Drunken Cowboy
Footballguy
They need to let him throw downfield.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
QB Mason Rudolph, PIT (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter pghrob
- Start date
The Frankman
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
The Frankman
Footballguy
The Big Donkey
Footballguy
Kind of stinks for this guy... you say Mark Sanchez - you think buttfumble. you say Mason Rudolph-you think guy who got domed with his own helmet.
IheartGuinness
Footballguy
Eh. I don't know...I actually kind of respect him for not backing down. Even after he got dinged he was still waving his arms calling for Garrett to get penalized. I give him credit for not hiding behind his linemen from the beginning.
He's still a pretty awful quarterback, though...
cloppbeast
Footballguy
I'd be shocked if Rudolph was suspended. Maybe a fine I guess, but the optics look pretty bad if you suspend Rudolph, even if by letter of the law, it could be appropriate. Only way Rudolph likely gets suspended, is if the Commish goes way over the top to make a statement. Like, 16 games for Garrett, 4 for Pouncey, 2 for Ogunjobi, 1 for Rudolph, and even though it wasn't part of the fight, 1-2 for Randall as well.
Going into the game Rudolph had a 90+ passer rating, and a nearly 3-1 TD-INT ratio. He was playing pretty well for the first 6.5 games of his career.
Peak
Footballguy
Should he get one for cleating Garrett in the nuts while he was trying to Garrett's helmet off? Or would that be rolled into the attempted de-helmeting?
The Frankman
Footballguy
So it looks like no suspension at all, but an undisclosed fine for Rudolph by the NFL. That's a little weird considering their rather strict rules on fight engagement/escalation, but I kinda expected the NFL to cave. A lot of similarities to the Andre Johnson/Courtland Finnegan fight except Finnegan actually manage to get the helmet off and didn't get decked by one.
The Frankman
Footballguy
dp
Last edited by a moderator:
ILUVBEER99
Footballguy
How in the world did Rudolph fade a suspension?
Garrett deserves whatever he gets, but Rudolph initiated the fight trying to rip Garretts helmet off. If Rudolph doesn't spazz out there is no fight.
NFL is a joke.
Garrett deserves whatever he gets, but Rudolph initiated the fight trying to rip Garretts helmet off. If Rudolph doesn't spazz out there is no fight.
NFL is a joke.
themeistersinger
Footballguy
I would say that Rudolph should be suspended for 1 game. Any attempt to deliberately remove the helmet of another player should be an automatic 1 game suspension. Then you escalate from there depending on how much worse things get from there. But just because Garrett lost his mind is no reason to be lenient with Rudolph.
The Frankman
Footballguy
EDIT:
nvm
Last edited by a moderator:
Statorama
gangster
We (and the league) can only speculate that's what Rudolph was trying to do. Was it likely? Yes. But still only speculation.
The part I haven't heard anything about is that it clearly looked like Rudolph kicked Garrett in the balls.
Bracie Smathers
Footballguy
In a related stories, Myles Garrett is not considering legal actions for sexual assault against Mason Rudolph as he kicked him in the groin but Mason faces a big court battle as numerous Pittsburgh fans ARE considering legal actions against Rudolph since he continues to masquerade as an NFL quarterback.
themeistersinger
Footballguy
When it happened I joked that Garrett must be a Steelers fan, since there are a lot of Steelers fans would love to do that to Rudolph.
kittenmittens
Footballguy
He did kick him in the balls with like a one legged mule kick. That kind of thing is probably going to provoke a reaction. Garrett was WAY out of line, but it wasn't unprovoked. Garrett did start it with a fairly late hit... But that hit was not flagged I don't believe.
Chaka
Footballguy
Stop. Nothing Rudolph did, not one thing, justified Garrett's reaction. In the real world that's a minimum of an assult with a deadly weapon charge, with a bunch of other lesser charges tacked on.
Yenrub
Footballguy
ILUVBEER99
Footballguy
Agree, Garrett's reaction was way out of line. That doesn't mean Rudolph wasn't wrong as well, albeit not near the level of Garrett.
Rudolph should have gotten a suspension as well for instigating.
Chaka
Footballguy
The point is that nothing Rudolph did, right wrong or otherwise, justifies Garrett's reaction.
What Rudolph did is (knowing what he did mind you) is entirely irrelevant. Garrett used a deadly weapon to attack Rudolph. That's all that matters.
Like I said, in the real world what Garrett did is a guaranteed assault with a deadly weapon charge at a minimum. And what Rudolph did would not pass as any kind of defense of Garrett's actions.
The first bold is true, but the second does not follow from the first.
I see posters in here independently assessing each player’s actions to discuss whether or not those actions warrant a suspension, fine, etc. I don’t support the principle of “only punish the worst offender, everyone else gets off,” and that is what your argument is implying.
If someone breaks into another person’s car, and the car owner sees it and responds by beating the crap out of the taunter, we don’t say “well, he wasn’t justified in beating the guy so it is irelevant that his car was being broken in to.” We’d punish the beating and the attempted theft indpendently.
Chaka
Footballguy
I never said Rudolph shouldn't be punished by the league. I said that, much like the guy breaking into the car, Rudolph did nothing that justifies being assaulted with a deadly weapon.
