In the interview Goodell maintains that he is “100 percent certain that he got Deflategate right” and proudly touts his “independent investigation.”
Then on last night’s broadcast, when it came time for Al Michaels and Cris Collinsworth to discuss Brady’s suspension and the “end” of deflategate, these were pretty much their comments summing up the affair:
Michaels: It was boring.
Collinsworth: It was bad for the league. And you know, I think it might’ve been as much about the commissioner having sole authority over disciplinary matters.
And then they waved to Brady on TV, laughed and moved on.
Very careful not to say anything negative about Goodell, the Dear Leader.
Belichick mismanaged the clock, the offensive line sucked, Bennett is a lazy dog!
Judging by Twitter, those were the hottakes coming out of the CSNNE studios following the game last night.
I’m glad I didn’t switch over to see for myself.
Despite the win, it might be a good time to largely avoid sports talk radio as well. (Of course, when isn’t a good time to avoid it?)
Here are a few of the top links covering last night:
To me, the title is a bit misleading, because I see it more as a look inside the minds of those working the Patriots beat, and what their agendas and predispositions are towards the Patriots coach.
The article leads off with Dave Brown, the Concord Monitor writer, who made himself the center of attention the first days of camp with his questions about Tom Brady’s job and the insinuation that if Jimmy Garoppolo plays well, Belichick might have a tough choice to make. It was clear at the time that Brown was looking for an angle to back Belichick into a corner. Brown confirms it here, saying:
So for the last eight years, I’ve been thinking: ‘Is there a way to get [Belichick] off his game plan?
Really? For eight years you’ve been looking for the opportunity to trip up the coach of the team you’re supposed to be covering? Sounds a little obsessive to me.
Next up is Tom E Curran, who disputes the narrative that “Belichick doesn’t answer questions and is a prick” which seems to be the national view of the Patriots coach. Yet, as Curran notes, there are always several times during the season when Belichick goes expansive on a topic, and the same people act like it is a unique episode because it is contrary to their Belichick narrative.
After a look at the first week of Deflategate and how Belichick handled that week, including his masterful Saturday press conference in which he played scientist (and in retrospect was largely correct about everything he said.), Curran acknowledged the skill with which Belichick handled that week:
“Nobody, in my opinion, is more instinctive than Belichick at reading what needs to be done,” Curran says. “You have this guy employing the Ideal Gas Law, using it, and taking attention away that day as his team was going to the Super Bowl, and then not talking about it again. It was masterful.”
Mike Giardi comes on stage next, showing himself to be the good media soldier, willing to jump on the grenade and sacrifice himself for his media colleagues. We’re talking of course about the press conference after the 2014 Kansas City game in which Giardi asked Belichick if the QB position was going to be evaluated that week. Giardi says:
That was one of those days where we felt like we had to ask the question, and the result was fairly predictable. But it had to be asked anyway.
That will be a line in the oral history of the Kansas City press conference.
I’ve never understood this mindset about the questioning having to be asked. It reminds me of the quote usually attributed to Albert Einstein about how insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
It had to be asked. That’s usually the response of someone who asks an obvious question when they are challenged about it.
What does that mean? Why did it HAVE to be asked? You’re not grilling a Presidential candidate here on foreign policy. It feels like a misplaced sense of importance is at play here.
The Boston Globe‘s Ben Volin steps up next and has a similar sentiment to Dave Brown.
you can’t let him win, because we have a job to do, too
Ben, your job is covering football. Maybe focusing on that rather than whether you “won” a press conference with the head coach might serve you and your readers better.
I mean, look at that mindset – you can’t let him win – you’re not in a war, or a contest here. The adversarial view isn’t going to work.
Shalise Manza Young is another who has frosty feelings for Belichick. Despite acknowledging that for almost her entire time on the beat, Belichick treated her professionally, she holds a grudge over being correctly publicly by the coach.
“When you want to try to demean me and put me down –– and I hate how this sounds, but I don’t know how to say it any other way –– all of the stories I had broken over the years and none of them had ever been proven wrong, and now all of a sudden I have hundreds of people telling me I’m garbage because he came out with a statement saying I wrote something that was incorrect? It was a lot to handle. And I thought it was really shady and really underhanded,” she says.
Apparently it doesn’t matter until he’s gone. Then you can dish.
