Quick hit thoughts from Mike Reiss

[ZoisKing]

BYU isn't making it up. I remember it as well. He was on the wagon with everybody else when the news first struck.

 

[Bobsyouruncle]

I've been digging but can't find anything remotely close to what you're accusing.

I check in on Reiss and this forum usually several times a day because I'm a ****ing loser, and don't recall anything like that from Reiss. Granted I haven't read every single post here and may have missed it, but I am a bit skeptical about this claim.

Well I don't know how to find every blog post Mike made between January and February of 2015. If you do, then I'll gladly search through them.

 

[JayNM]

I think I remember that to be honest. It was just after Mort reported the "balls were 2 PSI deflated". Reiss' didn't really accuse the Pats, but said that "If the charges are true, Pats should be punish accordingly..." It really was at the very beginning, when only the accusation had appeared. That's when i remember seeing something like that "guilty" report.

When the very first signs of suspicion started to pop up about this whole case, he became very skeptical of all the "facts", posting several Pro-Pats points. Then his posts were edited... It was clear that he didn't believe in that crap, but he couldn't say that, cause ESPN, his boss, had taken a side.

Reiss is a top notch report and a genuinely good guy, IMO.

EDIT - Adding more info and Correcting English. If you are not sober, don't post in foreign language, kids.

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

The Pats have also only given up 15 first quarter points in 6 games, a safety vs NY (grounding in end zone), 2 FG and one TD

That makes sense as every Patriot SB in the BB era has been a tight score. Yet I am surprised that we haven't scored a single first quarter point. And that also factors into why the scores are so nerve-rackingly close. We haven't done to anyone what, for example, we did to Pitt last week by mid 3rd quarter. But if there has ever been a good time to break that dubious streak it is this Sunday. This game on its face is not the most major uphill climb we've ever faced, however, ATL has a very potent offense. No doubt whatsoever this is the biggest test for our D all year. So at the end of the first quarter to be already in the scoring hole should be gravely concerning.

IMHO the sum of our parts makes us the winner. The D is proven good enough to slow down a potent Offense (at least reduce their regular expectation of very high scoring). Our O is good enough to score high points on any D that is not top of the league or next to it in pass coverage and/or pass rush. But we need both parts performing, to a normal degree, as they have shown they can. So if our O is unable to score points for the whole first quarter it means the D will need to exceed expectations -- doing so against their toughest O test of 2016. That's a bad way for the Patriots to start and likely means a Patriot win will only come as a nail biter (unless there is an unlikely cathartic shift between the first half and second half).

 

[Tony2046]

Yeah I'll look for it when I have time. It was also covered on this forum at the time. But here's no difference between what you're saying and what Macmullan wrote, she qualified her claim with "if", so did everyone else. When the 11 of 12 balls tweet hit the air, Mike, like everyone else and then opined on the implications and punishments.

He could have done many things, he did what everyone else did. That's why I'm not buying he's some media guy unlike others. In a sea of media with one narrative, he was not the guy pushing back, he was the guy that joined in and said the same things.

Not true. He has been one of the few that has never written anything he wasn't sure about. Further, he has strategically written articles that represent the real reasons the Patriots are successful. Coaching, Brady etc....

You won't find one article supporting Roger's opinion. You will find a few articles about Roger or the NFL HQ that make you wonder why BSPN didn't fire him.

You will also find that he will call out BSPN from time to time for editing his pieces and usually those are written articles related to the performance of the NFL HQ.

 

[Tony2046]

I've been digging but can't find anything remotely close to what you're accusing.

I check in on Reiss and this forum usually several times a day because I'm a ****ing loser, and don't recall anything like that from Reiss. Granted I haven't read every single post here and may have missed it, but I am a bit skeptical about this claim.

The thing with Reiss is that he is a true professional. He does not make assumptions. He puts a lot of effort into making sure his stuff is accurate. I have no doubt in my mind that he steps back and asks, " is this accurate?" before posting or writing anything. Unlike the contrarian ******* who asks, "will this get clicks?" before posting anything.

 

[supafly]

I think I remember that to be honest. It was just after the Mort had reported about the balls. Reiss' didn't really accuse the Pats, but said that "If the charges are true, Bad Pats..." However it was at the very beginning, when only the accusation had appeared. That's when i remember seeing something like that "accusatory" report.

When the very first signs of suspicion started to pop up, he became very skeptical of all charges, It was clear that he didn't believe in that crap, but he couldn't say that, cause ESPN, his boss, had taken a side.

Reiss is a top notch report and a genuinely good guy, IMO.

Agree with all you say here. When the news first broke, Reiss was lumped in with the others due to a couple of unpopular comments that he made, but he quickly leveled himself in the weeks and months to come.

I like both Curran and Reiss, and I find Howe to be informative at times, as well. All are good in my book.

