This year's ESPN hit piece

Buck Showalter

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 26, 2002
6,652
Citifield - Queens, NY
That said, the idea that this article is a warning shot fired by BB at the organization through a leaked article to ESPN, of all outlets, has no real grounding in reality and deserves push back.
Okay, I will play along with that.

Then why does this article have zero criticism toward Belichick? Any “fault(s)” for the cracks in the relationship are completely steered toward TB and BK. There’s not much wiggle-room on that one – is there?

So if you don’t believe the source for the information came from the Belichick Camp – then why would any low-level staffer (not aligned to anyone in particular) place his ass on the line to provide this information to ESPN? Clearly he is going to be ‘sniffed-out’ by the organization and fired right? And for what, what gain? To gain favor with Seth Wickersham?!

This isn't Mike Reiss or Sal Pal (who one "would" try to gain favor with).....this is Seth Wickersham.

Think of it; Stacey James has been there for 20+ years (even before BB became head coach). He’s had a hand in hiring any and every public relations individual(s) in that organization. And while all the official-media flows thru him – surely he knows (or someone on his staff knows) who Wickersham has a relationship with. 20+ years in the job, with a network of individuals in that organization, with the same ownership structure….you don’t think he / they could sniff that person(s) out and send his bags packing….yesterday?!!

Clearly the Wickersham's source(s) are not on the bottom of the food-chain.
 

SeoulSoxFan

I Want to Hit the World with Rocket Punch
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2006
22,089
A Scud Away from Hell
A prime example of ESPN talking heads making something out of nothing, here's Nick Wright implying Kraft made BB go "out of his way" to do an interview that's not "mandated" with Michael "he wrote a book with BB" Holley:


Embarrassing. BB's weekly interview at WEEI must have been going on for years.
 

soxin6

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
7,028
Huntington Beach, CA
A prime example of ESPN talking heads making something out of nothing, here's Nick Wright implying Kraft made BB go "out of his way" to do an interview that's not "mandated" with Michael "he wrote a book with BB" Holley:


Embarrassing. BB's weekly interview at WEEI must have been going on for years.
Nick "Never" Wright makes Cris Carter look like a genius. He is one of the media geniuses that has been predicting that Brady would fall off the cliff for years and one of these years he might finally be correct. He really should stick to his never ending fanboy love of Lebron.
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
21,755
Pittsburgh, PA
Then why does this article have zero criticism toward Belichick? Any “fault(s)” for the cracks in the relationship are completely steered toward TB and BK. There’s not much wiggle-room on that one – is there?
There's no doubting that it's far easier on Belichick than the other two. That said, there is a strong undercurrent of criticism for the value he got in trading Garoppolo. Tension with his HOF QB partially falls on him. The potential for him to leave the team in the lurch if he moves on or retires. I don't think it focused on criticizing Belichick, but it certainly didn't put him in a good light either.

So if you don’t believe the source for the information came from the Belichick Camp – then why would any low-level staffer (not aligned to anyone in particular) place his ass on the line to provide this information to ESPN? Clearly he is going to be ‘sniffed-out’ by the organization and fired right? And for what, what gain? To gain favor with Seth Wickersham?!

This isn't Mike Reiss or Sal Pal (who one "would" try to gain favor with).....this is Seth Wickersham.
Boredom. Feelings of importance. Having strong opinions no one but a sympathetic-seeming journalist would listen to. Ego. I mean: Why does anyone say anything controversial to any journalist? Why did white house people confide in Wolff? Same goes here.

I don't think it's clear that anyone is going to be sniffed out. The money items in the article either came from (A) a very highly-placed and prominent source, e.g. a coordinator or front-office exec, or (B) a few of the several-hundred interchangeable organizational flunkies who were willing to speculate off the record, and from which Wickersham drew a narrative. If it's B, and that's where my money would go, then there's no way they're going to figure it out. They're not the FBI and they have a playoff game to prepare for.

Think of it; Stacey James has been there for 20+ years (even before BB became head coach). He’s had a hand in hiring any and every public relations individual(s) in that organization. And while all the official-media flows thru him – surely he knows (or someone on his staff knows) who Wickersham has a relationship with. 20+ years in the job, with a network of individuals in that organization, with the same ownership structure….you don’t think he / they could sniff that person(s) out and send his bags packing….yesterday?!!
It's certainly possible, but there were zero direct quotes, and the only item of which very few people would be aware (a half-day meeting on the subject of QBs between Belichick and Kraft, and probably Jonathan / Caserio / McDaniels) seems to have been the subject of rank speculation that became fact, rather than something that limited the possibilities down to a few people.

