Sour grapes baseball writers say Julian Edelman shouldn’t have been allowed to play in Super Bowl LIII

WEEI Boston

For once, the most absurd anti-Patriots take doesn’t belong to Max Kellerman or Rob Parker. Though they both tried to rip Tom Brady in the immediate aftermath of his sixth Super Bowl victory –– Parker said Brady still isn’t the GOAT –– they at least acknowledged the right of each Patriots player to play in the game. That may seem like a simple baseline, but some are making the argument Julian Edelman, who came away with the MVP trophy, should have been sidelined due to his PED suspension at the start of the season.

USA Today’s Nancy Armour is leading the proverbial charge, penning an op-ed outlining her ridiculous case. Even though Edelman missed the first four games of the season, which is the collectively bargained punishment for a first-time offender, she thinks the discipline should’ve been harsher. 

“You can argue that Edelman shouldn’t even have been on the field,” she writes. “That he should have lost his postseason privileges as part of his punishment for trying to game the system. That his third ring is already tarnished.”

In the NFL, players who are suspended for testing positive for PEDs are eligible for the postseason. That’s no longer the case in MLB, which enacted its new harsher policy in 2014. There’s a double-standard when it comes to how each sports league legislates PED use. This is not breaking new ground.

#football, #professional

compose new post
go to top
go to the next post or comment
go to the previous post or comment
toggle comment visibility
cancel edit post or comment