Updated - Gordon Started - Was: Josh Gordon Disciplined For MNF - Miss A Few Series (1 Viewer)

[Joe Bryant]

From Boston.com

When Gordon was asked about the reported discipline after the game, he directed the questions to coach Bill Belichick.

“You know what, that’s gonna be a question you’re going to have to ask coach about,” he said. “But as it relates to the game, I was available, so that’s a plus.”

The 27-year-old noted he was not sure what reports had been published.

“I gotta check on everything, you know,” Gordon said. “I’m not too sure about what’s out there myself, I couldn’t even give you an answer.”

The Patriots traded a fifth-round pick to the Cleveland Browns for the wide receiver in September. Gordon has been suspended multiple times for substance abuse issues, and showed up late to a Browns team meeting two days before the team sent him to New England. Since Gordon arrived in Foxborough, the Patriots have lauded his ability to pick up the playbook and thanked Cleveland for moving on from the talented wideout.

Belichick was also asked about the reported discipline, but gave no further insight into the incident.

“I don’t know,” he said. “You’d have to talk to whoever wrote that. I have no idea.”




3

 

[BassNBrew]

Changing projections for MNF is an interesting question and one we've kicked around. As a general rule, we try not to stick to what we had Sunday afternoon as it doesn't seem fair to customers to tell them something and they lock a roster Sunday afternoon and then on Monday we change our mind and they can't do anything about it. Although for the guys that had two options to choose from in a Monday night game, I can see how that might be something to consider. We'll take a look there. 

Just realize that you have customers paying a surcharge who are playing dfs slates that are MNF only or MNF/TNF only.

 

[BassNBrew]

Changing projections for MNF is an interesting question and one we've kicked around. As a general rule, we try not to stick to what we had Sunday afternoon as it doesn't seem fair to customers to tell them something and they lock a roster Sunday afternoon and then on Monday we change our mind and they can't do anything about it. Although for the guys that had two options to choose from in a Monday night game, I can see how that might be something to consider. We'll take a look there. 

Just realize that you have customers paying a surcharge who are playing dfs slates that are MNF only or MNF/TNF only.

 

[Hairy Snowman]

In fact, I want any news from a credible source shared here as long as you're giving the source.

I even am ok with news from just about any source as long as the poster is 100% clear about the source. If your brother "knows a guy" in the organization and heard something, share that here as long as you're crystal clear it's coming from your "brother who knows a guy". That's how we're going to operate here. 

Someone can get into a lot of trouble for something like that.  I remember this one time a linebacker was being traded to Washington....

 

[Joe Bryant]

Someone can get into a lot of trouble for something like that. 

Exactly how?

 

[Joe Bryant]

Just realize that you have customers paying a surcharge who are playing dfs slates that are MNF only or MNF/TNF only.

Fully realize it. 

It's why we might consider a change and have to deal with the people yelling for Season Long. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

Posting threads about unsubstantiated rumors used to be taboo around here.

Interestingly enough, the projections didn't change for staff.  Were they getting info from different sources or is it SOP to punt the Monday night games?

Are you saying you don't want to see reports from Ian Rapoport discussed on this board?

 

[Pip's Invitation]

Thanks @Pip's Invitation

Do you have a list of the "fake news" stories by Rapoport he posted where nobody else went along? 

He often predicts things like playing time and will sometimes miss for sure. I don't recall him ever being accused of reporting fake news though. What stories are you talking about?

I don't have time to keep a log of these things, but it's happened enough that for a few years now, I've said to myself -- and posted on here when it's happened -- that I don't believe anything reported by Rapoport until someone else confirms it. If the search function here were better, I might be able to find more examples of my previous posts warning about him. 

The item that started on me with this train of thought was his report that a Jimmy Graham injury in 2015 or so was much worse than it actually was. The team and all the other reporters said it was minor, Rapoport said it was going to cost him at least a few weeks, and this site and others went nuts over the Rapoport report despite there being no corroboration for it. It turned out everyone else was right and Rapoport was probably just engaging in clickbaiting. 

