This year's ESPN hit piece

[joe dokes]

Wickersham said:

You want to verify things as much as possible and not just throw things out there, and this is another example of that."

Verifying things "as much as possible" is not even a close relative of "verifying things sufficiently." Maybe he was just being sloppy with his words. But if he thinks that "as much as possible" is necessarily "sufficient," then he has no business operating a pencil.

 

[ElcaballitoMVP]

What an annoying, garbage article. Not one quote from a named source, as Yee mentions, and just so much BS and conjecture that I almost can't wrap my head around this.

Here's my take:
Bill wanted to keep JG around, but knew it was unlikely he could resign him.
Bill meets with Kraft and they try to figure out a way to make the numbers work to keep both. Which would've been damn near impossible. Meeting takes forever, everyone in the office freaks out, and in the end they decide they're not going to get rid of Brady in the middle of an MVP season and can't keep JG long term- but Bill does know that SF has Hoyer, a guy he and Brady both like, and a huge need at QB- let's see if we can get a deal done there.
They leave the meeting, Bill calls up SF and says this is the price. Maybe he could've gotten more, but he's not trading a franchise QB to Cleveland because 1- they're in the AFC and 2- Screw Cleveland.

Sprinkle in a little bit of Alex Guerrero, mention how players don't like Bill's attitude, get a little coach-owner rift going and hit send.

This just doesn't match anything I've ever learned about this team. I don't believe it.

 

[Don Buddin's GS]

I was expecting WW II. Instead, it turned out to be the Spanish American War.

Seems more like The Falklands to my eye.

 

[Erik Hanson's Hook]

It's funny - I wonder if ESPN knows how reviled they are in New England. Like, the absolute lack of respect for anything that spews from from their site. We literally have a thread on them about how much they suck. That said, I'm not surprised by all this. 17 years is a long time. There's bound to be some lover's quarrels. But I do think Bill needs to rethink who's been been taking the snaps for him during that time. His Cleveland record is not gonna cut it. I think Tom made Bill, not the other way around.

 

[Ralphwiggum]

Jeff Howe on Twitter says that the Pats and JG never exchanged formal contract offers. Burt Breer on T&R this morning said that he knew for certain that the Pats tried to sign Jimmy G to a contract extension last off season. I suppose both of those things could technically be true, but it seems unlikely.

So basically nobody who covers this team has any fucking clue what actually happened.

 

[Dr. Winston O'Boogie]

I turned on XM and this story was on ESPN, ESPNews, and Mad Dog. I don't know a thing about him, so other than his terrible cheating article on the Patriots, what has Wickersham done to warrant this level of respect?

Edit: and this really does read as AG being quoted and Wickersham twisting the words to paint Tom in a bad light.

 

[Marciano490]

The Patriots are the Kardashians of the NFL. They change their hair color and there's 20 articles about it. How big a news story was the AB v. Tomlin spat or any other blowup between any player or coach or owner way more substantive than this probably every week on every team?

 

[Remagellan]

Don't overlook the fact that many of the games this weekend may be non-competitive contributing to this story getting so much play. If you're in the business of talking about football, this weekend's contests, especially the AFC games, aren't going to fill a lot of air time.

 

[Shelterdog]

I agree. Sure it is possible to dismiss everything with rose colored glasses, but it seems it could be true. The JG trade seemed to make little sense, considering other chances to trade him, talk they were not trading him coming from inside sources.

One crucial thing about the Jimmy G trade that the reporters are all missing is that Jimmy G has an incredible amount of leverage about where Jimmy G went.. Don Yee just has to tell any prospective trade partners that Jimmy won't sign a long term deal there and that deal is dead.

 

[joe dokes]

Jeff Howe on Twitter says that the Pats and JG never exchanged formal contract offers. Burt Breer on T&R this morning said that he knew for certain that the Pats tried to sign Jimmy G to a contract extension last off season. I suppose both of those things could technically be true, but it seems unlikely.

So basically nobody who covers this team has any fucking clue what actually happened.

I think Howe's and Breer's takes could easily both be true. There's a whole lot of room for "trying" (Breer) before the amorphous and undefined "formal contract offer." (Howe).

