With the sudden end to the Patriots season still stinging, things are slowly starting to return to normal, as we settle into the winter, another Patriots offseason, enjoy the Celtics and look forward to the Red Sox. The Bruins, well, will continue to be the Bruins.

Despite sour ending, Pats’ season had its moments – Robert Lee looks at some top moments from the 2010 season.

A look inside my 2010 All Pro ballot – Tom E Curran tells us who he selected as NFL All Pros.

Patriots enter offseason with variety of questions – Christopher Price has a look at where the Patriots will look to improve this offseason.

Wes Welker: I regret press conference – Karen Guregian has the Patriots receiver acknowledging his error in judgment.

Ben Roethlisberger’s a zero, not a hero – Gerry Callahan says that someone needs to stop Roethlisberger, who has had his way for far too long.

Matchup fine by any measure – Bob Ryan approves of this Super Bowl matchup. Greg A. Bedard notes that the teams are very similar.

Should David Ortiz be worried after Manny Ramirez’ $2 million deal? – Rob Bradford looks at the declining salary of the DH position.

Lester focusing on October – Peter Abraham has the lefty making sure he’s in good shape for October.

Still finding themselves short on big men – Frank Dell’Apa’s notebook has the Celtics again with a shortage up front. Dan Duggan has Shaq looking to return on the West coast trip.

Bruins late show a dud – Stephen Harris has the Bruins getting shut out in Los Angeles.


19 thoughts on “Still Picking Up The Pieces

  1. The Bruins are one of the best teams in the conference. Might want to actually give some reasonable coverage, since you're allegedly a BOSTON SPORTS media site.

    1. Another whiny fan of the fourth most popular big sport in the country whining about how it's the fourth most popular big sport in the country.

      Waaaaaahhhh! Why don't people like unpopular things that I enjoy? Waaaaaaahhhh!

    2. I think Bruce would give the B's more of a shot if the Boston sports media were dissecting them and making outrageous comments about them the way they do with the Pats and Red Sox. If anything, you're better off being a Bruins fan in this town so you DON"T have to read Shaughnessy or Felger or Callahan making idiotic comments about them.

    3. Given their 38 year run without a championship, propensity to choke their lunch all over their feet, and historical commitment to profitability over building a winning organization, it would seem that the level of coverage is more than reasonable.

      1. All of which accurately describes the Red Sox from 1918 to 2004. I'm totally with anyone who reserves judgement on the B's until the second round of the playoffs where they tend to choke like nothing else, but you can say the same thing about the Pats post 2005.

          1. No, it really isn't. Only the Celtics have put together consistent post season runs in the past 5 years. The Bruins flame out in the second round, the Pats haven't won a playoff game since 2008 and the Red Sox won a title in 2007 but crapped the bed throughout most of of the ALC series against the Rays and were bludgeoned by the Angels the next year.

          2. Okay, so the Pats and Sox haven't had any success in the playoffs for the last, what like 3 years.

            The Bruins haven't had any success in the playoffs for almost 40 years. Yeah, you're right. It's an absolute valid comparison.

          3. Just look at the Blackhawks. Nothing changed for them until the senior owner was gone and his much more motivated, savvy son took over. Unfortunately, neither Jeremy nor Charlie Jacobs is any different.

        1. Red Sox always spent money, were entertaining, and weren't afraid to try to go for it even if they didn't know how. The Bruins front office still runs like it's 1964. The Patriots argument is straight out of the Felger handbook. It also ignores a trip to the Super Bowl which also makes it completely inaccurate. Your little sport is nice for you. I'm not all that interested in the Revolution either. That's probably a better comparison than Pats or Red Sox at this point.

          1. They've spent to the cap (or above, depending on how you look at it) since there was a cap.

            Can we drop the "cheap" charge? I hate the Jacobs family too for the decades of bullsh.. they've fed us, but the Bruins post-lockout have been anything but cheap.

          2. They're not cheap, they're stupid. The Bruins spend money in bizarre ways, even with the cap. Tom Yawkey threw around a lot of money too and got nothing for it until Dick Williams showed up.

          3. Actually, they are cheap, except it doesn't appear they are now that there is a salary cap. You sucker Bruins fans fail to mention how the organization completely wasted Ray Bourque and Cam Neely's primes by never signing good supporting players. I bet you were the same people who celebrated Bourque winning in Colorado.

            Also, the Bruins will never be forced to compete seriously because they own the Garden. Jacobs pockets all concessions from Bruins and Celtics games. The ticket sales are just a bonus and you boneheads keep paying to see the 4th best sport in Boston.

          4. Given that the B's now spend up to the salary cap that Harry and Jeremy fought for decades to get implemented, you now have to look beneath the surface for evidence of their cheapness. I know for a fact (from working in the Garden and talking to B's employees) that about 10 years ago they had one of the thinnest and worst-paid scouting departments in the NHL, in addition to having one of the lower payrolls for major league talent. Has the scouring budget changed along with their propensity to spend up to the cap? I don't have the answer to that, but the Jacobs clan will always, always, always run a "budget" operation; and if they can't "underspend" other teams on major league talent now because of the cap, they'll find other ways to pinch pennies. That said, at least the cap gives them a fighting chance to win now. Before that came along, the organization was truly hopeless and they were utterly abusing one of the best fan bases in all of sports.

          5. Considering how well-stocked their farm system is and how many former prospects are making huge contributions to the big club, I'd wager that the scouting department has gotten a bump in investment over the last several years.

            It rather sickens me to defend the Jacobs family, but while there are many, many valid reasons to despise them and pine for the day when they sell the team, they have not been cheap by any real definition of the word over the past several seasons.

          6. Jacobs has improved, but he's still been severely outpaced by what the Sox, Pats and C's have done to their franchises over the past 5 years. And with the pats, we can go back even further to the Parcells hiring…

    4. In the 1990s, none of the teams were really contending for anything, excluding a lone trip to the Super Bowl (1997). Now that the quality and consistency of the output of the other three teams has improved dramatically over the last 10 years or so, not to mention the fact that Boston's hockey storyline (lotsa wins, then one-and-done) is unchanged since 1972, no one is impressed with an Adams (or Northeast) Division banner.

      Get out of the second round of the playoffs and maybe people will talk about you more.

Comments are closed.