Ben, Goodell, Vick, Pacman etc...

Is race an issue in the suspensions??

  • No, only the players with convictions should be suspended

    Votes: 4 30.8%

  • Yes, any type of trouble civil or legal should be suspendable

    Votes: 9 69.2%
  • Total voters
    13

Share this page

LVent*

LVent*

disgusted
Joined
Dec 27, 2004
Messages
12,975
Reaction score
515
Points
113
Age
43
Location
pittsburgh
Its been brought up alot over that past few days that if Roger doesnt suspend Ben the African American NFL players are going to be taken back by this. My question is what do you honestly feel. Is Ben being sued in a civil court the same as Vick funding dog fight? Pacman's many felonies? Buress shooting himself at a club? I cant recall the other names thrown out at the present time....


The other issue is the handling of Holmes some are saying if the Rooney's dont suspend Ben, then the locker room could be fractured. Well I say they traded Holmes for dodging a piss test netting him a 4game suspension....
 
LVent* said:
Its been brought up alot over that past few days that if Roger doesnt suspend Ben the African American NFL players are going to be taken back by this. My question is what do you honestly feel. Is Ben being sued in a civil court the same as Vick funding dog fight? Pacman's many felonies? Buress shooting himself at a club? I cant recall the other names thrown out at the present time....


The other issue is the handling of Holmes some are saying if the Rooney's dont suspend Ben, then the locker room could be fractured. Well I say they traded Holmes for dodging a piss test netting him a 4game suspension....
Click to expand...

Honestly, LV, I think it would be a big mistake not to suspend him. I don't think it's a matter of him being sued in civil court at this point. He has displayed a pattern of behavior that really does violate the personal conduct policy. He goes out, gets drunk, hits on women, some report it, some sue him, some don't say a word because they don't want the publicity, scorn, or a violation of their personal tribulations. Is this on the same level as the Vick dog fighting? No, I think it's worse. We're dealing with humans, females, and a man that is smug, not well-liked so it appears from many of the sportswriters and your local analysts, and thinks he's above the law or that he's not doing anything wrong. I think there's a problem with that.

He deserves some punishment by the NFL. If he doesn't get it, I think there just might be a mutiny and a separation of races in locker rooms.
 
I agree with Lisa in that it is bigger than the Dogs because it is humans

Look I love my Golden, great puppy and would be pissed if someone harmed it...but not as much as I would if some ass sexually assaulted a female I know, Sorry to the Dog lovers but I can not compare the two


that said I think like with Pacman, teh NFL should investigate and come to there own conclusion based on the information they find...if that means chasing every lead like teh Manion story so be it


then based on those findings suspend if it is justified, if not then pray the Cycle of Idiocracy Ben displays ends with this latest case

****edit****
I see no race issue but I am a white male, the talking heads on ESPN seem to be calling it a racial issue if he walks with a wrist slap
 
LVent* said:
Its been brought up alot over that past few days that if Roger doesnt suspend Ben the African American NFL players are going to be taken back by this. My question is what do you honestly feel. Is Ben being sued in a civil court the same as Vick funding dog fight? Pacman's many felonies? Buress shooting himself at a club? I cant recall the other names thrown out at the present time....


The other issue is the handling of Holmes some are saying if the Rooney's dont suspend Ben, then the locker room could be fractured. Well I say they traded Holmes for dodging a piss test netting him a 4game suspension....
Click to expand...
I'm an innocent until proven guilty guy, so for me, it's not the same at all.
 
PatsFanLisa said:
Honestly, LV, I think it would be a big mistake not to suspend him. I don't think it's a matter of him being sued in civil court at this point. He has displayed a pattern of behavior that really does violate the personal conduct policy. He goes out, gets drunk, hits on women, some report it, some sue him, some don't say a word because they don't want the publicity, scorn, or a violation of their personal tribulations. Is this on the same level as the Vick dog fighting? No, I think it's worse. We're dealing with humans, females, and a man that is smug, not well-liked so it appears from many of the sportswriters and your local analysts, and thinks he's above the law or that he's not doing anything wrong. I think there's a problem with that.

He deserves some punishment by the NFL. If he doesn't get it, I think there just might be a mutiny and a separation of races in locker rooms.
Click to expand...

See this is where I have trouble with agreeing. Your sounding like some of the media people here verbatim lol. How can you get suspended for doing nothing illegal?

Personally if the steelers slap 2 or 4 games on him I dont really care, as I feel that Dixon/Batch can hold it down. I am more concerned with 2 things : 1) the locker room. Those guys need gel imo... 2) Civil suits are not criminal imo....people in general are just out for the easy buck any more its sad to see
 
mikiemo83 said:
****edit****
I see no race issue but I am a white male, the talking heads on ESPN seem to be calling it a racial issue if he walks with a wrist slap
Click to expand...

its not just espn, its some of the local personalities here as well.
 
LVent* said:
See this is where I have trouble with agreeing. Your sounding like some of the media people here verbatim lol. How can you get suspended for doing nothing illegal?

Personally if the steelers slap 2 or 4 games on him I dont really care, as I feel that Dixon/Batch can hold it down. I am more concerned with 2 things : 1) the locker room. Those guys need gel imo... 2) Civil suits are not criminal imo....people in general are just out for the easy buck any more its sad to see
Click to expand...

Yes, but taking your fanship out of it, if this were another QB on another team, and he exhibited a pattern, whether prosecuted or proven in a court of law or not, the implication is there that this is a prohibited behavior, you would probably agree that his behavior warranted some punishment. If he were a governmental or even just some joe shmoe at the workplace, if he did something that was not proven illegal but was disruptive to the workforce, was outside of acceptable norms, he would be punished...demoted, suspended without pay, transferred, or released. It doesn't have to be an illegal behavior. Why should this be any different?
 
PatsFanLisa said:
Yes, but taking your fanship out of it, if this were another QB on another team, and he exhibited a pattern, whether prosecuted or proven in a court of law or not, the implication is there that this is a prohibited behavior, you would probably agree that his behavior warranted some punishment. If he were a governmental or even just some joe shmoe at the workplace, if he did something that was not proven illegal but was disruptive to the workforce, was outside of acceptable norms, he would be punished...demoted, suspended without pay, transferred, or released. It doesn't have to be an illegal behavior. Why should this be any different?
Click to expand...

I am in total agreement with this post. And not to get too far into the "role model" camp, but I do think these guys are watched - and often adored - by young kids coming up. Is this the example they need to emulate? Raunchy neanderthal snatch grabbing and worse? These pros get ridiculous money to play ball. They need to act like grown ups, at the very least. NOT like the lowest common denominator. Ben needs to get suspended - BY THE LEAGUE.

As to whether this is a race issue, don't really have a strong opinion. But as to a CHARACTER ISSUE - one standard of personal conduct simply has to fit all or it's meaningless hypocrisy.
 
Without actual CHARGES...I believe it is the team's responsibility to suspend. I think the Steelers SHOULD suspend him..not the NFL. The only exception is if Goodell knows a guy lied to his face a la Vick. If Goodell is smart he should advise the Steelers STRONGLY to suspend BR.
Think about it Pats fans...Moss has a pretty checkered history...should the commish have suspended him when that FL chick accused him...even though she dropped it?
 
I think this is a grey area. Players with convictions should definitely get suspended. Players who repeatedly cause off field problems but manage to escape prosecution need to be looked at very closely. Ben is clearly a sexual predator. The team or league needs to tell him to take 4 games off and rethink his lifestyle.
 
I think two reasons it will be the steelers not the Office of Commissioner

1. the players union and the NFL are trying to work out a new deal..it is easier on the whole process to have the team punish Ben for 2 games than the league do it


2. which leads me to - if Rooney says no - I think Roger calls Rooney and tells him you suspend him for 2 games or I suspend him for 4 to force the 1st situation
 
Also, I think if they anticipate LR issues it would be stronger for team unity if the TEAM suspended BR than if the league did it. After all the TEAM traded Holmes for a bag of 34 year old gummi bears. IF it takes the NFL to suspend BR, there could be a PERCEIVED racism by the players in Pitt.
 
This is tricky because Ben, to my knowledge hasn't even been "charged" with anything much less found guilty.

In general, I'm against the commissioner standing in judgement like this. My stance has nothing to do with race because I was against him suspending Vick for two games after he already served his sentence. I mean, I thought that was out of line, the man had already paid for his crime. It reeked of piling on, in a power trip sort of way. Just my opinion.

In Ben's case however, since this is the 2nd time he has been accused of such a horrible offense, if the commissioner, after talking to Ben, thinks he should be suspended, I could certainly live with it. If he doesn't because he hasn't even been charged, I will understand that decision too although, at first glance, it will look like favoritism due to his race.

I voted for 'B' however because I think there can be cases where a player should be suspended even without a legal conviction.
 
I think Goodell's policy has put him in a tough place. On one hand, it's tough to suspend someone if the prosecution declines to pursue charges, but on the other hand, there are valid code of conduct issues to address for players constantly at the wrong place at the wrong time. I don't think you can suspend Pacman without suspending Roethlisberger, but just putting proportionality in place.

The perception of it being a racial issue isn't too far off, IMO, either. I am curious if Roethlisberger were black whether or not this would get the same general lack of coverage that it's received in comparison to, say, Michael Irvin and Kobe Bryant.
 
There's already somewhat of a racial divide in the Steelers locker room. It bore itself out with the team MVP voting a couple years ago. Of course, they won a Super Bowl even with that, so maybe it's not as much of a distraction as you'd think. :shrug:

I agree that the Rooneys should probably suspend Ben for a game, because he brought bad publicity to the team and represented the organization poorly. But the commisioner can't suspend someone based only on accusations. Without proof, you can't suspend him. If you can do that, someone can accuse Brady or Manning or any other important player in the league and get them suspended. Goodell should let the Rooneys take care of this, and probably should encourage them to do so. But I don't think he can really do anything himself without setting too dangerous a precedent.
 
SteelerFan87 said:
There's already somewhat of a racial divide in the Steelers locker room. It bore itself out with the team MVP voting a couple years ago. Of course, they won a Super Bowl even with that, so maybe it's not as much of a distraction as you'd think. :shrug:

I agree that the Rooneys should probably suspend Ben for a game, because he brought bad publicity to the team and represented the organization poorly. But the commisioner can't suspend someone based only on accusations. Without proof, you can't suspend him. If you can do that, someone can accuse Brady or Manning or any other important player in the league and get them suspended. Goodell should let the Rooneys take care of this, and probably should encourage them to do so. But I don't think he can really do anything himself without setting too dangerous a precedent.
Click to expand...


Bull! Goodell can suspend him for violating the NFLs personal conduct. One accusation is questionable but now there is 2 so there is certainly a patten of bad behavior.

I think he should be suspended for 4 games. Tedy Bru brought up a great point last night. He said that when Ben walked down to the "bathroom" to bang a drunk 20 year old he took the Steelers brand adn the NFL brand in there with him.

And there is a racial element to this. I think that Goodell has no choice but to hit him with a 4 game suspension to show that even white QB's are subject to the same rules.
 
PatsFanLisa said:
Yes, but taking your fanship out of it, if this were another QB on another team, and he exhibited a pattern, whether prosecuted or proven in a court of law or not, the implication is there that this is a prohibited behavior, you would probably agree that his behavior warranted some punishment. If he were a governmental or even just some joe shmoe at the workplace, if he did something that was not proven illegal but was disruptive to the workforce, was outside of acceptable norms, he would be punished...demoted, suspended without pay, transferred, or released. It doesn't have to be an illegal behavior. Why should this be any different?
Click to expand...

It has nothing to do with whose team you support at least from my perspective. How about this then, When TB had his wedding didnt something happen where it ended up TB getting sued? Oh well he should be suspended then.

That above statement i just type, how dumb does that sound? He didnt do nothing wrong, no criminal charges but hey he got sued so maybe he did right?

Personally I dont think anything needs done. I dont know what goes on in closed doors when he meets with Tomlin, the Rooney's etc...however. Hell if he did something he told those guys he wasnt going to do or crossed them in someway they will hit him up, I dont doubt that.


I feel that players private lives are their own. If they want to hang out at a bar that serves 300$bottles fine. Or if they want to hang out in places like a local bar with 2$ beers more power to them. I can only speak on how I would carry myself. If i was making big $'s I would still go to the bars I go to now. Aint no one going to tell me where I can and cant go. Thats absurd to me.

But it didnt happen at his work place, it happened 4 states away during the off season. He wasnt reppin the Steelers or on official NFL business. As long as I am not at work or on company time and it wont interfere with work in the future there are no issues. As for goverment work? Its all union shit goodluck seeing one of those clowns fired. ex : http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10095/1047957-53.stm
 
I don't believe PacMan was convicted of anything the first couple of times he was suspended.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top