NFL Season 2010

[ScoopBrady]

I've never heard Madden this passionate about a topic in my life. I'm not even sure I've heard him this articulate in my life. I wish everyone in this city that is down on Cutler would listen to this. Good stuff, John.

[RobVarak]

But it's so much easier to just call him a sulking p***y and be done with it.

[GTHobbes]

"Are [these guys today] football players? Is that what they call football [these days]? It's not iron man football. Where you stay on the field. For 60 minutes. EVERYBODY. We were iron men. Not a bunch of p***y-foots."

-- Chuck Bednarik, #4 on the "Top 10 Most Versatile" show on NFL Network tonight

Too bad I don't have any audio of Concrete Charlie saying what he thinks about poor baby jay. Did Madden even play football?

[GTHobbes]

"Wall Street likes Steelers as market indicator"

Monday, January 31, 2011
By Len Boselovic, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

"Wall Street's bulls breathed a sigh of relief when the clock ran out on the New York Jets' Super Bowl dreams.

Not only has the stock market never had a losing year when the Pittsburgh Steelers have appeared in the championship game, it racked up a double-digit loss the only time the Jets did.

If past performance were any indicator of future returns, investors could expect Wall Street to be about 20 percent higher by the end of this year.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average has risen an average of 19.5 percent -- excluding dividends -- in the Steelers' seven Super Bowl years, more than double the Dow's average annual performance since the game was first played in 1967.

The Standard & Poor's 500, a much broader market index, has delivered similarly stellar results in Steelers Super Bowl years -- rising an average of 20.9 percent. That compares with an average annual S&P 500 advance of 7.9 percent since 1967.

Meanwhile, after "Broadway" Joe Namath -- a Beaver County native who would be considered a wallflower compared to many of today's NFL celebrities -- guided the Jets to the 1969 Super Bowl championship, the S&P 500 finished the year down 11.4 percent. The Dow did even worse, tumbling 15.2 percent.

Investors who put stock in Super Bowl indicators can also take heart from the Green Bay Packers' return to the game after an absence of 13 years.

In the four years they played in the Super Bowl, the Dow has gone up an average of 14.6 percent and the S&P 500 advanced an average of 21.4 percent. Their averages were goosed by the fact that the Packers made appearances in 1997 and 1998, when the greatest bull market in history swung into high gear."

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11031/11 ... z1CcnJmNk4

[wco81]

There's a difference between correlation and causation.

The big one used to be that when NFC teams won, the market went up.

The worst stock market in decades followed the Giants upsetting the Patriots in 2008. So much for Wall Street preferences.

[GTHobbes]

"In Pittsburgh, Terrible Towels are a birthright.

A hospital in the Pittsburgh area is wrapping newborn babies this week in the yellow Terrible Towels favored by Steelers fans. It's in support of the team's run to Super Bowl XLV on Sunday.

"They're born Steelers fans here in Pittsburgh," Sharon Johnson, clinical supervisor of the birth center at St. Clair Hospital told Patch.com.

New father Justin Eitel was thrilled with the garb his daughter was given.

"She can choose her religion, but she can't choose what team she likes," Eitel told Patch.com.

The Terrible Towels are a staple at Heinz Field for Steelers home games and often appear on the road too when Steelers fans travel to support their team.

Joe Laffey asked his girlfriend, Samantha Grimm, not to allow their baby to be born during the Steelers' AFC title game win.

She obliged, and then Laffey got to wrap his new daughter up in Terrible Towel to celebrate.

"It's pretty awesome," Laffey said. "I got a new baby and a new Terrible Towel. Couldn't ask for anything more."

http://content.usatoday.com/communities ... e-towels/1

[lexbur]

Poor kid... no wonder she's crying.

[GTHobbes]

Great seeing Polamalu get Defensive POY and Harrison come in 3rd, although I probably would've had those 2 reversed (tough call -- they both deserve it). With the guy from GB sandwiched between those 2 at #2, it's pretty cool that the top 3 defensive players in the NFL will all be playing in the SB. Can't remember that ever happening before.

[GTHobbes]

Poor kid... no wonder she's crying.

