If YOU say Tom Brady should just drop the case and move on, I have no use for you.

If YOU sigh and moan that Brady is going to take this ridiculous case (over air in a football!!) to the Supreme Court and waste all our tax dollars, I have no use for you.

If YOU espouse the theory that Brady’s suspension isn’t the worse thing in the world “because now we can see Jimmy G” I have no use for you.

Brady going to be 39 years old in August. No matter what shape he stays in, he doesn’t have many seasons left. We’re willing to just sacrifice a quarter of one?

That’s like saying I sure am glad Larry Bird missed almost all of the 1988-89 season so we could see what we had in Reggie Lewis!

If YOU say this – or any variation of this:

I have no use for you, although, to be fair, I never did to begin with, you Troy Vincent stooge.

If YOU report on the air that the court ruled yesterday that NFL acted within the parameters of the CBA, and treated Tom Brady fairly” as ESPN did yesterday, I hope you lose another 10 million subscribers very soon. 

If YOU are another NFL team and post this on your official Twitter page within minutes of the court’s decision:

I’m hoping for multiple opening-day, season-ending injuries.

If YOU are a local columnist who lost his job because of plagiarism, were guilty, and you still used your union to fight to the bitter end, and you say “It’s tap out time, Tom.”

It’s far past time you tapped out.

I have no use for a lot of people, apparently.


49 thoughts on “I Have No Use For You If…

  1. Stephen A Smith and Dan Shaughnessy seem to be of one mind on this. Somehow, fighting back against spurious charges and ‘lawyering up’ makes one ‘uppity’ and ‘arrogant’ and leaves the observer with the idea that the accused deserves whatever he gets, and probably more.

    Never understood how standing up for yourself could be seen so negatively. Smith and Shaughnessy, were they faced with something similar, would undoubtedly do the same thing. I don’t get it.


    1. I wonder if Dan was being uppity when he lawyered up to help his son with his legal problems. That actually happened, right?

      Liked by 1 person

    2. You’re only “uppity and arrogant” if you’re actually guilty but fight back anyway.

      If Screamin’ A and Shank actually thought Brady was innocent, they wouldn’t be clamoring for him to end it. Telling Brady to quit is just an insight into the minds of these dickheads, who clearly think Brady is guilty as hell and, by implication, think he’s been lying for months, including under oath.

      Pigs, the lot of them.

      Liked by 2 people

  2. I liked how this guy, who apparently is a beat Sox/Celtics writer for NESN, wants it to be over for good. Looks like he’s tired of doing his job:

    He’s not the first, but usually they’re in other markets.

    They forget it was also the NFL who filed the first court documents and also appealed the first decision.


  3. Each media perpetrator here has created a cottage industry that serves the god of themselves; an under-ground economy of withdrawals without deposits, a win-less wedging of being THEM against the US they ridicule. Pathetic prostitution of intellect. I wish nothing but termination for these frauds.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. I know one thing. if the suspension holds up..and Jimmy G plays even half way decent? We all know what’s on the menu next…the “Lazy Sportswriter Special”… also known as the MADE UP Quarterback controversy


  5. To all fucktards in the media, you got your wish.


    1. Who will be the first to say, “this proves he’s guilty.”??? I REALLY hope he pursues a defamation suit after the season is over. The liars on Park Avenue, down in Bristol, and on the NFLN have sullied his reputation — a defamation suit is the ONLY way to get some of it back

      Disgusting. Disgraceful…use whatever adjectives fit.

      This is a complete travesty of justice.


    2. This is all well and good, but do the Rams get their SuperBowl back? There can no longer be any doubt that the Patriots placed hidden cameras in their locker room and taped their practices.


  6. So only Mike Reiss has the whole story? It appears that Brady is dropping his involvement in the case but that the NFLPA is appealing the decision to the Supreme Court. I love ho it has become impossible to get the whole story in this town.


  7. While I thought that accepting the 4 games early instead of taking a chance on the Supreme Court granting a stay only to deny a hearing in, say, December, was the right thing to do for both Brady and the team, I still feel bad about the idea that a significant portion of the media and NFL fan base will take this as some tacit admission of guilt.

    All I heard yesterday was that Brady should back down now since he can’t win and that we as a nation have more important things to deal with. Now, of course, you have (the same) guys talking about how Brady tapping out means that he’s a 15-year serial cheater. I don’t like it, but I feel like he did the right thing.

    In any future barroom discussion, all you’ll hear is that Montana/Manning never got suspended for cheating. That’s the shame of the whole thing.