 

[supafly]

Not true. He has been one of the few that has never written anything he wasn't sure about. Further, he has strategically written articles that represent the real reasons the Patriots are successful. Coaching, Brady etc....

You won't find one article supporting Roger's opinion. You will find a few articles about Roger or the NFL HQ that make you wonder why BSPN didn't fire him.

You will also find that he will call out BSPN from time to time for editing his pieces and usually those are written articles related to the performance of the NFL HQ.

This is all true. Reiss hasn't been afraid to push the limit with his opinion about the changes to his blog, and I certainly agree that he has more credibility than most.

I think some of Reiss initial comments weren't quite as "pro-team" as many would like, and I do remember at least one of his blogs or tweets adding a little fuel to the fire. Like I said, it was pretty minor stuff and it happened in the initial stages (I'm guessing first 2 weeks), but it definitely did happen. Just for what it's worth, that's all.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

Well I don't know how to find every blog post Mike made between January and February of 2015. If you do, then I'll gladly search through them.

I just used Google. ESPN's internal search engine also helped narrow it down.

I think this is the post you may have been referencing:

Patriots should be held accountable

The headline is sensationalist, but nothing less than expected from BSPN. Here's the most "controversial" excerpt:

Prior to this point, the feeling was that if one or two footballs came in under weight, it was going to be hard for the NFL to make a decisive ruling against the Patriots. But 11 of 12 footballs is pretty strong evidence that something was happening from the time officials inspected the footballs 2 hours, 15 minutes before the game and the actual game itself.

The Patriots, assuming the initial inspection of footballs by referee Walt Anderson and his crew was done correctly and that weather wasn't a factor, should be held accountable.

As I wrote in Tuesday’s Patriots mailbag, “There are specific rules that prohibit altering the ball after they have been checked by the officials 2 hours, 15 minutes before game time. If the Patriots (or any team, for that matter) are knowingly breaking those rules outside of the normal scope of what is accepted (e.g. New York Times story on Eli Manning; Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers acknowledging how he likes his footballs to feel), there is a price to pay.”

I remember reading this at the time and didn't think it was anything controversial. There's a ton of qualifiers throughout the piece and is nowhere close to the inflammatory level of many original pieces on the subject.

 

[PatsBoy12]

I think I remember that to be honest. It was just after the Mort had reported about the balls. Reiss' didn't really accuse the Pats, but said that "If the charges are true, Bad Pats..." However it was at the very beginning, when only the accusation had appeared. That's when i remember seeing something like that "accusatory" report.

When the very first signs of suspicion started to pop up, he became very skeptical of all charges, It was clear that he didn't believe in that crap, but he couldn't say that, cause ESPN, his boss, had taken a side.

Reiss is a top notch report and a genuinely good guy, IMO.

You are correct. And if memory serves, he caught a little backlash then, but it never became a fire. People realized quickly that he wasn't accusing the Pats. I remember an article that followed where he clarified things for everyone. That's what this whole debate has been about and it really was nothing, ladies and gents.

 

[1960Pats]

How could any decent writer know that the NYFL lied about the numbers to create a false narrative? It shows us that sports isn't exempt from fake news.

 

[Tony2046]

Below are a few of his first deflategate articles. I've also provided the search BSPN search engine so that you can modify the dates if you wish. In each of the deflategate articles I read he discusses rules, ramifications and always cautions that this deflategate was in its infancy and more information would be needed in order to make a judgement. Like all of us we were living off of leaked information but after the Wells report was released Mike was one of the first to rip into it and should be seen as the equivalent of scorched earth mode when coming from a BSPN link.

Here is a time search for Mike Reiss's content from 18 Jan 2015- 8 May 2015. (Start of Deflategate to Wells report release.)

Mike Reiss News, Videos, Photos, and PodCasts - ESPN


First article I can find from Mike Reiss regarding deflategate.

NFL probing whether Pats deflated footballs


Here's one that says the Patriots should be held accountable. (Keep in mind that he is receiving information directly from the NFL and his trusted colleague Chris Mortensen and even then he cautions that more information is needed.)

Patriots should be held accountable

The Patriots, assuming the initial inspection of footballs by referee Walt Anderson and his crew was done correctly and that weather wasn't a factor, should be held accountable.

To be clear, more information is needed before any final judgment can be made on accountability. At this point, the fact 11 of 12 footballs came in underweight moves the story forward, and raises more questions as to how it happened.

This is his mailbag from Jan 20th. Keep in mind that Mike is under the impression that the balls were 2 psi below regulation and that this was going to end up as a $25,000 dollar fine.

Pats mailbag: NFL needs to defuse Deflate-gate

If you're curious for my own opinion on the deflated footballs, I think it is an overblown story.

