The 2010 NFL Thread

[Cactus Drags]

Unless you're personally in contact with the Rooneys to the point that they'd show you their hand on something as incredibly important as what goes on with their franchise QB, no, you do not know that Roethlisberger is untradeable.

[sahyder1]

To an extent, Chase has a point. Let's be honest here, TMZ isn't exactly known for portraying two sides to a story, just the side that will gain them the most viewers, readers, etc. and they've been a fixture on this story since the beginning.

It's not like TMZ prints stuff that isn't true. You may not like the way to business by paying people off but their sources are damn good. This isn't just some supermarket tabloid, they have legitimate sources.

Chase, a the girl is drunk, she's unable to consent. Doesn't matter how drunk Ben was, if they had sex, it wasn't consensual. He's not some 22 year old college kid, he's a 28 year old man and he and his crew knew better. You use the fact that she wasn't of the legal drinking age like it's some sort of plus for Ben, it's not and I wouldn't be surprised at all if he helped get her drunk in the first place.

According to the police report they were already drinking before they even went out. I'm not saying Ben didn't supply her with alcohol, but she was likely already pretty intoxicated before she even went out.

You really need to give this civics lesson to someone who doesn't know any better and not to someone who follows stuff like this on a regular basis. A prosecutor saying that he doesn't have enough to bring charges means that he just couldn't get enough people who were there to talk. In a high profile case like this you don't proceed unless you're certain of a unanimous jury vote.

Go back to the facts of the story. Ben and a teammate go into this bar and spend over $400 on 38 drinks according to TMZ. Safe to say some of those drinks could have been 20 year old which regardless of how drunk she was prior to that point is still illegal. He then has one of his security people lead this woman to a bathroom out back somewhere and follows her in. What part of that is sane behavior? Quit your crap about "if there was no alcohol involved none of this would have happened". No one dragged him into that bar. No one was forcing drinks down his throat with a funnel. He chose to get hammered. I really want to see if his teammate has made a statement anywhere. Did he just pick up the tab because Big Ben asked him to after the bathroom incident so it would be just a little harder to toe the girl to him.

Back to the facts? What facts? Nothing you said there has been reported as a fact. If it's from the police report, from a witness statement it's not a fact. The girls' statements are highly dubious due to their intoxication and the inconsistencies in their statement.

Everything you said is from the girl's side. And she and her friends were highly intoxicated. They're not credible. Which is one of the big reasons there were no charges.

Willie Colon did make a statement. He mentioned that the girl was trying to get Ben's attention all night, even going as far as pinching him. He also mentions that he was getting sick of being used as go-between by the girls to get to Ben so he left the VIP area, which he referred to as a "sausage fest" and said it was "gay."

Which, surprisingly () goes against the reports from tabloids like TMZ that there was nothing but girls back there.

"He was having a good time" is also a lame excuse. There are plenty of 28 year old men out there who can have "fun" without having to get an underage girl drunk or being in the same bathroom as a 20 year girl.

Just as I'm sure there are plenty of 28 year old men who act irresponsibly when they drink and end up in situations like that.

And yeah, I get that those other 28 year old men aren't the quarterback of the Pittsburgh Steelers and making millions of dollars. Which is why I'm okay with Ben being punished and being suspended.

But, as I've said before, I think the media witch hunt to report nothing but the scandalous details and pretty much ignore everything else is going to lead to Ben being punished much more harshly than he should.

This is his first incident, he should not be punished like a repeat offender.

99.9% of grown men who part (including a lot who drink) don't end up in a public restroom with a 20 year old. You're acting like a naive little idiot about this "witch hunt". Of course when there is a celebrity involved the media will report these cases like it more. If he doesn't like it...tough. Like I said before, have him give back his signing bonus and go get a real job in small town somewhere. No one will care.

As for all the actual football talk discussed about Ben and Bill Cowher, I know I'm right about that. Just like I know the Rooneys won't trade Ben. Not until they've given him the chance to win over the fanbase again.

No you aren't right about that. If anything Ben was lucky that the Steelers drafted him...not the other way round. Eli and Rivers could have won rings with that team that year. A team that had that defense and ran the ball 60% of the time.....the QB was there to manage the game. Him having a good first drive doesn't change it. You acting like Cowher was a nobody is laughable and doesn't help your football credentials one bit. He wouldn't be the hottest coach on the market right now at his age if you views were true. If Big Ben wasn't in the bathroom....that would have came out already. That is all the fact that you need to know. You've already stated your views are tainted because of you being a fan so you can't expect anyone to take you seriously.

[livid]

To an extent, Chase has a point. Let's be honest here, TMZ isn't exactly known for portraying two sides to a story, just the side that will gain them the most viewers, readers, etc. and they've been a fixture on this story since the beginning.

It's not like TMZ prints stuff that isn't true. You may not like the way to business by paying people off but their sources are damn good. This isn't just some supermarket tabloid, they have legitimate sources.

I didn't say that what they print isn't factual; I'm saying that they have a certain agenda when it comes to the stories they run and it's to gain viewers/readers by using shock tactics. You of all people (given your participation in the political aspect of this forum) should know that it's not hard to use facts to slant a story a specific way, which is something that TMZ has done in the past to maximize their potential viewers/readers.

[Powerhart]

Chase is so bad at arguing a point, he makes me root for the other side just to spite him.

I think I've done just fine.

But since I'm so bad at it, I'll just sum everything up here.

Did Ben rape the girl? No

Did Ben assault the girl? I don't think so. I think the young lady got fucked up and talked into something by her friends. I think both parties were hammered.

Did Ben fuck up? Yep.

Does Ben deserve to be punished? Yep.

Suspended a game? Yep.

I'm suspending Ben for fucking some 20 year old in a public bathroom. His drunken conduct is not the proper way for a guy of his celebrity to handle themselves if he wants to represent an NFL franchise.

This is a different era of football. The Joe Willie Namath, Bobby Layne, Kenny Stabler Era, well...those days are gone.

That said, it's clear to me that the media has let this get out of hand by the way they've only presented one side of the case. The way they've jumped to conclusions and assumed things is ridiculous.

How the fuck can you be so damn sure he didn't do it? Were you there? Were you in the same damn bathroom as them? Did Ben or the girl tell you that? Come on man, stop beign so damn biased, think about it for a second, think about it from another perspective, an unbiased perspective.

Suspended a game? A game? Just for this beign the second time he is acused of this and giving bad publicity to a team that has backed him up all the time he should be suspended more than a game, even more than Santonio Holmes who's getting 4 games for fighting at a bar. Ben should at the very least get 7 weeks of suspension.

He may or may have not raped the girl but he did take advantage of her since she was obviously drunk. The guy is fucked up.

[livid]

You weren't there either so how do you know that she was taken advantage of? :/

That's my whole point; is that none of us know what exactly happened that night. It's all he said-she said shit that one or both sides could be lying/stretching the truth about and that's why I think no charges were pressed against him; there just wasn't a way to tell one way or another what exactly happened.

But the bottom line is that Roethlisberger put himself in the situation by making stupid decisions and that, in itself, doesn't warrant any more suspension than Holmes. I'm not saying he wasn't wrong, but to suspend him for more games than Holmes is a bit fucking much for a he said-she said situation.

[DMN in the House]

Four games, minimum.

For all Chase wants to argue that this is Big Ben's first offense, it's not. It's his THIRD offense of immaturity and stupidity.

1. The motorcycle accident. No, nothing illegal, but you're the quarterback of the Pittsburgh Steelers, have some common fucking sense. I'm not even saying stay off the bike, though it is the best decision, but wear a fucking helmet, law or not. If I recall, he didn't have a license, either.

2. The first sexual assault case. I don't care if the chick is a gold-digging whore, stay out of the situation. How many other NFL athletes avoid this? It's not hard.

3. This situation, which is compounded by the fact that he should have learned his lesson last time. no one disputes that they were both in the bathroom. The only thing that's up for debate is what exactly happened. Big Ben should have known better.

Put all three incidents together, and you have a picture of a grown ass man who doesn't know how to behave, given his station in life. He needs to be taught a lesson, and one game does not accomplish that.

Don't compare it to Vick or Jones. Vick got off light because he'd already done prison time. Pacman got what, a year?

Big Ben needs a wake-up call. He's damaged the Steelers reputation with his stupidity and immaturity three times.

Enough is enough.

[Mysterio2000X]

Willie Colon did make a statement. He mentioned that the girl was trying to get Ben's attention all night, even going as far as pinching him. He also mentions that he was getting sick of being used as go-between by the girls to get to Ben so he left the VIP area, which he referred to as a "sausage fest" and said it was "gay."

Haha, Willie Colon knows what's up. (Y)

[JStarr]

As for all the actual football talk discussed about Ben and Bill Cowher, I know I'm right about that. Just like I know the Rooneys won't trade Ben. Not until they've given him the chance to win over the fanbase again.

What, like the part about how you paint Ben as a cross between Unitas and Montana for two first-quarter TD's against the Colts back in '06? If Ben's 6'3" instead of 6'5", Nick Harper has a pick-six, Colts win, and Ben's the biggest goat this side of...well, Mike Vandershank.

I will agree with you, Chase, about how there's very little factual knowledge flying around about this case, none of us knows shit about it, and we simply need to sit back and wait for the verdict from the Steelers or the league, whoever makes the decision. If Ben gets more than two games, I'll be frankly stunned.

But as far as talking football, if the Steelers are involved, you can make a little-six yard slant route sound like the Immaculate Reception and The Catch rolled into one with a little of the Original Hail Mary sprinkled across the top.

[sahyder1]

To an extent, Chase has a point. Let's be honest here, TMZ isn't exactly known for portraying two sides to a story, just the side that will gain them the most viewers, readers, etc. and they've been a fixture on this story since the beginning.

It's not like TMZ prints stuff that isn't true. You may not like the way to business by paying people off but their sources are damn good. This isn't just some supermarket tabloid, they have legitimate sources.

I didn't say that what they print isn't factual; I'm saying that they have a certain agenda when it comes to the stories they run and it's to gain viewers/readers by using shock tactics. You of all people (given your participation in the political aspect of this forum) should know that it's not hard to use facts to slant a story a specific way, which is something that TMZ has done in the past to maximize their potential viewers/readers.

As long as they are reporting the truth I really don't care that they are trying to gain clicks/ad revenue. Stories like this will be reported more and more now as TMZ launches TMZ Sports later this year (all athletes can thank Tiger Woods for that one).

I'm reading an article from the the Post-Gazette in Pittsburgh today and read that the bathroom was cleaned before the police processed it? What the hell is that?

[Mofoticon]

What I wanna know is, when did Ben sell his soul to the devil? First he goes flying through a windshield from his motorcycle crash and only gets a few face injuries, now he rapes a girl and gets off...clearly he is one of satan's minions or something.

[DMN in the House]

Maybe THAT'S why the Raiders suck. Al's deal with Satan has clearly run out, but since he's a vampire, he's got no soul for Satan to take, thus pissing our.m.I mean his... dark overlord off to no end.

So, in the ultimate act of revenge, he takes Al's greatest rival, the Pittsburgh Steelers, and gives them Ben.

It all makes sense now!

[GhostMachine]

I've thought of a few solutions for this problem:

1. The NFL and/or Rooneys spend millions, perhaps billions, of dollars to perfect cryogenics. Then they keep Roethlisberger on ice from the end of the season until training camp starts for the rest of his career.

2. Suspend him several games and tell him he's got two strikes. He gets in trouble again, he's DONE as an NFL QB.

3. Trade him to Cleveland. That way in a couple of years no one will give a fuck about him.

What I wanna know is, when did Ben sell his soul to the devil? First he goes flying through a windshield from his motorcycle crash and only gets a few face injuries, now he rapes a girl and gets off...clearly he is one of satan's minions or something.

I don't know if he actually did sell his soul to the devil, but I think the problem is that he donated his brain to science!

Edited April 18, 2010 by GhostMachine

[JStarr]

I don't know if he actually did sell his soul to the devil, but I think the problem is that he donated his brain to science!

Science probably wouldn't take it now...too pickled.

[Asuka's Gonna Kill You]

Holmes has been traded?

[Evil Chase K]

As long as they are reporting the truth I really don't care that they are trying to gain clicks/ad revenue.

But therein lies the problem. None of the stuff in the police report is "truth." It all comes from highly intoxicated girls who clearly got together and discussed the incident prior to giving their statements.

Also...I saw this on CBS Sportsline and figured I'd post it here:

Goodell's conduct policy veering from mostly right to all wrong

April 18, 2010

By Gregg Doyel

CBSSports.com National Columnist

I don't want to live in a world where an accusation is tantamount to a conviction. That's what happened in Salem, Mass., a few centuries ago. People were accused of witchcraft. Proof? There was no proof, just accusations. But accusations were enough. And so innocent people died.

I don't want to live there. Roger Goodell lives there.

Roger Goodell scares the hell out of me.

And it wasn't always this way. When Goodell as NFL commissioner unveiled his personal conduct policy in 2007, it was new, needed, even noble. The policy read, and I quote, "It will be considered conduct detrimental [for league personnel] to engage in ... violent and/or criminal activity." The policy went on to describe the line in the sand that could not be crossed, and that line was this: an arrest or a legal charge. A player didn't have to be convicted of a crime to be suspended; he had to be "arrested or charged," a phrase that appeared three times in the conduct policy.

And I loved it. The court system can take forever, and legal finagling often reduces charges to unrecognizable, even negligible levels. For example, domestic battery is often reduced to disturbing the peace, and a DUI arrest can be pleaded down to reckless driving. Goodell can't suspend a guy for disturbing the peace or for reckless friggin' driving, so he goes after the original charge. And we should understand. Tank Johnson and Pacman Jones were charged with all sorts of heinous crimes, and Goodell hammered them. Before all the lawyer wrangling, there was plenty of legal smoke, so Goodell brought the fire. Good for him, and good for his cynical but smart line in the sand.

But in recent weeks, Goodell has moved that line. Where did he move it? He moved it toward Salem, Mass. He moved it somewhere scary:

It's no longer necessary that there be enough evidence of "violent and/or criminal activity" for police to make an arrest or file charges. Nope. Now, an accusation is enough.

Goodell's new line in the sand was outlined in a memo leaked last week, a memo that reads, and I quote: "Every investigation, arrest, or other allegation of improper conduct ... threatens the continued success of our brand."

See that? An arrest is no longer needed. Forget about a conviction. Now, an "allegation" will do.

It makes me wonder ...

I live in Cincinnati. I see the occasional Cincinnati Bengal out at a bar. If I accused any of them of punching me in the face, could I get them suspended?

Hey, Commissioner. Carson Palmer and Chad Ochocinco decked me -- get 'em!

The news peg for my column, obviously, is Pittsburgh quarterback Ben Roethlisberger. He has been accused of sexual assault by two different women, most recently last month in Georgia. In both instances, police looked into the woman's accusations. In both instances, the district attorney reviewed the evidence and declined to take the case to trial. Roethlisberger wasn't convicted. He wasn't even charged.

But Goodell wants him suspended anyway. In hindsight, it seems obvious to me that Roethlisberger was the reason for that memo last week, and for the new line in the sand. In that memo, Goodell went all revisionist history when he wrote, and I quote, "Unfortunately, in recent weeks there have been several negative incidents ... that we have previously identified as particularly troublesome [such as] allegations of violence against women."

See what Goodell did there? We have previously identified ... allegations of violence against women.

Liar.

"Allegations" were never previously identified. That was never the line in the sand. Arrests and charges were identified. That was the line in sand: Arrests. Charges.

But now, "allegations" are enough. And let's be honest: They are rather horrific allegations. Sexual assault on a woman by anyone, much less by a 240-pound professional football player, is evil if true. Allegations like that must be taken seriously -- deathly seriously. And they were. Cops in Nevada investigated one accusation and found that the alleged victim had told friends she was hoping for "a little Roethlisberger" after the encounter, which sounds nothing like sexual assault to me. Cops in Georgia investigated the other charge, which sounded much more serious. In any event, neither state found enough evidence to go forward.

No matter to Goodell. He has been talking with the Steelers about how to deal with Roethlisberger, with Steelers president Art Rooney II saying it's a matter of time before Roethlisberger is disciplined. Said Rooney on Thursday: "When we get to the point where we have agreed with the commissioner on what that action will be, that's when it will be imposed."

In other words, this won't be an NFL suspension -- yet it'll be a Roger Goodell production anyway. If the Steelers, on their own, want to suspend Roethlisberger for a pattern of immaturity that makes the team look bad, that would be their right. He's their employee. If the Steelers want to suspend Roethlisberger, do it.

But Goodell is involved, redrawing his line in the sand to a location that should curdle the blood of every player in the league. Because if Roethlisberger goes down for this, anybody could be next. No charges? No problem. All the NFL needs is an allegation.

To understand how strongly I feel about this position, you have to understand how strongly I dislike Ben Roethlisberger. He's a serial idiot -- a stupid, cocky caricature of the modern-day athlete. Teammates don't like him. I can't stand him. I tolerate his existence by ignoring him whenever possible, but I can't ignore what Goodell is about to do -- not merely to Roethlisberger, but to my idea of justice. Suspending a player for one or two incidents that didn't merit a single criminal charge is an injustice. Once upon a time, Goodell had the right idea when it came to policing his league. But that time has gone. The NFL has become a police state. Enough is enough.

Never thought I would say this, but I'm saying it:

Roger Goodell must be stopped.

[Meacon Keaton]

I can't really say much that hasn't already been said. The guy is a twenty-eight year old man, he needs to start acting like a grown-up and not a college kid.

As for the allegations, I believe them to be false. I don't think Big Ben can figure out a way to get Chase off his dick long enough to rape anyone.

[sahyder1]

As long as they are reporting the truth I really don't care that they are trying to gain clicks/ad revenue.

But therein lies the problem. None of the stuff in the police report is "truth." It all comes from highly intoxicated girls who clearly got together and discussed the incident prior to giving their statements.

Also...I saw this on CBS Sportsline and figured I'd post it here:

Goodell's conduct policy veering from mostly right to all wrong

April 18, 2010

By Gregg Doyel

CBSSports.com National Columnist

I don't want to live in a world where an accusation is tantamount to a conviction. That's what happened in Salem, Mass., a few centuries ago. People were accused of witchcraft. Proof? There was no proof, just accusations. But accusations were enough. And so innocent people died.

I don't want to live there. Roger Goodell lives there.

Roger Goodell scares the hell out of me.

And it wasn't always this way. When Goodell as NFL commissioner unveiled his personal conduct policy in 2007, it was new, needed, even noble. The policy read, and I quote, "It will be considered conduct detrimental [for league personnel] to engage in ... violent and/or criminal activity." The policy went on to describe the line in the sand that could not be crossed, and that line was this: an arrest or a legal charge. A player didn't have to be convicted of a crime to be suspended; he had to be "arrested or charged," a phrase that appeared three times in the conduct policy.

And I loved it. The court system can take forever, and legal finagling often reduces charges to unrecognizable, even negligible levels. For example, domestic battery is often reduced to disturbing the peace, and a DUI arrest can be pleaded down to reckless driving. Goodell can't suspend a guy for disturbing the peace or for reckless friggin' driving, so he goes after the original charge. And we should understand. Tank Johnson and Pacman Jones were charged with all sorts of heinous crimes, and Goodell hammered them. Before all the lawyer wrangling, there was plenty of legal smoke, so Goodell brought the fire. Good for him, and good for his cynical but smart line in the sand.

But in recent weeks, Goodell has moved that line. Where did he move it? He moved it toward Salem, Mass. He moved it somewhere scary:

It's no longer necessary that there be enough evidence of "violent and/or criminal activity" for police to make an arrest or file charges. Nope. Now, an accusation is enough.

Goodell's new line in the sand was outlined in a memo leaked last week, a memo that reads, and I quote: "Every investigation, arrest, or other allegation of improper conduct ... threatens the continued success of our brand."

See that? An arrest is no longer needed. Forget about a conviction. Now, an "allegation" will do.

It makes me wonder ...

I live in Cincinnati. I see the occasional Cincinnati Bengal out at a bar. If I accused any of them of punching me in the face, could I get them suspended?

Hey, Commissioner. Carson Palmer and Chad Ochocinco decked me -- get 'em!

The news peg for my column, obviously, is Pittsburgh quarterback Ben Roethlisberger. He has been accused of sexual assault by two different women, most recently last month in Georgia. In both instances, police looked into the woman's accusations. In both instances, the district attorney reviewed the evidence and declined to take the case to trial. Roethlisberger wasn't convicted. He wasn't even charged.

But Goodell wants him suspended anyway. In hindsight, it seems obvious to me that Roethlisberger was the reason for that memo last week, and for the new line in the sand. In that memo, Goodell went all revisionist history when he wrote, and I quote, "Unfortunately, in recent weeks there have been several negative incidents ... that we have previously identified as particularly troublesome [such as] allegations of violence against women."

See what Goodell did there? We have previously identified ... allegations of violence against women.

Liar.

"Allegations" were never previously identified. That was never the line in the sand. Arrests and charges were identified. That was the line in sand: Arrests. Charges.

But now, "allegations" are enough. And let's be honest: They are rather horrific allegations. Sexual assault on a woman by anyone, much less by a 240-pound professional football player, is evil if true. Allegations like that must be taken seriously -- deathly seriously. And they were. Cops in Nevada investigated one accusation and found that the alleged victim had told friends she was hoping for "a little Roethlisberger" after the encounter, which sounds nothing like sexual assault to me. Cops in Georgia investigated the other charge, which sounded much more serious. In any event, neither state found enough evidence to go forward.

No matter to Goodell. He has been talking with the Steelers about how to deal with Roethlisberger, with Steelers president Art Rooney II saying it's a matter of time before Roethlisberger is disciplined. Said Rooney on Thursday: "When we get to the point where we have agreed with the commissioner on what that action will be, that's when it will be imposed."

In other words, this won't be an NFL suspension -- yet it'll be a Roger Goodell production anyway. If the Steelers, on their own, want to suspend Roethlisberger for a pattern of immaturity that makes the team look bad, that would be their right. He's their employee. If the Steelers want to suspend Roethlisberger, do it.

But Goodell is involved, redrawing his line in the sand to a location that should curdle the blood of every player in the league. Because if Roethlisberger goes down for this, anybody could be next. No charges? No problem. All the NFL needs is an allegation.

To understand how strongly I feel about this position, you have to understand how strongly I dislike Ben Roethlisberger. He's a serial idiot -- a stupid, cocky caricature of the modern-day athlete. Teammates don't like him. I can't stand him. I tolerate his existence by ignoring him whenever possible, but I can't ignore what Goodell is about to do -- not merely to Roethlisberger, but to my idea of justice. Suspending a player for one or two incidents that didn't merit a single criminal charge is an injustice. Once upon a time, Goodell had the right idea when it came to policing his league. But that time has gone. The NFL has become a police state. Enough is enough.

Never thought I would say this, but I'm saying it:

Roger Goodell must be stopped.

That column is absolutely retarded. As a sports fan I fully support Goodell's crackdown. The NFL has a highly funded security team that conducts their own investigations too. They're not suspending people just on hearsay. When they have enough information......like a grown man with a girl in a bathroom....he's completely in the right when he calls for a suspension. How is this different then any line of work? Drinking isn't illegal but guess what, if you get drunk and bring harm to the reputation of the company you work for, you will be fired. How is this any different?

[TCO]

Wow, just wow, did that really compare the Salem witch trials to Ben Roethlisberger's case?

Ben isn't being punished for rape, whcih in the laws eyes he's not guilty. He's being punished for acting like a drunken douche who brought shame to the leagues name for having sex with a drunk girl under the legal drinking age in a bathroom stall, which no one can doubt he is guilty of.

Edited April 19, 2010 by The Cool One

[Evil Chase K]

That column is absolutely retarded. As a sports fan I fully support Goodell's crackdown. The NFL has a highly funded security team that conducts their own investigations too. They're not suspending people just on hearsay. When they have enough information......like a grown man with a girl in a bathroom....

Please. The way you worded that you're acting like the girl was 15 or 16 years old.

Chris Henry got 4 games for supplying underage girls with alcohol (I believe they were under 18), a weapons charge, and drug possession.

Does Ben really deserve a suspension equal to, or even half as long as Henry's?

Wow, just wow, did that really compare the Salem witch trials to Ben Roethlisberger's case?

Ben isn't being punished for rape, whcih in the laws eyes he's not guilty. He's being punished for acting like a drunken douche who brought shame to the leagues name for having sex with a drunk girl under the legal drinking age, which no one can doubt he is guilty of.

You seem to be missing the point.

The original Personal Conduct Policy stated than an arrest or a charge was needed for suspension.

Now Goodell comes along and changes it to be nothing more than allegations. Doyel's point is that it sets in a motion a slippery slope in which any kind of false accusation could lead to a suspension.

The article isn't Pro-Ben as much as it is Anti-Goodell doing whatever he wants.

Edited April 19, 2010 by Evil Chase K

[Evil Chase K]

Wow, just wow, did that really compare the Salem witch trials to Ben Roethlisberger's case?

Ben isn't being punished for rape, whcih in the laws eyes he's not guilty. He's being punished for acting like a drunken douche who brought shame to the leagues name for having sex with a drunk girl under the legal drinking age in a bathroom stall, which no one can doubt he is guilty of.

What does that have to do with Ben?

Is it Ben's responsibility to card the girl and ask for ID?

Isn't the fact that she's in the bar and clearly was drinking prior to meeting up with Ben at the Capital City club reason enough to believe that she's 21?

How many of you ask to see a girl's ID before buying her drinks at a club?

I don't see how the girl's age reflects poorly on Ben seeing as she's over 18 and there is nothing to indicate that Ben knew she was only 20.