Tom Curran was all wrong about Brady's recovery

[Rob0729]

Well either one of two things happened, either Curran's source miscommunicated the information (hence why Curran thought that the ACL was loose and not just the MCL) or Curran heard the worst case scenario and portrayed it as the likely scenario to give more weight to his story. The former is not Curran's fault. Adam Schefter did say to Curran and Felger on WEEI that he had heard that one of the Patriots' medical staff was bitter that Brady had the surgery on the West Coast and was spreading false information. That could have been Curran's source. That source could also be the source to "The Pats are upset that Brady had his surgery in California" story too.

Curran got it wrong. That happens all the time to reporters. My only problem was Curran's attitude when people especially in the media questioned the validity of his story. He acted like a three year old claiming he was right and everyone is wrong and that no one other than him know what they are talking about. That was the most inexcusable part. The problem was they were right and he was wrong.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Well either one of two things happened, either Curran's source miscommunicated the information (hence why Curran thought that the ACL was loose and not just the MCL) or Curran heard the worst case scenario and portrayed it as the likely scenario to give more weight to his story. The former is not Curran's fault. Adam Schefter did say to Curran and Felger on WEEI that he had heard that one of the Patriots' medical staff was bitter that Brady had the surgery on the West Coast and was spreading false information. That could have been Curran's source. That source could also be the source to "The Pats are upset that Brady had his surgery in California" story too.

Curran got it wrong. That happens all the time to reporters. My only problem was Curran's attitude when people especially in the media questioned the validity of his story. He acted like a three year old claiming he was right and everyone is wrong and that no one other than him know what they are talking about. That was the most inexcusable part. The problem was they were right and he was wrong.

That's the issue in a nutshell. Tom took on a pompous attitude after landing the national gig and morphed into a real pompous ahole where his machinations about this team were concerned last season. It wasn't a case of hey, I report what I hear or it's just one man's opinion. It became you shmucks don't have a clue and I'm so savvy and wired in I know it all... He backed himself into a corner and when challenged rather than temper his stance he dug in and defended it to the death. Sadly I bet you if pushed on it privately he'd regret it but if questioned to this day publicly he would attempt to find some rationale by which to stand by his story.

 

[DarrylS]

I tend to agree here...I do like him and find him one of the better ones of the few writers from here that has gone national. He's not the screamer like Ryan, who seems to want to be louder than the ESPN folks, now that he's a has-been writing wise, or the "look at where I am now" snottiness of Breer, who I really thought had a lot going for him when local and now is way too full of himself. He was wrong on this with much wild speculation in a negative manner, but that does happen sometimes. I don't agree sometimes with his predictons, but he's a good guy and NOT like some of the other pompous jerks that seem to be so numerous when covering sports.

He is also an unabashed and unashamed homer, that makes his writing more salient... he also paid his dues prior to becoming what he has become.

 

[Rob0729]

That's the issue in a nutshell. Tom took on a pompous attitude after landing the national gig and morphed into a real pompous ahole where his machinations about this team were concerned last season. It wasn't a case of hey, I report what I hear or it's just one man's opinion. It became you shmucks don't have a clue and I'm so savvy and wired in I know it all... He backed himself into a corner and when challenged rather than temper his stance he dug in and defended it to the death. Sadly I bet you if pushed on it privately he'd regret it but if questioned to this day publicly he would attempt to find some rationale by which to stand by his story.

Well, I haven't had an issue with Curran other than his response to the disputing reports. The funny thing is that at the time he prided himself on never getting a big story like this wrong while others have. Well, he joins the ranks of the others who have blown a big story big time.

 

[Pats726]

He is also an unabashed and unashamed homer, that makes his writing more salient... he also paid his dues prior to becoming what he has become.

I am not sure a lot of people would agree with your notion that he's a homer...if anything a LOT of people who have listened to him as well read, think he's jumped OFF the bandwagon...so..maybe it's good that there are those pro and con on that...sometimes a good sign of balance. I agree totally, he's paid his dues..and seems like a great guy. I met him once and that was my impression.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

I am not sure a lot of people would agree with your notion that he's a homer...if anything a LOT of people who have listened to him as well read, think he's jumped OFF the bandwagon...so..maybe it's good that there are those pro and con on that...sometimes a good sign of balance. I agree totally, he's paid his dues..and seems like a great guy. I met him once and that was my impression.

Personally he's probably a great guy. But professionally he's got some issues. He wanted a gig that paid more for less because he had a young family. He took Peter Kings advice to heart after landing the job, and that advice was to write for your audience. Most of his audience is now composed of people who hate us for one reason or another. So whether he believes what he says or writes or not he is writing it and saying at times to appease his audience so he will remain in that job...

Life is all about choices. He did what he thinks works best for him, just like the players he covers do, doesn't mean we all have to grant him absolution, particularly when in the process, if challenged, he cops an attitude and makes the calculated decision to stick to his guns and even rub it in. And then he disappears when proven wrong.

There used to be rules for these guys like if you tear a player a new one be willing to walk in that locker room and face him the next day or week or month. I wish there was some semblance of that in the relationship between the media and fans. They love to claim they are here to serve us. Accountability I believe Bill calls it - and it should work both ways if you expect it to work at all. Mediots mock players and mock us but boy do they circle the wagons and get all upset if we mock them...

 

[DarrylS]

I am not sure a lot of people would agree with your notion that he's a homer...if anything a LOT of people who have listened to him as well read, think he's jumped OFF the bandwagon...so..maybe it's good that there are those pro and con on that...sometimes a good sign of balance. I agree totally, he's paid his dues..and seems like a great guy. I met him once and that was my impression.

Most of my comments have to do with listening to WEEI.. and in that scenario he sounds like a homer..

 

[Kontradiction]

Re: Tom Curran was all wrong about Brady's recovery.

You must be his brother or his ballwasher.
The setback was known.
It was Curran's story that it meant something far more ominous. A story not based on fact. Bad sources. Bad job.

No, he's just someone who likes to be the Devil's Advocate in every single thread, no matter how wrong he may be. Didn't Curran also state that Brady was on the fringe of needing a second major surgery on the knee (something that Brady has since passionately denied)?

 

[Ryan]

Was Curran the one who reported that Brady's career was likely over?

 

[Rob0729]

Was Curran the one who reported that Brady's career was likely over?

No that was some BS website. Curran did say that if he had the second surgery, he would miss the entire 2009 season and his future would then be in doubt. Curran still said the second surgery was a possibility.

 

[Pats726]

It is interesting that Curran has stayed with his sources on his earlier story...
This from a few days ago.....

"Health is a transitory thing. And while I most definitely stand by the original story and the bona fides of my source, Brady is certainly not behind schedule now. "

They were talking about this on EEI this AM...and speculated that possibly this story came from Brady himself, Belichick or even the doctor. That he has stuck with his story some may see as pompous, but if his source was that close to the situation, could that not have been what is was at the time?? Granted it's all changed..but I am just saying that that COULD be possible.
Trash him all you want..but..THAT is a possibility and if that was the case, I would not blame him for not backing down. I do think he could have handled it a bit better. Most go for trashing one..way before facts are really known.

 

[Jackson 2]

Personally he's probably a great guy. But professionally he's got some issues. He wanted a gig that paid more for less because he had a young family. He took Peter Kings advice to heart after landing the job, and that advice was to write for your audience. Most of his audience is now composed of people who hate us for one reason or another. So whether he believes what he says or writes or not he is writing it and saying at times to appease his audience so he will remain in that job...

Life is all about choices. He did what he thinks works best for him, just like the players he covers do, doesn't mean we all have to grant him absolution, particularly when in the process, if challenged, he cops an attitude and makes the calculated decision to stick to his guns and even rub it in. And then he disappears when proven wrong.

There used to be rules for these guys like if you tear a player a new one be willing to walk in that locker room and face him the next day or week or month. I wish there was some semblance of that in the relationship between the media and fans. They love to claim they are here to serve us. Accountability I believe Bill calls it - and it should work both ways if you expect it to work at all. Mediots mock players and mock us but boy do they circle the wagons and get all upset if we mock them...

Well-said. Does anyone other than me remember when it became clear that Tomase got taken on the Rams walk-through tape story? Virtually every local mediot, irregardless of outlet affiliation, defended Tomase. Many, including Curran, claimed that the fact that Walsh observed the walk-through, rather than taped it, made his story still essentially true ("monitored" was the term used).

