If you were doing a case study about the modern news cycle, this Tom Brady contract extension that broke on Monday afternoon might be the ideal subject.

First, Peter King absolutely deserves credit for being the first with the story. He broke it, good for him.

The victory lap he took yesterday morning though, was a bit much.

Way to stay humble, Peter.

The story has been updated so many times in the last 36 hours or so, it’s hard to keep track of who is reporting what details and analysis about the contract. Every few minutes it seemed like someone, somewhere was “reporting” something different about the contract – the amount guaranteed, the clauses in the deal, the base salaries in the final three years, the cap hits, whether he really took less money, whatever. Some of it conflicts, some is the same, some just look at it from different angles. It might be hard to know which ones to believe or not.

Others speculate about the motivation of the deal. They insist that this extension was done with the expectation, if not the edict that the Patriots re-sign Brady’s pal Wes Welker. You’ve got agents crying to Mike Florio about how the deal will hurt their clients. You’ve got some saying if Brady were truly unselfish, he’d play for the minimum. Others insist this shows how evil the Patriots really are because now they’re just going to go cheap with everyone.

It’s all part of the modern, constant news cycle. I’ve probably ranted on this before, but this might be a case where the old days were better. There would be a gap when all the information could be gathered before it was put into print, or on the air. It’s nice to have news instantly, but it is also nice to have accurate news. King insists his story is all you need and is 100% accurate. Maybe it is.

In any event, the Patriots and Brady both reached a mutually beneficial agreement. Maybe that’s all that needs to be said. However, there are columns to be written, and hours of on-air time to be filled. So everything is dissected and analyzed ad naseum.


A couple of updates on former Boston TV sportscasters:

Former WBZ sports director and anchor Bob Lobel has had a rough go of it in the last several years. In his column today for GoLocalWorcester, Lobel writes that “For the past four years, with three back surgeries and two broken femur bone heads from falls, I cannot walk without the aid of crutches. It means I can’t stand up without assistance.”

Yesterday, Frank Shorr of The Sports Institute at Boston University reported that former Boston sportscaster Bill O’Connell, who worked at WCVB and on Channels 7 and 56 among others, had passed away in Florida.

If you don’t remember O’Connell, here are some clips from his time on the air.


14 thoughts on “Brady Contract Reaction Typical of Modern Media

  1. How predictable was it that Mazz would show up and quote the Borges gospel on air? He’s been at his most insufferable this week. For me, this has also spotlighted a lacking issue with Felger — when challenged, and when he disagrees with something Mazz says, he backs off. Every few minutes he’ll say “I disagree,” but he doesn’t engage him. He just lets him go for minutes on end — like they’re talking at one another instead of having a dialogue. It makes for painful talk radio.


  2. I find it comical how mediots like Peter King think they should get a medal for being, “first with the story”…other than them, WHO CARES?….whether it’s a trade, a contract or any other story, I’m pretty sure I’ll find out about it eventually….


    1. I was thinking the same thing. Is it only the sports media that does this? I mean, you never hear traditional news report a story and give props to the competition for covering it first.


  3. My question is why do certain media members (Mike Florio in this instance) allow themselves to be manipulated by Agents or Reps or Players or Owners? I understand they will claim it is all about access but at some level you would think journalistic integrity would be more important to them than water carrying. So an agent complains that Brady took less money and this will hurt his specific QB client (I am guessing it is Joe Linta complaining about his Flacco negotiations)…does Florio think to ask the follow up…”with the cap the way that it is with Brady taking less that means there is more money for other players like Wes Welker or Sebastian Vollmer? Do you as an agent understand that the in the aggregate the Patriots spend to the Cap each year? If so why would Brady’s specific contract hurt the league?”

    One of the things the twitter age has brought is a lack of quality news. As Bruce pointed out there is little time to check information or process it…instead it is tossed out for the subscriber to break down. In doing so there is so much noise that it is hard to filter through to the actual news. Let me explain…wait there is not time…let me sum up …the speculation is Brady redid his deal specifically so there would be money to sign Welker. The problem is this is just speculation. What if the Pats let Welker and Lloyd walk and instead sign Dwayne Bowe and Mike Wallace, sliding Hernandez into Welker’s spot and going with Gronk and Ballard as their TE’s? Would that be a more potent offense and in theory a better use of Brady’s money because they got faster, taller and more Physical at WR which will also help the running game? I can make an argument that it would be…but again it is supposition. Getting beat guys to actually discover and report information is harder and harder these days.


    1. On the lack of reporting relative to maintaining access, LTD, Iook only at the quality of reporting in politics, government and business if you want to see that occurring even more blatantly.


  4. For years Michael Jordan accepted a nominal salary as a ways to keep the Bulls under the salary cap, and Horace Grant (aka Ryne Sandberg’s wife-f’er) and Scottie Pippen (aka don’t put me in if I don’t get the last shot) had to stay in line, because what were they gonna do, tell the world they was worth more than Jordan? Plus Jordan got millions and millions from Nike because we wanted to be like Mike, so he needed the salary like I needed to kill more people. So what Tommy Boy’s doin ain’t no big thing. Just standard practice for a stud.


  5. You make some good points on the how media is disseminated now.

    But you know what as with just about everything else in life it all comes down to the consumer.
    It is our fault that media is sold as it is now.
    We need everything now and on our smartphones.
    We can’t wait for the 6 o’clock news or old school Sportscenter to tell us for the millionth time about some trade rumor. No we need the never ending ticker at the bottom of the screen.
    It’s our insatiable appetite for sports information that has rotted the whole information gathering process.

    If the consumer didn’t demand instant news there wouldn’t be all this misinformation all over the media.
    Integrity and getting your info correct doesn’t pay the bills anymore.
    Only being first and controversial is what drives ratings,views,hits,ect.
    Whatever they need to go back to advertisers and show people are looking at their product…bottom line.
    You have to starve the beast.


  6. Very sorry to hear about Bill O’Connell. Not to sound too much like a “get off my lawn” old fart, but I came of age watching him and fellow class act Don Gillis report sports on Boston TV — way back in the pre-cable, pre-Internet, pre-mobile devices dark ages — when catching the nightly highlights on their sportscasts was must viewing.


Comments are closed.