Extra Points
News and commentary from around the Web

Patriots Cut Antonio Brown

Well, so much for that whole exercise. After new reporting that Antonio Brown has been harassing and trying to intimidate one of his accusers, the Patriots cut bait just 11 days into the receiver's contract with the team. They would have owed him $5 million of his $9 million signing bonus on Monday, and now will save that money. Does any other team take a chance on him at this point?

View Full Article


109 comments, Last at 26 Sep 2019, 6:26am

2 Holy Hell AB. Can you just…

Holy Hell AB. Can you just hire a common sense advisor at this point or just not have a cell phone or access to the internet???

I just don't understand how a human adult who managed to get to where he is now could so completely lose his mind. He's failed common sense 101 at every turn. But hey, 9 million dollars for one game is a pretty nice payday.

19 The only way Brown didn't…

The only way Brown didn't assault  his trainer is if you accept the idea that he rehired her after a 1st false accusation of sexual assault. In other words, he assaulted her. I do think it likely that he is such an idiotic sexual offender that he doesn't grasp that ejaculating on someone without their consent constitutes a sexual offense.

11 Sounds like he won't get the…

Sounds like he won't get the $9m signing bonus.  IIRC, his base pay was $1m and $5m incentives*.  So, he probably gets 1/16 of $1m (for the Miami game) and maybe 1/16 of $9m.

*can someone verify or correct, please.

16 Oh, the Patriots can…

Oh, the Patriots can probably get back as much as they want to get back, with the exception of week 2's game check.  There's no way Brown's contract didn't have some kind of language protecting the team.  He's probably in violation of contract for not disclosing his pending civil lawsuit, and he's probably in violation of his contract for texting threats to another accuser.  Behavior clauses are pretty standard.

62 My favorite line in all of…

My favorite line in all of this is Rosenhaus's statement: Unfortunately, it didn't work out with the Patriots.

As if his client was caught up in a numbers game or a salary cap casualty.  An unfortunate victim of circumstance.

93 He's doing now what he's…

He's doing now what he's always been doing and it got him to the top.

Work hard. Rely on talent. Listen to no one. Care about no one but yourself.

When it gets tough, that's when these traits bite you in the ass.

3 I think he's done

Patriots didn't even trade him, just cut him. I don't see how he comes back from this. Not to mention, the floodgates just opened a few days ago for stories coming out, wouldn't be surprised if even more comes out over the next few days or weeks. Sounds like he has a long history of bad behavior.

4 Well, NE had to make a $5mil…

Well, NE had to make a $5mil payment to him Monday, so I'm sure that's at least part of the reason for the release.

I expect the release is from some combination of:
1) That $5mil payment
2) NE and the NFL have heard something else is coming that we don't yet know about
3) Belichick benched Welker for a series in a playoff game for making foot jokes after the team was told to leave the Rex Ryan foot fetish thing alone. I can totally imagine he gave Brown some parameters of behavior and Brown ignored them, and given that, I don't see it's far-fetched that Belichick would cut him.

5 I hope AB saved enough money…

I hope AB saved enough money because I don't know what career he has now if he's not in the NFL. His reputation is so bad right now, what job could he get as a coach, broadcaster, or on tv analyst?

I guess he could write a tell all book where some lunatics will buy it for tabloid fodder...but still, what a shame. The dude needs a serious intervention.

24 This is right

I think that's right; The biggest barrier to him being put on the commissioners exempt list before was the way his deal with NE was structured. Now that the deal no longer exists, it will be hard for him to go after the league if it turns out the league cannot produce sufficient evidence to suspend him without pay (N.B. the league has lost all the lawsuits it's fought against players it suspended for similar allegations).

23 It's incredible how much has…

It's incredible how much has happened in this story in such a short time. AB was still a member of the Raiders just a couple weeks ago.

All of this makes me believe that the Steelers organization and Mike Tomlin must be pretty good at managing players in the locker room. AB was a productive member of the Steelers for nine years without much sign of trouble. Obviously it now appears he was doing all sorts of crazy and bad things off the field, but from an organizational perspective AB was a massive asset.

