Among the many reasons it's good to be Tom Brady -- the Super Bowl rings, the model/actress girlfriend, the shame-free snuggling with baby goats -- one in particular stands out.
Namely, getting the benefit of the doubt.
A few days ago, Brady voiced his support for teammate Deion Branch, a training camp holdout who wants more money than the New England Patriots currently are obliged to pay him. Without explicitly bashing team management, Brady made his feelings clear: Branch is the most important player on our offense. He's one of the best receivers in the league. Give him what he wants.
How did he do this? He skipped the first few practices. Yes, we're talking about practice, but any holdout large or small for a non-injury reason would get anyone else in the league several days of bad headlines. The team even released a statement that Brady had a "dead arm." What? No one but Mr. Brady would get such treatment.
In other words, Brady made essentially the same argument Drew Rosenhaus made on behalf of Terrell Owens last summer, and also the same argument Owens made on behalf of, er, himself.
Of course, you'd never know this from picking up the sports page.
Think back. Back to the driveway sit-ups. Back to Sal Paolantonio's death row vigil. Rosenhaus and Owens were pilloried for being selfish and disruptive, for putting me ahead of team and failing to honor a legitimate existing contract with the Philadelphia Eagles. Even feckless FEMA director Mike Brown didn't generate as much angry ink. Meanwhile, Brady has been lionized as a selfless team leader who takes care of his own -- in the words of one Boston Globe sportswriter, "a stand-up guy in a stand down situation."
Oh, and he probably helps blind grandmothers cross the street, too. The better to be reunited with their orphaned seeing-eye puppies.
To be fair, there's little unreasonable about commending -- or condemning -- Brady's position.
What's worth noting are the vastly different reactions provoked by Brady and Owens -- proof positive that in sports, what you do is often less important than who you are. At least when it comes to plaudits and put-downs. Indeed, athletic ethics aren't absolute. Or even situational. They're personality-driven. Jake Plummer throws an ill-advised pick into triple-coverage? He's a risk-taking dope who will never, ever learn. Brett Favre throws the same pass? He's a go-for-broke gunslinger who just wants to win. Andre Agassi smashes a racket, back in the days when he had lots and lots of hair? Disrespectful rock n' roll tennis brat.
Agassi smashes a racket during an upset loss at this week's Legg Mason Tennis Classic? The forgivable frustration of a classy legend, raging against Father Time.
Point is, athletes like Owens seldom get the benefit of the doubt. Guys such as Brady get it in spades.
Why? The former are widely loathed; the latter, loved.
Perhaps life really is like high school. Everything boils down to a popularity contest.
With that, Page 2 revisits some (mostly) recent high-profile gaffes, and how the rest of us might have reacted had Tom Brady been the one committing them:
