Mason Rudolph to face Browns--how many more QBs go down

Ian Rapoport
@RapSheet
#Steelers coach Mike Tomlin tells reporters that QB Mason Rudolph will start in Week 17. A bye week for Big Ben.

https://twitter.com/RapSheet/status/1343967632274448386

Quarterbacks out and pending over the last few weeks:

SF: Beathard in for Mullens (suck factor followed by season-ending injury).
LA: Goff out for Bortles or the former Arizona Hotshots AAF qb who has never played a down in NFL.
Zona: Murray possibly out.
WAS: Haskins benched, second stringer and third stringer get hurt, Haskins back, then gets fired. They're starting a guy who was studying for math finals two weeks ago.
PHI: Wentz benched for Hurts
NYG: Long stretch of Colt McCoy (I know this one hurts), not 100 percent sure Jones will be back
NO: Brees back after 11 broken ribs and a punctured lung, for now.

Mason Rudolph?

Starting in Cleveland?

After what happened last year?

He's going to get murdered.

Its week 17 and the game doesn't mean anything to the Steelers.

Whats the issue?

QB injuries are pretty common.

Uncle Si":55lyqtf5 said:

Its week 17 and the game doesn't mean anything to the Steelers.

Whats the issue?

QB injuries are pretty common.

Click to expand...

Do you not remember what happened last year?

And I still think Rudolph should've been suspended, too. His dumb ass started it.

Maulbert":p4rfret4 said:

Uncle Si":p4rfret4 said:

Its week 17 and the game doesn't mean anything to the Steelers.

Whats the issue?

QB injuries are pretty common.

Click to expand...

Do you not remember what happened last year?

And I still think Rudolph should've been suspended, too. His dumb ass started it.

Click to expand...

Oh certainly... and he should've been suspended.

Not sure thats the point of the OP though.

Uncle Si":3b7ucwkx said:

Its week 17 and the game doesn't mean anything to the Steelers.

Whats the issue?

QB injuries are pretty common.

Click to expand...

Maybe not to the Steelers but consider this pft nugget:

With the Browns, Ravens, Colts and Dolphins all competing in the AFC wild card race, a win for the Browns hurts the Ravens, Colts and Dolphins. (The Titans may also end up with a wild card berth, but their path to the playoffs is highly unlikely to be affected by the Browns-Steelers game.)

Click to expand...

In addition, who they are going to play against in the wc is yet tbd; all we do know is that the further up you are seeded the more likely you are to play an inferior opponent on record.

Finally, it's a division game and those tend to get most engagement and pos PR. Even if the 1 seed were not for us a theoretical possibility, I'd expect Russ to go out there Sunday, just like Kittle is.

SantaClaraHawk":1it63cf8 said:

Uncle Si":1it63cf8 said:

Its week 17 and the game doesn't mean anything to the Steelers.

Whats the issue?

QB injuries are pretty common.

Click to expand...

Maybe not to the Steelers but consider this pft nugget:

With the Browns, Ravens, Colts and Dolphins all competing in the AFC wild card race, a win for the Browns hurts the Ravens, Colts and Dolphins. (The Titans may also end up with a wild card berth, but their path to the playoffs is highly unlikely to be affected by the Browns-Steelers game.)

Click to expand...

In addition, who they are going to play against in the wc is yet tbd; all we do know is that the further up you are seeded the more likely you are to play an inferior opponent on record.

Finally, it's a division game and those tend to get most engagement and pos PR. Even if the 1 seed were not for us a theoretical possibility, I'd expect Russ to go out there Sunday, just like Kittle is.

Click to expand...

If the Seahawks were not playing for seeding you would not expect Russ to be out there. I think it's dub the 9ers would risk Kittle.

Thats silly...

The Steelers are not responsible for the plight of the Titans, Dolphins, Ravens, or Colts (3 of which they beat..) and are under no obligation to concern themselves with those teams. That's just not how it works.

Uncle Si":yql8bxdh said:

If the Seahawks were not playing for seeding you would not expect Russ to be out there. I think it's dub the 9ers would risk Kittle.

Thats silly...

The Steelers are not responsible for the plight of the Titans, Dolphins, Ravens, or Colts (3 of which they beat..) and are under no obligation to concern themselves with those teams. That's just not how it works.

Click to expand...

The Hawks not only have to win SF but have to hope the Bears beat GB AND Carolina beats the Saints to get No. 1. ESPN FPI puts the odds at 5 percent, as opposed to GB at almost 80 percent.