A story on the Patriots media would not be complete without Ron Borges.
According to Reimer “it’s not his annoyance with the press that Borges takes issue with, but the apparent enjoyment he receives from humiliating those who cross his path.”
I think the technical term for that is “not suffering fools gladly.” Borges then throws this gem out:
Many of the people who are so enthusiastic about how Bill Belichick operates, if they were working for him, their asses would be in the HR department in about 15 minutes. All of the things they’re cheering, they wouldn’t like it. They’d be crying about it,
The only people crying about things here are the media. Borges winds things down with a statement about the utter otioseness of sports media:
if you win, the writers can’t hurt you, and if you lose, the writers can’t help you.
I mentioned last week about the WBZ preseason telecasts. Watching other preseason telecasts around the league, it’s striking to me how different the Patriots’ broadcasts are. Most teams seem to hire an established NFL announcer and analyst for the preseason, the Patriots sort of used to do this when they used Don Criqui and Randy Cross – who weren’t exactly at the top of their game.
I applaud the Patriots for trying something different. But when I see some of the other preseason broadcast teams, I realize the gap in quality.
All that said, the overwhelmingly negative atmosphere of Boston sports radio and television has made me appreciate guys like Steve Burton and Dan Roche more than I have in the past. They may be awkward at times, but I know I’m not going to be trolled, and that they’re good people who enjoy what they’re doing.
The Red Sox must have the most gut-punch losses of any playoff contending team. It is astounding, it really is, yet there they sit, tied with the Blue Jays atop the AL East.
Imagine where they’d be with someone other than John Farrell as the manager. At least that’s the hot take of this season. Some minor (and a few major) sports media members in town have made crucifying Farrell for every loss into a personal mantra.
Second-guessing the manager is a time-honored tradition, especially in Boston, but the constant criticism here by some sound more like efforts to establish hottake bona fides.
Speaking of hottakes, the half-hearted effort to generate some sort of quarterback controversy, or rift between Tom Brady and Bill Belichick and Jimmy Garoppolo are nonsensical. The alleged evidence being that Brady has been distant, grouchy, generally a little less genial than we’re used to.
Why shouldn’t he be? Isn’t being pissed off and angry exactly how we want him to be right now? The guy just got railroaded by the NFL, suspended for a quarter of the season, while guys like Le’Veon Bell get their suspensions reduced, and serial wife beaters like Josh Brown can get suspended for just a game.
The Brown case is especially infuriating as the pious John Mara who apparently is one of the puppet masters behind Roger Goodell and the case against Brady, hypocritically brushed off the allegations against Brown because of not having sufficient evidence.
John Mara, 9/10/14, and this week. This guy led the charge in making sure Goodell nailed Brady despite no evidence. pic.twitter.com/bNc5Y6HVoi
This meshes with what I had been told, which was that he flat-out quit.
While Dennis definitely had his flaws, he was infinitely a better host than Gary Tanguay, who seems to be the lined-up replacement. (Please no.)
The Patriots play their second preseason game tonight, against the Chicago Bears, whom they have scrapped with in joint practices this week.
The preseason broadcasts remain a bit of a disjointed mess. I like all the people involved on the telecasts, but they’re not in great roles. I appreciate Dan Roche for his positive outlook on sports – a refreshing alternative in a sea of negative pundits, but he’s not a play-by-play guy, or whatever facilitating role he is expected to perform on these broadcasts. Christian Fauria is not a great a analyst. He’d be better as the sideline guy where he can be be Tony Siragusa Jr. Matt Chatham would be better as the booth analyst.
I’m never sure when they’re tossing to the PFW guys, or what they’re expected to contribute to the telecasts.
The only shame of it is that it probably means more Gary Tanguay foisted upon us.
If John Dennis is indeed done with the morning show at WEEI, it is the end of an era, the Dennis and Callahan program was the last show from WEEI’s heyday which had its original hosts remaining intact.
At their best, Dennis and Gerry Callahan (with or without Kirk Minihane) provided a smart, snappy program which always carried an edge. At their worst, they were bickering, angry, borderline hateful men who could force a dial change faster than anyone else in town not named Tony Massarotti.
In a way, it is rather sad and pathetic that it has come down to this. John Dennis, who has spent much of his media career as a bully to to his co-workers, can’t get along with his co-hosts, publicly threatens to beat them up, and then disappears, perhaps for good.
