Agree on many points made in the blog, article, and on the board. Let me try to summarize my thoughts:
Roethlisberger is a punk who needs to be knocked down a peg or two.
I would have to agree with this. Sorry, but it happens to many in positions of wealth, status, and/or power. A suspension might actually be the best thing for Ben, IMO. Not great for the team's record, but perhaps good for Ben.
Is it any surprise that young millionaire athletes might be a bit cocky? That any humility shown is merely a practiced response?
Yes...but that does not mean that the Steelers should endorse that attitude or behavior. And eventually, jackasses usually get it where they've been stickin' it, and I'd rather see Ben have an adjustment before he causes himself and the team permanent problems.
I found his argument... unconvincing at best. He's a lawyer? And he doesn't really seem to discuss the case per se, moreso the setting and tactics.
I dunno, call me old fashioned. I still prefer things like... what actually happened... the way those facts will be interpreted under the law... etc.
This guy makes the whole thing sound like who can throw on more window dressing.
Again, the article may be based on legal knowledge, but he's speculating more than Jack McCoy does. It's a guessing game that could
happen, but who knows?
On the other hand, he is right that it looks as if this thing is not going to clear up quickly on either side. EVERYONE has lawyered up; and I would not be shocked to hear that photo op cop tries to get one as well. Sorry to offend, LC, but once the lawyers get involved, you're looking at a long, drawn-out process.
This guy is offering a legal analysis, but very few facts.
Steigerwald acts like he just found out that the Tooth Fairy ain't real.
And there is the problem.
We've all heard the implications that Ben thinks his s*** doesn't stink. I've read posts and heard rumors and listened to commentators that implied Ben loves to bend over and kiss his own arse. We've speculated about this on this very board. I have no firsthand knowledge, but I've seen behaviors and attitudes that have made me think it may be the case.
I believe that the incident in GA backs up my speculation. But again, I was not there and I have yet to hear anything that I could call a "fact" about what actually happened.
As Puma mentions, sounds like "piling on" when you can get away with it. Why was no one pursuing this as a story on Jan. 8, 2009 if there was any truth to it? Why the speculation about Ben hitting the chronic or some other substance? If Steigerwald is a "journalist" then why did he ignore this until he got a blog?
Blogs are designed to be strictly opinion, and they have absolutely no boundaries. My beef is that these are not opinions so much as they are insinuations. Steigs HINTS that he has facts but doesn't produce any real ones. If you think Ben is a jackass, then just leave it at that.
I guess I'm just kind of in the middle on all of this. Glad I could clear that up.