Salty baseball reporters say Julian Edelman should not have played in Super Bowl LIII
 |
| Mark Rebilas/USA TODAY Sports |
A couple of baseball writers are denying Julian Edelman's incredible performance in Super Bowl LIII, saying he shouldn't have been allowed to play due to his PED suspension that cost him the first four games of the regular season.
USA TODAY's Nancy Armour:
Yet you can argue that Edelman shouldn’t even have been on the field. 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.
It’s been seemingly forgotten now, but the wide receiver missed the first four games of the season for violating the NFL’s performance-enhancing substance policy. In Major League Baseball, that also would have meant he’d be ineligible for the postseason.
Not sure if Nancy knows this, but that's not how football works....
Oh look! Fossil baseball reporter John Heyman weighed in too!
PED users should not be eligible to play in the Super Bowl the same season they are suspended. #superbowl53— Jon Heyman (@JonHeyman) February 4, 2019
New York Times' Tyler Kepner also had something stupid to say:
“A reminder that in baseball, Julian Edelman would not have been eligible to play in this postseason because he served a PED suspension this season,” he tweeted.
Again, football and baseball are different sports with different collective bargaining rules. Someone might want to tell these people that. None of this was a problem until the Patriots won the game, so this goes to show you how much of a bias the national media has against them.
Follow me on Twitter - @JesseGaunce
For more of my articles, click here.
