Tim Benz: New info shows Antonio Brown’s helmet tantrum might have been unnecessary | TribLIVE.com
Breakfast With Benz

Tim Benz: New info shows Antonio Brown’s helmet tantrum might have been unnecessary

Tim Benz
1533269_web1_gtr-ABnew1-081319
Raiders wide receiver Antonio Brown hasn’t participated in a full practice for the Raiders at training camp.
Raiders wide receiver Antonio Brown hasn’t participated in a full practice for the Raiders at training camp.

The details surrounding Antonio Brown’s helmet holdout keep getting more amusing.

According to one national report, Brown’s meltdown might have been even more needless than originally thought.

Via ProFootballTalk.com: “Brown can’t use his preferred helmet — a Schutt AiR Advantage — in 2019, because that specific helmet is more than 10 years old. However, because the NFL has not affirmatively banned from use the Schutt AiR Advantage, Brown apparently could use one that is less than 10 years old, if he can find one.”

Oh? Do go on!

“A PFT reader communicated directly with the NOCSAE (National Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment) on this subject, and Executive Director/General Counsel Michael Oliver has confirmed to PFT via email that, indeed, the NOCSAE continues to recertify Schutt AiR Advantage helmets that are less than 10 years old.”

In other words, Mr. Frostbitten Feet can still use his preferred brand of helmet. He just needs a more recent model, as PFT claims to have verified with a source.

To be fair to Brown — and I literally gagged while typing that — the story says the Schutt AiR Advantage was discontinued in 2011. So he needs one manufactured between 2009 and 2011, and he needs one in his specific size.

So, that’s a tough search.

And maybe those with the Raiders equipment office, the NFL, the NFLPA and Brown’s representation should’ve been aware of this potential loophole.

Brown staying away from practice and threatening to retire was basically a child stomping his feet — with pun thoroughly intended, by the way — when that energy could’ve been better served searching for a more equitable solution.

But, hey, why do that when creating a sideshow is so much easier to do?

On social media Monday, Brown posted that he wasn’t happy with the NFL’s ruling against his grievance over the helmet debate.

“While I disagree with the arbitrator’s decision, I’m working on getting back to full health and looking forward to rejoining my teammates on the field,” Brown posted on Twitter. “I’m excited about this season appreciate all the concerns about my feet.”

The next episode of “Hard Knocks” is Tuesday night on HBO. Let’s see if he makes a cameo. Or if this topic does at all.

Based on how scrubbed last week’s debut was, I’m dubious of how directly this issue will be addressed.

Speaking of selective silence, I wonder where all those highly critical national media types are today. Folks such as Amy Trask, Pat Creighton, Andrew Brandt, Kevin Van Valkenburg, Mike Greenberg and that lot.

They are a portion of the group who, back in March, tried to push blame on the Steelers for why Antonio Brown and Le’Veon Bell left. They tried to make it look like the organization was at fault for forcing those players out of town, instead of realizing those two for being the greedy, spoiled, petulant divas that they are.

If you need a refresher on their hot takes, I have one handy.

Since Brown and Bell left, all Brown has done is bring his circus act to Oakland. And Bell has made more news with his rap career than his practices.

I say now, as I said then, I still expect those two to be Pro Bowl performers in their new cities. My commentary about their personalities is independent of my praise for their remarkable talents.

But they are both ungodly goofballs.

This latest uneducated layer to Brown’s unnecessary helmet tantrum is further proof of how narcissism and rational behavior are rarely compatible.

Top Sports Videos

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.