Why is this Mets pitcher holding a chicken?

801142.jpg

Why is this Mets pitcher holding a chicken?

From Comcast SportsNet
NEW YORK (AP) -- Tim Byrdak and the New York Mets just gave new meaning to baseball's farm system. Thanks to the Mets' wacky reliever and a successful Twitter search, the most famous chicken in New York is headed to its new home. And surely, "Little Jerry Seinfeld" will be much more comfortable on a farm upstate than it was in the clubhouse at Citi Field. All the fun started last week, when Mets closer Frank Francisco called the Yankees "chickens." Of course, that made for cartoonish tabloid headlines in the Big Apple leading up to the Subway Series. As a prank, Byrdak, the Mets' resident joker, brought a live chicken into the clubhouse Friday, clucking up his teammates. The pitcher even posted a close-up video on Twitter of a chicken bobbing around on the carpet. Byrdak said the chicken, which he named after the funny-looking bird that stole the show on an episode of "Seinfeld," spent a couple of days eating oatmeal and resting comfortably at the ballpark. But then he realized he had to find it a new home. So a Twitter search put him in touch with the Farm Sanctuary of Watkins Glen, N.Y., which sent a representative to Citi Field on Sunday to take the celebrity chicken in a salient exchange that sent the New York press corps scrambling to document an undoubtedly transcendent moment about two hours before the game. "The power of social media saved a bird's life today," Byrdak deadpanned. Francisco explained Friday what he meant by his odd comment, saying he thinks the Yankees often protest calls by the umpires -- especially balls and strikes. He said he was excited to have a chance to strike out the side against them. For their part, the Yankees seemed pretty confused by the whole chicken dance all weekend. Confused, and disinterested. Not so the Mets. "I did my best to stay out of the clubhouse yesterday when they were trying to pull the gag on Frankie. It was pretty funny," manager Terry Collins said Saturday, shaking his head and chuckling. "It keeps the clubhouse loose in certainly an intense situation." Byrdak, of course, attributed his team's five-run first inning Friday night to its new good-luck charm. Francisco might not feel the same way -- after saving the series opener, he was placed on the 15-day disabled list Sunday with a strained muscle on his left side. Earlier in the day, Byrdak acknowledged there was a lesson to be learned from his chicken conundrum: "Always think ahead if you're going to get an animal."

Curran: Can we swear off the stupid questions?

Curran: Can we swear off the stupid questions?

FOXBORO  -- To think there’d be no further questions about the Tom Brady-Jimmy Garoppolo dynamic when Brady’s four-game suspension ends would be moronic.

Bill Belichick won’t like them. He’s destined to give them the verbal Heisman. But there are aspects to the story which demand further interrogation.

So there’s those questions. And then there’s baiting for the sake of baiting, which is what happened Friday morning.

A reporter asked Belichick, “You said Tom will start when he’s eligible. Can you think of an occasion when you named a Week 5 starter in July?”

“Yeah, I don’t know,” Belichick said.

“What happens if Jimmy plays better?”

“Look, I told you what’s gonna happen,” Belichick answered.

Pressing on, the reporter began, “So there’s no, there’s, there’s . . . ”

At that point, with Belichick reacting like he’d come open a month-old-corpse and muttering, “Jesus Christ," the reporter cut himself off.

I’ve been trying to steer clear of the media ombudsman business. But this stuff makes it hard. The first question was obtuse in the extreme. I don’t even know how that gets formulated.
This is not a Brady-Bledsoe scenario.

You have the best quarterback of his generation who – 17 months ago – took down what was supposed to be one of the great defenses in NFL history in the fourth quarter of the Super Bowl. A guy who got smashed all over the field in Denver at the age of 38 and still almost pulled out a win last January.

When that guy’s cleared to play, you sprint him onto the field regardless of the circumstances.

“If Jimmy plays better . . . ”? Better than what? Better than 11 touchdowns, no picks, 116-for-160 and 1,547 yards, which is what Brady did in the first four games last season? Better than Brady played in Denver while getting his head caved in every other play?

I understand that sometimes you have to ask the dumb question to get something on the record, but this was not that. This seemed like someone who really thought he was onto something. Was going to paint Belichick into an uncomfortable corner and hang him with his own words.

Sorry, counselor.

Now, you and I can sit on the front stoop and wonder what happens if Garoppolo plays ridiculously well then Brady comes back and spends four weeks playing like he’s never been on a field before and is clearly an impediment to the team’s success.

Won’t happen. But we can talk about it.

Asking Belichick if he’s gonna go with the hot hand when two days prior he told you what he was going to do is asking for a JC response.

Belichick probably figured that stating Brady was the Week 5 starter before he was asked was the best way to defuse idle speculation. “We’ll see . . . ” or “We always do what’s best for the football team . . . ” would have ignited a thousand hours of conversation about the budding quarterback controversy in New England.

Belichick now knows that the speculation and scenario spinning is coming anyway. JC may hear his name muttered a few more times from the podium between now and October.