This year's ESPN hit piece

EdRalphRomero

wooderson
SoSH Member
Oct 3, 2007
4,472
deep in the hole
I like Chad Finn a lot (is he a member here? My memory sucks). That said, he absolutely misrepresents the problem with these types of articles. It is not that it is a hit-job. Instead, it is that it is the same unverifiable, salacious crap that ESPN has built its business model around.

I mean I get it. It reminds me of what someone said about Money Magazine. What are they supposed to do, run magazine after magazine with one article "Buying and holding index stocks is your best bet?" No, they talk about the next hot sector or whatever, even if it has no proven predictive power. This article, and ESPN in general have become that "next hot stock" article. "The Patriots are a well-run organization where the principals will often have disagreements but have an almost two decade history of subordinating those disagreements for the greater good. READ IT TODAY!"

Sometimes these takes happens to be right. Often they are wrong. But with no sources, and an entire article really premised on one read of the inevitably contentious relationships of incredibly successful men, really what is the point of this article? How is it different from the "They hate their coach" takes of however many years ago? I don't dislike the article for being a hit-job. I dislike it for being uninteresting pablum masquerading as insight.
 

Rusty13

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 3, 2007
5,351
Is Greg Bedard the only Pats beat reporter and/or major NFL journalist that has confirmed the Kraft “mandate”with his own sources? Seems like the weight of all credible reporters, including now Mark Maske below, is heavily against this essential premise of the ESPN hatchet job.

 

Ralphwiggum

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2012
9,827
Needham, MA
ESPN's intent behind this piece could not be more transparent. It's all about the fact that the network doesn't want another two boring weeks of Patriots players and coaches refusing to give them sound bites or yuk it up with the MNF crew during the lead up to the Super Bowl. This is all so that if the Patriots do lose in the playoffs, they can go, "See? We told you they were fractured and nobody believed us," as they wear their shit-eating grins and cut to highlights of one of their binkies. And if they don't lose, they'll just pretend something changed and everyone is buddies again, "but this was an abrupt about-face from how contentious things were going into the playoffs. Winning really does solve everything!"
Seriously? You think ESPN ran this article hoping it would somehow derail the Pats and they would lose?

They ran it because they knew everyone would read it and then spend a number of days talking about it, because it is the Patriots and everyone outside of New England can’t wait for the BB/TB dynasty to crumble. No team has used this kind of bullshit better than the BB Pats (they hate their coach, onto Cincinnati, etc.). They are a bunch of idiots if they thought this article would actually have an impact on a Patriot playoff game.
 

Koufax

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
5,936
I'm betting that it's Bobby "Mr." Kraft that be jivin'. It seems entirely likely to me that Bobby told BB, after a 1/2 day meeting, that the time had come to get something of value for Jimmy G 'cause he wasn't going to pay him $20MM to sit on the bench next year and Tommy wasn't going anywhere after an MVP caliber season.
 

Dotrat

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 11, 2002
2,135
Morris County NJ
Is Greg Bedard the only Pats beat reporter and/or major NFL journalist that has confirmed the Kraft “mandate”with his own sources? Seems like the weight of all credible reporters, including now Mark Maske below, is heavily against this essential premise of the ESPN hatchet job.

Tom Curran has confirmed that his sources, whom he admits are not Wickersham’s (and probably aren’t Bedard’s), insist there was no mandate from Kraft and that the decision to trade JG came from B.B.

I’m still convinced that Wickersham has sources in the organization who suspect a lot, but don’t really know anything.

And because Curran has spent far more time in Foxborough than Wickersham, or even Bedard, and has good relationships with both Belichick and Guerrero, I’m inclined to believe his—that is, Curran’s—side of the saga.
 

BusRaker

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 11, 2006
2,371
Suddenly, Suzy Kolber gets all stern faced and says “we have to get to some much more serious stuff”: of course the Wickersham article and the “power struggle” in NE. She says you first, Adam (Mortensen is also there). Schefter goes right into who Josh and Marty P. Are interviewing with, completely ignoring the Wickersham article. Schefter is beautiful. Even Mort talked only about Tennessee. Completely deflected away from “Mein Struggle”. Sorry about the Nazi alluding.
I was really confused by that ...don't they have a producer/director that sets the "agenda" for those shows? If so either Suzy or Adam pretty much ignored it. Kudos to Adam though
 

Ralphwiggum

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2012
9,827
Needham, MA
In a word: yes.
There’s a ton of stupid in this thread, but you win. ESPN wants clicks, that’s it. They ran the story to get clicks and get people talking about it. I’m not saying it is accurate and that there isn’t an anti-Patriot agenda, but it isn’t motivated by wanting them to lose. It is motivated but he fact that there’s a huge number of people who want to consume anti-Patriot stories.
 

allstonite

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 27, 2010
2,472
So it’s 2 of the better, more plugged in local reporters (Curran and Bedard) and a plugged in national reporter with quotes from Kraft himself vs. an ESPN reporter who before Thursday was already known for using “staffers” and “unnamed league sources” to, not report news, but feed his narrative?
 

Mueller's Twin Grannies

critical thinker
SoSH Member
Dec 19, 2009
9,386
There’s a ton of stupid in this thread, but you win. ESPN wants clicks, that’s it. They ran the story to get clicks and get people talking about it. I’m not saying it is accurate and that there isn’t an anti-Patriot agenda, but it isn’t motivated by wanting them to lose. It is motivated but he fact that there’s a huge number of people who want to consume anti-Patriot stories.
Leaving aside the notion of wanting clicks and ratings, which is what they're after, what other motivation would they have for breaking the news right now instead of two weeks ago? Are we really going to pretend Whickersham JUST finished putting the final touches on this article? The Brady-Guerrero-Belichick thing was making the rounds 3 months ago, if not longer. They were sitting on this and waited until a planned moment to break it (and then leaked that they were going to). And are we going to pretend that an entertainment channel that masquerades as a news outlet isn't going to try to make their own stories happen? You want to call me stupid? Okay. But this is hardly the most eye-rolling conspiracy that's ever been uttered and really not that much of a stretch of you consider that the Patriots losing will bring more ratings and clicks than their winning will. But we can agree to disagree.
 

loshjott

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2004
14,946
Silver Spring, MD
Tom Curran has confirmed that his sources, whom he admits are not Wickersham’s (and probably aren’t Bedard’s), insist there was no mandate from Kraft and that the decision to trade JG came from B.B.

I’m still convinced that Wickersham has sources in the organization who suspect a lot, but don’t really know anything.

And because Curran has spent far more time in Foxborough than Wickersham, or even Bedard, and has good relationships with both Belichick and Guerrero, I’m inclined to believe his—that is, Curran’s—side of the saga.
How does Curran know who Wickersham’s sources are? Do reporters tell each other that kind of stuff?
 

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
61,996
New York City
Leaving aside the notion of wanting clicks and ratings, which is what they're after, what other motivation would they have for breaking the news right now instead of two weeks ago? Are we really going to pretend Whickersham JUST finished putting the final touches on this article? The Brady-Guerrero-Belichick thing was making the rounds 3 months ago, if not longer. They were sitting on this and waited until a planned moment to break it (and then leaked that they were going to). And are we going to pretend that an entertainment channel that masquerades as a news outlet isn't going to try to make their own stories happen? You want to call me stupid? Okay. But this is hardly the most eye-rolling conspiracy that's ever been uttered and really not that much of a stretch of you consider that the Patriots losing will bring more ratings and clicks than their winning will. But we can agree to disagree.
Good rant. But I think you're wrong. ESPN wants clicks and aren't actively trying to sabotage the Pats. It's a ridiculous assertion and you should have some shame for this opinion.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,402
How does Curran know who Wickersham’s sources are? Do reporters tell each other that kind of stuff?

Curran
: Thanks for that info. Given the differences, I assume you never talked to Wickersham about this?

Source: No.
 
Aug 20, 2017
2,085
Portland
Good rant. But I think you're wrong. ESPN wants clicks and aren't actively trying to sabotage the Pats. It's a ridiculous assertion and you should have some shame for this opinion.
So when Mort never changed his tweet and ESPN never offered an apology or retraction over the psi of the balls, that was what exactly?

Seemed like sabotage to me.
 

Ralphwiggum

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2012
9,827
Needham, MA
Leaving aside the notion of wanting clicks and ratings, which is what they're after, what other motivation would they have for breaking the news right now instead of two weeks ago? Are we really going to pretend Whickersham JUST finished putting the final touches on this article? The Brady-Guerrero-Belichick thing was making the rounds 3 months ago, if not longer. They were sitting on this and waited until a planned moment to break it (and then leaked that they were going to). And are we going to pretend that an entertainment channel that masquerades as a news outlet isn't going to try to make their own stories happen? You want to call me stupid? Okay. But this is hardly the most eye-rolling conspiracy that's ever been uttered and really not that much of a stretch of you consider that the Patriots losing will bring more ratings and clicks than their winning will. But we can agree to disagree.
If they truly wanted to sabotage the Pats playoff chances they would have dropped this story the night before the game. Nobody is going to give a shit about this story by the time the game is played.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
It was an asshole reporter digging in and acting like an asshole.
Yep. And a shit “news” outlet acting like a shit news outlet and not forcing him to retract. The persecution complex needs to relax a bit. This article wasn’t because it was the patriots. It was about clicks, that the patriots generate. There’s a difference people need to acknowledge.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,402
Yep. And a shit “news” outlet acting like a shit news outlet and not forcing him to retract. The persecution complex needs to relax a bit. This article wasn’t because it was the patriots. It was about clicks, that the patriots generate. There’s a difference people need to acknowledge.
Yeah, how many ESPN stories end up featured on CNBC's Powerlunch?
 

Dotrat

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 11, 2002
2,135
Morris County NJ
How does Curran know who Wickersham’s sources are? Do reporters tell each other that kind of stuff?
He didn’t say he knew who Wickersham’s sources were; he said he knew that his sources were not Wickersham’s—and primarily because Curran’s sources had different information from what appeared in the ESPN piece.
 

joeflah

New Member
Feb 1, 2015
57
We should all keep this in mind, ESPN’s actual motto is “WE’RE ESPN, WE THINK IT’S ABOUT US!” Filter everything they say and do thru this motto and see what you come up with.
 

m0ckduck

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
1,714
After taking a few days to think about the story: it seems entirely likely that many reported bits of friction are true... but the whole piece loses credibility at the point where the dust-up between Brady and McDaniels is characterized as the culmination of major tensions running through the organization. The whole article craters into bad faith at that point. It would be like producing airport footage of my wife and I squabbling after we got off a transatlantic sleepless flight with our two kids and using it as evidence that “the beginning of the end is near.”
 

NortheasternPJ

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 16, 2004
19,272
Doug Kyed is apparently sick of the nonsense of keeping both quarterbacks and fielding a competitive team.

 

eustis22

New Member
Nov 14, 2016
998
but he fact that there’s a huge number of people who want to consume anti-Patriot stories.
I know my other-forum foothball threads are all a-flutter from haters. So there's that.

Nobody is going to give a shit about this story by the time the game is played.
I disagree. I think this feeds the talks shows between now and next saturday and makes them unlistenable.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,853
What details in there were new to you? The $12.5 million? That's a lot different from the reported $7.5.

I don't see anything else, so wondering if it's been edited.
 

TheoShmeo

Skrub's sympathy case
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
12,890
Boston, NY
One thing I don’t get about Wickersham’s article is why he or anyone would link an arguably hard decision to understand (yes, I know some totally understand it; hence “arguably”) with “Kraft ordered it.”

Did Kraft order:

- Milloy being released

- AV being offered an amount such that he would leave for Indy

- Seymour being traded

- Branch being traded after Givens had left in free agency

- Collins being traded

- going into 2013 with totally inadequate WRs

I guess someone told Wickersham that Kraft indeed ordered it here and he believes it to be so. Maybe. But why anyone who has seen Belichick continually make roster decisions that don’t make immediate sense would nod their head at this assertion is beyond me.

Also, I should echo DOTB’s comment above. That the phrase “salary cap” was never used in that article is indeed very telling.

Last, it’s a sad day when one of the most sensible pieces out there belongs to Ron Borges. Sigh.
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
21,770
Pittsburgh, PA
And Florio, who produces some interesting details I didn’t know, stomps out some other nonsense, tabloid nonsense.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/01/07/zero-point-zero-percent-chance-belichick-leaves-patriots/
God, reading the comments in that article, I just wish I could wager against all these idiots who think he has any reason at all to leave, and take their money.

What details in there were new to you? The $12.5 million? That's a lot different from the reported $7.5.

I don't see anything else, so wondering if it's been edited.
That number jives with previous as-an-aside reports that I've seen, years ago - but when I went back to google those reports I couldn't locate them.

I did think that the system was that Belichick gets a budget from Kraft for the coaching staff, gets to allocate it as he saw fit, and keep for himself what he doesn't pay out to others. If so, then there's no fixed salary to report anyway. But I might be confusing that with the system someplace else.
 

skip wright

New Member
Jan 4, 2018
27
Brady forced Kraft to remove it despite BB's wishes.
every year we get get to the playoffs we go through something like this....i wonder if the penalty for spygate included being forced to participate in goodell theater every time we get near a super bowl.roger has gotta be coming up with this silly ass shit by himself
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,213
I've seen a number of reports over the years that speculate Belichick is at or above $10 mil a year, and that there is a belief he's paid at top of head coach scale (so, he might get raises as others do). But of course, no one knows.

I agree with Florio's conclusion that it's hard to see him leaving. I do think a team that decided they wanted him could make the investment in facilitaties and ops pretty quickly, though...the franchise who will pay what it takes to get BB isn't going to blink at a one-time $10-15 mil investment in facilities and technology to get the benefit of BB.

