Patriots Rumor ESPN hitpiece on Patriots (Rift with Brady/Belichick/Kraft) - Merged

[RobertWeathers]

Reading comprehension is clearly a liability for you.

Its @mosslost. Hes the Manny Ramirez of this board.

I've learned just let him to do his thing and be entertained. Hes harmless.

 

[Doctor DDS]

Let's assume for a minute that he actually did speak with a staffer(s) (whatever that means) - that still does not make what he wrote true. Am sure a lot of "staffers" have opinions on what is happening or may happen but that still does not make it a fact.

Speculation from low level employees is common place and to act like they have access to the inner thoughts of Brady, Belichick or Kraft seems unlikely. I am sure that Belichick and Kraft had numerous conversations about what to do about the QB situation. But to think that a "staffer" somehow knows that Kraft made BB trade Jimmy G over his objections or that Brady was mad about not winning some silly made up award is beyond logical. Do we really believe that Belichick leaves a meeting with Kraft and starts telling everyone that he was being forced to make a trade he did not want to? A coach who will not even tell anyone why he ran on 3rd down vs pass is now blabbing about trade authority. I do not buy it for one second.

 

[mosslost]

Reading comprehension is clearly a liability for you.

doubtful you are in my league Ivan.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Seth Wickersham was born without a penis, according to a source.

 

[Jackson 2]

Toucher and Rich would rather be talking about 80s/90s punk bands and the latest movies than sports...

The most hilarious thing about them, particularly Touch-hole, is that they genuinely think they're hip and cool.

 

[Huckleberry1]

Its @mosslost. Hes the Manny Ramirez of this board.

I've learned just let him to do his thing and be entertained. Hes harmless.

Pretty much says it all.

 

[Galeb]

Yes, unless BB decided to move Brady after this season and install JG for 2018-beyond.

That would be gangster.

 

[BradyFTW!]

I don't disagree with you. I am just saying that just "the sources are anonymous" is a bad argument to make against the veracity of a story. Without anonymous sources we would have next to no investigative journalism. I agree that this story is crap, but lots of posters keep posting at the anonymous sources as an issue.

It is entirely feasible that a Patriot employee (or any team) would supply information anonymously to a journalist. (A very reasonable claim in fact.) I highly doubt it, but if a Patriot employee were to give information, he would be nuts to do it on the record.

I think it's a bad argument to make against the veracity of a story being reported by a credible institution. I think it's a perfectly fine argument to make against the veracity of a story being reported by an agenda-driven, zero-credibility rag.

When Alex Jones says he has a bunch of anonymous sources stating that the US government is setting up military internment camps to wage a coup on the American people and end democracy, do you even entertain the thought that his anonymous sources are legit, or do you dismiss it outright because the source reporting the claim has zero credibility?

 

[Crazy Patriot Guy]

Everyone can have their opinion of Reiss, but personally I think he is very good and knowledgeable. I used to always email him when he had his weekly mailbag and even met him once in person. I thought he always answered my questions honestly and straightforward and still thinks he has a really good pulse on the team.

But....but.....but he works for the mean old, nasty network. I mean who cares if he's doing his job with integrity, every employee of ESPN should immediately quit their job in shame. Even the janitors should buy a tent and move their families under a bridge.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

I don't think Yee had anything to do with this. Any agent, who wants to continue in business (and not get sued by his clients) has an obligation (and financial incentive) to cut the best possible deal for his clients.

In addition, in this case, if Belichick cut a deal for Garoppolo, which was also clearly in Yee's client's interest (which it was), then Yee had no choice but to do the paperwork.

The problem is what happens when something that's in the interest of Client A is detrimental to the interest of Client B?

(I'd actually really like to know what the "rules" are for that in the sports agent world. How is an agent supposed to manage a conflict like that? In the legal world a lawyer would have to drop one or both of the clients. I know that's not what happens with sports agents, but how is it handled?)

 

[Ross12]

Let's assume for a minute that he actually did speak with a staffer(s) (whatever that means) - that still does not make what he wrote true. Am sure a lot of "staffers" have opinions on what is happening or may happen but that still does not make it a fact.

Speculation from low level employees is common place and to act like they have access to the inner thoughts of Brady, Belichick or Kraft seems unlikely. I am sure that Belichick and Kraft had numerous conversations about what to do about the QB situation. But to think that a "staffer" somehow knows that Kraft made BB trade Jimmy G over his objections or that Brady was mad about not winning some silly made up award is beyond logical. Do we really believe that Belichick leaves a meeting with Kraft and starts telling everyone that he was being forced to make a trade he did not want to? A coach who will not even tell anyone why he ran on 3rd down vs pass is now blabbing about trade authority. I do not buy it for one second.

This could very well be an assistant to a low level scout saying that he "thinks" that he "feels like" it "might" be the last year the 3 of them are together.