 

[PedroKsBambino]

Wickersham said:


Verifying things "as much as possible" is not even a close relative of "verifying things sufficiently." Maybe he was just being sloppy with his words. But if he thinks that "as much as possible" is necessarily "sufficient," then he has no business operating a pencil.

My problem is that there aren't many direct quotes and there isn't very clear sourcing of any of the key comments in the article. So he's saying "I verified it sufficiently for myself and ESPN, but we aren't sharing what that 'verification' looks like with you" and I think that's generally below the bar of what legit journalists do. Certainly, after the Mortensen debacle that ESPN's own public editor ripped, no one should rely on ESPN's editorial judgment until they prove it is warranted.

I have no idea if Wickersham is right or wrong---but his job is to put forward a story that is based on sourced information, and he's failed to describe that occurred.

 

[Dr. Winston O'Boogie]

One crucial thing about the Jimmy G trade that the reporters are all missing is that Jimmy G has an incredible amount of leverage about where Jimmy G went.. Don Yee just has to tell any prospective trade partners that Jimmy won't sign a long term deal there and that deal is dead.

That's the laughable thing about any fantasy trade with the Cleveland Browns. There is a college athlete that is telling the team he doesn't want to be drafted by him, but the Patriots were supposed to receive a haul from them when there is no way JG would sign long term with that franchise.

 

[Reggie's Racquet]

I confess that I unfortunately read ESPN's web site from time to time.
So does this mean Tom doesn't want us to honor Isiah Thomas with a video during halftime of the divisional round game or do I have things conflated? #inflatehategate

 

[Eddie Jurak]

Come on. If your mechanic were to tell you that you should put premium gasoline in your engine because it helps maintain performance and also prevents you from getting car AIDS, you'd have no problem calling him a quack, even if premium gasoline does provide some marginal benefit for engine longevity.

And, if you then wrote a book on things you had owned about car ownership, pointing to your long track record of not contracting car AIDS, people would call you a quack too.

Tom Brady is the best quarterback in NFL history. He's a complete and total fraud when it comes to health advice.

I’m not really trying to argue otherwise. I wasn’t meaning to address Tom’s proselytizing.

I was meaning to get at why is Brady sold on the quackery.

 

[tims4wins]

I think Howe's and Breer's takes could easily both be true. There's a whole lot of room for "trying" (Breer) before the amorphous and undefined "formal contract offer." (Howe).

I agree with this. The Pats could have approached JG and Yee and said we want to discuss an extension. JG and Yee could have responded with "as long as Brady is here, Jimmy isn't signing, he wants to be a starter in 2018". So they discussed it without a formal offer since a formal offer was pointless.

 

[RSN Diaspora]

The story is weak-sauce. Unnamed sources du jour.

Maybe it's living in DC, but I don't have an issue with unnamed sources per se--it's hard if not impossible to put together a good story about sports, politics, or entertainment without some people willing to provide insight but not willing to do so under their name. It's more that I don't know where the "there" is. Brady wants to play forever? We knew that. Guererro is a quack? Most of us knew that too.

The real scoop was supposed to be Brady demanding that Jimmy G be traded, and that obviously got spiked, almost certainly due to the inability to verify the rumor. The Don Yee angle is interesting (I guess), but was there any reasonable scenario where JG would've accepted a backup role at a discount or the Pats would be willing to pay him starter money under either a long-term deal or the franchise tag? Because if not, I don't see how you could justify not trading him this year unless you could justify benching/cutting Brady no later than week one of the 2018-19 season (which I don't think anyone could at this point).

 

[Ralphwiggum]

I think Howe's and Breer's takes could easily both be true. There's a whole lot of room for "trying" (Breer) before the amorphous and undefined "formal contract offer." (Howe).

But Breer made it sound like the Pats took several runs at JG and Yee to try to get it done. I don't know what constitutes a "formal" contract offer, but I'll say the spirit of what Breer was describing would seem to be in conflict with the Howe tweet.

It probably doesn't much matter, I think it is just evidence that none of these guys really have the full story.

 

[RedOctober3829]

I agree with this. The Pats could have approached JG and Yee and said we want to discuss an extension. JG and Yee could have responded with "as long as Brady is here, Jimmy isn't signing, he wants to be a starter in 2018". So they discussed it without a formal offer since a formal offer was pointless.