25 The whole idea that you can…

The whole idea that you can win at the rate the Steelers have during Tomlin's tenure while being managed by a bad football coach, because the roster is so talented, was always just too stupid for words, and revealed a towering ignorance of the nature of athletic competition, especially football, at the most elite level. It is kind of depressing that this debate was so frequent here, for so long.

36 I won't go so far as to…

I won't go so far as to argue he was and is a bad NFL head coach, but the Steelers perpetually feel like a chronic underachievers. And they keep losing to New England in exactly the same fashion over and over and over again and in ways that don't really inspire much in terms of coaching decisions, is not being aggressive when you're down and constantly leaving people wide open in the secondary. He did win a Superbowl but he also lost a playoff gameworks he allowed Tim freaking tebow death to throw all over his defense. 

And last year's flame out was pretty inexcusable as well.

Assigning credit for wins and losses is a pretty tricky business as you know, but seeing coaches like Jim Caldwell have a nearly undefeated regular season on his resume along with a 2 and 14 season on his resume really drives home the point that I'm not sure it's so easy to tell from wins and losses who is and is not a good coach. 


And just to be really clear about this, even though I've now soured considerably on mr. Tomlin, I do not in any way associate myself with mr. Infallible

41 Jim Caldwell had a >.500…

Jim Caldwell had a >.500 record with the Lions and took them to the playoffs twice.

The last Lions coach who won 56% of their games as Lions HC coached them as the Portsmouth Spartans! Caldwell was a good coach, and the Lions were stupid to fire him.

48 Jim Caldwell is the epitome…

Jim Caldwell is the epitome of a nonemotive football coach who know-nothings conclude is bad at his job, because he isn't late stage Al Pacino, when the producer in the t.v. truck cuts to him between plays.

(edit) To add on, if Bud Grant had coached a team where being phlegmatic wasn't declared the Official State Pastime, he probably would have been fired after 5 years.

46 Here's the problem. To call…

Here's the problem. To call the Steelers perpetual underachievers during Tomlin's tenure is to say that you think that they should have had one of the top 4 or 5 records of all time over such a span, while playing in the same conference as one of those teams, and in the same division with an extremely well managed team. When it gets to the point that you are saying "I feel like this team was chronically underachieving because it only had the 6th best winning percentage over a span of at least 180 games", your feelings are rendering the concept of "chronic underachievement" into a pretty trivial state. What's the basis for arguing that the Steelers should have had the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, or 5th best winning percentage, of any team that played for one coach, over a span of at least 180 games, in the entire history of the sport, thus escaping The Chronic Underachievement Zone? I truly do not get this point of view.


51 See, logically I agree with…

See, logically I agree with you, and I'm glad you quantified that for us. However, I also can't escape the eerie feeling that the Steelers really are underachievers. It's probably some combination of recency bias mixed with just expecting the Steelers to be a winning organization. However, there might be something there, and I think it has something to do with all the NE beatdowns on the resume.

54 I'll put it this way:…

I'll put it this way:

Everyone agrees Baltimore has drafted really well for almost two decades. They've won two SBs. They've been a quality team for years.

They are also clearly the second-best team in the AFC North.

68 Deserves it's own thread

First I'll say I think there should definitely be an "irrational fire Mike Tomlin" thread on this site; I think the argument comes down to "with a winning percentage that good over the last 11 years - how is it they haven't won a superbowl since 08". You see this from time to time in pro sports (e.g. the late Joe Torrey Yankees - forget that he won 4 in 4 years, it's been since 2000), it's hard to say whether it's fair, just that winning a championship is very difficult even for very good teams. I do think this has a lot to do with how much different playoff football is getting from regular season football (playoff baseball has been a mostly-different sport then the regular season ever since pitcher management started to change in the late 90's). In the same way the rule & practice schedule changes have really made September football a lot different from January football - which makes it easier to make the case the wining % doesn't mean as much as you might think.

84 Not true. It’s quite…

Not true. It’s quite possible to mathematically correct for the one and done format of the playoffs and convert a playoff win percentage to a normal win percentage. I don’t have access to a spreadsheet now, but it’s very doable. It is true that you can’t simply treat the two as equivalent quantities. 

88 I'd be happy to look at the…

I'd be happy to look at the calculation, but it seems to me that you inevitably are forced to make assumptions when the number of data points is dependent on the quality of the previous datapoint. With a very large number of data points this may be mitigated, but no coach has ever coached enough playoff games to get there. You end up magnifying the effect of random events that have nothing to do with quality of performance.

100 It's true that small sample…

It's true that small sample size is an issue, especially if we're talking about a coach with, say, one or two playoff appearances.  My comment was mainly relating to the idea that the format of the playoffs prevents a meaningful "W/L" number to be calculated, which is not the case.  You can correct for that, as I describe below.  However, you're right... small sample size limits the approach's utility unless there's a decent body of playoff work.

In Tomlin's case, however, there is.  His teams have made 8 playoff appearances, and played 15 playoff games.  This is basically a whole season's body of work, and we certainly take a season's worth of games to be indicative of the quality of a team in other cases.

The approach is a as follows.  What a person really means when they say a team is a "0.500" team may be the fact that they've won half their games, or may be that they, on average, win half the games they play.  Subtle difference there... the latter statement implies that if you picked a random opponent and had no knowledge of which team was home or away, you would expect them to have a 50% chance of victory.  That's what I'm after when I say "effective playoff W/L"... a percentage that, if you said a coach was up against a randomly chosen playoff opponent, would be indicative of his probability of victory, which we'll call "p".

Say a given coach has a probability p of winning in a given playoff game.  Then we can calculated the expected number of wins that coach should have given a certain number of playoff appearances.  Because of the playoff format, we need to know if the playoff appearance had a 1st round bye or not, since the expected number of wins for a team with a bye is smaller.

For a team that plays on Wildcard Weekend, the expected number of wins per playoff experience is 0*(1-p) + 1*p*(1-p) + 2*p^2*(1-p) + 3*p^3*(1-p) + 4*p^4.  I'll spare you the simplification math, but the answer works out to be EW_WC = p + p^2+p^3+p^4.  For a team that has a first round bye, the answer works out to be EW_1B = p+p^2+p^3.

Now, for a given coach that has M playoff appearances where they had to play on Wildcard Weekend, and N playoff appearances where they had a first round bye, their total expected playoff wins is M*EW_WC + N*EW_1B, and both the expected wins numbers depend on p.  If we know the actual number of wins, we can calculate the p such that the expected wins equals the actual number of wins.  (You have to do it numerically since a quartic polynomical cannot be solved in closed form). This is essentially a maximum likliehood estimator of the actual likliehood of a coach winning a randomly chosen game in the playoffs, which is what I would call the "Effective Playoff Win Percentage".

In the case of Tomlin, his team has had 8 playoff appearances (5 where they played on wildcard weekend, and 3 where his team had a 1st round bye), and won 8 games.  IN order for the estimated wins for this set of appearance to be 8, then p=0.527.  So we can say that Tomlin's "Effective Playoff Win Percentage" is 0.527.  

In other words, against a random playoff opponent, his teams would be expected to win just slightly over half the time.

I don't know how this compares to other coaches without doing the math for them (and the math isn't hard, but looking up how many of a coach's playoff appearances had a 1st round bye is annoying), but I suspect it's nowhere near as good as Belichick or Reid, and way better than Schottenheimer.



56 I don't have a metric that…

I don't have a metric that measures underachievement. It's admittedly my subjective assessment of how good the Steelers talent is and how consistent they manage to be. I invite Steelers fans to offer their views on Tomlin.


Also to clarify, I brought up Caldwell to illustrate the perils of using win loss to assess a coaches quality. That a coach could somehow go nearly undefeated and also have the worst record in football shows the limits of using wins and losses.

59 Well, yes, especially over…

Well, yes, especially over 32 games. I really don't even understand the subjective judgement that would result in someone saying that the Steelers, over the number of games we are discussing, have been top 5 in talent, all time, and thus they should have won a higher percentage of games than they did. What's the basis for saying that their talent was that  good?

