Skip to content

Tomlin not surprised players from other teams didn’t support Ben

Mike Tomlin

You’ve heard the story by now.  On Monday, Peter King of Sports Illustrated included within Monday Morning Quarterback an item regarding Commissioner Roger Goodell’s determination that Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger should be suspended six games, a punishment that later was reduced to four games.

Goodell said that he spoke to roughly two dozen players, and that none of them supported Roethlisberger.  King assumed that Goodell was indicating that he spoke with Steelers players.  Goodell later clarified his remarks, explaining that he meant non-Steelers.  King officially corrected his report.

King’s assumption, though ultimately erroneous, was in our view reasonable.  The latest proof in that regard comes from the mouth of coach Mike Tomlin.

I was surprised why the Commissioner would expect 24 players who don’t play for the Steelers to support Ben,” Tomlin said, according to Scott Brown of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. “Those guys are competitors. I would imagine they would have wanted the Commissioner to throw the book at Ben. That’s funny to me.”

Tomlin’s right — why would the Commissioner (or anyone) expect players from other teams to support Roethlisberger?  This thinking demonstrates the reasonableness of King’s assumption that the Commissioner was referring to Steelers players, not non-Steelers.

Permalink 50 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Home, Pittsburgh Steelers, Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors
50 Responses to “Tomlin not surprised players from other teams didn’t support Ben”
  1. seaner44 says: Feb 2, 2011 11:25 PM

    why would he be surprised? he had a player on his team commit a crime and didn’t get charged… again… who would support him?

  2. villagoo says: Feb 2, 2011 11:43 PM

    Get off King’s nuts already

  3. fancyleague says: Feb 2, 2011 11:46 PM

    why would he be surprised? he had a player on his team commit a crime and didn’t get charged… again… who would support him?

    ————————–

    They’re doing wonderful things with prescription medication these days. You should look into it.

  4. grs27 says: Feb 3, 2011 12:10 AM

    If Brady was in a similar situation, I wouldn’t expect ANY Steeler defender to support him….duh.
    I would LOVE it if the owners made a case for fining Goodell $25,000 for being a moron and letting this leak. He deserves a taste of his own narcissism.

  5. nickster2k says: Feb 3, 2011 12:14 AM

    King and Goodell are both idiots. King is a fat idiot.

  6. hobartbaker says: Feb 3, 2011 12:28 AM

    Someone is lying. Actually, probably everyone is lying a bit. But to get back to the root point, the only time Roethlisberger will be considered remotely “likeable”, is when he is in bloody chunks amidst a school of sharks.

  7. lawboy2000 says: Feb 3, 2011 12:30 AM

    It’s not about the misquote. It’s about the content of Goodell’s comments. They were completely inappropriate coming from the Commissioner.

    For King, it’s about the failure to fact check even a little bit. It is hard to imagine that King could not have guessed a few of the players Goodell spoke with – on the Steelers or otherwise – and called those players in an effort to confirm what Goodell told him was true before printing it.

  8. duffer58 says: Feb 3, 2011 1:44 AM

    I like Mike Tomlin but what he is saying is nuts. Players on other teams would not want Goodell to throw book at Big Ben unless they thought he deserved it.
    Tomlin is dead wrong.

  9. duffer58 says: Feb 3, 2011 1:46 AM

    Grs27 what your saying is absurd. If something Tom Brady did was questioonable Steelers and others would defend him if they thought he got a bad rap. Ben got lucky he was not punished longer given what he did.

  10. blitzburg10 says: Feb 3, 2011 2:03 AM

    Really hope to see the look on Goddell’s face after the game Sunday night if the Steelers win and he has to hand that trophy to Dan Rooney,Mike Tomlin,and Big Ben…..Can you say Pete Rozzelle and Al Davis??

  11. ihateannouncers says: Feb 3, 2011 2:11 AM

    Not the point!!! Why is the commissioner even talking about this to the media??? Why didn’t Peter King publish this article on MMQB the week it was obtained from Goodell?? Hey Mike, why don’t you ask King what he said to Ben on media day?? NFL Network saw the two of them in a close talker moment before the Steelers had their team picture.

  12. steelernation1 says: Feb 3, 2011 2:39 AM

    fine godhell get rid of his sorry face

  13. ampatsisahypocrite says: Feb 3, 2011 3:30 AM

    And so this joke of a suspension gets even more ridiculous. Some yo-yo on another thread actually suggested it was better for Goodell to interview players from other teams (yuk yuk) rather than Steelers. No doubt Tomlin would laugh at him, too.

