NFL Media claims Thursday’s Browner report was “right all along”

Getty Images

After NFL Media jumped the gun last night, reporting that cornerback Brandon Browner already had agreed to a contract with the Patriots, I wondered whether NFL Media would eventually claim to have been right all along if Browner eventually agreed to a contract with the Patriots.

Now that Browner has agreed on Friday (not Thursday) to a three-year deal (not two-year deal) with the Patriots, NFL Media is indeed claiming that Friday’s developments vindicate Thursday’s erroneous report.

“I guess we know who was right all along,” an NFL Media spokesperson told PFT via unsolicited email.  “I hope that will be noted.”

I responded by calling that claim a crock of something other than chocolate, so I got this reply:  “Ummmmm now that he is a Patriot it’s pretty clear [Ian Rapoport] was right all along.”

So let’s look at when and how Rapoport was “right all along.”

The initial report from Rapoport was unequivocal and unconditional and ultimately uncorroborated:  “Ex-Seahawks CB Brandon Browner has reached a two-year agreement with the Patriots.”

After agent Peter Schaffer disputed the report and accused NFL Media — on the record — of “irresponsible” journalism, the fallback, face-saving explanation became that Browner had “spread the word to those close to him” that he’d agreed to terms with the Patriots.

(I may have missed that day of “J” school — actually, I missed all of them — but hearsay doesn’t seem to be good enough.)

If Rapoport was “right all along,” there was a point on Friday where he conceded that he was wrong.  Both Rapoport and Albert Breer reported that Browner’s visit to the Redskins, postponed from Thursday, “is back on for today.”  If Rapoport was “right all along” that Browner had agreed to a two-year deal with the Patriots on Thursday, why would Rapoport and Breer report on Friday that Browner would be visiting the Redskins?

Look, we all make mistakes from time to time.  Seven years ago, we killed Terry Bradshaw.  But when he dies, we’re not going to say we were “right all along.”

That’s basically what NFL Media is trying to do.  Thursday’s report was premature, and thus incorrect.  The report from earlier in the day about the Redskins visit represents an admission that Thursday’s report was premature, and thus incorrect.  It would have been far better to just admit that Thursday’s report was premature, and thus incorrect, to learn from it (e.g., don’t report that a deal is done based on things that a player supposedly is saying to friends), and to move on.

29 responses to “NFL Media claims Thursday’s Browner report was “right all along”

  1. If Browner would have signed with the Redskins then Rapoport would have been wrong.

    Unfortunately for those wanting to prove him wrong, New England did overpay for Browner, therefore he was correct. 7 years and 20 hours does make a difference.


  2. To be fair a 3 year NFL deal is typically 2 years. No one ever finishes the last year of a big money contract

  3. Well I have been saying for a long time that anybody that reports anything that is not true and accurate should get fined appropriately. Get it right or don’t collect a paycheck should be the policy. Everybody does make mistakes, but everybody should be held accountable for their mistakes too, at least in my imaginary fantasy world where logic is built-into the system. I would have been pretty upset if I was his agent too, but I wouldn’t have gone into a diatribe about how my desires to play hockey are greater than anything else, including football of all things. I just can’t stand people who aren’t overly passionate about football and their football-related jobs, that is if they happen to be in the professional football business and making incredible money.

  4. This back-up player deal is getting too much play.

    If his agent wasn’t bothered during a rec hockey game which caused him to lose his mind, nobody is even posting on this matter.

    One more year and he will be back in Canada.

    Go Stamps!!!!

  5. That poor Ian Rappaport… that guy says the wrong names all the time and really has trouble getting through a single sentence without stammering all over himself. I don’t know, maybe he is really good at what he does, but it doesn’t seem like he’s too good in front of a camera. Reminds me of Adrian Peterson saying “you know” 17 times in a two-sentence interview…

  6. This could be a case of bad blood between Browner’s camp and the NFL Network after last season’s reports on Browner’s suspension. If it is, it needs to stop. How are fans supposed to trust the integrity of the NFL Network if they aren’t reporting the verified truth?

  7. But you weren’t right all along if what you reported was false to begin with. The deal that you reported that happened and the actual deal are two things. That’s like if I say tomorrow is Monday (today is Friday) yet I’m wrong then Monday finally comes and I say I was right all along.

    See how stupid that sounds? Exactly.

  8. Spot on Mike…Rapoport’s statement covered it, albeit through the back door, NFL Media didn’t need justify their existence.

  9. Browner was the weakest link in the LOB. Our trash are starters on other teams.

  10. Since the NFL media has such great foresight maybe they can find the missing Malaysian plane

  11. You have to remember he’s signing on a team coached by guy who lies on injury reports, spies on other teams, dictates what his players can and can’t say to the media and loves to give the run around. I’m sure he did sign Thursday, I’m also sure old Billy said don’t day a ting until I say it’s ok just to show him who is boss right off the start. This is the way he acts and coaches. Fantastic coach, yes, Hitler style dictator, absolutely.

  12. Let me rephrase that statement, he very well could have signed Thursday, but Bill always likes to keep people guessing.

  13. If I may interject here. I occasionally watch NFLN, and never tune in ESPN. Primarily because I got so tired of all of the “personalities” and their personal idiosyncrasies. But I also caught so many gaffes over the years that it made me wonder, “why are you guys getting paid for this?” There was one guy at a couple of years ago that persisted with an erroneous report, until it could no longer be justified, and then just let it drop without a word of apology. I don’t need the “pros” for this, I can hear this nonsense at a local bar.

    I have liked the PFT TV programs and the articles here, for generally (not always, no one’s perfect) they are trustworthy and accurate. The only question that I ever have is, how many keyboards does Mike go through in a year?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.