I just read the transcript of Mike Vrabels comments with the Kansas City media today and found myself convinced that, while he doesn't say it, Mike Vrabel is clearly pissed at BB for trading him. Check it out... Notice he doesn't answer the question with a strong "That's not true." Instead he answers with a hazy "I wouldn't say that is necessarily true." His language leaves several possible interpretations as to what someone could say about the situation. Vrabel himself wouldn't say that is necessarily true but someone else might be able to say it. Also why does he qualify the truth by putting the word necessarily in front of it? What does that mean exactly anyway? Again, instead of plainly stating, "That's not accurate" he muddies the water so that we don't really know how accurate it is. I mean how can we know if Vrable himself doesn't know. And then we have what may be a thinly veiled shot at Bill Belichick... While I wouldn't say this IS necessarily a thinly veiled shot at BB, I don't know how accurate it is to say it isn't. What do you think? Is Mike Vrabel pissed at BB for trading him to Kansas City?