If they already know who is friendly with Wickersham, then yes, they could start by demanding those people produce all their communications - and they'd need to rebut the presumption that they spoke to him. But beyond that, tell me, where exactly would you start? Which anecdotes do you think narrow it down? I don't see many that would lead me on anything but a wild goose chase -- and that, truly, would be a "distraction".

Maybe Stacey James has hired an investigative firm, and in the offseason, several people will get defenestrated. But from where I sit that seems unlikely. Unless the Pats lose to the Titans, this story will be forgotten and irrelevant by the time the Patriots' season concludes.

Finally: the common on-the-record refrain the last few days has been that Wickersham is full of it. Not that he made everything up entirely, but that he read far, far too into a few offhand remarks and let speculation add up to fact. They could just as easily let it all slide as a bunch of noise, rather than focus on it as some sort of priority. Isn't that a decent possibility in your mind?
 

BusRaker

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 11, 2006
2,371
Buck has been posting here for at least 10, maybe 15 years. I believe he is sincere in his statements (even if completely wrong), about as much as I believe that Kraft didn't order the code red. You can't make thousands of posts on a board without people coming to know how your mind works at least a little.
I'm sure Buck will agree that calling Tom Brady stupid on a Patriots message board isn't exactly "Un-trolly", but I consider most of his/her comments sincere and thoughtful and just thought a line was crossed with that comment in this forum.

As far as this media debacle is concerned, I'm a little surprised at the attention that BB/RK/TB have given it ... almost taking it as an opportunity to bring attention to their 18 year healthy relationship
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
16,090
Tuukka's refugee camp
A prime example of ESPN talking heads making something out of nothing, here's Nick Wright implying Kraft made BB go "out of his way" to do an interview that's not "mandated" with Michael "he wrote a book with BB" Holley:


Embarrassing. BB's weekly interview at WEEI must have been going on for years.
Neither person works for ESPN.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,273
AZ
As far as this media debacle is concerned, I'm a little surprised at the attention that BB/RK/TB have given it ... almost taking it as an opportunity to bring attention to their 18 year healthy relationship
I think we've seen a bit of an evolution in how they handle these stories du jour at Patriots Place. "On to Cincinnati" has become legend and kind of the mantra for how people think of the organization's relationship with the press, but it's actually a bit more nuanced, even for Belichick. I remember there was even debate here whether Belichick would comment on Aaron Hernandez, with some saying, "of course not," and others say, "no, he has to," and the latter was closer. I think the prevailing wisdom for years for Belichick was that you can't control what they are going to say or do, so just ignore the noise and don't feed the beast. And while that's still mostly his M.O., he's definitely become softer and willing to get his message out there when something is bullshit -- even if it's merely to say, "you mean another one of those unsubstantiated reports, no I'm not going to comment," which of course actually is a comment.

I think not even the most Zen-like person can always sit idly by and let people say things that are not accurate, and when Bill is in the right forum -- usually doing one of his weekly things -- he will respond and even ruminate. I listen to the weekly Monday conference calls on patriots.com, and I'm frequently surprised how open he is on stuff and particularly surprised that a fair amount of it doesn't seem to work its way into the media. I think there are some guys whose judgment he trusts a bit.

For a story that many of us perceive as a nothing burger, it is striking some kind of chord and we're almost on 20 pages here. I can understand these guys not thinking they were just going to let it all slide.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,055
Hingham, MA
Curran comes out with a strong piece on how somehow Brady has become the villain

http://www.nbcsports.com/boston/patriots/somehow-tom-brady-has-become-new-england-patriots-bad-guy-not-bill-belichick-robert-kraft-after-jimmy-garoppolo-trade

And now, almost 18 years later, the most obvious sign of Brady’s elite status in the locker room, the one thing that sets him apart from his peers? It’s an office chair. And it showed up this year. In the same year that Brady turned 40.

That’s your diva. That’s your prima donna.

That’s your guy who – as Seth Wickersham’s ESPN piece on Friday unmistakably illustrated – has been the angry lion in winter, arm-twisting teammates to see his body coach and business partner, browbeating the 76-year-old owner about his contract, throwing hospital balls to receivers like Chris Hogan and making sure the decks were cleared of all competition.

That’s BS.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
Okay, I will play along with that.

Then why does this article have zero criticism toward Belichick? Any “fault(s)” for the cracks in the relationship are completely steered toward TB and BK. There’s not much wiggle-room on that one – is there?

So if you don’t believe the source for the information came from the Belichick Camp – then why would any low-level staffer (not aligned to anyone in particular) place his ass on the line to provide this information to ESPN? Clearly he is going to be ‘sniffed-out’ by the organization and fired right? And for what, what gain? To gain favor with Seth Wickersham?!

This isn't Mike Reiss or Sal Pal (who one "would" try to gain favor with).....this is Seth Wickersham.

Think of it; Stacey James has been there for 20+ years (even before BB became head coach). He’s had a hand in hiring any and every public relations individual(s) in that organization. And while all the official-media flows thru him – surely he knows (or someone on his staff knows) who Wickersham has a relationship with. 20+ years in the job, with a network of individuals in that organization, with the same ownership structure….you don’t think he / they could sniff that person(s) out and send his bags packing….yesterday?!!

Clearly the Wickersham's source(s) are not on the bottom of the food-chain.
Why exactly do we think its one source rather than Wickersham taking bits and pieces he heard from a handful of people and then crafting what he thinks is the story out of that color? Which disclosure is such a specific bombshell that its trackable and fireable? Its not like they have people on the record calling out any of the key players in the story. Even thought the Pats dont "leak" we still get anonymous quotes from Pats sources in media stories on a fairly routine basis, so people in the building talk to the media. Even if your premise is correct about how no one in the building who cares about their future would talk (and I dont think that's true), you know the Pats personnel deparment so well and down to mid-level PR guys that you are sure there was no one on the way out anyways who would be willing to provide off the record color?

Aside from that, why would BB leak a story through ESPN (an outlet he has despised historically outside of a couple of individual friendships/relationships, the most notable of which is with someone no longer with the company)? Why would he time the article to come out at the start of a playoff run rather than while the supposed power struggle was actually happening? Or after the season was over? What in his track record with the press or with employment issues suggest this is a part of his playbook? Didnt BB quit the Jets with no notice or leaks by writing a resignation letter on a napkin? What is the advantage of leaking an article to ESPN over just, I dont know, talking directly to Bob Kraft and/or leaving after the season if the situation is really untenable? BB seem like the kind of guy too tongue-tied to deliver his message personally? What exact message is Kraft getting out of Seth Wickersham that he couldnt get from BB directly? Why would a BB focused shot through the press at Kraft aim most of its venom at Tom Brady? Like what's the grand strategy by this consummate thinker: 1) Leak the story and paint his star player in a somewhat bad light 2) ??????

Seems way more likely to me there is a bit of tension among the parties over a few issues (pretty clear not all is rosy between the team and Guerrero, isnt one of the most likely potential sources for some of this article someone from the training/strength team) and its telephone gamed into something much bigger than it is rather than this is some kind of BB shot across the bow to achieve (to be determined)
 
Last edited:

Buck Showalter

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 26, 2002
6,652
Citifield - Queens, NY
Which anecdotes do you think narrow it down? I don't see many that would lead me on anything but a wild goose chase -- and that, truly, would be a "distraction".

Belichick explained to Brady in early September that many younger players felt pressured to train at TB12 rather than with the team, and asked the quarterback what was going on. Brady said he didn't know anything about any such pressure, according to people briefed on the exchange, and the two men left the meeting without any resolution.

After the brief discussion with Brady, Belichick emailed Guerrero to let him know that while he was welcome to work with any players who sought out TB12, he was no longer permitted access to the sideline or all of the team headquarters because he wasn't an employee of the Patriots (a point that Belichick would resoundingly make clear when reporters asked about Guerrero).

---

But after Garoppolo was knocked out of his second start because of a shoulder injury, he set up a visit at TB12. As he later told Patriots staffers, when he arrived, the door was locked. He knocked; nobody was there. He called TB12 trainers but nobody answered. He couldn't believe it, Garoppolo told the staffers, and that night ended up visiting team trainers instead. Guerrero vehemently denies ever refusing to see any player, and Garoppolo was eventually treated at TB12 -- but it was two weeks after he showed up for his original appointment, and only after a high-ranking Patriots staffer called TB12 to inquire why Garoppolo hadn't been admitted.

---

Several times this past October, Brady met with Kraft to discuss playing longer. That same month, he also met with Belichick, who was skeptical of a long-term contract extension but was content to start Brady as long as he was the best quarterback. Belichick understood how much Brady had meant to the franchise, and had always insisted privately that he wouldn't move on from Brady unless he could convince the coaching staff of it. But the reality was that no quarterback has ever played at a championship level into his 40s. The meeting ended in a "little blowup," according to a source. Complicating matters was that Garoppolo would be a free agent at the end of this season. Complicating matters more was that Brady and Garoppolo share Yee as an agent.

---

Two weeks before the Nov. 1 trading deadline, Belichick met with Kraft to discuss the quarterback situation. According to staffers, the meeting ran long, lasting half the day and pushing back Belichick's other meetings. The office was buzzing. The meeting ended with a clear mandate to Belichick: trade Garoppolo because he would not be in the team's long-term plans, and then, once again, find the best quarterback in the draft and develop him. Belichick was furious and demoralized, according to friends. But in the end, he did what he asks of his players and coaches: He did his job.

---

But Belichick also has taken a longer view, as though he sees pieces of his impact leaguewide. He's preparing assistant coaches for job interviews elsewhere, which he didn't always do in years past.

---

Perhaps not the 'smokiest guns' but the highlighted items are certainly narrated as if from BB's world:

- Belichick emailed Guerrero....(specific on the type of communication)

- The meeting (between Belichick and Brady) ended in a "little blowup"....

- Belichick's other meeetings were pushed back.....(what - not Kraft's?)

- He didn't always prepare assistant coaches for job interviews....(how would a low-level or flunkie staffer know this?)

And then there's some pretty decent detail on the JG / TB12 attempt:

- when he arrived, the door was locked. He knocked; nobody was there. He called TB12 trainers but nobody answered.

- but it was two weeks after he showed up for his original appointment, and only after a high-ranking Patriots staffer called TB12 to inquire why Garoppolo hadn't been admitted.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
There’s a vast difference between being a dissenting opinion to avoid an echo chamber and trolling. Buck is quite clearly doing the latter.

It’s most definitely a positive to have different opinions and ideas, to challenge opinions, etc, but when you get to the point of completely ignoring things that are contradictory to your stance - oh, I dunno, let’s say the simple fact that JG was in fact not denied access to TB12 and in fact had his own key card, for one- and then double down on wild ass assumptions to back yourself up, then that’s beyond that. He’s trolling.

And it’s great he’s been here a while and has a lot of posts, it’s great that some have been kicked out for doing it, but we all know it doesn’t stop it from happening (as DH3/Plympton can affirm) or that a lot aren’t just let back in later (as you and Moviegoer can affirm). There is, in fact, a line though. Or at least there ought to be.
Probably better for Backwash, and its not aimed at Buck because I dont think he's trolling here, but +1 on the broader sentiment. Sometimes faux mods like to blindly cape up for dissenting opinions even if they come in the form of bad posts (and not bad as in "this opinion is bad" but bad as in "clearly below even a super loose interpretation of SOSH standards" and then tone police criticism of said bad posts. Their intentions are good, but It actively harms discourse and quality. The best solution is for moderators to moderate and enforce minimum standards and for posters to post and not moderate.
 

Buck Showalter

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 26, 2002
6,652
Citifield - Queens, NY
Stitch --- this is in response to your questions:

Which disclosure is such a specific bombshell that its trackable and fireable? Its not like they have people on the record calling out any of the key players in the story.

Tom Brady has taken a pretty good whack in this article. That the greatest player in franchise history (and current day) is the central subject of this negative article – any known contributors should be shown the door (again, unless it’s someone in a protected spot).

Aside from that, why would BB leak a story through ESPN (an outlet he has despised historically outside of a couple of individual friendships/relationships, the most notable of which is with someone no longer with the company)?

A local reporter / beat-writer would really be hurting his chances of gaining (much needed) access to Patriot Place in the near future – no?

Why would he time the article to come out at the start of a playoff run rather than while the supposed power struggle was actually happening? Or after the season was over?

In the face of JG’s 5-0 run....there were many criticisms that the Patriots got fleeced. This article gets the monkey off BB’s back. Plus, the article was released during their bye-week allowing for it to dissipate prior to the days leading up to the game itself.

What in his track record with the press or with employment issues suggest this is a part of his playbook?

BB’s camp has always had their ‘sounding boards’ / media pigeons while in Foxboro. You’re not paying attention if you don’t think that’s true.

What is the advantage of leaking an article to ESPN over just, I dont know, talking directly to Bob Kraft and/or leaving after the season if the situation is really untenable?

I already said, I don’t think BB wants to leave. He has a kingdom in Foxboro – especially now with his boys in the building and daughter coaching at Holy Cross. But he also doesn’t want anything less than 100% of the decision making.
 

Ralphwiggum

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2012
9,825
Needham, MA
In the face of JG’s 5-0 run....there were many criticisms that the Patriots got fleeced. This article gets the monkey off BB’s back. Plus, the article was released during their bye-week allowing for it to dissipate prior to the days leading up to the game itself.
C'mon. People were scratching their heads about the timing of the JG trade and the return, but this move isn't remotely the most controversial personnel move Belichick has made. I'd say there was more hand wringing last year when they traded Collins out of the blue, and there have been many others (Milloy, Vinatieri, Seymour, Mankins, and Welker come to mind immediately) where the media and large swaths of Patriot fans have been irate over his handling of established, contributing players. Yet after this move, where, outside of the morons on in the afternoon on 98.5, the worst people were saying about it is that it seems like they probably could have gotten more for him, he felt the need to go to the press to get the monkey off his back?

