No Curran did exactly what I said on his podcast and in a few of his post-expose articles. In them he touted Wishersham's "professionalism" and the fact he works hard and had sources. I know at the same time Tom question (as we all did) a number of his more ridiculous premises, but he never came out and flat out said, this was BSPN hit piece design to create a firestorm over nothing and thus generate well needed interest toward BSPN.
Instead, Curran, to some extent, climbed on board that firestorm and an is still riding it as are most of the mediots, even as it dwindles down to the "well if there's smoke there MUST be fire." stage. Remember even though Deflategate was disproven over and over again, even some local guys, and most national guys, will agree, but add, "where there's smoke there must have been something going on". IIRC, I once heard Curran himself say something like, Brady wasn't totally innocent.
Florio consistently takes this take on deflategate. (and I paraphrase). "Clearly the NFL got deflategate wrong. They never proved CONCLUSIVELY that the Pats did anything wrong". See, he loudly IMPLIES that there was something going on, just that the NFL didn't "prove it".
I see the same crap going on with this story. Sure there will be some who question one part of it or another, but no one will question whether the entire story was made out of pure speculation, and was put together SPECIFICALLY to put the Pats in a bad light and generate the benefits of "Patriot hate" and draw interest to their dying business.
You cannot deny that the SPECULATIVE narrative that Wickersham put out there is now being reported as fact in all the rebound stories other write. Christ, didn't some mediot speculate that it was Bill or one of his circle who gave Wickersham the "story" in order to light a fire under Brady?
See what you've done, Luuked. This was supposed to be a quick response to your response, and you got me on a rant, and now I'm late for a lunch date.