    1. And it will never be mentioned that Manning was accused of PED use and no one, least of all his adoring media acolytes, felt the need to investigate whether the accusation was true. It will be treated as if it never happened.


  8. I don’t expect the media trolls in Boston to root for Brady. I have never expected that, and I don’t believe an overwhelming number of the folks who visit this site do, either. What I did expect was that the media trolls would act like journalists, as they insist they are. And examine this controversy from an independent point of view. Make no mistake: That never happened. Had Tom Brady been guilty, I would have shaken my head and accepted his trespasses. And continued to be a fan. But by all measures, all independent measures, he is not guilty. But as I’ve said before, media outside Boston did their homework, while our much vaunted local boys were simply not up to it, except for a few notables, like Reiss and Curran. The Boston media is not a joke; they are just really poor journalists.


  9. I can only shake my head…. ESPN’s twitter page ( https://twitter.com/ESPNNFL ) has the following stat:

    Brady Does Not Start:
    15-18 (.454)

    Brady Starts
    172-51 (.771)

    Wow – they’re counting the 2000 season (5-11) when Brady was the #4 QB and the first 2 games of 2001 (0-2), in addition to Matt Cassel’s 10-5 record – not giving Cassel credit for the 7/8 of the KC game in ’08.

    I don’t know what they’re trying to say….


    1. Well to be fair, the NFL official “games started” stat and official QB wins state only counts who was QB on the first offensive state and gives the start and credit for the win/loss to the QB who took the first snap. Brady did, and in all official NFL stats gets credit for that start and that win (IIRC NE did win that ’08 KC game).


  10. We live in a culture where ignorance is celebrated. Why should this bogus fiasco be any different. Props to Bill Simmons for continuing to hammer the commissioner as a liar.


    1. A very good column. As usual, the NY media seems to understand this better than their Boston counterparts. Thnka for posting.


    1. He half makes the case that we all have been making. We all agree that no one knows whether or not Anderson gauged the footballs, no one recorded which gauge he used if he DID gauge the balls. And (he says) no one recorded the temperature – I’m assuming he means locker room temp. Anyway, this lack of recorded conditions somehow invalidates all the ‘science’ and renders it meaningless. I guess his point is that if you throw the ‘best guess’ science out, then all you’re left with is the deflator text.

      And apparently, instead of coming to the conclusion that there’s NOWHERE NEAR enough evidence to ruin a guy’s reputation and call him a cheat and a liar and suspend him for 4 games, what he’s actually saying is that Jim McNally’s reference to himself as the deflator one time in May of 2014 IS enough to condemn Tom Brady. It’s ludicrous.

      Ladies and Gentlemen, Ben Volin!

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Sad commentary on the state of all journalism today, but sports journalism in particular, that a clearly incompetent, stupid, ignorant boob like that can occupy the position of “chief NFL writer” at a paper like The Globe, which used to have the best sports section in the country, by a wide margin.

        I just love his use of “for the last time….” about the science in that Tweet, as if his display of impatience and righteous indignation gives his “point” some kind of validity.


        They don’t call him the MCI (mentally challenged intern) over on a couple of Patriots fan boards for nothing.


      2. Volin unintentionally touches on something that undermines the NFL’s case: The concept that “If you didn’t write it down, it didn’t happen.” This could apply to a client calling an investment firm to change their fund allocation to a nurse administering meds to a patient to someone cleaning a port-a-potty. If you don’t document your work, how can anyone be absolutely sure it was done? The employee can say they did and it may look like they did, but if someone is disputing it, it’s not going to stand up. Anderson may have accurately measured all of those footballs, but without any sort of paper trail, who can say if they were set at 11.5 or 14 PSI?

        If we’re going to assume that Anderson’s recollection is correct, then the science “matters” because it explains the whole thing. If we’re going to dismiss all the PSI measurements (pre-game, halftime, post game), then we’re left with, as you pointed out, one text from 8 months before the game. If you hadn’t made up your mind that the Patriots were guilty as soon as you read Kravitz’s tweet after the AFCCG (like Volin,) then you’d realize this whole thing was a witch hunt.


    2. And for (not) the last time, please try to see this, Mr. Volin: The scientific principal is universal. That means that the issue isn’t specific temperatures or pressures. If, as you must agree, the temperature in a locker room is warmer than the temperature on the field, the psi will drop. That is the scientific principal with which we are dealing. A total of 21 academic experts, who, again, you must concede, know more about this than you, have posited this. And those are only the ones who put their names on a piece of paper. Arguing against this is similar to scoffing at the concept of letting a ball;; go and seeing it drop to the ground. The weight of the ball does not matter, nor does the amount of time it takes the ball to reach the ground. The ball will drop. The psi will go down. It’s freakin’ science, dude!

