U mad, bro?: Readers emote about fans at games, protests, anti-maskers, Cam Newton and ... Dan Marino?

There’s no reason to ask if you were mad this week. Everybody got mad at something at some point.

Coronavirus numbers spiked. Bars were shut down again. A partial travel quarantine went back in place.

Worst of all, the New England Patriots upgraded at quarterback!

Yuck! What a terrible week. Here’s how you reacted in this week’s “U mad, bro?”

Harry isn’t buying the hype surrounding Cam Newton going to the Patriots. He thinks I’m off base suggesting the former Carolina Panthers quarterback will make New England three or four wins better than they would’ve been with Jarrett Stidham under center.

And that could impact where the Steelers wind up in the playoff tree. If they make it at all.

“Same impact on the Steelers that Dan Marino had.

See: No Super Bowl wins.

Life is about winning. Not participation trophies.

See: James Harrison.”

I did see James Harrison, Harry. And — as great as he was — he would’ve won nothing but participation trophies if he didn’t have a Pro Bowl quarterback to complement his standout defense all those years here in Pittsburgh.

Newton may not be a Pro Bowler anymore. But he’s better than Stidham.

Now let’s get to your Dan Marino analogy. Marino did impact the Steelers. He impacted them for 421 yards and four touchdowns in the 1984 AFC Championship Game.

True, Marino never won a Super Bowl and only made one during his career. Similarly, though, the Steelers never won a Super Bowl and only made one during his career, too.

I’m not saying Newton makes the Patriots a Super Bowl contender again. I’m saying he makes them a playoff contender again.

One that could wind up with a very similar record to the Steelers.

John was curious to find out how angry the reaction was to my column on Tuesday. It was about the prospect of the Steelers managing to get fans into Heinz Field for games this year.

“I’m aware — mostly from your “U Mad, Bro?” columns — that you get a ration of irrational, hateful emails with just about every piece you write.

Please enlighten us on reader response to this one since you, however timidly, threw out the POSSIBILITY that protests are at least partly responsible for recent covid spikes.

I get the distinct impression such thought isn’t even allowed, let alone actually openly discussed. I’ll be interested to hear of the number and INTENSITY of negative responses you receive.

Keep up the good work,

John”

I don’t get a “ration” of irrational emails, John. I get a glutton’s share.

However, they were practically nonexistent after that piece. The blowback I got on that piece actually came in advance of it when I voiced those opinions on Twitter.

That’s not a coincidence. Because if you read what I wrote in the column, there’s no way to defy the logic or the connection between allowing crowds at stadiums and the mass gatherings of people marching in the streets.

You can’t deny the existence of data to support one as allegedly harmless, while dismissing the other as an egregious risk.

In a column, I have the luxury of space and time to make my points. In a tweet, it comes off as a 280-character “hot take.”

Also, if someone sends me an email, that’s a private correspondence. No one can see it. There’s no opportunity for virtue signaling in an email.

Conversely, that’s Twitter’s main function. So, why bother sending an email if no one can give you the reward of a “like” or retweet? Right?

The column never said the protests shouldn’t have happened. The column never said that the protests were the main reason why covid-19 numbers have spiked. But that nuance could be lost on Twitter.

So, what I’m saying is, if you wanna see some hate spewed back at me over this opinion, just check my Twitter interactions.

It won’t be hard to find.

Speaking of Twitter, “BingeBreaker” checks in on the mask debate. If Heinz Field does eventually allow fans, could they stay masked the whole time?

I can see the highly educated comments already as soon as you typed masks and steeler/pirate games. “I’ll wear gloves, a steel foam beam on my head, a scarf from 1972, paint my face and get black out drunk for games, but wearing a mask is where I cross the line! Tryanny!! pic.twitter.com/MmwmCIvj5i

— Thebingebreaker (@thebingebreaker) June 30, 2020

Stunningly, BingeBreaker, I didn’t get much of that. I think the anti-masking crowd was just happy to see someone sound-off about the apparent government hypocrisy surrounding mass gatherings versus previously stated social distancing goals.

So, they swallowed their usual “I’m a modern-day Mel Gibson in ‘The Patriot’ for not wearing a mask” responses for one day.

Mark is trying to avoid getting too mad over the loss of the NFL’s preseason Hall of Fame Game.

“How about this? Have all NFL teams play weeks 1 and 3 of the preseason — allowing all teams two weeks between games to assess covid-19 concerns before beginning regular season play.

Also allowing competition instead of ‘just camp.’ Still plenty of time to alter home and away aspect.”

Not a bad idea, Mark. Allow roughly a 14-day window to see if infections spike.

I get it. I see you working.

Can I offer you another idea, though? No preseason games at all.

I know, I know. This year, beyond all others, preseason football takes on importance because of the lack of practice time. Agreed, 100%. And it appears as if the league is going to go with just two preseason games.

However, I’d argue not to run the risk of infection outbreaks on meaningless games. I say play Weeks 1 and 2 cold out of the gate like the NCAA does. Then you’ll have an infection sample size by Week 3.

And if it’s awful and the league then must shut it down, at least you’ve had two weeks of national television revenue. You wouldn’t have that in the preseason.

Finally, Marvin reacted to some photos I posted from Pittsburgh International Airport at 11:30 a.m. Tuesday.

No, seriously. I’m not kidding. That place still exists. They didn’t close it down.

Yet.

But it was a ghost town. Borderline apocalyptic.

Did you put a mask on George and Franco?

— Marvin (@MarvinPgh) June 30, 2020

I keep my social distance from statues these days, Marvin. They are the only thing more politically sensitive than masks at this point.

I think Franco Harris is safe. We’ll see about George Washington. Regardless, I wish them both well.

Those guys are getting up there in years, though, right? They shouldn’t be hanging out at an airport.

The exposure risk is too great!