Ben Injury / Tomlin's decision
Greetings All,
I'm more than a little surprised that there is no fan fallout and second-guessing regarding Ben's injury on this site. I guess no one wants to look like they aren't 100% loyal but I think there is some room for debate if nothing else.
Did Ben have to play? If so, how much? Who else had to play, who should sit?
Rothlisberger, Ward, Harrison, Clark, and probably Miller needed rest the most. Parker needed a few touches but Moore is their most valuable RB at this point. Moore sits earliest then Parker. I think Parker looked good for 2 reasons - the Browns defense and the fact he has not gotten used much lately - he's recovering still and is fresh. He may even play really well in the coming weeks but I don't think he has more than 20 or so plays in him full speed. He won't be fully recovered until next year.
In Tomlin's defense - you want the guys sharp. We all get that. However, who is the one guy you can't lose? The starting QB. No coach is going to get fired for sitting the starter in a meaningless game but coaches do get fired when bad things happen. If management believes the coach used poor judgment, he can be held responsible for the decision. Now, I don't think Tomlin is getting fired in 2009 no matter what. But, how is the decision to play Roethlisburger going to look if Ben throws 3 picks and the Steelers lose?
My contention is that Ben has not been the same since his motorcycle accident. He is still good but seems more indecisive and shows some real strange decision-making at times. It takes years to recover from brain trauma. Big Ben has sustained numerous concussions in football and one big one from the accident. The guy is standing on the edge of a cliff now. One more fall in the coming weeks and he may be really damaged. Do I want this to be true - NO.
I believe one quarter was the limit if the coach felt he had to play at all. The guy has been beaten up for two full seasons and the last half of this season has been no cake-walk. If anyone needed to sit down and recover for two weeks it was Ben. Harrison didn't play and for good reason. Roethlisberger can turn into Roethlisbungle at any time. If he plays poorly in the first playoff game, what is going to be the first question asked after the game?
0 recs |
30 comments
Comments
Overblown
I think you are over reacting. Like Tomlin said, they lost the meaningless game in Baltimore last year when they rested the starters and everyone points to them going into the playoffs with a losing streak. Net net from all this is that if you win, all is forgiven. If you lose, everyone and their mother will be second guessing every decision.
I like the fact he played the game to win. I figured if they went up by 2 scores, they would have pulled the starters.
Also, BB has had only 3 concussions that I know of. 1 from the motorcycle accident, 1 in the Atlanta game in 2006, and this latest one. Not sure where you get that he has suffered numerous concussions from, but that is not correct.
by vin2k on Dec 29, 2008 1:26 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Jeez
If he plays poorly in the first playoff game, what is going to be the first question asked after the game?
If he’d sat out this game, then plays poorly in the first playoff game, what would be the first question asked in that situation?
by Varmint on Dec 29, 2008 1:53 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
play vs no play
Touche’. “Were you rusty?” would be one of them. “No, next question…” would be the response. There is nothing to debate other than opinion in that case. The issue now is that he is hurt. He is hurt and it’s not the first time for him with the bell-ringer. If he didn’t play, he isn’t hurt – he’s healthy going into the game. The guy is banged up – is there any question about that? This year alone he’s been sacked what 46 times, 47 and 46 the previous seasons? He doesn’t need to play as much as he needs to be healthy.
I understand that you play the game to win. Who plays is a different issue. What are you winning? Nothing really.
Not everyone can or should sit out. Ben is vulnerable because of his style and his inconsistent O Line. No one person has as much to do with winning and losing as the QB – that’s why there are special rules for them in the NFL. The whole team is riding on the guy’s performance. If he can’t play or plays badly then Tomlin will be second-guessed and should be. He risked everything for very little gain – that is my point.
"Franz" in NoCal
by franz on Dec 29, 2008 4:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It was stated before the game yesterday
that Ben would play the first quarter or half. Obviously it was first half. I too like the fact Tomlin plays to win. I heard the announcers talking after the injury yesterday and actually agreed with what they were saying. They said that “if you were a coach, and scared to put players in for fear of them getting hurt, you should go coach tennis”. Rest easy know we have a capable back up quarterback if need be. Not better, but definitely capable. All will be fine! I like where we are right now!
by Cdsumm on Dec 29, 2008 2:01 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
The difference in this case
is that Tomlin played an injured qb in a meaningless game. No problem playing him 1 or 2 quarters if he is healthy, but BB is nursing a littany of nagging injuries and he’s just too vulnerable to a season ending injury at this time. I don’t think BB’s play has declined due to his few head injuries but a concussion 2 weeks from game time against a defense like Baltimore’s who know BB’s tendencies well is not a good scenario and could have been prevented.
by qwikdoc on Dec 29, 2008 8:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
no chance we play baltimore in 2 weeks
3 weeks maybe
by schnifin on Dec 29, 2008 8:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m more than a little surprised that there is no fan fallout and second-guessing regarding Ben’s injury on this site.
