Mike Reiss: Mea Culpa on the Butler article.

Thelonious said:

He did the right thing...after doing the wrong thing. There's nothing heroic about that. I respect him, always have, but he's down a notch or two in my book.

Click to expand...

Not disagreeing or agreeing with you but BSPN has "edited" Mike's articles in the past. I think they even posted one under his name that he had nothing to do with.

Not sure what the case is here.

Tony2046 said:

Not disagreeing or agreeing with you but BSPN has "edited" Mike's articles in the past. I think they even posted one under his name that he had nothing to do with.

Not sure what the case is here.

Click to expand...

Not sure either. I despise ESPN for several reasons anyway, so my expectations there are down in the sludge at the bottom of the barrel. I really have always liked Reiss, and I still do. I wish somebody would hire him away from that mess.

Guess he needed a "tighter edit".

Bill Simmons outta bring Reiss to the Ringer.

I was one the ones Mike replied to on Twitter.

He's a standup guy and I apprecate him doing that but when reading his follow up it failed to answer many questions.

Why was AHern used as an example the way it was.

Why wasn't Gronk or JE11 given as an example of single players that have signed here for big contracts?

Something is up and I'm sure we will find out more when the time is right..

TomPatriot said:

My respect for him went down ten notches. Now it has gone up 15.

Everyone makes mistakes and few own up to them. Good for him.

Click to expand...

Did you actually read his clarification/"apology" .......he doubled down on his marriage premise and his entire thought process is ABSURD

borg said:

Did you actually read his clarification/"apology" .......he doubled down on his marriage premise and his entire thought process is ABSURD

Click to expand...

Yeah, I read it. Sounds like he was trying to explain himself to save face. I agree that the married stuff is stupid and inaccurate but I do see an apology. Let me know the next time Tomase, Borges or CHB, apologizes.

From Reiss:

"Here is the point I was striving to make: The Patriots covet players who don’t have a lot of off-field variables. For instance, one of the things they liked about 2015 first-round draft choice Malcom Brown, who was married with two children when he entered the NFL, was that he was considered mature beyond his years. Vince Wilfork, too.

I’m not saying that a player who isn’t married is undependable, only that, chances are, the player with a wife and kids will have a more predictable day-to-day life and is more settled than a single person. Generally speaking. There are, of course, exceptions."

There is a feeling in town that players who are poised to leave the Patriots are sometimes unfairly maligned. While that was not my intention with Butler, I realize in hindsight how it sounded.

I apologize to Butler for the tone."

Pretty much sounds like an apology to me.

borg said:

Did you actually read his clarification/"apology" .......he doubled down on his marriage premise and his entire thought process is ABSURD

Click to expand...

He didn't double down. His first article insinuated that Butler's "off field" activities could have been part of the reason BB wanted to trade him.

His second article clarified that he didn't mean Butler had off field issues.

He then explained that married players may have more of a routine lifestyle. Guess what? Just about every corporation you'll ever work for feels the same way.

So maybe BB prefers to give guys big money contracts after he has evaluated them throughout their rookie contract and not before.

"Here is the point I was striving to make: The Patriots covet players who don’t have a lot of off-field variables."

That was no apology, he simply wrote that people may have mis-interpreted what he wrote. It was slimey and he's not man enough to own up to it. I understand ESPN is going to have a ton of layoffs, perhaps he is one.
And one other thing, name me one NFL team that "covets" players with off field variables. What a pompous twit.

Reiss made an attempt to make it right, and I get that and respect that, BUT, the original article should be amended or retracted by ESPN. If not, its just click bait on both sides, the original and his retraction.

I think he was trying to use the marriage thing as an illustration of how the Patriots take EVERYTHING into account. In the original article, that came across as an insinuation. It was a mistake and he admitted it. As for why ESPN is refusing to fix it, well, I'll let that be my own insinuation.

slackerjack said:

"And one other thing, name me one NFL team that "covets" players with off field variables.

Click to expand...

The Bengals.

slackerjack said:

"Here is the point I was striving to make: The Patriots covet players who don’t have a lot of off-field variables."

That was no apology, he simply wrote that people may have mis-interpreted what he wrote. It was slimey and he's not man enough to own up to it. I understand ESPN is going to have a ton of layoffs, perhaps he is one.
And one other thing, name me one NFL team that "covets" players with off field variables. What a pompous twit.

Click to expand...

Wrong

ESPN not letting him change the article pretty much proves everything we accuse them of.

I think Mike was naive enough to not realize people would see some innuendo about what he said. There's no doubt employers see people with families as having more reason to stick around and be loyal than single guys.

He was wrong to leave it out there. It is something every employer, including Pats sees in terms of "risk."

RayClay said:

I think Mike was naive enough to not realize people would see some innuendo about what he said. There's no doubt employers see people with families as having more reason to stick around and be loyal than single guys.

He was wrong to leave it out there. It is something every employer, including Pats sees in terms of "risk."

Click to expand...

I think, if he had reread it, he might not have posted it at all. It seemed like it was some innuendo about Butler and, even if his point was valid, there wasn't any way the reader didn't think Butler had some outside issues.

The man writes for a living - is trained to use words carefully and be fact-based and accurate. There is no way that he missed seeing the interpretation that everyone who read it immediately saw. He knew his story was incomplete and gossipy when it was printed. Apparently he did not care until his journalistic ethics were called into question.

bormio said:

The man writes for a living - is trained to use words carefully and be fact-based and accurate. There is no way that he missed seeing the interpretation that everyone who read it immediately saw. He knew his story was incomplete and gossipy when it was printed. Apparently he did not care until his journalistic ethics were called into question.

Click to expand...

I guess in 20 years you never overlooked something that was a mistake in your job.

RayClay said:

I guess in 20 years you never overlooked something that was a mistake in your job.

Click to expand...

Reporters do make mistakes - typically when they get facts wrong. It happens. That was not the case here. He knew he was being careful to not give specifics - there were no facts. It made little sense. The Pats paid single players with more high profile issues. The story was gossip and any J-school student would know that (as did everyone else). I like Reiss but this story was disgraceful.

DaBruinz said:

I see that Mike posted this on his own domain. Was it also posted on ESPN???


EDIT: No update to the actual ESPN article.. That being said, it could be as (@Tony2046 suggests) that ESPN isn't allowing Reiss to update the article..

If that is the case, it's pretty sleazy on their part. If I'm Reiss, I tell them to pound sand and hand in my resignation.. Reiss is a damn good reporter and there are plenty of places that would love to add him..

Click to expand...

That dynamic between him and BSPN has been playing out for at least 2 years - - he has expressed frustration many times at the loss of control he was originally granted when they wooed him over to Bristol.

He has been fighting a losing battle against the suits.

.