Reiss takes on PonyExpress

[Miguel]

Just kidding. With the subject line.

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/reiss_pieces/

MR presents numbers relating to Branch's worth.

 

[Pats726]

Just kidding. With the subject line.

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/reiss_pieces/

MR presents numbers relating to Branch's worth.

I think it is interesting what he said....sounds right to me...good find Miguel!!!

 

[Johnny Z]

Average receptions and average yards adds up to a below average analysis.

 

[I'm Ron Borges?]

Well, as he even admitted in this post, last week Reiss said in his mailbag that Branch was a #1 receiver and then he gives you info that proves the exact opposite. God forbid he takes a stance against anyone associated with the Patriots in a mailbag.

 

[mgcolby]

Well, as he even admitted in this post, last week Reiss said in his mailbag that Branch was a #1 receiver and then he gives you info that proves the exact opposite. God forbid he takes a stance against anyone associated with the Patriots in a mailbag.

Glad I got to get a chuckle out of you before you were kicked out!

 

[I'm Ron Borges?]

Glad I got to get a chuckle out of you before you were kicked out!

Why would I get kicked out? I didn't do anything wrong? You get kicked out of this forum if you don't love Mike Reiss? That's a new one.

 

[Willie55]

Would the real wRong Borges please stand up.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

What our new Ron troll fails to appreciate is it is a reporters job to report, which includes the facts as they stand (Branch is a #1 by default as he fills that roll on this team and might well fill it on upwards of a dozen others) and his analysis which he does offer on a limited basis (turns out Deion's stats don't match up production wise with the highest paid receivers...) I believe because he does not (yet) possess the overblown ego that some of his so-called peers exhibit. That is why whenever he feels he may have misspoken or over reacted or mislead he acknowledges it.

And most of the most opinionated who prefer to stew and dig into positions are now classified by choice as columnsts. There job is not to inform but to provoke, and they love it. Unfortunately in Boston these guys tend to cross over periodically in coverage - and then they want to be treated like reporters where access is concerned and behave as columnists when it comes to presenting whatever they uncover or cannot uncover. Several also serve as full or part time media talking heads whose job is to really incite, though for the life of them they cannot understand why most teams, players and rational fans can't stomach them. After all they will whine they are just doing their job and trying to earn a living at our collective expense.

 

[I'm Ron Borges?]

What our new Ron troll fails to appreciate is it is a reporters job to report, which includes the facts as they stand (Branch is a #1 by default as he fills that roll on this team and might well fill it on upwards of a dozen others) and his analysis which he does offer on a limited basis (turns out Deion's stats don't match up production wise with the highest paid receivers...) I believe because he does not (yet) possess the overblown ego that some of his so-called peers exhibit. That is why whenever he feels he may have misspoken or over reacted or mislead he acknowledges it.

And most of the most opinionated who prefer to stew and dig into positions are now classified by choice as columnsts. There job is not to inform but to provoke, and they love it. Unfortunately in Boston these guys tend to cross over periodically in coverage - and then they want to be treated like reporters where access is concerned and behave as columnists when it comes to presenting whatever they uncover or cannot uncover. Several also serve as full or part time media talking heads whose job is to really incite, though for the life of them they cannot understand why most teams, players and rational fans can't stomach them. After all they will whine they are just doing their job and trying to earn a living at our collective expense.

Why am I troll? Because I don't love Mike Reiss? Look at my other posts in other threads, they're all pro Patriots. So, in order not to be a troll you have to love Mike Reiss too? Is that what you're saying because if it is, you may like Reiss a little bit too much to be healthy.

 

[I'm Ron Borges?]

Also, you are wrong about what Reiss said about Branch. This is what he said from his own mouth:

"In a Patriots mailbag on Boston.com last week, I wrote that Branch is a No. 1 caliber receiver, a vital cog to the offense."

At no point does the word "default" appear.

 

[PATSNUTme]

Also, you are wrong about what Reiss said about Branch. This is what he said from his own mouth:

"In a Patriots mailbag on Boston.com last week, I wrote that Branch is a No. 1 caliber receiver, a vital cog to the offense."

At no point does the word "default" appear.

He is right. Branch is a #1 caliber reciever in our offense. He may be about 15-20th of the #1 recievers in the NFL.

Just becasue Tenn over paid for Givens doesn't mean that the Patriots should over pay for Branch. I think a four year deal at about $16 mil that includes any signing bonus would be about right for him.

 

[I'm Ron Borges?]

He is right. Branch is a #1 caliber reciever in our offense. He may be about 15-20th of the #1 recievers in the NFL.

