Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 14 of 14

Thread: A question for the defenders

  1. #11
    Legend
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    12,902

    Re: A question for the defenders

    Quote Originally Posted by SanAntonioSteelerFan

    Burgh86, many valid points there, and easy to read, thanks!

    I think those fans that insist that Ben needs to be traded because Holmes was traded need to consider that the situations are quite different, with Holmes having gotten arrested and even found guilty on multiple occasions. Additionally, he failed the "show me remorse" test. I think Ben hasn't quite yet, though he will have if he fubars again.

    And I think the Steelers should be well protected against charges of racism (Ben treatment vs Holmes treatment) when one considers James Harrison's treatment (didn't he admit to choking his child's mother?).

    But - you're right - it's more emotional than logical. So, it's pretty tough on Ben and the Steelers right now. I have a feeling that over the weeks, if it doesn't get worse for Ben because of new revelations, it will get better!

    (I admit it, that's stolen from the weather forecaster's training manual, fall back forecast #14c: "Weather will improve later this week, unless it doesn't." !).
    Holmes definitely showed no remorse but we need to remember it's Twitter and people do stupid things when typing on a computer.

    If Holmes had 3 or 4 more years on his contract he would still be here. It's not racism it's contract and player value. Let's keep it 100 on this suspensions and Rooney way. Ernie Holmes shot a cop in the foot for no reason at all and he didn't miss a practice. We aren't as pure as we think we are... Cedric Wilson was cut for not upholding the "Steeler way" but James Harrison chokes his girl and missed how many games?

    If our WR depth looked like our QB depth Holmes would be at OTA's.

    While I don't see racism many will... it's not like we got rid of Faneca right after he threw the FO under the bus... we didn't cut Reed even though he has a long list of drunk behavior. It's depth chartism IMO.... we had Ced and Holmes and while Holmes was much better then Ced with a 4 game suspension and a new contract coming up it was a logical decision that can be dressed up as putting our foot down.

    Funny how we never put our foot down with Holmes after the first 5 incidents when he had a few years left on his contract. It's no different then "waiting til after the draft" with Ben's punishment but we deal Holmes for a 5th and some popcorn in the heat of the night like he was a vampire who would melt before sunrise.

  2. #12
    Hall of Famer Sugar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,087

    Re: A question for the defenders

    Quote Originally Posted by brothervad
    Sugar,

    I am curious, why does the Steeler Nation have to blindly accept Ben's version? It's a person's perogative to question and have an opinion.

    I have already stated in other threads that I don't know what happened that night.

    People say that the DA not bringing charges means that he is all in the clear.

    Did you listen to the DA? It was very clear from what was amassed that he couldn't bring a case, but you could tell that he WANTED to be able to bring a case.

    I don't back a guy just because he can throw the ball and win Super Bowls. If that is your criteria then fine, but a lot of people have different criteria.

    I don't have a problem with your support for Ben, but please quit thinking that you and your bretheren have the insight to Ben or how the Nation should or should not support someone.

    At a minimum there are some serious character quesitons surrounding BB. We as fans have every right to ? and make our own decision about Ben.

    The Nation is still strong...just some of us have serious questions surrounding one of the guys who is currently wearing the team's colors.

    I apologize if you take this the wrong way, but I get sick of the thought police...you have a right to rant about it, but I have a right to rant about your rant

    brothervad

    PS one other thing...if the Steelers do trade Ben will you quit supporting the Steelers? My bet in no...you will be mad, but guess what you are a Steeler fan. And many years from now when Ben is long gone from the game you will still be a Steeler fan (more than likely)

    please try to separate a Steeler fan from being a Ben fan. They are very different.
    Nobody has to accept Ben's verson, but why should they accept hers? She's the one that made the accusation, not him.

    As for the DA, of course he wanted to bring a case. That would have been a career maker for him. I deal with these people all the time and just because someone is on the law enforcement side of things doesn't mean that they don't want advancement or at least an additional 15 minutes.

    I back Ben for many reasons, including the fact that he is our QB, but that isn't the extent of it. In all of these threads, no one has given me a single reason why we should put any stock into a word the accuser said. Not one.

    He has been extremely charitable with his police dogs among other things. He has refused to throw his underperforming OL under the bus and treats them like kings. He hasn't laid blame on the Defense that gave away 10 point leads in the fourth quarter like it was trendy. He always fights to win and doesn't give up on plays.

    You are right about the fact that I am a Steelers fan first. I was a fan long before he came around and will be long after he's retired (Lambert is my all-time fav). That said, if the Steelers were to unload Ben simply because of appearances and without any real evidence it would be the worst lapse in judgment in the history of the franchise. I'll continue to pull for the Steelers, but will root for Ben aside from that.

    I hope that makes sense.

  3. #13

    Re: A question for the defenders

    Quote Originally Posted by feltdizz
    I will still cheer Ben on the field regardless of all the talk and media blitz against him but off the field I can't vouch for him.

    My question for those who think Ben is 100% clean and is being lynched by the media. Just wondering if this is due to honestly not being able to cheer him if he is the bar bully he is reported to he regarding women? I ask this because I read about how it was never established he touched her, he isn't responsible for checking her ID, he was never in the bathroom with her, he never said sex so the contact was of the friendly nature... The cop is resigning because he wants to open a school for the blind...

    Its the stupid sh!t being said that makes me wonder if some fans are turning this latest episode into a G rated Pixar Cartoon when we know it's more like a NC 17 straight to DVD short film.
    The main reason I still reserve judgment regarding Roethlisberger’s alleged guilt is the nature of the typical media presentation. The deductions are presented in sequential fashion so the observer, if not cautious, performs an almost pseudo-gestalt closure with the presented information. An example would be the conspiratorial slant granted to the “bully boys” incident in which an alleged blocking scheme was performed so Roethlisberger could perform his premeditated plan. The reader might assume that Roethlisberger and the “guards” had pre-scripted the scheme, but isn’t this hearsay predicated on a potentially spurious correlation? In fact, isn’t it possible that Roethlisberger had no idea that the blocking, if not entirely fictitious, was actually occurring? He may simply have entered the restroom on the assumption that the girl was interested in some form of physical contact, and had no idea what was transpiring outside. With regard to the erased “tapes” and quickly sanitized restroom; is it just possible, but somewhat mundane to assume that this might simply be normal protocol. Further, I read one account that claimed all four sorority sisters were heavily coerced into imbibing shots of alcohol; this seems statistically unlikely that all four would be abstaining as a cohort when is appears their goal was to become intoxicated. Incidentally, I coordinate and facilitate court-mandated domestic violence psychoeducation groups on a weekly basis. I am professionally aware of the compartmentalized cognitions and insidious sense of entitlement that certain men foist upon woman, but I still reserve judgment…

  4. #14

    Re: A question for the defenders

    Quote Originally Posted by feltdizz
    While I don't see racism many will... it's not like we got rid of Faneca right after he threw the FO under the bus... we didn't cut Reed even though he has a long list of drunk behavior. It's depth chartism IMO....
    "depth chartism"
    It is the most evil of all bias
    Also known as "the silent predudice"

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •