Ok, so Steve Weatherford is a punter. But his latest call out in the media that Sean Payton is breaking the rules of his suspension terms reminds me an awful lot of this:
Mind you Weatherford, who happens to be a former Saint, isn't going public with this theory because he has a shred of proof or evidence... he's just theorizing. He's just talking in hypotheticals and creating unsubstantiated rhetoric. For the New York Times to waste everyone's time with something so asinine is laughable. I'm not even suggesting that Sean Payton doesn't somehow communicate with the Saints. I think everyone acknowledges that it's a possbility, even the NFL. But why call out a peer like that unless you have evidence? Actually, why call out a peer even if you have evidence? Congrats, Steve, you are the newest idiot kicker (or punter). This is really nothing new with you, though, using questionable judgement. But I'll tell you why:
Clearly Weatherford is still bitter than Sean Payton canned him after the 2008 season. Let's call a spade a spade here, this is a punter's attempt at retribution. Sean Payton drafted Thomas Morstead in 2009, the draft right before the Saints won the Super Bowl, and sent Weatherford packing for a promising rookie. Morstead would go on to win a Super Bowl ring in his rookie season, a prize Weatherford no doubt thought was destined for him. And shame on the New York Times for giving a punter, the lowlife pond scum of the NFL (excuses to Thomas Morstead), for giving him one of the biggest platforms to spit out unfounded jibberish. The lowest possible profile player with an axe to grind, sounds like a reliable source to me, especially when he offers no source for his claim. And bloggers continue to get blasted as illegitimate by the "real media". Now I know why you guys read my stuff instead of theirs. Some standard they set.