I wonder if the brownies had taken # 7 instead of Kellen Winslow with the 6th pick in the 1st round back in 2004 if it would've been them and not the Stillers going for a 3rd SB in 6 years on Sunday.

Must really piss ya off to even think about it, huh? Especially with him being from Ohio.

[Danimal]

If the Big rapist is such a great leader I wonder why none of his team mates supported him? Like I said just a mater of time guys like this don't change.

http://superbowlblog.dallasnews.com/arc ... sberg.html

Surprising the commissioner would let this out and of course his team mates now will back pedal and say it isn't true because football players are only brave over Twitter.

[lexbur]

I wonder if the brownies had taken # 7 instead of Kellen Winslow with the 6th pick in the 1st round back in 2004 if it would've been them and not the Stillers going for a 3rd SB in 6 years on Sunday.

Must really piss ya off to even think about it, huh? Especially with him being from Ohio.

Ha!

Actually, let’s see, just off the top of my head... the Browns are “starting over” AGAIN with their sixth head coach in 12 years while the friggin’ Steelers are in yet ANOTHER Super Bowl... spring training hasn’t even started yet and there are already rumors the Tribe’s looking to deal yet another fan favorite, Grady Sizemore... and the Cavs just went 0-for-January!

So the Browns not drafting Rapistberger wouldn’t even crack a Top 100 List of things pissing off Cleveland fans right now.

[GTHobbes]

"Goodell has some explaining to do"

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 01, 2011 12:15 AM WRITTEN BY BOB SMIZIK

"The commissioner of the National Football League traditionally conducts a news conference on the Friday before the Super Bowl. Roger Goodell might not be able to wait that long before addressing a particularly pressing issue.

Goodell made a out-of-character, almost bizarre, comment to Peter King of Sports Illustrated about four weeks ago. King was interviewing Goodell for a story that will appear in the magazine later this week.

King used a quote from that interview in his column on SI.com Monday. Concerning the investigation of Roethlisberger, which resulted in a four-game suspension, King quoted Goodell as saying the following:

“I bet two dozen [Steeler] players … Not one, not a single player, went to his defense. It wasn’t personal in a sense, but all kinds of stories like, ‘He won’t sign my jersey.’ ”

King has since slightly amended that quote. In an explanation at SI.com, he points out that he thought Goodell was referencing Steelers players when he made the comment, which is why he inserted ''Steeler’’ in brackets. He was attempting a clarification. It turns out Goodell was speaking of NFL players in general and not just Steelers players.

That sheds Goodell comments in only a slightly different light. He still appears to be in violation of the strict confidentiality that had surrounded the Roethlisberger investigation. The NFL never released any of that information, even though Roethlisberger was not charged with a crime.

Not only was Goodell breaching confidentiality with this statement and showing an almost immature attitude on a particularly sensitive issue, but he was throwing two dozen players, some of them Steelers, under the bus.

It’s hard to imagine someone of Goodell stature, who should be media savvy, making such a statement. But he did and he has made no attempt to back off of it to date. Certainly, the finely turned NFL PR arm would have reached out by now if that's what Goodell wanted.

If Goodell does not address this issue before Friday, he will be pressed on it at the news conference. Certainly, Roethlisberger, coach Mike Tomlin and other Steelers will be asked to address it a news conferences beginning today.

One last point: This should not affect -- neither negatively nor positively -- the way the Super Bowl between the Steelers and Green Bay is played on Sunday. If the past season has shown anything about Roethlisberger it’s that he can take a clear mind into a game regardless of the events surrounding him. As for the Steelers, they hardly need a grudge against the commissioner to motivate them for this game.

Meanwhile, Goodell is drawing fire in many places for his unusual stance. Here’s a piece by Dan Wetzel, the lead columnist for Yahoo! Sports, which severely criticized Goodell."

http://communityvoices.sites.post-gazet ... iziks-blog

Here's the link to the Yahoo! Sports piece that is referenced:

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=d ... 11&print=1

[GTHobbes]

From the Yahoo piece:

"At Monday’s media session, there was confusion and rebuttals to Goodell’s comments, with Roethlisberger saying he knows – “for a fact” – some teammates did support him. Some of the Steelers agreed. Of course, at this point, what else could they say?