Given BB's comments and actions post-Cleveland, I think he places an extraordinary value on trusting the owner. Thus, I actually think the biggest question is what his assessment of Jonathan Kraft might be and how he assesses his timeline relative to RK's timeline. No reason to think there's any issue there, I just think it's a question people haven't asked as much yet. I find it a lot easier to believe BB would look elsewhere if I knew a) RK was stepping way back and b) BB had concerns about JK. But neither of those has any basis right now
 

troparra

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 3, 2007
1,921
Michigan
Rex Ryan on Sunday NFL Countdown believes Belichick is going to leave after the season.
He's been right before. Remember when he said this in January 2015?
“I know it’s been 15 years since the Bills have been to the playoffs,” he said. “Get ready. We’re going. We are going.”
Boom, three years later the Bills are in the playoffs.
 

loshjott

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2004
14,946
Silver Spring, MD
It is plausible that Belichick is retiring, simply because it’s plausible every year at this stage of his career. He certainly won’t telegraph it until he makes the announcement. Did Ryan cite any reasons?
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,853
It is plausible that Belichick is retiring, simply because it’s plausible every year at this stage of his career. He certainly won’t telegraph it until he makes the announcement. Did Ryan cite any reasons?
Publicity.
 

Quiddity

New Member
Oct 14, 2008
237
No chance Belichick is going everywhere else.

He is the greatest coach/GM in the history of the league. What is that worth in compensation to Kraft/the Patriots if he was to move franchises? I'd argue at least 5 first round draft picks if not more.Is Belichick really going to move franchises to rebuild when any compensation required to move him there will likely hamstring the franchise for several years, by which time the compensation is gone Belichick will probably be ready to retire anyway?
 

Byrdbrain

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
8,588
Volin on twitter figured out how to come up with the money to franchise Jimmy G. The major part of that would be cutting Cooks who Ben theorizes they may not feel is worth his contract. That is the same contract he had last year when they traded a number 1 pick for him by the way.
 

jsinger121

@jsinger121
SoSH Member
Jul 25, 2005
17,677
Volin on twitter figured out how to come up with the money to franchise Jimmy G. The major part of that would be cutting Cooks who Ben theorizes they may not feel is worth his contract. That is the same contract he had last year when they traded a number 1 pick for him by the way.
Volin is a fucking moron. I can't wait for him to leave the New England market.
 

dynomite

Member
SoSH Member
Rex Ryan on Sunday NFL Countdown believes Belichick is going to leave after the season.
For those who weren’t watching, before saying this Rex mentioned that he thinks Belichick is the best coach in the history of the NFL and Brady is the best player in the history of the NFL. Old friend Randy Moss piped up to say “Best Quarterback!” and Rex laughed and said “Nope, best player.”

Not totally relevant, so perhaps this belongs in the “Celebrating What It Is” thread, but it’s really remarkable.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,101
What Volin conveniently ignores is that the Pats would have to also replace or resign their starting LT, one of their starting DB's (Butler), 2 of their starting RB's (Burkhead and Lewis). And guys like Matt Slater and their backup OL's (Fleming and Waddle).

Saying that the Pats could simply "find a way to make it work" is wishcasting at best, utter incompetence at worst.
 

Mystic Merlin

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 21, 2007
46,776
Hartford, CT
What Volin conveniently ignores is that the Pats would have to also replace or resign their starting LT, one of their starting DB's (Butler), 2 of their starting RB's (Burkhead and Lewis). And guys like Matt Slater and their backup OL's (Fleming and Waddle).

Saying that the Pats could simply "find a way to make it work" is wishcasting at best, utter incompetence at worst.
Anyone with access to Miguel's website could figure out how to create space, Volin is a fucking moron. The whole problem is you'd undermine your roster for 2018 to make it work.
 

EdRalphRomero

wooderson
SoSH Member
Oct 3, 2007
4,472
deep in the hole
No chance Belichick is going everywhere else.

He is the greatest coach/GM in the history of the league. What is that worth in compensation to Kraft/the Patriots if he was to move franchises? I'd argue at least 5 first round draft picks if not more.Is Belichick really going to move franchises to rebuild when any compensation required to move him there will likely hamstring the franchise for several years, by which time the compensation is gone Belichick will probably be ready to retire anyway?
That assumes, of course, that he was contractually bound. I don't think we know anything about the term or conditions of BB's contract.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
What details in there were new to you? The $12.5 million? That's a lot different from the reported $7.5.

I don't see anything else, so wondering if it's been edited.
That primarily.