THE STEELERS JUST CAN’T SHUT UP
By STEVE KING
Browns head coach Freddie Kitchens wore a shirt that said the Pittsburgh Steelers started it, meaning the fight between the two teams three weeks ago in Cleveland.
What he did was stupid, for a lot of reasons, even though the shirt’s message is absolutely true.
The Steelers said they finished it after they beat the Browns 20-13 last Sunday in the rematch to knock Cleveland out of the playoff race while enhancing their own postseason resume.
OK, but they didn’t finish it, for center Maurkice Pouncey continued it several days ago when he said that the fight was worth his getting suspended for two games for attacking Browns defensive end Myles Garrett, including kicking him between the legs several times. Garrett will have plenty of time to heal, because he has been suspended for at least the rest of this season.
The NFL wants to get past this fight, right? But it can’t because the people in Cleveland are still mad that they lost the team’s best player in Garrett while Steelers quarterback Mason Rudolph, who did indeed start the fight, was not suspended at all. Along with that, now Pouncey is chirping about the fight and in fact said that his participation in it was a noble deed because he was protecting Rudolph.
As such, if Pouncey is glorifying fighting this time, who says he won’t do it again? The NFL hates fighting, so, understanding that, Pouncey should be suspended again, right?
Yes, of course, in the world of common sense, but no, not in the NFL’s skewed world of logic, right and wrong and what counts as inflammatory rhetoric.
I will quit writing about this fight, and its aftermath, when the Steelers quit talking and quit delving in revisionist history. That they keep getting away with it is a real crime, but no one at the league office seems to understand that.
With the NFL’s refusal to suspend Rudolph, and by decreasing the duration of Pouncy’s own suspension the NFL is broadcasting its values.
Two things bother me about this incident, and the framing of it/the punishments met out.
1) Mason Rudolph attacked Myles Garrett. Repeatedly. His punishment does not demonstrate his own culpability in first instigating the fracas, nor his further aggression’s towards Garrett.
Rudolph clearly attempted to remove Garrett’s helmet, but was unsuccessful. After Rudolph’s own helmet had been pulled off, and Garrett was being restrained by two LARGE men, Rudolph attempted to further attack Garret – risking Rudolph’s own safety, and taking advantage of a 3-on-1 situation.
Mason Rudolph deserved a 2 game suspension. What it looks like from the outside is that Pittsburgh was granted special dispensation due to positional consideration and potential roster-moves that might’ve needed to be made, were Rudolph unavailable for 2 games.
2) The notion that Pouncy’s acts were “defending” his quarterback.
Pouncy defended no one. Pouncy attacked a man who was on the ground. Another large man was on top of Garrett. Pouncy was offensive, aggressive, violent. His acts were those of revenge… to satisfy his own ego & sense of (vigilantly) justice. Where is the attention this point deserves!?
Rudolph, Garrett and Pouncy each acted to satisfy their egos. The difference with Pouncy is that he was not directly involved in the fight. He came into the skirmish after the fact, and attacked a defenseless man. For that his punishment should have been even more severe, not less.
By reducing Pouncy’s suspension, the optics appear that the NFL feels that Pouncy’s acts were justified.
The NFL’s values and messages (unspoken) are clear:
The NFL biases punishment based on player position vs act/s. Quarterback position receives special consideration/dispensation.
The NFL endorses violent acts of retribution, when they’re socially expedient /deemed proportionate. Even when the acts are clearly acts of aggression, and clearly not defensive, in nature.
By Allowing Mason Rudolph to escape without suspension. And by not addressing Pouncy’s attack on an effectively defenseless player the NFL is demonstrating its values, and setting dangerous precedents!