If Garrett kept his cool and didn't literally, not figuratively, try to kill Rudolph (whether he intended to or not is, again, irrelevant. In any other venue it was assault with a deadly weapon) I am quite certain the refs and the league would still have punished Rudolph.
The inverse is also true: Another point is that nothing Garrett did, right, wrong, or otherwise, excuses Randolph’s action.
You say in the real world what Garrett did is a guaranteed assault charge. If we ignore the obvious question of why are these two men walking around in the real world wearing football helmets, then OK, you are correct. What would also obviously bring charges would be the Rudolph’s initial attempt to steal aggressively steal Garrett’s helmet and Rudolph’s assault when he kicked Garrett in the groin.
So, there’s that. In the “real world,” where these two men aren’t playing football, but are wearing helmets, both men would have had charges filed against them.
You said what Rudolph did was entirely irrelevant. If guy 1 doesn’t break into guy 2’s car, guy two doesn’t assault guy 1. Rudolph’s actions are completely relevant. If he hadn’t done what he did, Garrett wouldn’t have done what he did. Doesn’t make what garret did OK, or even less horrible. But to say Rudolph’s actions are irrelevant is totally false.
Chaka
Footballguy
Not absolving Rudolph but he didn't swing a helmet full force at a guy not wearing a helmet. Rudolph arguably assaulted Garrett, Garrett arguably tried to kill Rudolph.
Not sure why people think I'm giving Rudolph a pass. But their transgressions are apples to spaceships.
Chaka
Footballguy
It is irrelevant as it is not a legal defense.
Breaking into your car, in no way justifies assault, let alone hitting someone in the head with a brick.
Sure, it's a precipitating event but we live in a society with laws and the proper legal remedy in that situation is to call the police.
If you go the AWD route instead you'd go to jail with the full sentence for AWD. I guess the excuse might help in a plea bargain if the DA was lazy.
You said his (Rudolph’s) actions were irrelevant. If that’s not giving him a pass, what is it?
What Rudolph did doesn’t excuse & isn’t a defense for what Garrett did. As Baker said, “that’s inexcusable.” That does not make what Rudolph did irrelevant. If Rudolph hadn’t been pissed off that he sucked Thursday & tried to rip at Garrett’s helmet & kick him in the balls, this incident wouldn’t have happened. That makes it totally relevant.
Chaka
Footballguy
Where did I say Rudolph shouldn't be punished by the league?
I said his actions were irrelevant as it relates to Garrett swinging a helmet at Rudolph.
Chaka
Footballguy
No. Garrett had remedies within the rules of the game. Keep your cool, watch and laugh as Rudolph gets penalized and fined. End of story. That's what smart players do.
AWD renders all that came before it irrelevant. There is no self defense claim, Garrett was never in fear for his health and safety but he swung a helmet with full force at the unprotected head of an opponent. That opponent was an idiot to be sure but being an idiot does not justify, in any way shape or form, AWD.
Do you think Garrett would have swung a helmet at Rudolph if Rudolph hadn’t clawed at his helmet & kicked him in the balls?
If you are being honest, your answer will be no. Therefore Rudolph’s actions were directly relevant to Garrett swing a helmet at him. This does not excuse or justify Garrett’s actions, but it shows clear relevance between Garrett’s act & Rudolphs actions that came beforehand.
If Rudolph thought Garrett’s tackle was so egregious that it warranted him ripping atGarrett’s helmet & kicking him in the balls, he too had remedies within the rules of the game. He chose to go outside the rules, and instigated this situation. If Rudolph had, as you suggest, “kept his cool,” and watch & laughed as Garrett got penalized & fined, that, also would have been the end of story. But he didn’t; he went after Garrett, and Garrett responded way more violently and aggressively than is warranted, acceptable, or justifiable. But the fact remains that Rudolph’s actions were relevant to Garrett making the stupid decision that he did make.
Chaka
Footballguy
Of course Garrett wouldn't have if Rudolph didn't, but it still doesn't matter.
I think we are talking past each other a bit. My only point is that Garrett's punishment, in no way shape or form, should be impacted by what Rudolph did (and vice versa). That makes Rudolph's actions, even as the precipitating event, irrelevant. They simply don't factor into Garrett's suspension.
To be very clear, I am not defending Rudolph in any way, shape or form. He's an idiot who should have kept his composure and he has earned whatever punishment comes down.
Last edited by a moderator:
Steeler
Footballguy
Chaka
Footballguy
Steeler
Footballguy
I think Rudolph acted like an idiot but I can separate that from what punishment Garrett should get.Says the completely unbiased person named Steeler.
I agree; Garrett deserved the suspension, regardless of what events came before his actions. I don’t think that’s in question.
Chaka
Footballguy
Encumbrance
Footballguy
No need to bring up your character integrity for further impeachment, either. What if he was a sexist, racist, etc. in high school or college? I'm way more forgiving than most, but it would still be newsworthy because of his public stature and his now being really thrust front-and-center into the news. And some guys' Twitter feeds don't age well.
The Frankman
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
Godsbrother
Footballguy
Rudolph has regressed to the point that he shouldn’t be starting. If something happens to Duck the Steelers should give Lynch a shot.
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
When you get benched in favor of a QB nicknamed "Duck," you know you've hit rock bottom.
Similar threads