There’s no complicated legacy at play here.
The world got another close up view of the disaster which is the NFL Ops department last night as the annual Hall of Fame game which kicks off the preseason for the league was cancelled due to unsafe field conditions.
I’ve refrained from knocking David Price thus far, knowing that he’ll be better next year than this year, but man, he’s been a tremendous disappointment this season. To his credit, he’ll admit the same, but things are not improving.
It's hard to make a playoff run when you're losing with your ace on the mound. Entering today, Red Sox are 3-9 in Price's last 12 starts.
It’s also confirmation that Shaughnessy has no real interest in sports.
In 1986, when Mookie Wilson’s grounder rolled through Bill Buckner’s legs, Dan Shaughnessy felt a familiar sensation: nothing. Here was a play so awful that it seemed — as Shaughnessy would lucratively suggest — cosmically directed. Yet as he perched in the Shea Stadium press box, Shaughnessy was unmoved. Without a pang, he put aside the feature he was writing about Dave Henderson and changed course.
Yes, Shaughnessy is just as narcissistic as the headline would lead you to believe. Rather than reflecting about the moment, Shaughnessy thinks about himself.
“What does this mean for my work and my travel and my book?” he continued. “What does this mean next spring, and how we’re going to have to cover these guys? It’s not about, Oh my god, the team of my youth was just denied winning the World Series. None of that. … I always say, ‘I’m rooting for myself.’”
I suppose there are points for honesty there, but he can’t resist twisting the knife, even in an interview. When asked what moments did bring him pleasure and move him, he mentioned a couple events.
Despite what you may have heard, Dan Shaughnessy was not inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame this weekend. He was given the J.G. Taylor Spink Award, presented at the Baseball Hall of Fame, and will be recognized in the media exhibit at the Hall.
Oh, but it’s just semantics, right? I hate Dan Shaughnessy so I need to discredit him and take this tremendous honor which has been bestowed upon him and minimize it. Probably because I’m jealous or something, I forget what exactly.
(For those who apparently didn’t get the above paragraph. I don’t “hate” Shaughnessy. I’m accused of it often, so I took that perception and projected it into that statement.)
But one of the CENTRAL TENETS of our profession is accuracy, and it’s just wildly inaccurate for a Spink Award winner to describe himself as a Hall of Famer, or to say he’s in the non-existent “writer’s wing” of the Hall of Fame.
Some do try to set the record straight:
Just as a reminder, there no "writer's wing" at the Hall of Fame. Writers aren't inducted. There's a media exhibit. https://t.co/wx4eVItKyY
That’s all. So this “Hall of Fame” award is the BBWAA voting for a BBWAA member. Only once has a non-BBWAA writer received the award, and that was Roger Angell in 2014. Now if any writer deserved to be inducted in the Baseball Hall of Fame, it might be Roger Angell. But since Angell wasn’t a member of the precious BBWAA they didn’t honor him with the Spink Award until he was 94 years old.
Of course, in 2011 they honored Bill Conlin, six months before he resigned following multiple accusations of child-molestation. Nice timing.
Aside: How has Roger Kahn not been recognized yet? Oh, he’s not a member of the BBWAA.
Here’s more on the award from the actual Baseball Hall of Fame website:
The award is voted upon annually by the BBWAA, via a meeting and subsequent “show of hands” either at the preceding year’s World Series or Winter Meetings. A nominee is recommended by the BBWAA’s Screening Committee prior to the meeting. Each award recipient (not to be confused with an inductee) is presented with a certificate during Hall of Fame Weekend and is recognized in the “Scribes & Mikemen” exhibit in the Library of the National Baseball Hall of Fame.
From now on though, be prepared to hear Shaughnessy introduced as Hall of Fame writer Dan Shaughnessy. (and die a little inside each time.)
So what about these “meritorious contributions to baseball” that Shaughnessy has provided?
You mean like the Curse of the Bambino? That qualifies? Apparently so. If you were around prior to 2004, you remember how much that thing was shoved down our throats. Because of his book(s) Shaughnessy had an active interest in the Red Sox losing at the end of each season in the most painful way possible. He profited from it.
From his work as a beat writer? As a day-to-day baseball beat writer, he was actually not on the job all that long. How many people remember him for that?