January 21 2015

All thoughts in one place on deflated balls

Analyzing incomplete information. At this point, we have incomplete information and more facts are needed to make a final judgment. From this viewpoint, this is the greatest challenge in the 24/7 news cycle we now live in. It's obviously too early to rush to any judgment, but when 11 of 12 footballs come in under weight, it naturally raises questions as to how that can be the case.

Two days after the Wells report release:

Turning a critical eye on Wells report


"Turning a critical eye on Wells report"

Thus, I rejected the Wells report's explanation for dismissing the role of science based on their usage of this uneven data between teams.

Role of Brady's autographs. In building their case against the Patriots and Tom Brady, the Wells report focused in part on autographs/memorabilia that Brady provided McNally. It was framed in the context that he was giving him things in exchange for a favor. I personally find that hard to believe -- or should I say "more not than probable."

And Mike freaking nails it home with this blurb:

Manipulating public perception. At the March owners meeting, commissioner Roger Goodell said: "If there was anything that we as a league did incorrectly, we'll know about it in that report.” I didn't see much of that in the report, if anything at all. Specifically, I was curious whether there would be any mention of reputation-damaging leaks from the league office that helped manipulate public opinion, ultimately setting the stage for the release of the Wells report.

 

[Bobsyouruncle]

How could any decent writer know that the NYFL lied about the numbers to create a false narrative? It shows us that sports isn't exempt from fake news.

Mortenson's report was from an anonymous source, not the NFL. At the very least the fact that the NFL wouldn't publicly confirm it should be a red flag.

 

[1960Pats]

Mortenson's report was from an anonymous source, not the NFL. At the very least the fact that the NFL wouldn't publicly confirm it should be a red flag.

What gives the NYFL away is the fact that they repeated the same air pressure lies to the Pats, even though they had the real numbers. Then when they did give the Pats the correct numbers they forced them to keep quiet about it. Meanwhile, the Mort Distort was sitting there for months.

 

[Tony2046]

Mortenson's report was from an anonymous source, not the NFL. At the very least the fact that the NFL wouldn't publicly confirm it should be a red flag.

You've been provided a search engine and links. Where is your "outrage train" article? There isn't any.

 

[sb1]

I don't remember Reiss joining the outrage train with the rest of the country. The only thing I remember is that before the report was released he was saying the Pats would almost certainly at least be looking at some kind of fine for an equipment violation.

 

[Bobsyouruncle]

You've been provided a search engine and links. Where is your "outrage train" article? There isn't any.

The one he posted is sufficient. Mike saying the same things everyone else said at the time. I don't consider that "different". There were tons of red flags the story was balogna. There were tons of reasons to doubt Mortenson's anonymous source. Instead he wrote "Patriots must be held accountable".

This information alters my outlook on the overall story.

Prior to this point, the feeling was that if one or two footballs came in under weight, it was going to be hard for the NFL to make a decisive ruling against the Patriots. But 11 of 12 footballs is pretty strong evidence that something was happening from the time officials inspected the footballs 2 hours, 15 minutes before the game and the actual game itself.

His own words, his opinion was changed.

 

[Tony2046]

The one he posted is sufficient. Mike saying the same things everyone else said at the time. I don't consider that "different". There were tons of red flags the story was balogna. There were tons of reasons to doubt Mortenson's anonymous source. Instead he wrote "Patriots must be held accountable".

That's ridiculous. What were the red flags on Jan 21st ?

In the same article he states:

The Patriots, assuming the initial inspection of footballs by referee Walt Anderson and his crew was done correctly and that weather wasn't a factor, should be held accountable.

and,

To be clear, more information is needed before any final judgment can be made on accountability. At this point, the fact 11 of 12 footballs came in underweight moves the story forward, and raises more questions as to how it happened.

That's not jumping on any "outrage" train.

Given the environment the guy was working in at the time that article is reasonable. The NFL had full control of its leaks and told the Patriots to keep their mouths shut. There wasn't any numbers or data to dispute anything the NFL said until the Wells report was released. And still Mike had the wherewithal to add disclaimers into his articles such as those posted above.

I've just reread a bunch of his articles. He attempts to maintain objectivity but he also continuously hints that he thinks something is amiss.

 

[sb1]

I think there's a lot of merit to the theory that this came entirely from the owners who felt the league was too light with the Spygate punishment and told Goodell to strike when the opportunity presented itself...by any means necessary.

 

[Tony2046]

I think there's a lot of merit to the theory that this came entirely from the owners who felt the league was too light with the Spygate punishment and told Goodell to strike when the opportunity presented itself...by any means necessary.

I don't. I think that's just some added BS to sooth the Scientifically or the Legally literate community.

1. Patriots cheated. Deflated footballs.
2. Wells report. Weather wasn't the cause of the deflation.
3. Professors. The Science doesn't add up.
4. Brady smashed his phone.
5. Appeal transcripts released. Roger lied. Why?
6. This is to make up for going easy on the Patriots during camera placement gate 8 years ago?