65 I don't remember the exact…

I don't remember the exact numbers, but I saw once the Steelers were one of the worst teams against the spread as heavy favorites. I don't know how much the numbers have changed over time, but a team that performs well against strong to medium competition but then fails to come through when they're supposed to have a big edge smells of underachieving. The lack of imagination when playing the Pats also weighs kind of heavy with me.



67 The issue with that metric…

The issue with that metric is that you have to be historically great to become heavy favorites consistently enough, over 12 seasons, to make it meaningful. It's kind of a self negating metric.


66 Functionally I see the…

Functionally I see the Steelers in the same way I think a lot of packer fans saw McCarthy, he won but there was this expectation that he should have won more given the quarterback and some of the talented pieces they had on defense. there was a sense that the offense was perpetually underachieving given who their quarterback was. 

And if you look at McCarthy's tenure, he only had one poor season when his quarterback was fully healthy, but that didn't stop most of the fans from wanting him gone. That attitude seems unjustified given how much McCarthy won when Rogers was healthy. 

 The same arguments by the way could even be made of Chuck Pagano with the colts. when he had his quarterback healthy they were winning games and winning playoff games. but I followed that team closely and I could see the coach making decisions on the field that were detrimental to the team. 

If all you did was put pagano's win percentage when luck was healthy against a baseline NFL average, you would also conclude that the colts hardly underachieved... And yet, almost no one believes Pagano was a good head coach.

In the same vein I see Mike Tomlin. When you see the Steelers look thoroughly unprepared against the Patriots ( it's one thing to get beat by the Patriots, it's another to get beat and literally the same way over and over...just as the colts did against Ne), it falls on the coach. When you inexplicably lose to the Raiders and miss the playoffs last year, that's also on the coach.


It seems to me if you're going to hold Mike McCarthy accountable, then Mike Tomlin very much falls in the same category.



69 There's a reason why Pagano…

There's a reason why Pagano's career as a head coach is never going to get close to 13 years, and it isn't solely because Luck was injured. It's a very small sample, but Tomlin's winning percentage without Roethlisberger as starter is about 55%, and the Steelers have never had a backup qb as good as Matt Hasselbeck.

To the degree the Packers have fallen short in the Rodgers era, I'd put that a lot more on Ted Thompson than McCarthy. I'd say McCarthy's greatest failing was excessive loyalty to Dom Capers, which was a failing he corrected last year.

There is no doubt that my views on this are informed by another view I have, which is that the importance of qb play to winning NFL games is currently significantly overstated, even while it is obvious that it is easily the most important position.

74 Clearly overstated depends…

Clearly overstated depends largely on your vantage point. But having seen the colts without Peyton Manning and seeing the broncos with Peyton Manning was as close to a natural experiment as you're going to find in the NFL and it was jarring

73 With McCarthy, there is a…

With McCarthy, there is a very clear point beginning in 2015 where the offense sharply dropped off. They had a great run in the second half of 2016 where they bounced back a bit, but by December of last year it was obvious that half-season run was an aberration. McCarthy's Packers, and their offense in particular, weren't the same from 2015-18 that they had been from 2006-14 (and especially not '09-14), and that's why he lost his job.

75 I don't buy this argument at…

I don't buy this argument at all. Should Dungy have been fired because the Colts offenses were a significant come down from the 2004-2006 squads. You don't think losing players like Nelson had a big sway on the offensive decline? And 2016 - the packers fielded the 4th rated offense and made it to the NFC championship game.

2017 Rodgers got hurt(they had a winning record w him) and 2018 was his only bad year with Rodgers as his primary qb. 

77 Using Rodgers' passing DVOA…

Using Rodgers' passing DVOA as a proxy for the Packers passing offense (as that's what it basically is, and can account for time he missed due to injury):

2008: 8.5% (14th)

2009: 17.8% (9th)

2010: 26.9% (4th)

2011: 46.6% (1st)

2012: 23.4% (4th)

2013: 25.4% (6th)

2014: 32.2% (1st)

2015: -1.0% (17th)

2016: 18.7% (8th)

2017: 7.8% (14th)

2018: 8.1% (12th)

It's quite clear they weren't the same passing the ball beginning in 2015. I totally agree that losing Nelson was a big factor, but it's one they struggled to solve for four full seasons outside of the second half of 2016 - that's a big sample size of diminished performance! They likely would have missed the postseason in 2015 if not for Dom Capers' last good defense, when they finished 9th in defensive DVOA.