    What’s great, though, is that Goodell has been exposed as a little sneak who leaks details he has no business divulging to the media.

  14. contract says: Feb 3, 2011 6:03 AM

    “I would LOVE it if the owners made a case for fining Goodell $25,000 for being a moron and letting this leak. He deserves a taste of his own narcissism.”

    Goodell wouldn’t sign my jersey.

    True story.

  15. Spoonthis says: Feb 3, 2011 6:04 AM

    Stop with the man crush already. We get the point, you support Peter King’s assumption.

  16. nokoolaidcowboy says: Feb 3, 2011 6:13 AM

    I thought PFT was taking a stand at only reporting on the game. This is just looks more and more like filler when you can’t think of anything else to report on.

  17. wryly1 says: Feb 3, 2011 6:38 AM

    Well duuuh! If Goodell only talked to BR’s teammates, ya think he’d get an objective sample? He wasn’t talking only to players who had a vested interest in supporting him.

  18. edgarpoe2 says: Feb 3, 2011 6:52 AM

    Why would any player support someone who is involved in the assault of a young woman? Or were these players just asked to vouch for his character? Like, what kind of person he is, irregardless of case pending? If that were the case, and not one came forward in defense of him, damn!

  19. 6burghgirl says: Feb 3, 2011 7:00 AM

    OMG. Now I get it. This story is no longer about Goodell OR Roethlisberger. It’s about YOU and your buddy KING!

    Birds of a feather stick together. Goodell, you and King should all have dinner together.

    Seriously, Dude. You’ve ridden this horse way too long.

    GO STEELERS!

  20. holeinone09 says: Feb 3, 2011 8:18 AM

    Once again, any investigative activities by the commissioner related to a player would seem to have be held in confidence. GODell and King talking about it in public seems insane. Surprised the players union is not all over this. And, the reporting of this information was botched.

  21. Caldon says: Feb 3, 2011 8:28 AM

    That is BS. We see players sticking up for other players all the time from other teams. Remember Mike Vick? Do I really need to go dig up the quotes to jog your very short term memory?

    The fact that NO ONE outside of his team would speak up for Ben speaks volumes.

  22. hooterdawg says: Feb 3, 2011 8:32 AM

    Big Ben and Tomlin wonder if Peter King has ever seen the movie Big Fat Liar…

  23. mcsteeler says: Feb 3, 2011 8:33 AM

    Wow, can’t wait for the next installment in this thrilling story!!!

  24. bristerfan says: Feb 3, 2011 8:38 AM

    I don’t know what has happened to Goodell. When he first took over for Mr. Tagliabue, I thought that he was going to be a fresh face and a good influence in the league. He was determined to clean up all of the off the field problems that players were getting into and was a dictator, of sorts. And he was headed that way for the first couple of years as commish. Now, he’s become nothing more than a punchline of a bad joke. He has the league headed towards a lockout, he’s made remarks about players and coaches that have come out this week and taken away from the biggest game in the world, and has clearly lost most all respect from the players in the league.

    If this labor situation does not get straightened out, I think it might be time for a change at the head of the table for the NFL.

  25. SteelTown6 says: Feb 3, 2011 8:49 AM

    It’s no wonder Goodell seems to have a beef with the Steelers. Players and coaches alike all know he’s a clown and they aren’t afraid to say so.

    / well, he is a clown.

    Hey owners, throw “firing Goodell” on the table at the next contract talks.

  26. SteelTown6 says: Feb 3, 2011 8:51 AM

    What are the odds on Peter King ever getting an interview with a Steelers player again?

  27. edgarpoe2 says: Feb 3, 2011 9:01 AM

    Tomlin’s right — why would the Commissioner (or anyone) expect players from other teams to support Roethlisberger? This thinking demonstrates the reasonableness of King’s assumption that the Commissioner was referring to Steelers players, not non-Steelers.
    ————————————————
    Which makes me believe the original story was accurate and the rebuttal was merely damage control. At the time, I would understand why his own teammates would not back him up. Goodell said something he probably should have never said (even if it were true).

    King took the fall for “the team” with his gracious rebuttal. I could really see him doing that as from what I’ve seen of him, he is a decent person. We need more reporters like King. Most sports media are becoming nothing more than tabloids.

  28. pittsixtimechamp says: Feb 3, 2011 9:01 AM

    Why is Goodell doing interviews with S I. ? Oh Yeah He is Trying to Win Back the Approval of Fans. Nice Job With That Good(For Nothing)ell.

