at least they didn't cut me" and Tomase follows with Seymour didn't deny he might need surgery in the future.

Someone here quoted it and I followed the link the within hours and the story was totally different.

If you want reporters guessing about injuries and bashing the team, I guess you don't want Reiss.

 

[alamo]

I just think this is so funny. I know you're backing away from it, but i just think it's hilarious we have to make excuses for a beat writer who cultivates sources in the organization so he can write accurate stories.

I put it the way I did to highlight and contrast the differences. But I do believe Reiss does let the Patriots exercise some editorial control. (Not necessarily explicitly, but I am sure there are cases such as injuries where Reiss has the facts but doesn't print them because he knows the Patriots want the information released on their timetable. Thus people like Tomase may indeed get a scoop if they get the information from an agent or their own reporting.

 

[RayClay]

I put it the way I did to highlight and contrast the differences. But I do believe Reiss does let the Patriots exercise some editorial control. (Not necessarily explicitly, but I am sure there are cases such as injuries where Reiss has the facts but doesn't print them because he knows the Patriots want the information released on their timetable. Thus people like Tomase may indeed get a scoop if they get the information from an agent or their own reporting.

I'm sure that's true. I'm just saying I think it's smart to cultivate your sources.

Every other writer in town seems to want to antagonize the only people that are giving out accurate information. The back door's closed.

I think the reality check is the tremendous negative slant to the reporting and the gotcha mentality of all, (including Tomase, who has nevertheless produced some fine feature articles).

I see Reiss in his mail bag saying, be patient-I think it will work out- they have a pretty good track record, and he sounds like a shill.

Problem is, he's right! They've won 3 SBs. They've replaced most of the "irreplaceables" with younger, more affordable players.

There comes a point where you have to say this team knows what they're doing. We should have at least one writer in town who reflects that reality.

 

[TruthSeeker]

I'm sure that's true. I'm just saying I think it's smart to cultivate your sources.

Every other writer in town seems to want to antagonize the only people that are giving out accurate information. The back door's closed.

I think the reality check is the tremendous negative slant to the reporting and the gotcha mentality of all, (including Tomase, who has nevertheless produced some fine feature articles).

I see Reiss in his mail bag saying, be patient-I think it will work out- they have a pretty good track record, and he sounds like a shill.

Problem is, he's right! They've won 3 SBs. They've replaced most of the "irreplaceables" with younger, more affordable players.

There comes a point where you have to say this team knows what they're doing. We should have at least one writer in town who reflects that reality.

Yup, I say the same thing. Now, I do acknowledge that I'm gullible at times and slow to change my thinking to correspond to shifts in reality. However, you do have to give credit to BB and the Patriots for their track record. I'd rather be right and a shill than wrong and a doofus.

 

[Pat_Nasty]

I'm sure that's true. I'm just saying I think it's smart to cultivate your sources.

Every other writer in town seems to want to antagonize the only people that are giving out accurate information. The back door's closed.

I think the reality check is the tremendous negative slant to the reporting and the gotcha mentality of all, (including Tomase, who has nevertheless produced some fine feature articles).

I see Reiss in his mail bag saying, be patient-I think it will work out- they have a pretty good track record, and he sounds like a shill.

Problem is, he's right! They've won 3 SBs. They've replaced most of the "irreplaceables" with younger, more affordable players.

There comes a point where you have to say this team knows what they're doing. We should have at least one writer in town who reflects that reality.

I agree w/ a lot of what you have to say. I find the NE sports media too prone to chicken-little hysteria, and I appreciate a writer who placed the appropriate trust in a coaching staff that has had such brilliant success.

But I will say this: Reiss most certainly does cede too much editorial control over his writing to the Pats' FO, and this is exactly why he's been able to "cultivate his sources" (viz: team media rep Stacey James).

Now, since the Pats already have a prominent beat reporter willing to compromise his independence, they don't need to deal with guys like Tomase, who won't.

This forces guys like Tomase to go in the other direction, and chase rumors + unconfirmed sources, because he sure won't be getting the exlusives + scoops from the team that Reiss does.

 

[RayClay]

I agree w/ a lot of what you have to say. I find the NE sports media too prone to chicken-little hysteria, and I appreciate a writer who placed the appropriate trust in a coaching staff that has had such brilliant success.

But I will say this: Reiss most certainly does cede too much editorial control over his writing to the Pats' FO, and this is exactly why he's been able to "cultivate his sources" (viz: team media rep Stacey James).

Now, since the Pats already have a prominent beat reporter willing to compromise his independence, they don't need to deal with guys like Tomase, who won't.

This forces guys like Tomase to go in the other direction, and chase rumors + unconfirmed sources, because he sure won't be getting the exlusives + scoops from the team that Reiss does.

I disagree. Tomase has written some very good feature articlesand I've praised him for them.

BB had a press conference, gave a statement about Branch then said that was all he was going to say about it. "I'm only going to talk about players that are here."

Tomase immediately asked him about 3 questions about Branch, or repeated the same one, (I can't remember).

Of course he got no response.

Put yourself in Belichicks place.

You've had unprecedented success and most of the reporters are going to keep asking leading questions until they get a response they can twist into a sensational headline.

If you're the most succesful coach in year, are you going to go out of your way to give these guys actual information, when they want tabloid headlines while you're trying to answer legitimate questions in a press conference?

I'd say screw 'em. But that's just me.

 

[RayClay]

Also, we're not talking about exposing government policies, this is a football team.

If the football team is winning, that's pretty much the story.

Borges trying to find evil and corruption in a team that has won it all 3 of 5 recent times is a Circus side show.

Scores, interviews and accurate injury information. There really aren't any sexy controversies going on.

 

[captain stone]

Since when does the Boston Globe care about credibility of their reporters...? The Globe is a ragsheet that has humiliated itself time and again.

Megadittos. The bowtied bumkissers of Morrissey Blvd. are owned by the New York Crimes. 'Nuff said.

As for my thoughts on "...as long as it takes...", BB should have told DB: Look, we're on a good roll right now. Tom is managing the game well, and everyone else has stepped up. We started the season 0-2; I'm not implying that both losses were all your fault, either. But we're not going to replace Tom just because of some ridiculous "rule" stating that a starter cannot lose his job due to injury, or because you make more money than he does. Until he shows that he's losing control, Tom's our starter. All I can tell you for now is, keep getting healthy, and stay ready. M'kay?