 

[Rob0729]

It is interesting that Curran has stayed with his sources on his earlier story...
This from a few days ago.....

"Health is a transitory thing. And while I most definitely stand by the original story and the bona fides of my source, Brady is certainly not behind schedule now. "

They were talking about this on EEI this AM...and speculated that possibly this story came from Brady himself, Belichick or even the doctor. That he has stuck with his story some may see as pompous, but if his source was that close to the situation, could that not have been what is was at the time?? Granted it's all changed..but I am just saying that that COULD be possible.
Trash him all you want..but..THAT is a possibility and if that was the case, I would not blame him for not backing down. I do think he could have handled it a bit better. Most go for trashing one..way before facts are really known.

I have no problem with Curran sticking by his story. It was the way he stuck by his story. He basically accused reporters who had conflicting reports of not doing their jobs correctly and not getting the right sources not in so many words. He was defensive and arrogant.

If Curran's source was credible, he had a right to defend his story. Just don't be a jerk about it.

 

[jmt57]

Re: Tom Curran was all wrong about Brady's recovery.

Well, since the story was public, his admission ought to also be public. It will never be.

It is. It's just not as widely known because Curran admitting he was wrong is not going to attract nearly as manny readers as the original story - even if NBC Sports made it their headline story for seven straight days.

Brady Sharp in A.M. Practice

In December, a source told me Brady was significantly behind in his rehab from the early October surgery that fixed his torn ACL and MCL. A buildup of scar tissue after an infection set in limited the range of motion in Brady's knee and there was laxity in both the ACL and MCL. While the source never said Brady's 2009 season was doomed, it was noted that the laxity could present a problem if the scar tissue and range of motion prevented him from strengthening his leg.

Clearly, Brady's made up whatever time he was behind. Now, the strength of the knee and repair by Dr. Neal El Attrache, who performed the surgery have made the knee strong enough for Brady to participate at a fairly astonishing level in early June.

Health is a transitory thing. And while I most definitely stand by the original story and the bona fides of my source, Brady is certainly not behind schedule now.

Curran does have his faults and it appears that he bet the wrong horse in this race. However, just because we don't like him that doesn't mean he should be held to higher standards than any other sportswriter. Do we demand any one else make public apologies when it turns out that an opinion or prediction of their's is incorrect? Did anybody demand Mike Reiss issue an apology after saying Matt Cassel would or should be cut last August? Of course not.

Curran took available information and formed an opinion; that is what columnists do. The only people that need to issue apologies are those that are unethical (Ron Borges), have hidden agendas (Gregg Easterbrook) or flat out lie (John Tomase.)


EDIT: Just saw Rob's comment above, and wanted to say I also agree that Curran was, in my opinion as well, arrogant and out of line in defending himself when the original story broke.

 

[Pats726]

Re: Tom Curran was all wrong about Brady's recovery.

It is. It's just not as widely known because Curran admitting he was wrong is not going to attract nearly as manny readers as the original story - even if NBC Sports made it their headline story for seven straight days.

Brady Sharp in A.M. Practice



Curran does have his faults and it appears that he bet the wrong horse in this race. However, just because we don't like him that doesn't mean he should be held to higher standards than any other sportswriter. Do we demand any one else make public apologies when it turns out that an opinion or prediction of their's is incorrect? Did anybody demand Mike Reiss issue an apology after saying Matt Cassel would or should be cut last August? Of course not.

Curran took available information and formed an opinion; that is what columnists do. The only people that need to issue apologies are those that are unethical (Ron Borges), have hidden agendas (Gregg Easterbrook) or flat out lie (John Tomase.)

Thank you for posting MORE of the Curran article than I did. I just wanted to point out what Holley was saying about his source that it was probably someone VERY close..and that he and Arnold speculated it was maybe Brady himself (during a bad period of recovery) Coach B or the Dr himself.
I agree with Rob07 that he didn't help himself with the way he acted..and he did act jery at times. But an apology???
Reiss apologizes more than anyone when he knows he messed up...not where opinion is involved..although he will easily say he was wrong on something he speculated on..but on factual errors. I agree about Borges, Easterbrook and Tomase as in a different category.