With the sale of the Chicago Cubs agreed to (but not final), is the Chicago Tribune sports desk demonstrating its independence and tearing into the struggling Cubs in a way that perhaps they wouldn't have, say, two weeks ago?

We and others have long been critical of the Trib's coverage, though largely for logical fallacies, bad writing, or lack of effort or incisiveness.

Now, however, the tone coming from the band of not-so-merry reporters seems to have hardened.

Today, Paul Sullivan - whose smugness is belied by his utter lack of talent or creativity - blames Milton Bradley for keeping the racism story alive, even as he makes it clear it was the reporters who were pushing the storyline:

When Milton Bradley grounded out with the tying run on second in the ninth inning of Thursday's 5-4 loss to the Nationals, the game ended.

But the real story was just beginning because Bradley refused to let it end.

The Bradley saga took another strange turn when the Cubs outfielder claimed the media "twisted" his comments Tuesday and Wednesday about being the victim of racial abuse from fans in Wrigley Field. It all started when Bradley was asked if he was "misunderstood."

In short, Sullivan is criticizing Bradley for not refusing to answer the media's questions. Note the "was asked" in the above paragraph. Who did the asking, Paul? You? A reporter? The clubhouse guy?

Therefore, it is fair to ask who exactly is keeping the story alive at this point, as ACB notes.

In another story today, Sullivan lets Z twist for a few paragraphs before making it clear he was only joking about wanting to play elsewhere.

Carlos Zambrano is not going to let Milton Bradley have all the fun.

While defending himself for playing softball with his daughter during his recent rehab stint brought on by his back issues, Zambrano wondered if he would get the same kind of media scrutiny playing elsewhere.

As noted below, Phil Rogers is also in the Trib today saying the Cubs need to cut Milton Bradley. For the children. Or something like that. And he blames Bradley for all of the team's troubles:

For a variety of reasons, almost all of his own making, Bradley has not been a contributor for manager Lou Piniella and the Cubs, at least not in normal terms. You could count him -- and Hendry's decision to get him -- as the leading contributor to the epic 2009 disappointment.

This simply is not true, and Phil - or at least his editor - knows it. As we said in the below post, this is only true if you believe the following:

1. Bradley separated Aramis Ramirez's shoulder.

2. Bradley sold Geovany Soto his dope and Oreos

3. Bradley Gilloolied Alfonso Soriano's knee and forced him to play on it game after game.

4. Bradley blew leads in the bullpen.

5. Bradley batted for the second baseman all year.

I don't concede any of the above, so I must presume Phil Rogers is being intellectually dishonest, and the Trib is letting him do it.

Additionally, Sullivan rouses himself to use the Hardball blog - long the playground of Sox beat reporters - to take another whack:

The Cubs would like Bradley to stop talking about his alleged problems with fans, and do not believe his claim that he's been the target of racial abuse at Wrigley Field.

Cubs security insists there has been no incident this season in which a fan has been removed for inappropriate comments directed towards Bradley, and a team spokesman said Bradley has not asked them to remove anyone for targeting him. 

To be fair, Cubs security is also the crack group that ejected the wrong player for dumping beer on Shane Victorino. So their ability to identify troubles in the bleachers is a bit suspect at best.

Say what you will about Steve Rosenbloom, he is at least consistently assish, though he doesn't miss the chance to pile on and say Bradley's claims of racism are unfounded because ... well, because he wouldn't name chapter and verse what was said and by whom:

He made sure everyone knew he was a target. Then, just to make sure, he played the martyr.

Racism is serious. If you are concerned or angry enough to put that in the public discussion, then you seemingly should be motivated to explain when and where this happened. How else do you take a step toward keeping it from happening again?

But when Bradley offers only cynicism and sarcasm, he diminishes the severity of the issue. Moreover, he does a disservice to those suffering abuse but who are willing to fight the fight head on.

Rosenbloom criticizing someone from employing "only cynicism and sarcasm" (not true, by the way)? Some would call that irony. They would be wrong. It's rank hypocrisy.

Finally, the radio arm of the World's Greatest Newspaper (good one) offers up this poll:

Cub's (sic) right fielder Milton Bradley says fans have been racially taunting him.

  * It's the same taunting every player hears, and he needs to get over it.
  * I've heard offensive racial taunts, and they need to stop.

Whether the complaints are valid or not, this may be the first time I've seen a press corps be so dismissive of a racially charged complaints (on the heels of those made by others, no less). They usually love that angle.

All of these stories appear today. While I have problems with each of them (though valid points, concerns and issues underlie each story), it is worth wondering: Is the Trib sports desk collectively taking shots they wouldn't have taken before the sale deal was reached?

Perhaps. But they seem to be getting away with a lot today.