Exactly. The contract stuff is semantics. They very well could have approached Jimmy and Yee and be like "Hey we'd like to re-sign you. Here's our figures. What do you guys think?" Jimmy/Yee: "We're not interested unless Jimmy is the starter because he wants to play." Pats: "Ok thanks." That's it. There was no formal offer because it never got to that point but to think they never discussed what it would take to sign him then that's being naive.

 

[jsinger121]

 

[pappymojo]

Something Wickersham This Way Comes

Something Wickersham This Way Farts

 

[Stitch01]

One crucial thing about the Jimmy G trade that the reporters are all missing is that Jimmy G has an incredible amount of leverage about where Jimmy G went.. Don Yee just has to tell any prospective trade partners that Jimmy won't sign a long term deal there and that deal is dead.

A lot of people dont consider the extension of this idea, namely that Yee could tell the Patriots "Jimmy wants to play next year. If you franchise Jimmy as the backup he's not signing a long-term deal with the team"

 

[PedroKsBambino]

A lot of people dont consider the extension of this idea, namely that Yee could tell the Patriots "Jimmy wants to play next year. If you franchise Jimmy as the backup he's not signing a long-term deal with the team"

Or, "Jimmy will hold out until week 9 if you franchise him" which would be even more impactful for the 2018 Patriots and not really hurt Jimmy G all that much.

 

[mauf]

Why aren’t we at least contemplating the possibility that Wickersham, who is generally well-respected, has sources for this story that meet the usual standards for sports journalism (which are not as stringent as the standards for hard news, particularly with respect to reliance on unnamed sources)?

The Wickersham article is kind to BB, and unfair to his rivals. What’s the conclusion we would normally draw from such a piece?

 

[Curt S Loew]

"It is unfortunate that there is even a need for us to respond to these fallacies"

Yes. It is. There wasn't a need. This is so laughable. It's like they need to get out ahead of this before they are all forced to resign.

Celebrating what is, indeed.

 

[PedroKsBambino]

Why aren’t we at least contemplating the possibility that Wickersham, who is generally well-respected, has sources for this story that meet the usual standards for sports journalism (which are not as stringent as the standards for hard news, particularly with respect to reliance on unnamed sources)?

The Wickersham article is kind to BB, and unfair to his rivals. What’s the conclusion we would normally draw from such a piece?

Out of curiosity, how do you know what anyone contemplated as possibilities?

Serious question: have you actually read the article?

 

[The Needler]

Why aren’t we at least contemplating the possibility that Wickersham, who is generally well-respected, has sources for this story that meet the usual standards for sports journalism (which are not as stringent as the standards for hard news, particularly with respect to reliance on unnamed sources)?

I reject both the premises underlying this question. This is a hard news story, and there are not separate standards for "sports journalism," as least as far as good journalism goes.

 

[PedroKsBambino]

Just to illustrate, here's an excerpt from the article:

"A year later, after another Super Bowl win -- the Brady-led, historic comeback from 28-3 to defeat the Atlanta Falcons -- Brady's stature in the organization had grown to the point that he was considered management. New players often address him as "sir."

Can anyone say where in the article he explains the sourcing for this? There's at least a dozen examples of this...and no sourcing (let alone direct quotes even if unattributed) for them. That's the problem. One can have a discussion of whether that meets the standards for sports journalism, or other journalism, and I think the likely conclusion is that you need some sourcing somewhere.

 

[Ed Hillel]

"It is unfortunate that there is even a need for us to respond to these fallacies"

Yes. It is. There wasn't a need. This is so laughable. It's like they need to get out ahead of this before they are all forced to resign.

Celebrating what is, indeed.

What?

Also, fire up the “We Stand United” shirts and signs.

 

[Koufax]

I can easily see Bob Kraft selling the team to avoid the scrutiny of having forced the trade of GG. Then the new owners come in and fire BB and TB12 just to prove a point. Totally likely.

 

[boca]

"It is unfortunate that there is even a need for us to respond to these fallacies"

Yes. It is. There wasn't a need. This is so laughable. It's like they need to get out ahead of this before they are all forced to resign.

Celebrating what is, indeed.

They released it so that the next time Bill or Tom stand at the podium and get asked dozens of questions about this stupid piece they can just refer back to the statement and move on.