If there was interference by Kraft (a big if), I certainly expect that Belichick would have been annoyed, and, depending on how strongly he felt about JG, I could even see him ultimately walking away if he felt that he couldn't operate the team the way he wanted to. But the absolute last thing that BB cares about is what fans or (especially) the media think about any personnel move that he made. Even if his hand were forced, him planting this story to get the press or whoever off his back makes absolutely zero sense.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
Buck,

How much sloppiness do you tolerate in your affairs, personal or professional?

I ask because the article’s author already has withdrawn one of the more bizarre contentions in the article — that B.B. met with Goodell let week.

And characteristically in this regard Seth and ESPN acted like weasels — they just went in and edited the story, with no explanation, after BB vehemently denied the account of a meeting last week.

There is blood all over the floor. My guess is because the author was played — not by B.B. but by unsettled Pats employees. And instead of bringing skepticism to their accounts, Seth just ate them.

This is not professional grade work. Which is why Kraft and B.B. and the Pats can sit back like snipers and pick off the pieces that are demonstrably false.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
How does the ESPN article make it less likely BB leaves? He can just talk to Kraft directly. He's not going to need favorable press to set up his next opportunity if he leaves.

I dont really understand this "100% of decision making" either. BB talking with Kraft about major personnel moves seems like it has always been SOP, at least dating back to A Football Life if the Wilfork contract was anything resembling SOP. Even the local guys who think Kraft got more involved than usual here portray it as Kraft pushing BB to accelerate the timing of trading JG, not the actual decision (Bedard says BB realized he was going to lose JG and choose Brady next year anyways). Im in the camp that Kraft would have more influence on whether BB moved on from Brady than in any other situation, but that horse is out of the barn regardless of how it went down. What message did Kraft receive via an ESPN article that BB couldnt have just delivered directly? If BB wants to stay, why on earth would he cook up an article that "takes a good whack" at Tom Brady after, if you believe the article, he lost a power struggle with Brady?

There are media outlets besides ESPN and local beat writers.

BB caring what the press thinks of a trade is pretty amusing based on his track record.

Also who is BB's "camp"?

Still seems way more likely that ESPN took some kernels of truth (there is some tension between Brady and BB over Guerrero's role on the team, Brady feels a little offput that some in the building were considering whether to move on to JG during yet another MVP caliber season, Kraft nudged BB towards moving JG sooner rather than later) and blew it up into something overhyped based on JGs hot start in SF rather than this being some sort of BB orchestrated hit piece.
 

OurF'ingCity

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 22, 2016
8,469
New York City
In the face of JG’s 5-0 run....there were many criticisms that the Patriots got fleeced. This article gets the monkey off BB’s back. Plus, the article was released during their bye-week allowing for it to dissipate prior to the days leading up to the game itself.
I find it hard to believe given his history that Belichick one give one shit about what the press/public thought about the JG trade. But, if BB truly wanted to deflect criticism for the JG trade, throwing his starting QB and owner under the bus would have to be the worst possible way to do that. If that was his goal, why wouldn't he (or his "camp," whoever that is) instead leak things like "Cleveland never offered us anything close to a second-rounder and anything they say to the contrary is BS"? That would seem to accomplish the same goal without involving anyone else on the Patriots.

BB’s camp has always had their ‘sounding boards’ / media pigeons while in Foxboro. You’re not paying attention if you don’t think that’s true.
Can you provide some examples? And, given that Wickersham was one of the authors of the stupid Spygate/Deflategate re-hash (which was certainly not pro-Belichick), why would Belichick's "camp" choose him of all reporters to leak this story to?

I already said, I don’t think BB wants to leave. He has a kingdom in Foxboro – especially now with his boys in the building and daughter coaching at Holy Cross. But he also doesn’t want anything less than 100% of the decision making.
But that doesn't really answer the question - even if Kraft did order the JG trade, what is preventing Belichick from walking up to Kraft's office, opening the door, and saying "by the way if you ever order me to do a trade again I'm quitting on the spot." What added benefit does he get from making his frustration public?
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,238
My guess is because the author was played — not by B.B. but by unsettled Pats employees. And instead of bringing skepticism to their accounts, Seth just ate them.
.
That's the issue. Journalism 101. ("played" implies it was intentional by the sources. I'm not even sure it was that. I think people may have accurately recounted their feeling and thoughts to the reporter, But there was not enough "how do you know that to be the case" from the reporter's side, or from his editors.) Sometimes, "how they know that" is self-evident, but not always, and, I'm guessing, not here in many cases.
 

HowBoutDemSox

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2009
10,103
I ask because the article’s author already has withdrawn one of the more bizarre contentions in the article — that B.B. met with Goodell let week.

And characteristically in this regard Seth and ESPN acted like weasels — they just went in and edited the story, with no explanation, after BB vehemently denied the account of a meeting last week.
It actually looks like they doubled down on this, here's what it currently says:
He has even become good friends with Goodell. The two men had a long and private meeting, which two sources told ESPN occurred during the off week after the regular season, when the commissioner visited Foxborough. The NFL says the meeting happened last year, not within the past week.
Here's the original quote, note no mention of two sources or the NFL's denial:

He has even become good friends with Goodell. The two men had a long and private meeting during the off week after the regular season, when the commissioner visited Foxboro.
Archived version: https://web.archive.org/web/20180105063612/http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/page/hotread180105/beginning-end-new-england-patriots-robert-kraft-tom-brady-bill-belichick-internal-power-struggle
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
27,957
Saskatoon Canada
Bill Belichick claims he hasn’t read it. Robert Kraft and Tom Brady have disputed its contents. But privately, the New England Patriots are steamed over ESPN’s recent exposé. That’s according to The MMQB’s Peter King, who reported Monday the Patriots are more furious about author Seth Wickersham’s bombshell report — which alleges a serious, potentially irreparable rift between their owner, head coach and quarterback — than any other issue since Deflategate began in January 2015. “The Patriots haven’t been as angry about anything since the Tom Brady deflated footballs scandal,” King wrote. “Apoplectic might be a better word.”

Read more at: https://nesn.com/2018/01/nfl-rumors-patriots-apoplectic-over-espn-report-alleging-internal-rift/
https://nesn.com/2018/01/nfl-rumors-patriots-apoplectic-over-espn-report-alleging-internal-rift/
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,405
around the way
Buck,

How much sloppiness do you tolerate in your affairs, personal or professional?

I ask because the article’s author already has withdrawn one of the more bizarre contentions in the article — that B.B. met with Goodell let week.

And characteristically in this regard Seth and ESPN acted like weasels — they just went in and edited the story, with no explanation, after BB vehemently denied the account of a meeting last week.

There is blood all over the floor. My guess is because the author was played — not by B.B. but by unsettled Pats employees. And instead of bringing skepticism to their accounts, Seth just ate them.

This is not professional grade work. Which is why Kraft and B.B. and the Pats can sit back like snipers and pick off the pieces that are demonstrably false.
This 100%.

And don't hold your breath waiting for a worthwhile response from the OMFG talk radio hot takez chicken little set either.

Belichick laid down the law and limited Guerrero's access, because lines were blurred, players were getting different messages on how to train, etc. Shit happens. BFB did what he thought was right. Brady was probably pissed, because he is the fucking man, but also because he's an apostle for this Guerrero stuff. All of this is understandable, and none of it is a fatal blow. Can't have too many cooks in the kitchen. -- I don't think that anyone would dispute any of this.

All of the other stuff is out of character for all of the principals involved. With their denials on the record and nobody coming forward to corroborate any of the other stuff--the big stuff--the burden of proof is on the pearl clutchers, IMO. And the pearl clutchers bring nothing to the table except conspiracy theories and groundless speculation.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,840
I'm as astounded as y'all, just intrigued by the possibility, however outlandish.
But think about it--a secret handshake deal? This would so quickly become the biggest story in the sport if it broke into the NFL media circles. But no, you heard it on a message board.
 

Buck Showalter

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 26, 2002
6,652
Citifield - Queens, NY
But Belichick also has taken a longer view, as though he sees pieces of his impact leaguewide. He's preparing assistant coaches for job interviews elsewhere, which he didn't always do in years past.
So - let's assume the report(s) are correct and Patricia is leaving for the NYG.....

Still think Wickersham's sources were low-level flunkies?
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
26,993
Newton
I'm not following -- how does Patricia leaving for the NYG (or Lions, who they were apparently "bracing for" a day ago) impact who was sourcing Wickersham's piece?
 
Apr 7, 2006
2,503
Why wouldn't low level flunkies be aware that BB is helping prep long-time assistants for potential job offers? That doesn't seem like some FOR YOUR EYES ONLY situation?
 

