Jump to content


The Robert Kraft Monopoly of the Truth


  • Please log in to reply
36 replies to this topic

#1 TheLynchTrain

TheLynchTrain

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 990 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 08:11 AM

“The top 25 players have received $700 million. How many Pro Bowls do any of you think, cumulatively, those 25 players have gone to? Anyone have a guess? Six. So cumulatively, the players that got $700 [million] – 25 players – so that tells you that the trend is going to signing young, up-and-coming players. There were 52 starters – and a starter is someone who plays more than eight games – who have been cut this year, and 41 of them are over 30 years old. I don’t think this has ever happened the same way in the league.” - Robert Kraft

I'm sure everyone saw Robert Kraft bemoaning the loss of Wes Welker earlier this week at the owner's meetings, crying how sad it is that little old Wesley isn't playing on his Patriots (on Bobby's terms of course). But that's not exactly what my thread's about. Did everyone see his rapid-fire answer about lessons learned from Free Agency this year? I think it impressed quite a few people who read it, including about every sportswriter in America. It seems like every column I've read this week has a portion of the quote thrown in.

Except I'm calling it BS. Now don't get me wrong - I don't argue with the underlying trend - younger, unproven players getting money, older proven more expensive players getting the axe. Who can argue with that? But I think the numbers he's using are complete BS. Twenty five players making six pro bowls? What Free Agent list are you looking at? Mike Wallace (27 mil guar. - 1 Pro Bowl), Jermon Bushrod (22.5 mil guar. - 2 Pro Bowls), Greg Jennings (18 mil - 2 Pro Bowls) and Jake Long (16 mil gaur. - 4 Pro Bowls) would like to disagree with that assertion.

Where the hell are the sportswriters to call out these numbers? And since when has free agency not been about going after younger unproven talent and cutting older proven talent? Is Robert Kraft that reverent in NFL media circles that we can just parrot whatever he says and that's gold? I counted four players with big money guarantees, all of whom I assume would be in the top 25. I would argue that there's probably another six pro bowls in that top 25 somewhere. I would take a gander that he also made up the 700 million number.

So anyone out there with better googling skills than me find a list with the top 25 contracts? I've looked long and hard to no avail. I would really like to prove this bastard wrong.

I'll say also that Stephen Jackson (4 mil guar. - 3 Pro Bowls) and Wes Welker (6 mil guar - 4 Pro Bowls) might have an very slim chance at this top 25 list, since FA was such a bust this year. I left them off for this reason. If anything, I think both signings point to the bargains you can get in Free Agency this year than years past.

#2 jboyst62

jboyst62

    Hall of Farmer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,346 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 08:13 AM

It is not efficient any more to pay $3mm to a player for a year. It is not worth it to sign a guy for 3 years ans pay him $8mm.  The young new guys come cheaper, and in such a water down field of competition the entire league has been suffering in quality.

An example of this is Levitre. He went and inked a new deal with anew team. He will be beside a guy making $2 mm this year and replaced by a guy here making $600k...

Another point is that if there is a longer season there will be larger rosters and that means even more watered down play.

#3 BillsVet

BillsVet

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,476 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 08:30 AM

The Patriots didn't want Welker, knowing that players at positions like WR which require speed and quickness are wont to break down after 30-31 years old.  Belicheck and Floyd Reese decided retaining him at his price was not the most value added decision and let him sign elsewhere.  They then signed a lesser known and younger player who they believe can adequately replace Welker's production.

#4 BillnutinHouston

BillnutinHouston

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,688 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 08:45 AM

OP: I don't dispute your facts.

If you follow politics at all, you know that most of the media do not heavily critique or fact check major political figures when they grossly  misquote or distort facts to explain their positions.  Why then would you expect the sports media to fact check Bob Kraft?

Edited by BillnutinHouston, 20 March 2013 - 08:46 AM.


#5 Cash

Cash

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,803 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 08:54 AM

View PostTheLynchTrain, on 20 March 2013 - 08:11 AM, said:

“The top 25 players have received $700 million. How many Pro Bowls do any of you think, cumulatively, those 25 players have gone to? Anyone have a guess? Six. So cumulatively, the players that got $700 [million] – 25 players – so that tells you that the trend is going to signing young, up-and-coming players. There were 52 starters – and a starter is someone who plays more than eight games – who have been cut this year, and 41 of them are over 30 years old. I don’t think this has ever happened the same way in the league.” - Robert Kraft

I'm sure everyone saw Robert Kraft bemoaning the loss of Wes Welker earlier this week at the owner's meetings, crying how sad it is that little old Wesley isn't playing on his Patriots (on Bobby's terms of course). But that's not exactly what my thread's about. Did everyone see his rapid-fire answer about lessons learned from Free Agency this year? I think it impressed quite a few people who read it, including about every sportswriter in America. It seems like every column I've read this week has a portion of the quote thrown in.