 

[Ed Hillel]

Honestly, the lack of Oxford comma is really distressing to me. Fuck this team.

 

[Morgan's Magic Snowplow]

Honestly, the lack of Oxford comma is really distressing to me. Fuck this team.

That's what I saw first too. Totally unacceptable and unprofessional.

 

[Curt S Loew]

They released it so that the next time Bill or Tom stand at the podium and get asked dozens of questions about this stupid piece they can just refer back to the statement and move on.

I know why they released it. It's just laughable that they had to. "United We Stand" IS a great follow up to "We are all PATRIOTS!", though. Go, Bobby Go!

 

[rodderick]

I'm starting to hope Jimmy has an Andy Dalton type career, just so I don't have to keep reading shit like this for the next decade.

 

[BuellMiller]

Seems more like The Falklands to my eye.

I was thinking Grenada. I just wonder if Wickersham is Anthony or Tony?

 

[Stitch01]

Or, "Jimmy will hold out until week 9 if you franchise him" which would be even more impactful for the 2018 Patriots and not really hurt Jimmy G all that much.

Yup, or even just "Jimmy wont be signing the tag until the deadline", which fucks up the idea of a tag and trade since the Pats would have been cap jammed through free agency if they didnt rescind the tag.

None of this is riskless to JG, but he had enough leverage that it was a lot more complicated of a decision then "just tag Jimmy for a year"

 

[CantKeepmedown]

Volin tweeting: NFL's Joe Lockhart says Roger Goodell did not meet with Belichick in the past week, as was written in ESPN Mag. Lockhart says there was a meeting maybe this past offseason. "That happened last year, not within the past week."

I wonder who Wickersham's source was for how chummy Belichick and Goodell were this week?

 

[Dogman]

 

[RedOctober3829]

Bedard has an article up on his site explaining what he's been told about BB/TB/JG. He said that BB was taking all the time he was allotted to make a decision on JG. He says the end game BB was looking at was tagging/trading JG ala Matt Cassel if JG did not want to agree to a bridge deal and sticking with Brady. But Kraft stepped in and said to trade JG now so he could demonstrate his loyalty to Brady.

 

[PedroKsBambino]

I wonder who Wickersham's source was for how chummy Belichick and Goodell were this week?

...and this is why including some form of sourcing is essential before we take published stories seriously. Maybe he has a source. Maybe it is one of the people in the meeting. Maybe it's second or third-hand info. Maybe Wickersham literally made it up and got lucky that some meeting occured at a different time than he claimed. We have no idea, and no way to assess the value of his conclusions because he shared almost nothing about where the info came from, and very little of it (though not none) via quotes.

 

[HurstSoGood]

...The real scoop was supposed to be Brady demanding that Jimmy G be traded, and that obviously got spiked, almost certainly due to the inability to verify the rumor. The Don Yee angle is interesting (I guess), but was there any reasonable scenario where JG would've accepted a backup role at a discount or the Pats would be willing to pay him starter money under either a long-term deal or the franchise tag? Because if not, I don't see how you could justify not trading him this year unless you could justify benching/cutting Brady no later than week one of the 2018-19 season (which I don't think anyone could at this point).

Agreed, although most of the controversy seems to be Guerrero being less a personal trainer and more a televangelist/guru with newfound access to a bigger target audience. The bottom line is that the GOAT wanted to play for another 4-5 years with the Pats. Whatever Jimmy wanted above and beyond backing up Brady becomes irrelevant once Bill and Bob decide to keep Brady. A trade was inevitable.

For context: Is it a real stretch to believe that, while discussing Patriot futures, Brady replied (something along the lines of) "Look, I want to play. If that means Jimmy is going to demand a trade, then let him go." Put another way, does a Brady demand to play = a demand for Jimmy to be traded? Which context sounds more like click-bait?

I will be looking for: How many regional reporters are going to support Brady? This is foundation work. The talking heads see every Tom misplay and overthrow. They see Jimmy being 5-0. They want ratings. How many are preparing for the inevitable Brady smear campaign if he hangs on too long? Or rather, how long before the prophets of doom escalate their smack from "daily bitching" to "end-times are here" rhetoric?

 

[DJnVa]

Well, someone is finally on the record in regards to this story.

 

[Ralphwiggum]

Bedard has an article up on his site explaining what he's been told about BB/TB/JG. He said that BB was taking all the time he was allotted to make a decision on JG. He says the end game BB was looking at was tagging/trading JG ala Matt Cassel if JG did not want to agree to a bridge deal and sticking with Brady. But Kraft stepped in and said to trade JG now so he could demonstrate his loyalty to Brady.

If the plan all along was to tag and trade Jimmy, how does trading him mid-season "demonstrate loyalty to Brady"? Just tell Brady the plan is to do the same thing we did with Cassell. You are the QB until you don't want to be anymore, but we think this will maximize the deal we can get for Jimmy which makes the team better next year and beyond.

 

[Carmine Hose]

"Now 76 years old, Kraft ultimately will attempt to broker a solution. He has paid both Brady and Belichick tens of millions of dollars, won and lost some of the greatest games in NFL history with them, and has stood by both at their lowest moments. He apologized in front of a room of owners for Spygate. And he stood by Brady during Deflategate, even after he backed down and accepted the NFL's penalty. Kraft did so even though many staffers in the building believed there was merit in the allegation, however absurd the case. The team quietly parted ways with both John Jastremski and Jim McNally, the equipment staffers accused of deflating footballs -- they've never spoken publicly -- and Belichick reorganized the equipment staff. Kraft has privately told associates he knew that he went too far in his attacks against the league. "I had to do it for the fans," he has told confidants."

 

[mauf]

Out of curiosity, how do you know what anyone contemplated as possibilities?

Serious question: have you actually read the article?

Have you?

As to the former, I thought I was clear enough, but if you’re looking to be the king of internet prdantry, I’ll rephrase: if anyone here has seriously considered the possibility that this is a piece of legitimate journalism, there’s not much evidence of that in this thread.

Maybe Wickersham’s article is a work of fiction, but when a respected journalist writes an article that lionizes one party and denigrates the others, the inference we usually draw has to do with the author’s sources, not his integrity.

 

[RedOctober3829]

If the plan all along was to tag and trade Jimmy, how does trading him mid-season "demonstrate loyalty to Brady"? Just tell Brady the plan is to do the same thing we did with Cassell. You are the QB until you don't want to be anymore, but we think this will maximize the deal we can get for Jimmy which makes the team better next year and beyond.

Bedard says Kraft did this because he wanted to make Brady comfortable about his status on the 2018 roster. He said earlier in the article that Brady had a fear of BB trading him after this season because they kept Garoppolo.

 

[dcmissle]

Well, someone is finally on the record in regards to this story.

As indicated last night, none of this came as a surprise to the principals. And it certainly will do nothing but help them for this playoff run.

This is a carefully crafted statement, enabled by the fact that certain people — certainly radio in Boston — flat out make shit up.

Much of the criticism of the piece is fair. The criticism over unnamed sources is complete fucking bullshit. Woodward and Bernstein did not name their sources. People spent forever trying by to figure out who Deep Throat was. There are good and obvious reasons for keeping sources confidential.

 

[mauf]

By the way, I thought the most troubling part of the article wasn’t the handling of the JG situation, but the whispers that beneath his continuing statistical success, TB12 isn’t as good as he used to be. Not because it necessarily matters whether that’s true (he was good enough to lead a flawed team to a 13-3 record), but because it’s troubling that people in the organization would say that out loud to an ESPN writer. Can’t imagine anyone in the Pats’ organization doing that 3 years ago.

 

[Kull]

Thanks Carmine, I was just coming here to post on that. The hidden "nugget" in this 100% unattributed article is that "many staffers" believe Deflategate was TRUE and it was orchestrated by Brady. As others have noted, this is a hit piece aimed squarely at Tom Brady.

 

[TheoShmeo]

"It is unfortunate that there is even a need for us to respond to these fallacies"

Yes. It is. There wasn't a need. This is so laughable. It's like they need to get out ahead of this before they are all forced to resign.

Celebrating what is, indeed.

Nah, addressing this was smart. Now when they get asked repeatedly they can say we addressed it and have no further comment. Easy, quick and avoids people overly reading into how they would have otherwise deflected it.