Well, OK, he’s been around a long time, I guess. Is this a longevity award?
Lets look at what the BBWAA thought made Shaughnessy worthy of this honor. Check out their page on him. (That’s a really bad WordPress website guys. Maybe check out WordPress.com VIP?)
Here’s the pertinent part:
Shaughnessy, 62, came to the Globe in 1981 after four years of covering baseball for the Baltimore Evening Sun and Washington Star. The Holy Cross College graduate has covered more than 35 spring trainings and 25 World Series. Shaughnessy has written 12 books, nine of them on baseball, notably Curse of the Bambino. He also popularized the phrase, “Red Sox Nation.”
Through his columns, Dan has taken on owners, front offices, managers, coaches and players alike in pertinent issues through good times and bad with the Red Sox. He has covered three championship Red Sox teams, the heartbreaking 1986 season and wrote some of the most eloquent prose in 2004 after Boston ended its 86-year title drought.
In 2006, Shaughnessy wrote a column which forced Theo Epstein to resign as Red Sox general manager. Dan wrote a book on high school baseball; covered high school, NCAA and Cape Cod League baseball, and delivered talks on baseball at the Norman Rockwell Museum and the Smithsonian Institute in Washington, D.C. Shaughnessy was the last writer to interview Ted Williams, in 2002, and had exclusive access to Williams in his final years.
Ah yes, his bravery in taking on owners (but not John Henry, he’s his boss) front offices (but not Larry Lucchino, he’s his source) managers (but not Terry Francona, he wrote a book with him) coaches (like who? Wendell “send em in” Kim?) and players (mostly Dominicans.)
He wrote eloquent prose? When? Has anyone ever read a Shaughnessy column and been awestruck by his craftsmanship with words? Just because the Globe put his columns during the 2004 postseason the front page of the paper didn’t make them eloquent.
In 2006, Shaughnessy wrote a column which forced Theo Epstein to resign as Red Sox general manager.
This is stated as if this was an accomplishment! The column was ghostwritten by Larry Lucchino. Epstein resigned because it was clear to him that Lucchino had gone to Shaughnessy, said these things, and acted like Epstein’s new contract was a done deal. It doesn’t even read like a typical Shaughnessy column. But this gets put on his “Hall of Fame” resume?
Epstein didn’t resign out of shame because of something Shaughnessy wrote exposing him. He resigned out of disgust. This is supposedly a feather in Dan’s cap?
Dan wrote a book on high school baseball – to be more accurate, the book was about his son.
Shaughnessy was the last writer to interview Ted Williams, in 2002, and had exclusive access to Williams in his final years.
Why was that? Because Shaughnessy brokered a peace with the duplicitous John Henry Williams, who had taken over his father’s life. Dan would get exclusive access to Ted in exchange for not being critical of what JHW was doing to his father and his business decisions. Brave, indeed.
All that is worthy of being honored at the Hall of Fame?
In recent years Dan Shaughnessy has had no aim other than to make the life of Boston sports fans miserable – during the greatest period of sports success this city has ever seen.
Does that qualify as a “meritorious contributions to baseball?”
It’s worth keeping in mind that the J.G. Taylor Spink Award is really just a media award given out by the media. It doesn’t really have anything to do with the Hall of Fame, other than that is where the award is given, and the recipient will remembered in the media exhibit.
If you look through the names of the writers who have received this award, many of them are all-time greats. Ring Lardner, Grantland Rice, Damon Runyon, Shirley Povich, Red Smith, Dick Young, Jim Murray, Sam Lacey, Jerome Holtzman, Peter Gammons, Angell.
Now Dan Shaughnessy.
Forgive me if I don’t fawn over him, or call him a “Hall of Famer.”
Kevin Durant would’ve been fun to watch here in Boston. Kevin Durant will be very fun to watch with the Warriors.
The former Thunder star disappointed Boston fans when he announced yesterday that he was choosing to join the Golden State Warriors, a team that won a league record 73 games but lost in the NBA finals to LeBron James and the Cleveland Cavaliers.
Durant is under criticism in some corners for choosing to go to a team that already has three established stars, with the knock being that should the Warriors win the NBA title, Durant will have just tagged along for the ride, rather than taking a team on his own to the championship.