  29. bleedgreen says: Feb 3, 2011 9:09 AM

    But, players all over supported Vick, remember? Is it cuz he’s white?

  30. bluestree says: Feb 3, 2011 9:47 AM

    This whole thing stinks. What positive outcome could derive from Goodell bringing this up? King using it right before the SB is just a publicity stunt, but Goodell should know better, and I hope he’s given his last interview to King, who’s dropped a few rungs in my estimation.
    This was unfair to Ben and the Steelers. He did his punishment, so it should be case closed.
    Go Pack.

  31. SteelTown6 says: Feb 3, 2011 9:52 AM

    Caldon says: Feb 3, 2011 8:28 AM

    “The fact that NO ONE outside of his team would speak up for Ben speaks volumes.”

    Of course even though Goodell felt it proper to be talking out of school, you’ll also notice he didn’t name a single player.
    How convenient.

  32. ArtModellsPimp says: Feb 3, 2011 9:52 AM

    Who cares what Tomlin thinks or says? He lost all credibility when he ordered hell to “unleash.”

    Pittsburgh, Tomlin, and their perverted QB all deserve each other.

  33. SteelTown6 says: Feb 3, 2011 10:01 AM

    wryly1 says: Feb 3, 2011 6:38 AM

    “Well duuuh! If Goodell only talked to BR’s teammates, ya think he’d get an objective sample? He wasn’t talking only to players who had a vested interest in supporting him.”

    Right. Instead he chose to talk to players who had a vested interest in not supporting him.

    /just in case, you know, you totally missed the entire point of Tomlin’s response.

  34. maneough2b says: Feb 3, 2011 10:26 AM

    Lets face it nobody really (except Steeler fans) want the Steelers to win. Sport Illustrated had all season to run the story but they chose to run it a week before the Super Bowl. I find that a bit odd. If Ben had not made it to the Super Bowl would they have ran it? I do feel the press is doing all they can to keep it going to put pressure and mess with the Steelers heads- I think it is working. My question to the NFL- If Mark Sanchez had made it would all fans feel the same as they do about Ben? -Mark was arrested in college for the same thing as Ben but it is ok because he was in College? I no longer look at him the same either. Doesn’t matter that it happened in NFL – College- Or just every day life.

  35. steeelfann says: Feb 3, 2011 10:28 AM

    ArtModellsPimp says: Feb 3, 2011 9:52 AM

    Who cares what Tomlin thinks or says? He lost all credibility when he ordered hell to “unleash.”

    Pittsburgh, Tomlin, and their perverted QB all deserve each other.
    ———————————————
    No, not really. They just unleashed it a little later.
    4th all-time rush defense. Number 1 overall. Mostly healthy.

    They have stormed into the super bowl:

    Ravens second half Yardage: 27 yards
    Ravens total Yardage: 126 yards
    Jets First Half Yardage: 50 yards
    Jets running Yardage first half: 1 yard
    Raven 2nd half-Jets 1st half ydg total: 78 yds
    Ravens total receptions by receivers/tght ends: 35
    Ravens rushing yards total for game: 35 yards
    Boldin Receiving yardage: -2
    Derrick Mason Receiving yardage: 0
    Steelers ranking in Sacks in NFL: 1st
    Steelers ranking in Total Defense: 1st

    Yea, now that they are “mostly” healthy. hell as been unleashed. Super Bowl. Again. Tomlin correct. Again.

  36. billyrocket says: Feb 3, 2011 10:34 AM

    Basically Goodell suspended Roethlisberger for being a jerk. He is the first and only player to ever be suspended for that. He wasn’t suspended for committing a crime since there was no evidence that a crime was committed.

    The comments were inappropriate for Goodell to make. And whether or not he signed other players jerseys should have no bearing on whether or not a player is suspended.

  37. footballfan says: Feb 3, 2011 10:37 AM

    I know if I played for the Ravens, Browns, or Bengals I wouldn’t support him either… Heck, I would have begged for a 1 year suspension… lol.

    I really think this was one of those times that Roger should have kept his mouth shut. I find it hard to believe that any of the players would want to discuss these kinds of things with him now.

  38. Mike Tomlin says: Feb 3, 2011 10:38 AM

    Its not really a question of why would players from other teams support Roethlisberger. Its a question of WHY is Godell going to players for advice on fines and suspensions in the first place? When Troy Polamamlu brought up the idea of a panel of players to assist in handing out fines for helmet to helmet hits, Godell scoffed at the idea and dismissed it immediately. Now hes confiding in players to help him make his own decisions.