78 Yes but...He was the same…

Yes but...He was the same coach during those great years and the same coach during the latter years. So what changed...He got dumber and or lazier? 

In any case he proves my point. He's stewarded terrific offenses and weaker offenses and in both cases, I did not hear those early years being held up as a reason to keep him as the head coach. If you weren't going to defend him in the latter years, then you can't then praise him for the early years and thus - where does that leave us with regards to McCarthy as a coach and by proxy, Tomlin. 

79 No, I don't think so. I…

No, I don't think he got lazier or dumber. I think we were having this conversation the other day - defenses found a way to slow down the Packers offensive scheme (initially facilitated by Nelson's torn ACL), and McCarthy struggled to find an adjustment to find their way back to their previous heights.

To the extent that McCarthy's scheme was about exploiting mismatches, one could argue that his scheme was bound to fail without personnel who could fill some specific roles. You can also point to the fact that no one survives 10+ years in the NFL without adapting their scheme - for example, Ron Rivera has gone from coordinating Lovie Smith's Tampa 2 to running a 3-4 as his base defense in 2019. Defenses are also used to facing more shotgun spread/11 personnel now than they were back in 2007-10, when McCarthy was among those at the forefront of those trends. McCarthy not being able to adapt in his 10th-13th seasons doesn't mean he never had any good ideas or wasn't a good coach.

95 The Steelers won Super Bowl…

The Steelers won Super Bowl XL at the end of the 2005 season. In 2007 Tomlin took over.

He won the Superbowl again a year later with many of the same players, running mostly the same scheme. Then lost the superbowl to the Packers 2 years later (2010). 

We are in 2019 now. The one constant was his HOF Quarterback Ben Roethlisberger. On the defense they adjusted little. The reason why many Steelers fans are sick of Mike Tomlin is that the team they say the winning record mostly comes from the team he received from Bill Cowher and that it's quite hard to lose many games if Ben is your QB and is surrounded with so many weapons. Steelers fans don't like it that the team has gotten worse over the past decade. Everyone knows Tomlin doesn't scheme or is as smart as the smart coaches in this league, he just plays 'my guy is better than your guy' football. He mismanages the clock all the time and when asked he answers 'I use my gut'. Or gives another dumb excuse.

He consistently runs his primary runningback too many times only to miss them in the playoffs.

Tomlin manages the team well, is what they say, but he allows Bell to miss a whole season while on the pay role and AB wasn't on the field in the last game of the season last season - a crucial one to make the playoffs.

I'm on the side that acknowledges that Tomlin is a 'successful' coach. But I have seen enough Steelers games to conclude that the guy is also a very limited game manager, prepares very poorly for opponents, if at all, and the Steelers will never win another Super Bowl under Tomlin.


105 I sure hope this comment is…

I sure hope this comment is a joke.  The offense has definitely evolved after Arians' departure and the defense plays a very different style relative to the Lebeau era.  Go watch a game from 2008 and a game from 2018 back to back if you don't believe me.  Furthermore, the fact that the Steelers have never had to bottom out until this year is evidence that Colbert/Tomlin are good at identifying talent and Tomlin/coaching staff are good at developing talent.  

Bell decided to light ~$14MM on fire in order to become a free agent and get pretty much the same contract from the Jets that the Steelers offered him.  AB's issues are well documented.

I agree that he's far from perfect.  But it's not fair to imply that just anyone could've come in and enjoyed the same amount of success.  As fans of nearly any other team in the league can tell you, it's difficult to win year in/year out for a decade.

106 Good at identifying talent…

Good at identifying talent.

The steelers cant draft a secondary to save their lives. Tomlin was a secondary coach.

The linebackers they have drafted are very suspect too.

And no. Its easy to win games if you always have Ben as QB. Tomlin has been rebuilding the defense for over a decade now and on offense we see now what he is worth without his hof qb.

