Surprisingly, the usually contrarian Slimers has this to say in todayyesterday's fishwrap:

Just asking . . . because Plaschke already nailed it perfectly in an earlier column, but after the latest report in The Times that has Uncle Pete saying he'd have said the same things at Mark Sanchez's news conference had it been his own son, I wonder. Does that also mean he would not have sat with his son for the biggest announcement in the kid's life to date? Does that mean he would have given him the cold shoulder or token handshake while walking by him rather than offering a big hug?

Additionally, Slimers considers "Uncle Pete" a poor sport, making reference to the Ken Norton, Jr saga:

Just guessing again . . . the same thing happened when he told Ken NortonJr. to go public and criticize Rick Neuheisel a few weeks ago after a prized recruit turned his back on USC to commit to UCLA. Still waiting for someone besides Norton and Uncle Pete to say someone at UCLA was passing around misleading information.

Hmmm, maybe the (previously suc-loving) media are like rats leaving a sinking ship...

For the Bruins in exile, these clips are from local sportscasters, Steve Hartman and Jim Hill, giving point and counterpoint on Petey's reaction to Sanchez leaving early. Interesting point by Hartman about what Petey is going to say to NFL GM's that wonder why he says Sanchez isn't ready to make the jump. Has Petey created a self-fulfilling prophecy, thereby sabotaging Sanchez's pro chances? Well, that's Petey: the humanitarian.