Just becasue Tenn over paid for Givens doesn't mean that the Patriots should over pay for Branch. I think a four year deal at about $16 mil that includes any signing bonus would be about right for him.

I agree with that deal. I wouldn't go much higher than that though and I don't believe the Pats will either but it's just a guess.

 

[mgcolby]

Why would I get kicked out? I didn't do anything wrong? You get kicked out of this forum if you don't love Mike Reiss? That's a new one.

Ahm.. I think your signature might end up having something to do with it, along with the obvious fact that you are a troll.

And now that you mention it, not loving Reiss might be something the powers to be should consider as a banable offense!

Ian?

 

[I'm Ron Borges?]

Ahm.. I think your signature might end up having something to do with it, along with the obvious fact that you are a troll.

And now that you mention it, not loving Reiss might be something the powers to be should consider as a banable offense!

Ian?

I don't even know what a troll is but what have I done to deserve that label? Have I started trouble for no reason? Listen, if you need to start off with 5,000 posts to contribute to this board, let me know and you can get back to your weird ( and a little scary) love fest with Mike Reiss.

 

[JoeSixPat]

What our new Ron troll fails to appreciate is it is a reporters job to report, which includes the facts as they stand (Branch is a #1 by default as he fills that roll on this team and might well fill it on upwards of a dozen others) and his analysis which he does offer on a limited basis (turns out Deion's stats don't match up production wise with the highest paid receivers...) I believe because he does not (yet) possess the overblown ego that some of his so-called peers exhibit. That is why whenever he feels he may have misspoken or over reacted or mislead he acknowledges it.

And most of the most opinionated who prefer to stew and dig into positions are now classified by choice as columnsts. There job is not to inform but to provoke, and they love it. Unfortunately in Boston these guys tend to cross over periodically in coverage - and then they want to be treated like reporters where access is concerned and behave as columnists when it comes to presenting whatever they uncover or cannot uncover. Several also serve as full or part time media talking heads whose job is to really incite, though for the life of them they cannot understand why most teams, players and rational fans can't stomach them. After all they will whine they are just doing their job and trying to earn a living at our collective expense.

I agree that good reporters need to ask tough questions even if they don't always agree with the premise. Its their job to report - not predetermine the answer to the questions they pose.

I too often like to play the role of contrarian around here as well... sometimes just trying to make everyone prove their points they convey as facts when they strike me as opinion.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Also, you are wrong about what Reiss said about Branch. This is what he said from his own mouth:

"In a Patriots mailbag on Boston.com last week, I wrote that Branch is a No. 1 caliber receiver, a vital cog to the offense."

At no point does the word "default" appear.

The default is he is the #1 here and vital for that reason, it's his caliber amongst other #1's relative to productivity and compensation that he now realizes may not be clearly evident where a new contract is concerned.

 

[mgcolby]

I don't even know what a troll is but what have I done to deserve that label? Have I started trouble for no reason? Listen, if you need to start off with 5,000 posts to contribute to this board, let me know and you can get back to your weird ( and a little scary) love fest with Mike Reiss.

Well considering you are "contributing" to this board with a mere 14 posts shoots down your far fetched theory. No weird love fest, just a good old fashion appreciation for someone that reports a story, rather than make himself or his agenda the story.

And your signature doesn't lend you much credibility.

 

[mgcolby]

I agree that good reporters need to ask tough questions even if they don't always agree with the premise. Its their job to report - not predetermine the answer to the questions they pose.

I too often like to play the role of contrarian around here as well... sometimes just trying to make everyone prove their points they convey as facts when they strike me as opinion.

You always struck me as the clever one.

But isn't 90% of what is posted on here opinion? Considering that we root for the most clammed up organization in sports, I would think much of what we post is either speculation or rumor's that may or may not be based on truth.

 

[I'm Ron Borges?]

Well considering you are "contributing" to this board with a mere 14 posts shoots down your far fetched theory. No weird love fest, just a good old fashion appreciation for someone that reports a story, rather than make himself or his agenda the story.

And your signature doesn't lend you much credibility.

Buddy, I just joined. Is there some kind of rapid rate where you can get to 1,000 posts? Come up with something better than that. Just because I recently started posting doesn't mean your opinion is worth more than mine and for you to imply that it does is childish on your part. My sig is a joke on Borges. My God, if you guys can't laugh and enjoy yourself on a sports message board, you have bigger problems than my stupid sig.

 

[I'm Ron Borges?]

Also, there is no reason to slam me personally just because we like different reporters. I haven't said a bad thing about anyone on this board, so I don't think that's really necessary.