Maybe its our level headed thinking…
Seriously though I think almost all of us thought that a.)The offense needed some reps to try and get a rhythm going and b.) 3 weeks is way too long for any team to go without any real game action. Injuries happen, they are a part of football. If you really think Ben hasn’t been the same since the accident, how do you explain last year when he had his best year as a pro?
by schnifin on Dec 29, 2008 2:56 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Ben
Best year is debatable. Statistically he had a lot of good numbers. In 04 and 05 he had higher yds/reception and similar yds/game while making 15-20% fewer attempts. In my mind, one of the shocking numbers is his fumbles last two seasons – 9 in 07 and 14 this year. Losing the ball is never a good thing and some of this is attributable to his decision-making. That decision-making is affected by brain injuries.
In 2005 they won the SuperBowl – the ultimate stat and accomplishment. There are a hell of a lot of factors when trying to devine the truth or reasons for such things. The 2007 Steelers had the 9th toughest schedule, 2006 team the 5th, this year’s the #1 schedule in the league. Their schedule this last half of the season has been brutal, not because of the offensive skill of their opponents but because of their defenses. The Steelers have played 10 of the top 12 defenses in the league.
Last year’s offense was better because they had better O Line for one thing. I’m not saying the guy sucks, I’m saying he has sustained damage and is beat up. Brain injuries are serious things and are cumulative. Look at Steve Young – he had to stop playing even though his body could perform. The risk is great to begin with. No sense in turning his head into a can of creamed corn in an effort to win a meaningless game and to “get ready”. These guys are ready and will be ready, they are pro football players. If they lose it’s not rust – they get beat by a better team.
On a sidenote – I like the way Leftwich is playing. He is really hungry and is doing a good job when he plays. He certainly is no Michael Vick back there but is not getting pounded the way Ben is.
"Franz" in NoCal
by franz on Dec 29, 2008 5:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
1 week off = good, 2 weeks off = bad
I completely agree with Tomlin’s decision to play Ben for a whole half. The starters needed to play some football this week. We got unlucky, and Ben went out with a couple minutes to play in the half. The most indispensible player on the team, IMO, is Troy because Carter is a huge dropoff. Leftwich is a capable backup, and our offense sucks anyway, so the defense has more to lose. I’d also think about putting Harrison above Ben on the “indispensible” list. As it turned out, Ben got hit, but he should be okay 2 weeks later (assuming he practices). It could have been a knee, elbow, or shoulder, which would have been a lot worse.
charity standing orders
by BadMaafala on Dec 29, 2008 2:58 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
It could have been a knee, elbow, or shoulder, which would have been a lot worse.
He has had these injuries already plus hitting his hand on helmets and other wear and tear. I love football and have coached for a long time. I just don’t agree with Tomlin here. Ben is a big kid who is going to play no matter what if he can. Cooler heads must prevail at times…. like schnifin said – “level headed thinking….”
"Franz" in NoCal
by franz on Dec 29, 2008 5:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Nothing to 2nd guess
It was unfortunate that Ben got injured, but it was the right decision to let him play at least a half. I was excited on that last drive that the Off. was going to get in game reps in a 2-minute drill.
by _ET_ on Dec 29, 2008 9:07 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
It doesnt matter,
If there is any player on the team that can use as many reps as possible its BB. Im not trying to be mean. But this guy truly needs to get his groove intact.
I think its funny that people are wimpering about whether Tomlin should have played BB or not. Hey people ,the guy is a football player and a leader of this team. Then to suggest that his previous head injuries have contributed to his decision-making on the field is is borderline Chris Rock material.
Ben ’s (and I love him) decision making on the field is completely by virtue of his own confidence, arrogance, and dogma that usually makes or breaks sometimes the outcome of Steelers games.
Does anyone agree or disagree? Please I’d like to hear from you. Go Steelers!
by C-Mac on Dec 30, 2008 1:52 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
decisions, decisions
You are right – his decisions on the field make or break the Steelers in most cases. Given that, why risk him to injury?
If you don’t believe his prior injuries have anything to do with his performance then you don’t know anything about playing sports. It’s not just the concussions and cumulative brain trauma I’m concerned with. It’s the multitude of injuries he has had this year – knee, ankle, thumb, hip etc…
I’m not saying BB is limited in a quantifiable way – not from the limited information we fans get. I do think he has been affected and shows some signs of it during games. His tendency to hold onto the ball and some of the throws he is making seem far below his physical and historical ability. If the guy is truly healthy he is a great QB and a weapon.
"Franz" in NoCal
by franz on Dec 30, 2008 1:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
sorry http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08365/938457-114.stm
"Franz" in NoCal
by franz on Dec 30, 2008 6:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If it was such a "meaningless" game...
…why did anyone watch it?
by Varmint on Dec 30, 2008 1:13 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Actually, I didn’t watch it until the 4th quarter. The only thing that mattered was that they come out of it healthy. Unfortunately, they have sn issue to contend with now.
I like our chances with Leftwich vs most teams. I think we are least likely to beat Baltimore if that is who we end up playing in 3rd round. We don’t match up against their defense very well and the Ravens always play the Steelers tough and to the bitter end.