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Your post just reminded me of the other “only” involved with this entire affair: Brady is the ONLY principal in this case to raise his right hand in court and swear to tell the truth, under oath. No one else has had the ballz to do that.

        Therefore, the media trolls who continue to push the “something must have been done (to those footballs)” mantra are essentially accusing Brady of committing the felony of lying under oath. And, mind you, they are accusing Brady of being a liar, with no evidence, while at the same time, by default, believing Roger Goodell, a proven, pathological liar on so many, many, many other issues.

        Bizarro World.


    1. “2. I believe Spygate was much, much worse than we in the public ever knew and that the Patriots — Brady included — would take any advantage they believed they could get away with. I believe this to be true of most teams and most players at the highest level of sports, but the Patriots in particular.”

      Credibility: zero.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Anyone who believes Spygate was anything more than a jaywalking violation that was turned into Grand Theft Auto by the media/league office is not to be taken seriously.

        To the extent that it was “much, much worse” than anyone let on, it’s that Goodell probably went out of his way to suppress the proof the Patriots had that other teams were doing the exact same thing with video cameras that they were…and he probably told Belichick and Kraft to keep their mouths shut, or face the consequences.


        1. I think he was going out of his way to try and prove he wasn’t a Patriots honk. I was put off by the comment as well, but he pulled me right back with his Ortiz argument as I have pretty much felt the same way about Ortiz since the report. Maybe I’m being naive because it’s Papi, but I honestly think it could have been an over the counter substance that he was not aware would make him test positive. Then the following year there are lists of substances that the players should avoid so he avoids them. But everyone else thinks he cheated and he continues to cheat. Maybe he is that far ahead of the testing but I don’t think so.

          Anyway the point is, he makes a great case about a lie becoming the truth. Thought it was a good take especially given the Ortiz, Boston, way he connects it.


          1. Yeah but he’s trying to have his cake and eat it too. “I don’t think the Patriots and Brady cheated in this case (Deflategate) but I do think they have a history of egregious cheating (Spygate)”.

            Again, credibility: zero. If he’s willing to do some research on the Ortiz situation and timeline, he could do a little more and find about about the oddly written memo and the actual rule that allows teams to film opposing team’s defensive signals just not from the sidelines. Or read reports of what exactly was on the tapes. But nope that would be too much work, I guess.


  11. Brady walked away from this fight because he wanted some certainty to his football season.
    A smart move on Brady’s part given the remote odds of him having success with the Supremes.

    Stephen A is Troy Vincent’s tool. I don’t expect anything from Stephen A. He’s a company boy.

    Count me as one of the many looking forward to seeing Jimmy G play.
    Contrary to the belief of many in the Brady Pinkhat crowd the Patriots are far more than a 1 man team. They will be just fine with Jimmy G running a loaded offense.


  12. is it odd that SI.com is giving a small sidebar link about the death of Dennis Green and while CBS Sports, Deadspin, etc. are providing much more coverage?


  13. OK – first I’ve heard of this ever: https://twitter.com/RonBorges/status/754672667643506689

    Borges, explaining that there were several complaints about the Patriots, from this and that to headsets, etc., is reminded that headsets are under league control.

    His reply: “Illegal double wireless line league found in Foxboro wasn’t”

    Guys ask for proof/reference/link. No reply.

    Have any of you heard of this or is Borges just trolling? My feeling is that if this actually happened neither Borges nor Shaughnessy nor Volin nor the entirety of ESPN would resist – in any way – publishing it.


    Liked by 1 person

    1. I’ve read a decent amount about the Patriots sideline taping story (not everything, but a lot) and there’s nothing to back this up. People like Borges really want it to be true, but that’s the extent of their “evidence.”

      Most likely, this idea springs from the unsubstantiated Flutie/Second helmet frequency story. Without going into a lot of detail, there are significant problems with that story, besides the sourcing issue. The tinfoil hat anti-Patriots crowd accept that story as 100% true and then build their “Illegal double wireless line” theories on top of it. If there was any real proof, we would have heard it years ago.

      To go off on a tangent, this reminded me of a sizable hole in what the spygate truthers believe happened. Their theory is that the sideline cameraman filmed the defensive signals. Ernie Adams broke down the signals and game film in real time to decipher the signals. Then Adams communicated with Brady on the secret helmet frequency to tell him what the defense was going to do before each play. What the truthers never consider or address is how do the tapes get to Adams? This was before the days of the Cloud or file sharing. Someone would have to physically take the tape from the sideline to wherever Adams is located. The cameraman can’t leave because he might miss something on his trips back and forth, so there had to be some runner/gopher type who would do this. The problem is, no one ever saw or mentioned anyone performing that role. Matt Walsh never mentioned anything that even hinted at that activity. So…if no one was bringing the tapes to Adams, then the signals weren’t decoded in game and there was nothing to tell Brady on the secret helmet radio frequency.


      1. Right – I never believed that ‘in-game decoding’/’Brady knew the defensive play call’ theory because there would have had to have been a transmitter of some kind to get the picture to the guy doing the decoding. The NFL only had a guy with a camera – they never mentioned a transmitter. And then there’s the whole timing thing – the defense has to wait until they see the offensive package to make their own substitutions and then signal in the play call, while the quarterback’s headset gets turned off with :15 left on the play clock or at the break of the huddle. Very little time to do what people assume they did.

        Also – why use a video camera for that at all? Why not just give the ‘decoder’ guy a pair of binoculars and a seat in the coaches booth and let him get the message to Brady from there?

        The only thing that makes any sense is what the Patriots and Matt Walsh said – that the tapes were never viewed in game and were handed off to Adams after the game so that he could match the signals up with the personnel groupings and eventual play call. All perfectly legal, of course, except for the camera location, as we all know.


        1. That was about as well articulated an explanation as I’ve seen about Spygate. Thank you. As for how those signals got to Adams, clearly the “double secret super invisible ultra wireless mike” had everything to do with it!


        2. The part about Walsh’s comments is similar to the reaction to Jastremski and McNally’s texts. Everyone focuses on “deflator,” but ignores Jastremski texting “They should have been at 13” to his fiance and that there was never a mention of a plan to deflate footballs.

          Along the same lines, everyone focused on Walsh’s comments about turning his shirt inside out* and disabling the red light on his camera, but ignored him saying he made one tape per game and it was with him the entire game. He was consistent about this in all his interviews, from Goodell to Specter to the media. He even said that, sometimes, he wouldn’t hand off the tape for a couple of days following a game. Hardly the high priority, in-game operation the truthers believe it was.

          *I would love to know if this was a workplace joke, like “Let’s see what we can get Walsh to do.” It may have been exactly what Walsh claims it was, an attempt to conceal his employment with the Patriots, but I think an inside out shirt would look more conspicuous, not less.


    2. Sue him. If he has no proof, then sue his pathetic, plagiarizing, dishonest, agenda-drive ass. Enough is enough with this sh*t.

      Just to file the lawsuit, even if it’s dismissed on NYT vs. Sullivan grounds, would still at least get it out there that the b.s. must stop, or that the Pats are no longer going to take these b.s. cheating accusations lying down.

      God, I hate the effing media.

      Liked by 1 person

    3. Good find. I read the thread and saw no follow-up with any facts, as well. That sounds like some unvarnished theory he and his fellow BB-haters locally discussed over drinks, jokingly. No facts so they could never publish, but its fun when this stuff comes out.


  14. I forgot Shank got some bullshit media award, but his fellow LOLbies (Cafardo here) writing about him is great:

    <blockquoteShaughnessy is known for his tell-it-like-it-is, fearless style. One of his endearing qualities is that he faces the people he criticizes, which is courageous in its own right, unlike the new bloggers or talk show hosts who easily criticize but never have to face the people the next day.

    Yeah, when I think of CHB, accountability comes to mind. It’s also a very common term used throughout the media of today, as well. Say what you will about the “talk show hosts”, but they at least take calls then and there. Some address and deal with it differently, but there’s an almost instant reaction that can be heard.

    In his speech,

    “Thank you Boston Globe, home of the greatest sports page in America, and all the bosses, editors, and peers who make us look good on the page every day.”

    Greatest sports page?


    1. I wonder what John McNamara thinks of Shank getting into the HOF. The guy was fired 28 years ago and I think the CHB still takes a gratuitous shot at him at least once a year. I’m no fan of Mac (one of the worst Sox managers ever and the main reason why they lost the ’86 World Series), but Shank’s never-ending obsession (and apparent grudge) against him is example 1A (Bob Kraft is example 1) of why a guy like that should never be honored, for anything.

      I say this knowing full well that in his 15 years or so as a baseball beat writer (including a pre-Boston stint in Baltimore) he was pretty good, maybe even very good, when he wasn’t pushing a petty personal agenda.


Comments are closed.