Tomlin also loses games by his own decisions and poor game management. And it never changes. Its not like he is a rookie head coach.

Tomlin might talk a nice game if you are into rara speeches and hollow phrases. Beyond that, he is a poor head coach.

31 The stories indicate his bad…

The stories indicate his bad and bizarre behavior has been going back for years, though. It's only emerged into public views recently, but it's been happening for quite a while, mostly during his time with Pittsburgh.

52 Haven't most of crazy…

Haven't most of crazy stories been dated 2017 or later? Obviously the 2018 season didn't go fantastic between him and the Steelers. The more I think about it, the more I come down on the side of brain damage.

60 No, there are stories that…

No, there are stories that the Steelers defense (particularly Ryan Clark and Troy Palomalu) wanted to "light him up" for his treatment of Lebeau, Clark was quote as saying "pay him and you'll create a monster", he had numerous incidents both at FIU and Central Michigan (why he fell to the sixth round), and his stepfather has said his awful treatment of women in particular dates from his teenage years.  As Chris Long said last week, it's kind of garbage to attribute all bad behavior from athletes who've been entitled assholes their entire lives to CTE

104 But I see a big shift from…

But I see a big shift from bad behavior to outright self-destructive behavior, and the fact that we didn't hear about the earlier stuff at the time is evidence supporting that.

Lots of athletes are selfish. Some of them are genuinely bad guys, either in the locker room or out in the real world or both. I'm having a hard time thinking of one who sabotaged himself as badly as Brown has done in the past few weeks/months. It could be a mental health issue unrelated to football, or it could be CTE, but something is wrong with him.

40 Mike Tomlin was such a…

Mike Tomlin was such a vortex of suck that he created a local buffer underflow error in reality, and the performance of everything around him had to commensurately improve in order to maintain the fabric of reality.

It's brilliant, really.

63 If you go back to the NFL…

If you go back to the NFL Films vaults, and examine footage of the Vikings from the late 80s , which was another multi ProBowl and All Pro player team which was called underachieving, a teen aged Mike Tomlin can be spotted in the stands, as a vendor hawking from a bunch of fan gear he holds up! He's like Pennywise the Clown, from King's horror classic, holding a bunch of balloons at the periphery of all deadly disasters in a small town in Maine through the decades! Any time NFL fans are subjected to the hideous agony of their favorites only winning 65% of their games, Tomlin is on the scene somewhere, chanting "We do what we do!" instead of "You'll all float!".

I know I'm expecting Gary Zimmerman, Chris Doleman, Randall McDaniel, Joey Browner, and Anthony Carter to show up in Pittsburgh this season to perform some manner of ritualistic exorcism!

26 Bye!

Well, this Patriots fan says thank goodness and good riddance.

It’s too bad they signed him in the first place. But it’s really too bad they then traded away Deymarius Thomas because of it.

Hope that can recoup the cap hit.

Now pardon me... I have to go add Josh Gordon onto my fantasy roster...

35 10 team league with a…

10 team league with a shallow bench (5 spots plus an IR). Also, we have four first time fantasy players who don’t understand that rostering multiple replaceable TEs (let alone multiple Defenses) is a bad idea!  


You know how ESPN or Yahoo will say a player is rostered in 98% of leagues?  I guess we’re the 2%. 

44 Congrats on the easy money…

Congrats on the easy money. I had an incredible run of success in my league when I was the first one to realize that I could stock up on RBs and WRs, punt on TEs, pick up Matt Stafford in the 10th round, and stream defenses. It lasted about 3 seasons.

49 You do realize Demarius…

In reply to by MJK

You do realize Demarius Thomas is hurt and probably not playing this week against the Pats, and hasn't played for the Jets yet.  As a Jets fan I would have preferred the Jets kept the 6th round pick, since devoting resources to a lost season is really foolish.  But if you want to convince Belichick to trade those two rookies who beat Thomas out for a roster spot to the Jets, please do so.

28 Boston Sports Journal is…

Boston Sports Journal is reporting that the Pats are on the hook for 2 weeks of pay, but can probably get out of paying him anything else. Behavior clause.

Wow, if so, sending those texts on Wednesday cost him $9M. What an idiot.