Except I'm calling it BS. Now don't get me wrong - I don't argue with the underlying trend - younger, unproven players getting money, older proven more expensive players getting the axe. Who can argue with that? But I think the numbers he's using are complete BS. Twenty five players making six pro bowls? What Free Agent list are you looking at? Mike Wallace (27 mil guar. - 1 Pro Bowl), Jermon Bushrod (22.5 mil guar. - 2 Pro Bowls), Greg Jennings (18 mil - 2 Pro Bowls) and Jake Long (16 mil gaur. - 4 Pro Bowls) would like to disagree with that assertion.

Where the hell are the sportswriters to call out these numbers? And since when has free agency not been about going after younger unproven talent and cutting older proven talent? Is Robert Kraft that reverent in NFL media circles that we can just parrot whatever he says and that's gold? I counted four players with big money guarantees, all of whom I assume would be in the top 25. I would argue that there's probably another six pro bowls in that top 25 somewhere. I would take a gander that he also made up the 700 million number.

So anyone out there with better googling skills than me find a list with the top 25 contracts? I've looked long and hard to no avail. I would really like to prove this bastard wrong.

I'll say also that Stephen Jackson (4 mil guar. - 3 Pro Bowls) and Wes Welker (6 mil guar - 4 Pro Bowls) might have an very slim chance at this top 25 list, since FA was such a bust this year. I left them off for this reason. If anything, I think both signings point to the bargains you can get in Free Agency this year than years past.

Great post.  Kraft is a total douche.  But for some reason, everyone in the media is so enamored with his two-tone shirts that they  treat him with awe and reverence.  Most prominent men would be skewered for making a huge deal of their wives' deaths, then shacking up with a woman half their age a couple months later.  Not Kraft.

#6 Big C

Big C

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,783 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 08:58 AM

Is that 6 not counting players who didn't participate due to playing in the Super Bowl or injury?

#7 TheLynchTrain

TheLynchTrain

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 990 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 08:59 AM

View PostBillnutinHouston, on 20 March 2013 - 08:45 AM, said:

OP: I don't dispute your facts.

If you follow politics at all, you know that most of the media do not heavily critique or fact check major political figures when they grossly  misquote or distort facts to explain their positions.  Why then would you expect the sports media to fact check Bob Kraft?

You're correct, but I know for myself (and I'm sure you'd say the same) would never imagine putting someone else's numbers in any report I do for work without act least giving them a cursory check. When Kraft said it, I was at least skeptical, to say the least. How can at least 10 different sports writers (by my small count at least) simply trot out that statement without even a qualifier that those were Kraft's numbers and Kraft's alone?

And I also add, unlike politics, I am a complete partisan when it comes to football, so the fact that Kraft and not Major King Kong said it got me steamed  But this man is such a raging lying scumbag in my book that I had to say something. It seems like every time he opens his mouth he attempts to stretch the

View PostCash, on 20 March 2013 - 08:54 AM, said:

Great post.  Kraft is a total douche.  But for some reason, everyone in the media is so enamored with his two-tone shirts that they  treat him with awe and reverence.  Most prominent men would be skewered for making a huge deal of their wives' deaths, then shacking up with a woman half their age a couple months later.  Not Kraft.

LOL, I wasn't going to go there but I agree. I mostly get pissed off more for what he says regarding football than his personal life.

#8 dollars 2 donuts

dollars 2 donuts

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,817 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 09:00 AM

Great thread, TLT.

I read the quote about five minutes before seeing your post and i questioned Kraft's figures while reading.

#9 Max997

Max997

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,772 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 09:02 AM

Pro bowl appearances are even more meaningless now without players from the Super Bowl teams then it was before

#10 NoSaint

NoSaint

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,404 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 09:03 AM

View PostBig C, on 20 March 2013 - 08:58 AM, said:

Is that 6 not counting players who didn't participate due to playing in the Super Bowl or injury?

there are a lot of ways to skew that - it could also exclude the 6th alternates that eventually got in. id be hardpressed to call those guys probowlers even though they suited up. id guess teams tend not to entertain those "probowls" when negotiating with a player so it may be a number he uses that we do not.

not sure what his standard was. he was specific enough that i doubt its just made up, but it might have some restrictive guidelines to try and prove his point

Edited by NoSaint, 20 March 2013 - 09:04 AM.


#11 atlbillsfan1975

atlbillsfan1975

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,691 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 09:07 AM

The best thing that could of happened this week in regards to Kraft was Welker's agents coming out with their side of the story. It took some brass ones to do so, but i applaud them. Kraft was full of it and they did not let him skew the facts.
If you have ever watched any interaction with BB and Welker you knew Welker was gone. BB likes smart guys and team guys. Welker is not exactly that. He is good and talented, but that diminishes with age. I think the Pats where trying to phase Welker out to begin the year in 2012, until the realized they could not.
And btw what is going on with Krafts face?

#12 Pneumonic

Pneumonic

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 805 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 09:27 AM

View Postatlbillsfan1975, on 20 March 2013 - 09:07 AM, said:

I think the Pats where trying to phase Welker out to begin the year in 2012, until the realized they could not.

I believe they were as well.  And probably would have had Gronk and Hernandez not gotten injured as they did.

#13 TheLynchTrain

TheLynchTrain

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 990 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 09:34 AM

View PostMax997, on 20 March 2013 - 09:02 AM, said:

Pro bowl appearances are even more meaningless now without players from the Super Bowl teams then it was before

Of course, it's a popularity contest. But in Kraft's defense (I shudder saying those words), I think he was trying to set a low barometer on the ability of a player. We can dispute how worthless a Pro Bowl berth is, but for the most part, a player that makes the Pro Bowl is still in at least the top 15 at his position (with the exception of Jeff Saturday last year).

It still doesn't excuse Kraft for pulling numbers out of his ass so that the media thinks he's smart.

#14 MOFO

MOFO

    Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 366 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 09:45 AM


“Oh, people can come up with statistics to prove anything. 14% of people know that.” -Homer Simpsomn


#15 jeremy2020

jeremy2020

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,224 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 09:54 AM

View PostBillnutinHouston, on 20 March 2013 - 08:45 AM, said:

OP: I don't dispute your facts.

If you follow politics at all, you know that most of the media do not heavily critique or fact check major political figures when they grossly  misquote or distort facts to explain their positions.  Why then would you expect the sports media to fact check Bob Kraft?

It's a damn shame that reporters forgot they are not supposed to be useless parrots and investigate things to see if they are actually true.

#16 Drifter

Drifter

    UDFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 591 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 10:01 AM

View Postjeremy2020, on 20 March 2013 - 09:54 AM, said:

It's a damn shame that reporters forgot they are not supposed to be useless parrots and investigate things to see if they are actually true.

Unfortunately today's news orginizations are more concerned about being first instead of being right.  You can always change your story later when the actual facts come to light.

#17 NoSaint

NoSaint

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,404 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 10:17 AM

View PostTheLynchTrain, on 20 March 2013 - 09:34 AM, said:


It still doesn't excuse Kraft for pulling numbers out of his ass so that the media thinks he's smart.

do we know they were made up, or like i said earlier, does he possibly have a different set of qualifiers than you do?

also, i think i saw that top 25 for 700m stat pretty early in FA (ie pre-steven jackson for instance) so it may have been just a few days outdated

last up - is welker in the top 25 pay wise? id guess jackson isnt.

but who lets facts get in the way of a rant about lack of fact checking.

Edited by NoSaint, 20 March 2013 - 10:22 AM.


#18 Mr. WEO

Mr. WEO

    All Pro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,326 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 11:05 AM

View Postjeremy2020, on 20 March 2013 - 09:54 AM, said:

It's a damn shame that reporters forgot they are not supposed to be useless parrots and investigate things to see if they are actually true.

Like when Buddy said he was fielding 15 calls a day for the Bills HC job--before he settled on Chan Gailey?

#19 NoSaint

NoSaint

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,404 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 11:11 AM

View PostMr. WEO, on 20 March 2013 - 11:05 AM, said:



Like when Buddy said he was fielding 15 calls a day for the Bills HC job--before he settled on Chan Gailey?

given what we have learned about the ease of calling buddys office, perhaps he really was. in hindsight im disappointed i didnt call up to chat about potential employment opportunities.

#20 Stevie Ray

Stevie Ray

    SRV

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,010 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 11:13 AM

View PostMr. WEO, on 20 March 2013 - 11:05 AM, said:

Like when Buddy said he was fielding 15 calls a day for the Bills HC job--before he settled on Chan Gailey?

Well in light of the recent catfishing thing, maybe there is truth to his statement! :lol: