I hate how everyone is saying 'other teams want him'. Yes, that is why the Rams would trade for him. He is a bad QB for THE PITTSBURGH STEELERS now. You know, the team he plays for. It doesn't matter if he's better than the pupu platter Philadelphia is going to throw out now.
And yes, 9-7 with losses to half the shit teams in the league qualifies as a horrible season for the Steelers.
And he's not been the same since that little motorcycle incident. Notice how he keeps having issues.
I would jump all over this trade if I was the Steelers, and usually I don't advise trading proven players for draft picks. But it's the #1 pick. They could get a QB.
EDIT - I also can't believe no one thought 'gee, they just traded their top receiver for a 5th round pick just to get rid of them, it's not outside the realm of possibility they will trade their best player for 2 1st round picks just to get rid of him, either.' They're the Steelers, they probably have a 'we'll win no matter what we do' attitude.
I do not see this happening at all. Big Ben now has image problems to deal with and his off-season is an off-season one would like to forget, but Big Ben is still a legitimate QB (despite having a disappointing 9-7 record...... weird to say a team had a disappointing season when they went 9-7; sorry I live near Buffalo and 9 wins is what you get in 2 seasons combined. Anyway,
The fact is the Steelers have won 2 Super Bowls with Big Ben and is clutch in the playoffs. The Steelers may care about their image, but like any professional sports team, they also care about the win column. If this were to happen by any stretch (and I do mean by any stretch), this would probably be bigger than McNabb with Washington.
Originally posted by lotjxhell Bonds got a standing O at times.
Out of all the things said in this thread this is by far the most outrageous. What Pirates games have you been to? As a regular visitor to Three Rivers/PNC since the mid-80's I can tell you that Bonds wasn't liked in Pittsburgh even before he left them for Giants. Pittsburgh fans knew very early on that Bonds was the douche we all know now. When he played for Pittsburgh he wasn't even the first or second favorite outfielder.
As for Big Ben. To say he didn't have a good season last year is nuts. The Steelers were a top 10 passing team in 2009. Their rushing and defense failed them. That being said I could live with or without Ben. If the Steelers keep Ben I'm sure they'll be good again. If they get rid of Ben I'm sure they'll be good again.
Originally posted by lotjxDuring his chase for the home run record.
Your contention that Pittsburgh fans cheered one of the most reviled figures in baseball certainly strengthens your argument that they'll turn on Ben, win, lose or draw!
Originally posted by Psycho Penguinhe's not been the same since that little motorcycle incident.
He's only won one Superbowl since then. Worra loser.
He is a bad QB for THE PITTSBURGH STEELERS now.
Again, no he isn't. He's a year removed from a Superbowl and last year posted a QB rating over 100 while throwing for 4,300 yards. He ain't bad. He's maybe even just a smidge above average.
9-7 with losses to half the shit teams in the league qualifies as a horrible season for the Steelers.
No, it's a bad run of games. They also beat a good number of the better teams in the league. If their defence had managed to stop the Raiders driving for a TD in the last two minutes, or they'd sneaked an OT win over the Ravens (when Roethlisberger didn't play) they'd have been 10-6 and a dangerous wild card. It ain't great, but hyperbole does your argument no favours.
But it's the #1 pick. They could get a QB.
Maybe one as good as Alex Smith, or Tim Couch, or JaMarcus Russell!!
Trading proven franchise QBs under 30 for the uncertainty of draft picks. Rarely Smart.
It doesn't matter if he's better than the pupu platter Philadelphia is going to throw out now.
I was a little worried about the Eagles' QB situation, but if Roethlisberger's terrible and we merely have a "pupu platter" you've filled me with renewed confidence. I thank you.
I can't thank you however for being partly responsible for enticing me to post three times in a thread about a trade that has about a 0.1% chance of coming to fruition (don't worry, I mostly blame ME for not having something better to do than respond).
