Blog Entry

Steelers dispel notion they don't have Ben's back

Posted on: January 31, 2011 9:18 pm
Edited on: January 31, 2011 11:45 pm
 
Posted by Will Brinson

UPDATE 11:37 p.m. EST: Peter King has issued a clarification on Goodell's lightning quote about how not one of "two dozen" Steeler players came to Roethlisberger's defense. Goodell was referring to two dozen NFL players in general, not two dozen Steelers.

----------

FORT WORTH, TX -- Following Ben Roethlisberger's suspension to start the season, there was plenty of speculation that he wasn't the most popular person in the Steelers locker room.

On Monday, Peter King of Sports Illustrated posted in his weekly Monday Morning Quarterback column a quote from Roger Goodell that emphasized just how little the Steelers had Ben's back.

"Not one, not a single player, went to his defense," Goodell said after revealing he talked to "two dozen" Steelers players. "It wasn't personal in a sense, but all kinds of stories like, 'He won't sign my jersey.'"

Roethlisberger, asked Monday about the report, didn't necessarily dispel the notion.

"I'm not sure," Roethlisberger said. "I wasn't there. I don't know exactly what was said, so it's hard to say."

The report obviously stings for Ben, but it's far more indicative of how Steelers players perceive their quarterback, making their responses far more interesting.

However, most of the players asked seemed to indicate they felt differently than King reported, including wideout Hines Ward.



Ward wasn't the only one, though.

"I was highly upset by this whole situation," linebacker James Farrior said. "When Roger Goodell came to us in teh preseason, I think I was the guy who asked him a lot of the questions about Ben. I was pretty upset about it.

I really didn't get any answers from him that I was looking for, but I was definitely disappointed in what the verdict was and how they proceeded."

Brett Keisel, he of the most amazing beard in the world, was even more emphatic with his defense of Roethlisberger.

"I've always had Ben's back," Keisel said. "Even when everything was going on, Ben and I have had a very good relationship.

We're close friends on and off the field. I think everyone was behind him. Everyone just didn't know how to respond to all the questions and all the scrutiny."

So maybe that's the answer -- no one knew how to respond. And that's logical, too, because of the situation with which they were approached.

Goodell was asking them to provide input on a player in a very sticky situation, involving an alleged act that was so squeamish it wasn't easy to broach in the media, much less in a one-on-one conversation with the man in charge of disciplining the entire NFL.

Or maybe the members of the Steelers didn't have Ben's back when they were asked before the season. That's acceptable, even if it's a little awkward.

Because at the end of the day, he's helped the team get a shot at their third Super Bowl ring since he took over as quarterback. And that means that -- all issues of personal redemption aside -- he's rehabilitated himself as a teammate and member of the Steelers workforce.

For a team charged with winning football games, there's not much more they can really hope to expect.

For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow @cbssportsnfl on Twitter and subscribe to our RSS Feed.
Comments

Since: Dec 2, 2011
Posted on: January 10, 2012 10:11 am
 

Steelers dispel notion they don't have Ben's back

Simply put i evaluate the actual wp web-site layout, just exactly within ever get which it by way of?


dsfjwerw
Since: Dec 2, 2011
Posted on: January 5, 2012 11:29 am
This comment has been removed.

Post Deleted by Administrator



jhfgdters
Since: Dec 2, 2011
Posted on: December 9, 2011 4:58 am
This comment has been removed.

Post Deleted by Administrator




Since: Dec 28, 2007
Posted on: February 1, 2011 2:39 pm
 

Steelers dispel notion they don't have Ben's back

spiralarchitech,
I certainly am glad that you live in a country that allows free speech, trial by jury, and idiots such as you to broadcast your inane slurs.How you ever got a reputation of 86 and all-star level has to be due to the number of your rants, not the validity thereof.  You certaionly paint with a broad brush (or do you use your fingers?) when you state that all who support Ben are scumbags, but I guess it takes one to know one.  Perhaps that is the only thing you really knos?




Since: Jul 29, 2009
Posted on: February 1, 2011 1:22 pm
 

Steelers dispel notion they don't have Ben's back

All you Steeler fans are getting what you deserve.The guy is a scum bag.No one, not even ones own teamates will support a RAPIST.After watching the officials hand you folks the last 2 Super Bowls, there is no way on Gods little green earth the league(REFS) will let the Steelers win.Look at Vegas with the spred.The AFC has been clearly the dominate confrence for a decade.The Steelers are 15-3, the Pack 13-6, how is PITT NOT FAVOURED?Does Vegas know something we don't?It's as if they want people to load up on Pitt so they can make a killing.IT WON"T EVEN BE CLOSE.Holding bring that TD back, unsportsman like conduct, offensive interfearance in the end zone bring that TD back.Now it's your turn.I fully expect Ben to be run out of town after the next offence in the near future.Scum Bag fans supporting a Rapist, makes me sick.



Since: Oct 22, 2008
Posted on: February 1, 2011 12:41 pm
 

Steelers dispel notion they don't have Ben's back

@ SuperDuperSteelersfan:

'Nuff said.  You, my good friend, are an idiot.

Big Ben admitted to Goodell that he may have done things against the girl's will...however, since she is the best friend of his fiance,
some good came out of it as he is now getting married.

Big Ben rocks.



Since: Jan 6, 2010
Posted on: February 1, 2011 11:52 am
 

Steelers dispel notion they don't have Ben's back

all issues of personal redemption aside -- he's rehabilitated himself as a teammate and member of the Steelers workforce.

I have been beating this drum against God-dell for a long time as he has demonstrated, time after time, his affinity for making inane rulings that mostly are biased against the Steelers.  I am also certain if Pittsburgh wins God-dell will only make a brief appearance and disappear from the scene.  I further predict he will not be photographed with Ben whether they win or lose.

I would bet that the great majority of the Steelers and fan's have Ben's back and that only the Vegas boys have God-dell's interests at heart.  Why else would GB be a favorite in the game?  They are well aware of God-dell's wishes and actions to undermine Pittsburgh.

I hope and pray Ben does not get into a pissing match over God-dell's latest lies about Ben and his team mates....the reason, he would suspend him again and probably just before kickoff.

Some may feel my case is overstated...but it is my story and I will stick by it until someone, somewhere, wises up to this loser and shows him the door to the Hall of Shame.  



Since: Aug 30, 2007
Posted on: February 1, 2011 9:21 am
 

Steelers dispel notion they don't have Ben's back

It isn't his backside Ben gets into trouble with, it's his frontside.



Since: Oct 1, 2009
Posted on: February 1, 2011 12:33 am
 

HOW RIDICULOUS!!!!!!.THE TRUTH IS ON TAPE

 Mendenhall clearly has his backside.  It was captured during some game footage.  He was even pretty gentle about it.  



Since: Sep 13, 2007
Posted on: February 1, 2011 12:27 am
 

Steelers dispel notion they don't have Ben's back

I am disappointed that the NFL commissioner would choose the days before the superbowl to claim that the players on one quarterback's team did not have his back. It's as if he is trying to rattle one team. Peter King claimed in an interview that Goodell was seeking a theme of "redemption" in the handling of some cases this year including Ben's situation as well as Micheal Vick's. I am not sure who designated Goodell to be a judge or god. 
If anyone watch the pro bowl - that may be the type of game that Goodell envisions for the regular season. Plenty of scoring, splash plays, and no hard hitting. It did have the best television ratings for the pro bowl in twelve years - he is probably contacting the competiion committee now to asee what changes can be made for the next regular season (2012?) so that they can emulate the success of thispast pro bowl.


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com