37 See my point above about a…

See my point above about a common-sense advisor. Ideally such stupidity wouldn't make it through the average person's common Sense detector, but his behavior to this point doesn't inspire much in his abilities for common sense.


At this point he might be better off just adopting the George Costanza philosophy of doing the opposite. 



39 Common sense advisor, as…

Common sense advisor, as known as a lawyer. Problem is you can't make people listen.


Life in family law:

Lawyer - "Now listen, for the next week, you absolutely can't do X, got it?"

Client - "Totally, no problem."

(15 hours pass, phone rings)

Client - "So, umm, yeah, is it OK that I did X again?"

Where X is some combination of texting the wrong person, posting dumb crap on Facebook, or smoking weed.



45 Common Sense Advisor

Every so often people ask me "if you could meet a (famous person etc...) who would it be". I'm always tempted to pick someone like AB, or Johnny Football, or peak Mike Tyson, just to silently observe the crazy close up, to know what it's like to see someone both out of their damn mind and with unlimited resources to indulge the crazy and (Mike Tyson e.g.) buy that set of tiger cubs as pets and just see how it goes. I'm personally emotionally incapable of overpaying for lunch - I think it would be educational.

43 Thank goodness. I hated the…

Thank goodness. I hated the signing from the start and liked it less with each passing day. I was beginning to have serious misgivings about following the team if they kept him any longer.

55 I hear there's no truth to…

I hear there's no truth to the rumor that the XFL has already reserved a "He Jack Me" jersey for Brown.

72 Not integrity

It wasn't his sex crimes that led to his departure from the Patriots. They could have figured that out last week. What changed is that the Patriots were informed that Brown would be on the exempt list, meaning that the Patriots would still have to pay him while not playing him.

80 Source?

In reply to by morganja

I don't see one linked or cited . . .

83 No, what changed was that…

In reply to by morganja

No, what changed was that Brown sent threatening texts to a potential witness/victim, that were made public. This happened while a member of the Patriots, unlike his other alleged and proven transgressions, and presumably after the Patriots had told him to shape up.  


86 So you agree that it wasn't…

So you agree that it wasn't the sex offences that caused the Patriots to release him. The timing points to only one possibility. The NFL was about to issue their ruling. The Patriots were informed, and made their move. It was totally about the money for them. They had zero problem with what Brown had done. 

90 Of course they had zero…

Of course they had zero problem with that Brown had done.  I fully expect we will find out that Kraft (and Sheldon Adelson, of course.) was a silent partner with Epstein. Gillette Stadium was probably built with sex-trafficking money via a hush-hush loan from Epstein.  But Robert Kraft's best friend Goodell will make sure that never comes out.  Even if Goodell and his lieutenants have to personally destroy tapes to make sure of it.

99 Cognizant dissonance. How do…

Cognizant dissonance. How do evil men continue to do evil? By their supporters blindly supporting them no matter what they do. 
The Patriots are trying to have it both ways. They wanted to employ Antonio Brown up until the point that the NFL told them that he was going on the exempt list. Then they cut him. Not over his behavior, which they knew about last week, but about having to pay him while not being able to play him.
They are claiming that they cut him over the 'threatening text'. Then they are claiming that he violated the availability clause so they now don't have to pay him the signing bonus.
The problem for them is now their 'availability clause' is based exclusively on the 'threatening text.'
Was it a threatening text? Probably. 
Was the text enough by itself to get a player's contract terminated without paying the signing bonus?
They only way that the Patriots can make a claim on the unavailability clause is if they were informed by the NFL that Brown would be unavailable.
They cynicism and complete lack of integrity in the Patriots is extreme, even for the pack of integrity challenged people that own the NFL. 

101 **** off

Why is it cynical or lacking in integrity to realize that judging such matters is not actually your Job. BB is an expert in football and (self professedly) not much else, why is it bad that he looks to the justice system and/or the league to determine whether a man should be eligible to play football. I'm so sick of the virtue signalling culture that acts as though every person should take on themselves to be the moral arbiter of the entire world. How about BB be a football coach/GM and just be that - I find his approach utterly refreshing.