If you want to argue two first rounders is a decent deal for him, fair dos. I disagree strongly, but hey, to each their own. When you start trotting out stuff like "Ben Roethlisberger's a terrible QB" and "he's never been the same since his accident" (when he's not only won a SuperBowl since then but led his team down the field late in the 4th to do it) you just sound very silly indeed.
Tavaris Jackson is a terrible quarterback. JaMarcus Russell is a terrible quarterback.
Well, there were really only two games all year that he came up short in, the second games against Cincinnati and Cleveland. The rest of the losses all came from the defense blowing late leads, including the particularly funny Oakland game when Roethlisberger led three straight go-ahead TD drives and the Raiders scored again right after. He also took them into FG range in overtime in the Kansas City game, got knocked out of the game, and they lost. And then he missed the Baltimore loss. I'm not rationalizing or parsing situations to fit an argument as is customary; there really was that clear-cut of a culprit.
Originally posted by Psycho PenguinGot it, it's everyone else's fault when they go 9-7 but he's the man when they win the Super Bowl. I'm gonna jot that one down.
Look. In the past month, you've compared Brady Quinn to Drew Brees while also arguing that Ben Roethlisberger had a "horrible" season last year (and, as it was one of his best seasons, it stands to reason that you think he his "horrible" in general). You suggest the Steelers ditch their "horrible" two-time Super Bowl winning quarterback, while you criticized the Browns for ditching a guy who has complete 52 percent of his career passes and has thrown for like 5,000 career yards because he hasn't proven himself to suck enough by your standards yet.
In short, your arguments are ridiculous and without merit, and your absurd oversimplification of the arguments of others is not going to make your nonsense all of a sudden rational.
With the police report out and other details, this guy has problems. One is likely alcohol. The other is his predilictions sexually. The two may be tied together and if he controls the booze his assualts and behavior may take care of themselves. This isn't a TO or Marshall situation. They have done nothing close to this, just pains in the ass. Big Ben needs big help.
I just don't think a QB should be judged solely on numbers. He's the leader of the team and if Pittsburgh wants to be a bunch of thugs then he's the man for the job. They clearly don't want to be thugs, hence trading their best receiver for basically nothing, so what is so hard to comprehend that they might consider trading him? He's not untouchable.
I think the Ben and Kobe Bryant situations are quite similar. It's worked out fine for Kobe - he didn't have to switch teams or anything, got his ring and now that's a small footnote on his career. I suspect it will work out similarly for "His Big" Ben "Was Already Out of His Pants" Roethlisberger.
Holy fuck shit motherfucker shit. Read comics. Fuck shit shit fuck shit I sold out when I did my job. Fuck fuck fuck shit fuck. Sorry had to do it....
Revenge of the Sith = one thumb up from me. Fuck shit. I want to tittie fuck your ass. -- The Guinness. to Cerebus
Originally posted by JayJayDeanI think the Ben and Kobe Bryant situations are quite similar. It's worked out fine for Kobe - he didn't have to switch teams or anything, got his ring and now that's a small footnote on his career. I suspect it will work out similarly for "His Big" Ben "Was Already Out of His Pants" Roethlisberger.
I agree. I think the big outcry right now is mostly because it's the story du jour and there's blood in the water. Not that I'm saying the guy's reputation should be golden right now, far from it. The details of the investigation certainly portray Ben as a boorish jock, an irresponsible playboy, a meathead, not a very cool dude, etc. But the reporting on those details has used leading headlines and constructed a narrative that cherrypicks details and discards the contradicting ones that caused the case to not go forward because it lacked probable cause. It's no surprise that the court of public opinion is killing him like this; they've been whipped into a frenzy by irresponsible, contrived reporting about a girl who was dragged into a bathroom by bodyguards.
The "chicken" comment was an afterthought and said in haste, but you know how I hate doing more than one take of my VYou answers. Absolutely accepted. I cannot accept the terms of this wager quickly enough.