Also keep in mind that the NFL Network is not a journalistic organization. They exist to promote the league, not to provide unbiased reporting about it. They care about attention. They don't care about accuracy as long as Rapoport isn't writing anything libelous. 

I don't think the solution is to not mention anything Rapoport reports. I think it is to mention that his report has not been independently confirmed when that is the case. 

 

[Elevencents]

It's really sad. You have people who are incredibly down on their luck who just get kicked over and over when they're down but do everything humanly possible to survive. Then you have people like JG who are just given dozens of chances and continue to blow it. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

I don't have time to keep a log of these things, but it's happened enough that for a few years now, I've said to myself -- and posted on here when it's happened -- that I don't believe anything reported by Rapoport until someone else confirms it. If the search function here were better, I might be able to find more examples of my previous posts warning about him. 

The item that started on me with this train of thought was his report that a Jimmy Graham injury in 2015 or so was much worse than it actually was. The team and all the other reporters said it was minor, Rapoport said it was going to cost him at least a few weeks, and this site and others went nuts over the Rapoport report despite there being no corroboration for it. It turned out everyone else was right and Rapoport was probably just engaging in clickbaiting. 

Also keep in mind that the NFL Network is not a journalistic organization. They exist to promote the league, not to provide unbiased reporting about it. They care about attention. They don't care about accuracy as long as Rapoport isn't writing anything libelous. 

I don't think the solution is to not mention anything Rapoport reports. I think it is to mention that his report has not been independently confirmed when that is the case. 

Thanks.

And to be clear, are you saying Rapoport intentionally is lying on stories with "fake news"? Or that he fully believed a story to be true and what he was predicting turned out not to happen? That's a giant distinction. To accuse some of intentionally lying with fake news is strong.  If you get some specifics on "fake news", I'd love to see them posted here.

And for sure, it's always the right thing to check to see if anyone else is reporting the same info. That often is not the case if it's truly a scoop. But that's good to know as well. 

Everyone has different weights they put on reporters. For me, I put Adam Schefter and Ian Rapoport at the very top for integrity and credibility. They're not perfect. But I don't know of two reporters I look to more often and trust more.

 

[nittanylion]

A bit of a tangent, but Mike Florio has been/is currently notorious for throwing poop at a wall to see what sticks. It really annoys me to see him get air time on major media. Then again, I already have a low opinion of mainstream media, which probably doesn't help...but if my memory servers me well, I'm fairly certain that I'm far from the only one  around these parts that casts the fisheye at anything emanating from Pro Football Talk, and doesn't acknowledge it's validity until other sources start confirming.

 

[Rove!]

reminds me of the year where rumors were spread saying that NE was going to cut Randy Moss and then he not only makes the team, he starts and he catches loads of TD.....I wonder if Belichick likes to create fake news to mess with opponents....

 

[BassNBrew]

Fully realize it. 

It's why we might consider a change and have to deal with the people yelling for Season Long. 

You could update the projections but not publish them to the site on the season long side but have them roll into the optimizer.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I wonder if Belichick likes to create fake news to mess with opponents....




1

I'd be lying if I said I hadn't wondered the same. I don't think he does. But I also don't know for sure...

 

[BassNBrew]

Are you saying you don't want to see reports from Ian Rapoport discussed on this board?

@Joe Bryant I'm going to offer you an apology.  I was just a little salty from the time I spent deconstructing my lineups and reconstructing them to account for JGs snaps going to other Pats.  Also had a long conversation with my co-owner about dropping Gordon for a better option last night (which we didn't do).  Shouldn't shoot the messenger.  My bad.

 

[Joe Bryant]

@Joe Bryant I'm going to offer you an apology.  I was just a little salty from the time I spent deconstructing my lineups and reconstructing them to account for JGs snaps going to other Pats.  Also had a long conversation with my co-owner about dropping Gordon for a better option last night (which we didn't do).  Shouldn't shoot the messenger.  My bad.

All good Buddy. No worries.

 

[Pip's Invitation]

Thanks.

And to be clear, are you saying Rapoport intentionally is lying on stories with "fake news"? Or that he fully believed a story to be true and what he was predicting turned out not to happen? That's a giant distinction. To accuse some of intentionally lying with fake news is strong.  If you get some specifics on "fake news", I'd love to see them posted here.

And for sure, it's always the right thing to check to see if anyone else is reporting the same info. That often is not the case if it's truly a scoop. But that's good to know as well. 

Everyone has different weights they put on reporters. For me, I put Adam Schefter and Ian Rapoport at the very top for integrity and credibility. They're not perfect. But I don't know of two reporters I look to more often and trust more.

I have no way of knowing whether he is making things up out of whole cloth or is reporting misinformation that he is given without verifying it. 

I suspect something closer to the latter is true. He seems to be a strong example of the current journalism climate where it is much more important to be first - or to have the hottest take - than to be right. And as I said earlier, it is unlikely he is getting any incentive to change from his bosses because his employer is not a journalistic institution. 

But this is all theory. We don’t get to see the “sausage made,” so we have no way of knowing for sure. I’ve just seen enough examples where he was on an island and way off that I’ve decided to take everything he writes with a grain of salt. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

I have no way of knowing whether he is making things up out of whole cloth or is reporting misinformation that he is given without verifying it. 

I suspect something closer to the latter is true. He seems to be a strong example of the current journalism climate where it is much more important to be first - or to have the hottest take - than to be right. And as I said earlier, it is unlikely he is getting any incentive to change from his bosses because his employer is not a journalistic institution. 

But this is all theory. We don’t get to see the “sausage made,” so we have no way of knowing for sure. I’ve just seen enough examples where he was on an island and way off that I’ve decided to take everything he writes with a grain of salt. 




 

I agree we can't know for sure. I'll disagree with you sharply though in that I don't "suspect something closer to the latter is true". If he misses something, I'd bet the farm it's the latter where he just got bad info. I'd be floored if it were to be found he was making stuff up. 

He's one of the most respected people in NFL Media. And in my opinion, is one of the most accurate. 

I think it's super interesting you don't. For the future, please post when you see him get stuff wrong. I'd be interested to see. Maybe I'm just missing his misses. Thanks. 

 

[Hairy Snowman]

Are you saying you don't want to see reports from Ian Rapoport discussed on this board?

Oh, not at all.  I think you are doing a great job.  There is no reason why you should not report news that is sourced.  People are over reacting. 

Plus you have the trolls that are miserable to begin with and are just looking for a reason to try to needle you and complain.

ETA - the reference was to something I may have posted on your board 10+ years ago regarding a friend of a friend which did not go over well at all after the fact.  Who knew so many people read your boards... 

 

[Soulfly3]

Hey, does anyone else remember when Hue Jackson, who was fired THE SAME DAY AS THE PATS GAME, said Gordon would be benched for a while to start the opening game this season, and there he was on the first snap, on the field?

Kinda reminds me of yesterday. 

I was gonna post that before the game was even played, but thought to myself "nah, even SF3 has his limits on how hard he believes a HC can troll"

.... but nah. That was a giant homage/troll of Hue Jackson. 100%

 

[avina1]

Hey, does anyone else remember when Hue Jackson, who was fired THE SAME DAY AS THE PATS GAME, said Gordon would be benched for a while to start the opening game this season, and there he was on the first snap, on the field?

Kinda reminds me of yesterday. 

I was gonna post that before the game was even played, but thought to myself "nah, even SF3 has his limits on how hard he believes a HC can troll"

.... but nah. That was a giant homage/troll of Hue Jackson. 100%

thing is, Hue Jackson is an awful communicator and coach, and had a terrible relationship with Haley. It is entirely plausible that he failed to tell Haley strictly "don't start Gordon", and Haley, who wants to put his best offensive players out there to win, started Gordon.

 

[Arodin]

Maybe Bill is trolling the Browns.  Considering they accidentally started Gordon when he was supposed to be held out of the starting lineup.

Too bad all the Browns responsible were fired today before Bill could make his taunt stick.

Hey, does anyone else remember when Hue Jackson, who was fired THE SAME DAY AS THE PATS GAME, said Gordon would be benched for a while to start the opening game this season, and there he was on the first snap, on the field?

Kinda reminds me of yesterday. 

I was gonna post that before the game was even played, but thought to myself "nah, even SF3 has his limits on how hard he believes a HC can troll"

.... but nah. That was a giant homage/troll of Hue Jackson. 100%

Hmmm...actually yes, I do remember reading something like that at the time...

 

[Soulfly3]

stop copying me bro

 

[Cowboysfan8]

The next (first) time this bum goes off he'll be on my bench 

 

[jvdesigns2002]

It's also quite possible that BB decided to change Gordon's punishment last second because of the trade deadline.  If they were hypothetically in discussions for Tate/Demaryious--benching their stud WR who has a vast history of substance abuse and discliplinary issues one day before the trade deadline would give their potential trade partners far more leverage in any hypothetical deal.   Benching him would effectively be the Patriots cutting their noses off to spite their faces.     If I had to choose between trusting  Rapoports reporting or Gordons behavior--I'll take Rapoports reporting all day.   

 

[Hankmoody]

Changing projections for MNF is an interesting question and one we've kicked around. As a general rule, we try not to stick to what we had Sunday afternoon as it doesn't seem fair to customers to tell them something and they lock a roster Sunday afternoon and then on Monday we change our mind and they can't do anything about it. Although for the guys that had two options to choose from in a Monday night game, I can see how that might be something to consider. We'll take a look there. 

Unless something changes, I will 100% no question about it share a story from NFL.com's lead reporter, Ian Rapoport when it comes to a starting WR's playing time. Always. No question. If you think in any way shape or form we shouldn't relay information from someone like Rapoport, we'll have to disagree.

In fact, I want any news from a credible source shared here as long as you're giving the source.

I even am ok with news from just about any source as long as the poster is 100% clear about the source. If your brother "knows a guy" in the organization and heard something, share that here as long as you're crystal clear it's coming from your "brother who knows a guy". That's how we're going to operate here. 

I don't understand this.  Things change, and of course when they do you have to make updates.  If Gronkowski is downgraded to Out on Sunday morning I would hope to heck you wouldn't leave him projected with 15 points, that's far more deceptive.  I'd be livid if I were a paying customer and checked projections and saw him at 15 when he was known to be getting a 0.

It's not like those guys that are locked can do anything anyway.   Whether or not you update the projection they are still locked out, but at least you can keep the ones that still have options informed.  I get not updating things based on a new opinion, but if it's based on credible new information I would suggest you have an obligation to do so.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I don't understand this.  Things change, and of course when they do you have to make updates.  If Gronkowski is downgraded to Out on Sunday morning I would hope to heck you wouldn't leave him projected with 15 points, that's far more deceptive.  I'd be livid if I were a paying customer and checked projections and saw him at 15 when he was known to be getting a 0.

It's not like those guys that are locked can do anything anyway.   Whether or not you update the projection they are still locked out, but at least you can keep the ones that still have options informed.  I get not updating things based on a new opinion, but if it's based on credible new information I would suggest you have an obligation to do so.

Understood. We've updated in the past for situations like this but it hasn't been consistent. Working on dialing in a consistent approach with David, Sigmund and Maurile so everyone is on same page. 

 

[Pip's Invitation]

I agree we can't know for sure. I'll disagree with you sharply though in that I don't "suspect something closer to the latter is true". If he misses something, I'd bet the farm it's the latter where he just got bad info. I'd be floored if it were to be found he was making stuff up. 

I’m a little confused by this statement. I said I think “the latter” is more likely, in other words, that he’s passing on bad information rather than making it up. I don’t see what we disagree on.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I’m a little confused by this statement. I said I think “the latter” is more likely, in other words, that he’s passing on bad information rather than making it up. I don’t see what we disagree on.

You said of the two choices you "suspect something closer to the latter is true." I"m saying I'm as certain as one can possibly be the latter is true. 

And again, please post here the next time you see Rapoport posting "fake news".