While Brunt may be a good journalist, it’s his choice of topics which shows his anti-CFL bias. Instead of writing about the big games and outstanding players, his CFL columns amount to the perceived scandals, false accusations and belittling comments about the CFL littered throughout his columns (often in brackets, like, “you’d never see this in the NFL” or “the CFL has never been accused of being a professionally-run league”, etc.) This is consistent with the other Globe & Mail football writers like Naylor and Skeres, who always have a keen eye towards anything which can bring the CFL’s image into disreput…then play it up big. But their daily Bills coverage is full of optimism, with puff pieces on Owens ('he’s really not as big of jerk as everyone says!") But they can turn nasty when the topics come up relating to the Bills move to Toronto, then Buffalo is all bad, bad, bad!
You don’t have to read between the lines to see Brunts and the G & M’s pro-NFL agenda. Their problem is, according to any survey, rating or measure you care to use, the Argos and the CFL are more popular than the NFL in southern Ontario. An NFL team will never be successful in Toronto when 50% of the football fans support another home team. That is what this is all about.
Why do Brunt and the G & M continually smear the CFL? Perhaps they are being secretly funded by the pro-NFL billionaires in Toronto? Perhaps Brunt is angling for a lucrative “PR Director” position for the Bills? Perhaps they are trying to curry favour from the NFL so they could become the lead NFL columnist and publication in Toronto? Since MLSE apparently hates the Argos, will the G & M now get preferred access to the Leafs?