    Tomlin and the Steelers havent said a word about Roethlisberger since the season started. Its Godell and the media that are beating a dead horse and cant let it go. Any other organization would have folded under these circumstances, the Steelers took it in stride all the way to the Super Bowl.

  39. steelersmichele says: Feb 3, 2011 10:38 AM

    “Those guys are competitors. I would imagine they would have wanted the Commissioner to throw the book at Ben.”

    Of course the players would say he isn’t a good person and would hope their negative comments would help get his suspended. If Goodell came and asked me about Suggs, I’d say he was horrible–why wouldn’t I want to get one of the Ravens best players off the field for a few games. Lowers their chance of winning…

    The real question remains as to why Goodell felt the need to get current player input for a current player suspension.

  40. steelersmichele says: Feb 3, 2011 10:54 AM

    One more thing: I wonder if Goodell spoke to two dozen players about Favre?

  41. Deb says: Feb 3, 2011 10:59 AM

    @duffer58 …

    I am so sick of this crap. “Given what he did.” I’m a writer who’s covered legal and medical issues for years, has a brother who’s a criminal defense attorney and we have a friend who worked that investigation, plus I’ve spent months studying the files that were released (as opposed to the TMZ headlines).

    Here’s what he did: He went out and ran into a groupie that witnesses said following to at least three establishments, pinching his butt, propositioning him, asking him back to her place, and engaging him in graphic sexual dialogue. She was drinking the whole time alcohol she bought herself on her fake ID. Witnesses said she was crawling on him to the point that he looked embarrassed. He tossed her sorority sis from the party for ragging on him about the woman in Nevada who’d sued him. That one had texted people she couldn’t wait to see him again, then a year later sued for $3 million claiming rape. Most guys settle those cases–he countersued.

    Georgia went with him to the bathroom, probably for a little romp, but witnesses said they were in there less than 10 minutes. She later complained to cops that he just dumped her there. When she left the party, the sorority sis he’d thrown out dragged her to cops and said she’d been raped. She told the cops they didn’t even have sex. And the medical exam showed she didn’t have sex that evening. But later she went along with her sorority sis. The only people telling that story about the bodyguard blocking the door were her two sorority sisters and it conflicts with her own written statement and everyone else’s. Her story changed umpteen times.

    If Ben hadn’t been a celebrity, they’d have dropped the whole thing THAT NIGHT b, but because of the media scrutiny they made sure to conduct a thorough investigation. In the end, the DA said they couldn’t find enough even for probable cause–the reasonable assumption that a crime had occurred. Goodell said in his statement suspending Ben that his people found nothing to contradict the DA’s findings.

    Like Mark Sanchez, Jerome Bettis, Charlie Batch, Clay Matthews, and dozens of others, Ben was an athlete falsely accused of rape. And Goodell is a big ass. Try googling Jason Whitlock with Ben’s name if you want to read an interesting perspective.

  42. newreality1 says: Feb 3, 2011 11:24 AM

    Its really simple Deb. Big ben STUFFED her in the bathroom. There isnt a guy on the planet that needs porbable cause and dna to no that. Sit back and enjoy the game sunday ,Im sure that ben is just fine even after this traumatic experience

  43. chris4599 says: Feb 3, 2011 11:30 AM

    13. THE ACCUSER HERSELF WAS UNCERTAIN ABOUT THE MATTER. When the officer on the spot said “I need to talk to the alleged victim, not [the sorority sisters],” he asked the accuser if Roethlisberger had raped her. She said:

    (A). “No.” (DA news conference; PART 2, starts 2:42, key point: about 4:10:

    NO, did you read that folks? THAT WAS HER FIRST ANSWER TO A COP MOMENTS AFTER.

    This whole thing is a sick joke

  44. footballchamp says: Feb 3, 2011 12:00 PM

    Ah yes, yet another shining example of Roger Jet-dell showing the “integrity” that he demands out of players. Why again is he bringing this up now?

    Considering that Goodell works FOR the owners, and this is Rooney’s time for greatness, it figures that Goodell is spouting sour grapes considering the Steelers put his Jets out of the Super Bowl. What a joke.

    Isn’t the commissioner supposed to be positively promoting the Super Bowl and NFL now?! Isn’t this a time to put the NFL’s best foot forward? Nope, because Goodell’s Jets are not in the Super Bowl. Sometimes I think he forgets he works for the owners and not the other way around. Good for Tomlin for speaking up. As if opposing players are going to gush about the opposition. Hey Goodell, have you listened to your team talk? Shocking that nothing the Jets say goes against your “integrity.”

    And Peter King, let me guess, you’ll post another amazing column and buried somewhere between your self-important travel/coffee/kids talk will be yet another blurb about how you still can’t “figure out why” the Ben, Tomlin and hopefully the entire Steelers organization no longer cares for you anymore. Yeah Peter, it’s really hard to figure out. Oh well, at least you can keep writing to your agenda.

  45. chris4599 says: Feb 3, 2011 12:05 PM

    Goodell is a complete joke.

  46. Deb says: Feb 3, 2011 5:57 PM

    Oh for heaven’s sake, moderators! You’ll post junior-high language like “He STUFFED her, but won’t post grownup terms like penis. You should be ashamed of yourselves!

    @newreality1

    Do you even have the slightest comprehension what probable cause is? He “stuffed” her? Were you a spider on the wall? She accused him of vaginal rape. She did not accuse him of oral rape. She did not accuse him of any other assault act. She said he forcibly penetrated her vaginally with his penis. The medical exam said that did not happen, you vulgar little dweeb. You get to dream things up in your vulgar little head. Fortunately, real cops and prosecutors need silly little things like probable cause.

  47. steelernation1 says: Feb 3, 2011 6:58 PM

    actually Deb wasn’t he just charged with sexual assault?i don’t ever remember anyone saying he raped her.and the 2 are totally different things.which they never found any proof of it..please dont misinterperet what i just said.wasnt a bash on you…was just basicly asking you about the whole issue..i just don’t remember anyone ever saying rape just sexual assault

  48. Deb says: Feb 4, 2011 2:53 PM

    @steelernation1 …

    He was never charged with anything. She made an accusation that was originally reported as sexual assault. In fact, the Milledgeville Police Chief said in a press conference that it wasn’t a rape investigation (but they didn’t handle the case). After the investigation was over, the DA gave a long press conference to explain the findings. He began by saying he wanted to make clear that the accusation was vaginal rape and that was the only accusation. Since no evidence of vaginal rape could be found (her medical exam made clear that never happened), no charges were ever filed.

    How it works is that someone makes an accusation. If there’s enough evidence to show probable cause–the reasonable assumption that a crime occurred and that the accused did it–and arrest is made. Once the arrest is made, the prosecutor looks at what the investigators have and decides whether there’s enough to warrant going to trial. If so, charges are filed. If not, the prisoner is released.

    In Ben’s case, the accusation was made. Because there was only her word and her story changed repeatedly, nothing else could be done until police investigated. This investigation was conducted by the Georgia Bureau of Investigation, a highly respected state agency. Because of Ben’s celebrity, they took several weeks to make sure all the bases were covered. In the end, the DA said they didn’t even find enough evidence for probable cause–the reasonable assumption that the crime occurred.

    So there is nothing on Ben’s record. The Nevada case is a civil suit for money. She never reported a crime. Local police said they have no reason to believe a crime occurred. They said they will not open a criminal investigation no matter what happens with the lawsuit. So Ben will never have any police record from either of these cases. The authorities know both women fabricated their stories.

    The worst that could happen is, because of the Georgia publicity, stupid jurors could decide in favor of the Nevada woman and award her money. But there’s a lot of evidence against her and Ben has countersued. She was already trying to get out of the case without losing face when the Georgia thing came up. If not for those sorority sisters and their prank, the Nevada case would have been dropped long ago.

    The reason there’s confusion between rape and assault is that most people heard the original reports that it was assault but didn’t listen to the DA’s final explanation that it was actually a rape accusation/investigation. So some guys claim it was an oral assault. But she never said that in any of her statements. She alleged only one thing–and the medical exam showed that was impossible.

  49. newreality1 says: Feb 4, 2011 7:20 PM

    Oboyyyyyyy Hey Deb I wanted to give you a response, but they removed my post. Wow , and there wasnt any profanity involved. But could you post shorter stories. I got tired of the lectures in law school too.

  50. Deb says: Feb 4, 2011 8:38 PM

    You went to law school? Get a degree? Pass the bar? Oooo malpractice suit waiting to happen ;)

    Usually when I post short, I’m being a smart ass, so be careful what you wish for. Of course, no one’s forcing you to read any of my posts :)

    Trust me, they’re equal-opportunity censors and their standards are a mystery. :roll:

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!