"Franz" in NoCal
by franz on Dec 30, 2008 2:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree.
I like our chances against the Dirty Birds. First, it would be at our house, second, their offense is still led by a rookie QB, (and it would be in the AFC Championship). My guess is the Lebeau would concoct something special for them, So as tough as their defense is, ours is just as tough…no tougher, and I like BB’s experience in big games vs a tough team (he has played multiple times) in a pressure situation over a rookie, no matter HOW good he played during the regular season.
"Whaddya' mean all the beer is gone..?
by OhioYinzer on Dec 30, 2008 6:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Thank goodness,
Ben himself is not making such pitiful excuses like that. His game is not sharp enough to have him sit. I’m sorry, this is crunch time. And there are many qb’s who have similar injuries going into their last game of the season and they have been competitive and sharp for the post season. Ben probably knows he nneded to play in this game and thus he did . Unfortuately he got injured.
I also think Tomlin is insightful enough to discern if his injuries are hindering decision making in some way that Ben would not be playing but on the bench with Leftwich to start most of the games this season.
by C-Mac on Dec 31, 2008 2:26 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Hope you are right CMac
I would love to see them beat the Birds for a third time. I think the Ravens might be the toughest team for anyone to play right now. Not because they are balanced – they’re not. Because they are very physical on both sides, have a great defense which is playing well and have the ability to hurt or beat you up in the process. The team that beats Baltimore may not be able to win the following week.
This is true for the Steelers also. I don’t think the Steelers are quite as scary on defense, even though their defense is great and statistically better. If the Steelers do lose, their opponent may not be able to win the following week. Something tells me one of these defenses is going to crush a big time player in these playoffs with big repercussions. I would love for us to get Woodley, Timmons and Harrison on the field at the same time and let all 3 come at the QB on the same down… now that would be scary!!
"Franz" in NoCal
by franz on Dec 31, 2008 2:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
On Playing Ben
Sad thing is, we NEEDED to get some rhythm on offense. If Ben coulda probably gotten another TD in there we wouldnt have had him in. But come on, only up 7-0 against Cleveland? Hell yes I keep my starters in until they put it away.
Regardless, at halftime I think I would have put my reserves in. But its clear our offense needed some time to get something going. And we’ve seen teams falter when resting their starters for this week and the first week bye, and sometimes even week 16. You need to keep the guys hungry and looking for blood.
by Mechem on Dec 31, 2008 9:09 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Stale offense
I would agree that 95% of the time, you want to get some work for the offense and then get them out, so they aren’t off work for more than 2 game weeks. But, with BB banged up and recovering from multiple issues it just isn’t worth the risk.
For those who say the players themselves don’t make excuses and everyone should play a quarter or half – why didn’t Harrison play? He certainly could have, but that doesn’t mean it’s the smart thing to do.
"Franz" in NoCal
by franz on Dec 31, 2008 2:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Harrison Played
Harrison simply meditated in a dark room and channeled his rage. It was enough to terrify the spirit of Bruce Gradkowski and cause him to suck.
I think its just a case of bad timing here. I mean you hate to see it happen, but his being out there was needed from a performance standpoint. Wrong place, wrong time.
I have to say though, at least Ben is like the Paul Bunyan of QB’s. Hes practically Favre’ian with his resilient power and the fact that it takes a mortal wound to keep him off the field.
by Mechem on Jan 1, 2009 12:47 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
how can you say he hasnt been the same since the motorcycle accedent, he threw 32 touchdowns last yr and had the 2nd highest rating next to tome brady
he has one of the worst o-lines in the nfl and still has managed to lead the team to a 12-4 season. it been very clear threwout the yr when BB doesnt practis he doesnt play well, so if they held him out and he lost the game because of poor play everyone would be sayin he should have played against the browns
by Alitron on Jan 2, 2009 12:04 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Now what?
I can’t prove it to you. I base it upon his decision-making and the results of those decisions. I don’t base it on statistics, only from my observations. The 2007 season was a good one for him statistically but they played an easier schedule than the year before or after. Playing against good defenses forces the QB to make quicker decisions and therefore more bad decisions are exposed, resulting in turnovers or missing open receivers. Look at the TexasTech – Oklahoma game, the Sooner defense made Harrell look more average because he didn’t have the time, vision or wide-open receivers that he had earlier in the year. His decision-making became more critical to his team’s success. I’m not saying it was his fault they lost, only that good defense puts a premium on QB decisions. Getting another concussion is the worst thing for a decision-maker under pressure…..
I think you are missing the point. He may not even play now. The fact that his health is now worse than it was before the Browns game is my point. The risk was not worth the reward. He was hurt before the game and is now hurt even more so.
If BB plays poorly for the whole game, the reason will be in question. If he hadn’t played vs Browns, there are no excuses. He may not play as well with a week off early in the game but that isn’t a good enough reason in my view…. sorry that’s how I see it.
"Franz" in NoCal
by franz on Jan 2, 2009 1:56 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

by 

