“I’ve always had Ben’s back,” defensive end Brett Keisel said. “Ben and I have a very good relationship. I think everyone was behind Ben all along.”

So now someone isn’t telling the truth.

This is why the subject never should’ve been broached. Nothing good could come of it. Simply put, why would the commissioner of the NFL reveal any inside details of what was supposed to be a closed-door investigation?

Why have Roethlisberger now understand that a bunch of his teammates – and he can assuredly figure out who did and didn’t speak to Goodell – were crushing him, potentially behind his back? And why betray those guys, who certainly didn’t think their honest cooperation would one day become a Super Bowl week mini-controversy?

Most of all, why bring up something that’s negative for the Steelers, Roethlisberger or the NFL?

Goodell’s comments carry no positive information or spin. They do nothing for anyone. At best, it’s an annoying line of questioning that the Steelers are capable of compartmentalizing and ignoring. At worst, it’s an unneeded distraction that only regains steam when the rest of the story is printed in SI later in the week.

The NFL symbol is a shield and the commissioner is the person who’s supposed to carry it.

It’s the basis, Goodell says, for the suspensions he’s handed out to Roethlisberger and others. The quarterback was never charged with a crime in Georgia. The police’s detailed report of his boorish behavior was enough to cost him a month of the season anyway, a pretty severe penalty.

Goodell appears to thrive in the role of judge, jury and executioner. He comes across as very comfortable as the purveyor of justice. His predecessors in the commissioner’s office were never so iron-fisted when it came to player conduct. The public has backed his authority, in part because it has little sympathy for things like millionaire quarterbacks and drunken 20-year-old coeds in bodyguard-protected bathrooms of dive bars.

But with the authority that Goodell has seized comes a responsibility to put his employees in the most positive light possible. Everyone else can debate the merits of Ben Roethlisberger this week. Goodell should be pushing the spotlight onto something else. He can’t be preening around and talking it over with reporters.

That’s not how the disciplinary system has been sold to the players.

If he’s going to ask for teammates to participate in investigations, he can’t go defying that trust by passing along what they said. Things are either anonymous or not; you can’t be a little bit pregnant on that.

No, Goodell didn’t name names. He didn’t need to. By saying everyone he spoke with killed Roethlisberger behind his back, Goodell implicated every Steeler with whom he spoke. He ratted them all out.

That isn’t fair to them.

Maybe Roethlisberger cares. Maybe he doesn’t. Maybe the Steelers care. Maybe they don’t. Maybe there are hurt feelings and suspicious glances. Maybe not.

We’re unlikely to know for sure because the Steelers are sure to get together in advance of media day and agree to do the one thing Roger Goodell should have been smart enough to do himself.

Not say a meaningful word about it."

[GTHobbes]

I wonder if the brownies had taken # 7 instead of Kellen Winslow with the 6th pick in the 1st round back in 2004 if it would've been them and not the Stillers going for a 3rd SB in 6 years on Sunday.

Must really piss ya off to even think about it, huh? Especially with him being from Ohio.

Ha!

Actually, let’s see, just off the top of my head... the Browns are “starting over” AGAIN with their sixth head coach in 12 years while the friggin’ Steelers are in yet ANOTHER Super Bowl... spring training hasn’t even started yet and there are already rumors the Tribe’s looking to deal yet another fan favorite, Grady Sizemore... and the Cavs just went 0-for-January!

So the Browns not drafting Rapistberger wouldn’t even crack a Top 100 List of things pissing off Cleveland fans right now.

LoL

[Brando70]

Clearly the commissioner thinks Big Ben's an asshole. I always thought Goodell was insightful.

I love the one blogger calling Goodell's actions immature while standing up for the guy who was accused of raping women twice. You can't spell "fanatic" without "fan."

The worst part about this Super Bowl is that I'm going to want to gargle glass regardless of the outcome. Seeing the Packers win will be awful, while another Steelers Super Bowl may elevate that fan base to the summit of Mt. Doouche, ahead of the Patriots -- a feat that didn't seem possible just a couple of weeks ago. Worst of all, that may be the last NFL moment until the millionaires and billionaires can agree to play nice.