Bunt4aTriple

Member (member)
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,347
North Yarmouth, ME
What a dumb article. Winning team that only ever wins is more upset about bs article than anything else since the last bs accusations by the same organization.

I'm sure they were more upset about Edelman's injury.

Or, Hernandez's death.
What? Why would they be upset about Hernandez's death? Hernandez's crimes and deception, sure. But his death? Good riddance to bad rubbish.
 

steveluck7

Member
SoSH Member
May 10, 2007
3,994
Burrillville, RI
What? Why would they be upset about Hernandez's death? Hernandez's crimes and deception, sure. But his death? Good riddance to bad rubbish.
I think that was his point. Nothing has happened since the deflating issue that would have caused any ire at Patriots HQ so saying "they haven't been this upset since deflate..." is kinda a huge "no shit, Sherlock"
 

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
61,996
New York City
What a dumb article. Winning team that only ever wins is more upset about bs article than anything else since the last bs accusations by the same organization.

I'm sure they were more upset about Edelman's injury.

Or, Hernandez's death.
These things aren't really comparable. Edelman had a freak knee injury but it's the way it goes in football. This article was a team assassination that was poorly sourced and very speculative. And it was written because it was about the Patriots. That isn't the way it goes.

I'm pretty sure nobody on the Pats really cared that much that Hernandez died. He was a stone cold killer.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
62,312
What? Why would they be upset about Hernandez's death? Hernandez's crimes and deception, sure. But his death? Good riddance to bad rubbish.
Yeah, I think someone you knew and played with committing suicide would be more upsetting than a poorly-sourced article.
 

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
61,996
New York City
Yeah, I think someone you knew and played with committing suicide would be more upsetting than a poorly-sourced article.
He was a murderer. I'm guessing the team was more shocked and upset about the actual murders than Hernandez killing himself after being jailed for life.
 

TheoShmeo

Skrub's sympathy case
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
12,890
Boston, NY
So - let's assume the report(s) are correct and Patricia is leaving for the NYG.....

Still think Wickersham's sources were low-level flunkies?
Are you serious with this?

Patricia leaving for the Giants or more likely, the Lions, is totally expected. We’re lucky he didn’t get hired last off season. Successful coordinators routinely move on to HC gigs.

That Wickersham wrote about this is irrelevant and if and when Matt goes, it will be something that any NFL fan could have predicted.

PS: just saw the King report about the Giants preference. My point remains and is unchanged.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,055
Hingham, MA
So - let's assume the report(s) are correct and Patricia is leaving for the NYG.....

Still think Wickersham's sources were low-level flunkies?
Huh??? Patricia and McD interviewed last year too. And we know for a fact that BB helped McD when he was going through interviews the first time around, as well as Bill O'Brien. This is 1000000% bullshit.
 

DavidTai

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
1,242
Herndon, VA
Huh??? Patricia and McD interviewed last year too. And we know for a fact that BB helped McD when he was going through interviews the first time around, as well as Bill O'Brien. This is 1000000% bullshit.
Agreed. This isn't out of the ordinary especially compared to last year, and I don't even understand why -this- is supposed to be news.

If the next thing I hear is that is all a prelude to Belichick leaving for the Giants... :p
 

Blue Monkey

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 23, 2006
5,353
Reading
We do? What sources have told you / us that?
It’s widely known. I don’t have a link but it’s well documented that B.B. gave McD a 5 page document on “what it takes to be a successful HC” that McD refers to his “bible”. He also asked and prepped McD with a gouge on questions to ask at the interview.

Edit... it’s actually right on McDaniels Wiki page
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
it’s actually right on McDaniels Wiki page
We have found unnamed source #1. I'm betting that two, three, and four are Curran, Shefter, and Howe. However given the quality of some of the shit regurgitated he probably read Volin's articles as well.
 

splendid splinter

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2001
1,076
Greenville, SC

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,055
Hingham, MA
Buck I appreciate that you are pushing the envelope on this but when you start questioning widely known, reported, facts, you lose credibility and look more like a troll.


Still, perhaps the most important lessons McDaniels learned came in February 2008, two weeks after the Patriots' quest for an undefeated season ended with a 17-14 loss to the Giants in Super Bowl XLIII. When the coaches returned from a two-week break, Belichick called McDaniels into his office and handed him a five-page, typed report on what it takes to be an effective coach and have a winning organization.

"I had been talking to Bill for a few years about being a head coach, and after I didn't do any interviews during the bye week in the '07 playoffs he said, 'I will help you in any way I can to get you ready for all the other things that go into the job,'" McDaniels said. "Just being around him every day was going to help me from a football standpoint because I could see what he did and how he did it. But he was saying he would help me with some of the things that you won't really get a chance to witness or understand or become knowledgeable about until you're in that position.

"I remember when we first came back after our break, that very first day, that very first morning, he brought me into his office and he gave me five pages, typed, of all the topics and things that he felt like I needed to be educated about to become an effective head coach. I'm thinking to myself, here he's got 10 or 12 days where he can do whatever in the hell he wants to do -- we've just come off a season where we were 16-0 and lost in the Super Bowl -- and the very first day back he gives me this? That was kind of like my bible."

During the 2008 season, the men met for an hour here, 30 minutes there, until they had addressed every point in the report. From there McDaniels developed 60 to 65 questions of his own that he carried into job interviews with Cleveland and Denver earlier this year.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
Seems a reasonable possibility we’ll lose both coordinators again.

If so, the reset button gets hit on the QB successsion and the HC succession, the latter of which I think is further down the line but nonetheless inevitable. Plus, there is the ongoing Bob > Jonathan succession.

Future is a mist.
 

OurF'ingCity

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 22, 2016
8,469
New York City
Yeah, that's another part of the article I never understood - if the Patriots do end up losing both coordinators that should be more, not less, incentive for Belichick to stick around so he's not leaving the Patriots entirely bereft of high-level coaching talent. I'd actually be more concerned Belichick is going to retire in the next few years if one or both of the coordinators end up staying, because that makes it more likely that he told (or at least insinuated) one or both of them "feel free to interview but there's a solid chance I'm gone in the next few years and if that happens I'll make sure you have a very good chance to become the next head coach."
 
Apr 7, 2006
2,503
For some compelling insight on this whole topic, I highly recommend listening to the most recent episode of Tom Curran's Quick Slants podcast. Jerod Mayo, who is regularly awesome on this podcast, is particularly funny and honest about this and other aspects of locker room dynamics amid media or roster "noise."
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,191
So - let's assume the report(s) are correct and Patricia is leaving for the NYG.....

Still think Wickersham's sources were low-level flunkies?
I still think we have no idea who they are, actually.

As others noted, getting the BB-Goodell meeting wrong is highly inconsistent with him being a source. Wickersham has stood by that item, so while it is possible he intentionally made that mistake to camoflague his source I don't think that's very likely.

Citing, for example, the BB-Guererro email does nothing to suggest it is BB (or Guerrero) because we have no idea that what Wickersham said about the content (or occurrence) of the email is accurate. In addition to that, there are all sorts of people who may have knowledge of such an email. On the Patriots, one can easily imagine BB telling the strength coach, the trainers, team doctors, security. In addition to all those he might tell the Krafts, his assistants, his position coaches (in particular those who interact wtih Guerrero clients), the PR team. He might also tell the players Guerrero works with, and any players who have raised a concern about pressure from Brady. When he told any (or all) of these people he might have said how he communicated with Guerrero ("I sent an email to Guerrero letting him know we didn't want him on the premesis, but that he's welcome to see his guys outside"). Or Guerrero and any number of people on his side may have leaked this---note that Bedard has said Guerrero talks a lot.

In short, what you've shown is that there's virtually no real evidence or basis for suggesting BB was the leak. He may well be, I don't pretend to know, but the case being made here that it is him really boils down to "I read the article as less unfavorable to him than others" and that's as much a bet on Wickersham as it is about anything else.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,055
Hingham, MA
For some compelling insight on this whole topic, I highly recommend listening to the most recent episode of Tom Curran's Quick Slants podcast. Jerod Mayo, who is regularly awesome on this podcast, is particularly funny and honest about this and other aspects of locker room dynamics amid media or roster "noise."
Mayo is really smart. Great listen.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,055
Hingham, MA
Talk about twisting words. Belichick gave him a manual and then MET WITH HIM LIKE EVERY DAY TO PREPARE HIM. Your entire argument was that it is "new" that BB is prepping assistants. THIS IS NOT NEW AT ALL. Quit the trolling.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,238
Wait what?!
Providing someone with an outline (however detailed) about the best-practices to be a head-coach in the NFL is preparing someone for specific interviews?!!!
Apparently McDaniels thought so, because "[f]rom there McDaniels developed 60 to 65 questions of his own that he carried into job interviews with Cleveland and Denver . . . ."


I suppose its possible that McDaniels didn't know what McDaniels thought about the outline that Belichick provided to McDaniels. And its also possible that words like "questions" and "interviews" and "developed" have some hidden meaning that some of us aren't privy to.

Or maybe it's quite clear what those words mean, and you've either done an admirable job of helping to undermine your own thesis, or you're trolling.