The first sentence (along with Brady’s pickiness) is the reason for the second sentence.
BINGO! The first impression I got had to do with Phil Perry's question
Phil Perry: “If you look at your offense historically, younger players have had a hard time in terms of having a lot of production…”
When you look at it closely it's really not a question at all since there is only ONE answer he can give. It's like me asking someone, "Given the sun has historically risen in the east, would you expect it to rise in the east tomorrow?" Only one answer to that question right. Same for Brady.
Perry asked a skillfully framed question designed to get an answer he wanted and hopefully get the ball rolling in the direction he wanted it to got.
IMHO, Brady answered the question predictably. EVERY QB wants experienced quality receivers. This is especially true since the Pats offensive system isn't very WR friendly. BUT Brady's full response allowed for a number of interpretations including the "Woe is me" narrative we got from Bedard.
Now as a subscriber, I enjoy Bedard, even when I hotly disagree with him. He makes a decent case for his point of view. Others aren't so rigorous or tempered with their thoughts, and the narrative gets crazier and more extreme. in the hands of the Volins of the world
Listen, we are 4-0 playing a game where only the spread is a question, not the final result. Then we are going for 6-0 against a team who's only chances for victory are massive injuries and a short week. In other words, what else is there to talk about other than AB, what a crabby old man Brady has become, and Bob Kraft's massage habits.
Hoperully, when we finally get to the Browns we will be able to start and talk about the actual games that will be coming up the next 6 weeks.