[GTHobbes]

Worst of all, that may be the last NFL moment until the millionaires and billionaires can agree to play nice.

After the Stillers win number 7 on Sunday, I personally won't care if they ever come to a new labor agreement. Just bust up the league for good and allow Pittsburgh to be eternal champs of the old NFL.

[Danimal]

I love the one blogger calling Goodell's actions immature while standing up for the guy who was accused of raping women twice. You can't spell "fanatic" without "fan."

Since when do bloggers opinions count on anything? Really if the defense of The Big Rapist or Tubby the p***y Steeler as I like to call him has come down to the blogs of retarded fans then it's just further proves the point he is a waste of space.

[GTHobbes]

Bob Smizik is not just some blogger. He's a retired sportswriter and columnist for the Pittsburgh Post Gazette, and has long been very well respected in the 'burgh. And the other dude's the lead columnist for Yahoo Sports. Dumb ass. Talk about a waste of space. Why don't you go out and do some shopping with Jay -- ya got all offseason to be bitter.

[pk500]

Steelers +2.5 UNDER 44.5

Those are my picks. Book 'em! (Then again, take Packers and the OVER if you want to win. )

[wco81]

Are reporters allowed to ask Ben about the rape cases or is he being protected?

That's the flip side of the SB hype, that not all media attention can be positive.

There will be some fluff stories about how he's changed, found God, etc.

Kind of like how Kobe's image was cleansed too.

Just goes to show that in sports, winning is all that matters and all other sins are forgiven.

[RobVarak]

Let's put this Roethlisberger thing to bed already. Either you think he's a sleazeball, dirty quasi-rapist or you're a Steelers fan/ NFL media leech. Because it suits them for either business purposes or the purpose of their team winning football games, the latter camp professes to believe that this is some sort of redemption story, as if one can receive redemption for an irredeemable act....series of acts really.

In any event, the gulf betwixt these two camps is unlikely to be bridged, the media's efforts to the contrary notwithstanding.

[ScoopBrady]

Please refrain from discussing Ben Roethlisberger or "Number 7" unless it is strictly about his play.

GT, it seems to me as if you are trying to incite some users in this thread. With your constant posting of all things Ben related and your bashing of Jay Cutler it seems pretty obvious who you are trying to get a rise out of. That needs to stop now as it is obvious trolling.

[HipE]

I'm as big of a Steelers fan as there is, and I still think Roethlisberger is a scumbag. Winning football games does not redeem him personally, and it is pretty sickening to see how many people are linking the two and all of a sudden believing he is a good guy. Just to provide a counter to the many pro-Ben stories that have been posted here, here is a story from the SI website yesterday:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/w ... index.html

I do remember in his first interview after he was suspended when he was asked how he would rebuild his reputation and win back fans, he replied "win games". I guess he is smarter than I thought.

I'm going to agree with everyone about us Steelers fans. I'm about to root for the Packers just to spite myself and my fellow fans. I think a beatdown of the Steelers by the Packers might be the best thing for the NFL.

[GTHobbes]

GT, it seems to me as if you are trying to incite some users in this thread. With your constant posting of all things Ben related and your bashing of Jay Cutler it seems pretty obvious who you are trying to get a rise out of. That needs to stop now as it is obvious trolling.

I ripped Cutler cuz he deserved it, and responded to your post regarding Madden's comment with a quote from Concrete Charlie. Can see why you didn't like that, I guess. But I didn't post anything Ben related (other than in response to Danimal's idiotic comment -- why is he always free to start s*** up and walk away? I'd argue his comment about us "retarded fans" is a lot more offensive than anything I've posted about Cutler.) Anyways, I have been posting plenty of Steelers' articles and will continue to do so (absent another ban) since ya never know when your team is going to make it back to the SB.

[RobVarak]

Please refrain from discussing Ben Roethlisberger or "Number 7" unless it is strictly about his play.

That seems like a bit of overreaching, Todd. I think his off the field activity is a legitimate a topic here as anything else. Or is this the creeping censorship inevitable once we started the no-(banned topic) rule?