 

[mosslost]

I think it's a bad argument to make against the veracity of a story being reported by a credible institution. I think it's a perfectly fine argument to make against the veracity of a story being reported by an agenda-driven, zero-credibility rag.

ok. So if this were .. (I was going to say New York Times, but I am actually not sure what a credible outfit is anymore) NYT or Wash Post or whatever you think is a strong viable entity, and it had anonymous sources you would have no problem with the anonymous sources then basically.

 

[luuked]

Lombardi is getting in the mud it seems.

Been on a flight the last hour and listened to the podcast and I think he was pretty reasonable with his answers.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

I really wish kraft had a much bigger set of balls to publicly condemn Seth and ESPN for this fabricated story. Instead, Kraft just sits there and takes it like usual, releasing a small paragraph without too much in it. Kraft needs to make his voice be heard on this one. This article is blowing up big across the entire country and everyone outside of New England believes it.
...

Agree.

The denial is hardly unequivocal and reads as though it were written by a committee after much debate. Either that, or Kraft should fire his PR staff.

Why add "unsubstantiated" and "highly exaggerated" and not just stay "flat out inaccurate?" There is a big difference between "unsubstantiated ...[or]...highly exaggerated" and "flat out inaccurate."

Why not just end the statement there? Unfortunately, the rest of the statement consists of:

Truisms: "share a common goal" the "enormous challenge of competing in the postseason." Oh, barf!

Wishy washy language: "the opportunity to work together..." Why not just say "We look forward to...working together in the future." If you've ever written something like this, you know that throwing in words like "the opportunity to..." is designed to soften the statement.

Things that didn't have to be said: "It is unfortunate that...fallacies." But...OK...now that you've raised the subject, Mr. Kraft, which "fallacies" are you talking about? The "unsubstantiated" ones, which might be true, but which haven't been substantiated? The "highly exaggerated" ones, which might have an element of the truth that has been magnified or the "flat out inaccurate" ones which are really not true.

Sloppy, sloppy, sloppy.

Finally, saying, "As our actions have shown..." doth protest too much. Why end by looking to the past and not the future? Why not simply say, "We stand united today and will stand united in the future."

Please note: the above is a criticism of Kraft's statement, not an endorsement of the veracity of anything in the ESPN article.

State,emt"
“For the past 18 years, the three of us have enjoyed a very good and productive working relationship. In recent days, there have been multiple media reports that have speculated theories that are unsubstantiated, highly exaggerated or flat out inaccurate. The three of us share a common goal. We look forward to the enormous challenge of competing in the postseason and the opportunity to work together in the future, just as we have for the past 18 years. It is unfortunate that there is even a need for us to response to these fallacies. As our actions have shown, we stand united.”

 

[DefenseRules]

There should be at least one...F U ESPN SIGN AT THE PLAYOFF GAME. We all sit here and gripe among ourselves. We fans sould have our say too. Tell them to blank off. No one is paying us. I am sick of that Pos network. **** THEM.

 

[Patstopia]

It's should be an embarrassment that BSPN only spends a second on the release from everyone involved saying it is not true. And the rest of the time saying it is true without ever talking about the lack of anything substantive. And every two bit web site picks it up and runs with it (coughyahoocough)

 

[DefenseRules]

It's should be an embarrassment that BSPN only spends a second on the release from everyone involved saying it is not true. And the rest of the time saying it is true without ever talking about the lack of anything substantive. And every two bit web site picks it up and runs with it (coughyahoocough)

Like I said. There should be a collective **** you ESPN from the fans.

 

[AtomicDawg]

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

The twitter response from Reiss saying that he had some thoughts on the article but wanted to present those thoughts in the most professional way tells you that he indeed does have some problems with his ESPN co-workers.

We can read between the lines to conclude that he knows many aspects of the article are outright lies. The question of how to call out those lies, when they are coming from your employer, is one that Reiss is understandably struggling with. He likely wants to counter un-sourced claims with sourced rebuttals, and given that there is no access today. that will be hard to do.

Unfortunately, by Monday the sources will be saying "We are on to X" where X = Buffalo, Kansas City, or Tennessee.

I am hoping that Kraft or others throw him a bone, exclusively. We will see.

 

[ForThoseAboutToRock]

"We verify things as much as possible."

Live look into the verification process...

Wickersham: "This is some pretty incredible information you're giving me. You said you're a Patriots staffer?"
Source: "Yeah I am."
Wickersham: "Can you prove that this information is true?"
Source: "No I can't prove it."
Wickersham: "Can you prove that you actually work for the Patriots?"
Source: "No."
Wickersham: "Well, we verified it as much as possible. Print it!"

Are we going to pretend that Wickersham hasn't previously written / co-authored quite a few other pieces on the Patriots, specifically on Belichick and Brady?

I don't love this piece at all. I think it's fair to criticize it. But people are acting like this guy's someone they've never heard of who couldn't possibly have sources within the organization. There's a body of work that suggests otherwise - he has some access.