Podcast: How the Antonio Brown deal came together for the Raiders | TribLIVE.com
Breakfast With Benz

Podcast: How the Antonio Brown deal came together for the Raiders

Tim Benz
Pittsburgh Steelers’ Antonio Brown celebrates a touchdown against the Cleveland Browns during an NFL football game at Heinz Field, Sunday, Oct. 28, 2018 in Pittsburgh. (Winslow Townson/AP Images for Panini)

And I thought I had a lot of jobs!

Marcus Mosher works for Bleacher Report, Pro Football Weekly and The Athletic (Dallas).

But most importantly, for our purposes, he’s the managing editor of TheRaidersWire.com, of the USA Today NFL platforms.

In Wednesday’s Sided.co podcast, Mosher joins me to talk about how the Antonio Brown deal came together between the Steelers and Raiders.

LISTEN: Raiders’ view of the Antonio Brown trade

Also, we forecast how he will perform in Oakland and whether the Steelers could’ve gotten more in return for his service. And we debate whether the Las Vegas angle had anything to do with Brown signing off on the trade and his new contract.

Plus, did the Raiders strongly consider bringing Le’Veon Bell on board with him?

Tim Benz is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Tim at [email protected] or via Twitter. All tweets could be reposted. All emails are subject to publication unless specified otherwise.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.