I don’t really buy into that. If all Durant wants is to win, and to win right away, Golden State was the choice. This doesn’t feel the same to me as when superfriends LeBron, Wade and Bosh teamed up in Miami. Durant was also smart in signing the two year deal with the option after one, not only for the raise he’ll be able to command next offseason, but also in case this just doesn’t work out.
It’s tough to swallow as a Celtics fan, but I can’t get too upset over this.
The Celtics still have more building to do. Al Horford is a nice piece and will make them better, but he’s not the star they need to really challenge the Cavs in the East. They need more shooting, though the youngsters put on quite a show in that area in last night’s Summer League game.
The extremist factions of the Boston sports media will paint this as another failed offseason for Danny Ainge and his “assets.” They can be ignored on this topic, just as you would on many of their other precious opinions.
The Brady en banc decision should be coming down any day now. I was optimistic that the court would at least order the NFL to respond, but my hopes are going down in that regard. I now think it is Supreme Court or bust, and I think Brady’s team believes that as well, which why Ted Olson was brought on in the first place.
The calls for John Farrell’s head on certain sports radio shows has been loud and adamant. My thoughts on Farrell is that in-game decisions, which is the most visible part of his job, is also his weakest area. I don’t know this for sure, but my sense is that Farrell is strong in the other aspects of the job, the parts that aren’t seen by the media and fans. This could explain why he’s hung onto this job through multiple last-place finishes.
Local team has a ton of draft picks shrewdly acquired through various trades.
Lots of anticipation and speculation as to what local team should do with picks.
Local GM with Championship experience makes draft selections based on players he and his scouts like.
Internet scouts and airchair GMs decry picks because they’re not in line with their own rankings and expectations.
Same people shout that trades should be made, ANY TRADE.
When trade IS made, it involves future picks, not players.
TV analysts left scrambling for highlights of said picks because they’re being taken out of the generally prescribed order.
Fanz and media are generally underwhelmed by results.
Following the NBA and NFL drafts on Twitter can be one of the most frustrating experiences ever. Instant judgment! Should’ve done THIS instead! Oh, Player X is still on the board, they’re foolish not to take him! WHAT AN AWFUL PICK!
Or the one spilling over into today: DANNY AINGE OVERRATED HIS ASSETS! HE’S TAKING THE FANS PATIENCE FOR GRANTED.
Ah well. What can you do?
I’m largely in agreement with Chad Finn today on Mike Adams:
I was not a fan of the Mike Adams schtick in the early days, but recently as the sports radio landscape became more and more negative, panic-mongering and hot-takez-oriented, I began to appreciate the show more.
After years of trashing “Pedro the punk,” Manny Ramirez’s lack of hustle, David Ortiz’s annual requests for a new contact, the sports radio airwaves have a new Dominican target: Hanley Ramirez, who has been a steady topic on the WEEI mid-day show. For some reason, the affable, goofy Christian Fauria, really hates Hanley.
It couldn’t be an act, could it?
Dan Shaughnessy rips the Patriots. Rinse. Repeat.
Dan Shaughnessy shows he is clueless (or more likely willfully obtuse and ignorant) about Deflategate. Let’s break down his most idiotic statement from yesterday and put it on blast:
3. Love the high-powered legal frauds who had no issue with other Goodell punishments, then expressed outrage in amicus briefs (solicited by the Patriots) in the name of justice and labor fairness . . . all because it was Tom Brady.
This is awesomely stupid. The best known arbitrator in the country, Kenneth Feinberg is a “high-powered legal fraud?” So the former Solicitor General of the United States, Ted Olsen is a “high-powered legal fraud” as well because he recently joined Brady’s fight?
Even if the Patriots did solicit the amicus briefs, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that, the parties who submitted them could’ve refused, but chose to do so.
They had no issue with other Goodell punishments because the NFL lost those cases and Goodell got smacked around by Judges, who made specific reference to his dishonesty.
And sure, what Ray Rice and Adrian Peterson did and their punishments are exactly like what Tom Brady is accused of doing. If Shaughnessy can’t see the difference, he’s…well, we know what he is.
Bill Simmons is wildly rich and famous. So why does he have to keep playing the diva and crying about past slights?
This from the guy who got snubbed at a breakfast 20 years ago and has used every opportunity since that day to take it out on the Krafts.
Why am I talking about Shaughnessy? He’s irrelevant, right?