ShareThis Page
U mad, bro? The all-Antonio Brown edition | TribLIVE.com
Breakfast With Benz

U mad, bro? The all-Antonio Brown edition

Tim Benz
| Thursday, March 7, 2019 8:29 a.m
847002_web1_1086127774
Getty Images
Antonio Brown celebrates a touchdown against the Saints in December.

In this week’s “U mad, bro?”, it’s all Antonio angst! Well, except for the weekly mandatory swat at Mike Tomlin, of course.


Gerry in Florida sent me an email responding to our poll about whether people in Pittsburgh hated Le’Veon Bell or Antonio Brown more.

For the record, Brown won with an 88 percent majority.

I wish you would have thrown (head coach) Mike Tomlin in the mix.

Probably would have found him somewhere between the two divas. Maybe closer to Brown than Bell.”

That may be true, Gerry. And that would be too bad. There is certainly anti-Mike Tomlin sentiment within the fan base. I get that.

However, while Tomlin has had his shortcomings, his intention has been to make the team better. Maybe he hasn’t been as good at that task as we want him to be. In his defense, though, Tomlin hasn’t done things to actively extract himself from the team, or withhold his services, while remaining on the payroll.


Someone named the “Say Hi Kid” (I like that, by the way) responded to a tweet I sent Wednesday night.

I noticed the 2017 Steelers-Ravens home game was being replayed on the NFL Network. So I flipped it on.

Happily, the Steelers still won 39-38 … again.

This guy is mad, indeed. Sounds like he wants us to build a wall around Pittsburgh.

And make the Raiders pay for it.


“Jonathon” tweeted me, disagreeing with my preemptive applause of Kevin Colbert.

That’s if Colbert can get a first-round pick in return for Antonio Brown.

What do you mean “only save a million on the cap?”

If Brown is on the Steelers’ roster, they have to account for his salary. Even if he no-shows, or if they suspend him for conduct detrimental, they just save the cash. His cap space doesn’t open.

So if Brown stays — and potentially doesn’t report, like Bell last season — then that’s $22 million against the cap the Steelers can’t spend. Just like they had to set aside $14.5 million last year.

In that scenario, they don’t have the cap space. They don’t have the player. And they don’t have the draft choice.

How does that help?


“Patience8898” also doesn’t agree with my praise of Colbert if he snags a first-rounder in exchange for the disgruntled receiver.

No doubt, Patience. I cosign on that.

Unfortunately, though, in Brown’s case, it’s not a matter of “worth.” Of course, in terms of talent, he’s “worth” a first-round selection. But he’s a guy that Pittsburgh can’t keep. And he doesn’t want to stay. He may not report. And then the Steelers would have all that money tied up like they did with Bell last year.

Given those circumstances, if Colbert gets a top-32 pick, he should also get rose petals thrown at his feet.


“Greg” sent me a Twitter message on a string with some other folks who cover the Steelers in the media.

(I was) Just trying to explain the whole Antonio Brown Saga to a coworker who had never heard of him. I feel ridiculous talking about it. How do you guys do it?

Therapy helps, Greg.


The “Oddschecker” site sent out this question about Antonio Brown’s “next team.”

How about …“perpetually exhausted?”

I know I am! And I don’t even have to pay the guy.

Tim Benz is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Tim at tbenz@tribweb.com 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.