The 95 percent outcome is that we're 2 or 3 seed playing the Rams, Cards or Bears in playoffs. Either way we're facing a team with recently injured qbs (Rams, Cards) or Mitchell Trubinsky. Steelers are in fact in the same position as us except they have zero percent chance at the No. 1 seed.

So if we were at zero you'd say, hell, pull Russ, Tyler, Brooks, DK etc. because it's a meaningless game and the most we'll fall to is #3? Because that is the strategy in fact in pulling a healthy Russ.

The 49ers have less at stake than even the 5 percent that we do. In fact why don't they go ahead and pull not just Kittle but Kinlaw, Verrett, Moore etc. because after all they could go down with an ACL and that'd be problematic?

That's not ever how it's worked with a professional National Football League team in my memory.

I understand what's being played for.

What does that have to do with anything I said? You need to read better.

Uncle Si":xnazf9tk said:

I understand what's being played for.

What does that have to do with anything I said? You need to read better.

Click to expand...

I'm responding to part of what you said.

Is it worth it to put your starting QB as well as your crucial 2021 pieces out there to risk ACL or injury for a game that in all probability will give us a 2 or 3 that's in fact fungible? If our chances were not five percent, but zero percent, would you be in favor of benching all the 2021 crucial pieces?

Do you really think the Bills would bench a healthy Allen for Week 17 for instance?

Zero percent with playoffs ahead.. yes.thats what I said.

If there wasno chance at the playoffs, id sit every major player possible.

Many teams do this.

So who was telling the truth about that incident? Garrett or Rudolph?

Uncle Si":39mlqc3x said:

Zero percent with playoffs ahead.. yes.thats what I said.

If there wasno chance at the playoffs, id sit every major player possible.

Many teams do this.

Click to expand...

I'll stipulate your football knowledge is greater than mine, so I'm asking, who are the "many" teams who have sat all their crucial pieces for next year for a worthless week 17 because they were assured over the past 10 years? Or even just sat their healthy QBs?

SantaClaraHawk":127rz0mf said:

Uncle Si":127rz0mf said:

Zero percent with playoffs ahead.. yes.thats what I said.

If there wasno chance at the playoffs, id sit every major player possible.

Many teams do this.

Click to expand...

I'll stipulate your football knowledge is greater than mine, so I'm asking, who are the "many" teams who have sat all their crucial pieces for next year for a worthless week 17 because they were assured over the past 10 years? Or even just sat their healthy QBs?

Click to expand...

Off top of my head..

Vikings last year against the Bears. Was at that game with my son.

No cousins, cook, diggs, thielen.

They will likely sit most if their bigger players who have had any type of injury this year

Colts sat most their team for a season to draft Luck

Uncle Si":3u2yhjl0 said:

SantaClaraHawk":3u2yhjl0 said:

Uncle Si":3u2yhjl0 said:

Zero percent with playoffs ahead.. yes.thats what I said.

If there wasno chance at the playoffs, id sit every major player possible.

Many teams do this.

Click to expand...

I'll stipulate your football knowledge is greater than mine, so I'm asking, who are the "many" teams who have sat all their crucial pieces for next year for a worthless week 17 because they were assured over the past 10 years? Or even just sat their healthy QBs?

Click to expand...

Off top of my head..

Vikings last year against the Bears. Was at that game with my son.

No cousins, cook, diggs, thielen.

They will likely sit most if their bigger players who have had any type of injury this year

Click to expand...

Thanks for this evidence. I'll say that if I paid the Stubhub price for two tickets to go see Seattle@49ers for the last week of 2016, I'd be beyond pissed if Russ hadn't shown or there was no Sherman or other pieces of that time. And similarly I'd be even more angry if the Hawks lost 7-23 for lack of effort instead of winning 25-23.

And I would have been also irritated if the 9ers had not, at least, tried.

Most people view at home to the advantage of the league and the network/streaming airing them. For my time I'd still be irritated. It's a little too close to fixing a game, you know? If you know either side is going to healthy scratch or rest their crucial pieces, the game is boring...why watch it? Bet millions think the same--and hence there's actually an interest on the league's part to foster at least passable competitions.

Seems this thread was hijacked

If Rudolph was guilty there is no way his team would still accept him, Garrett gets the pass because he is an all time talent. Dude should’ve been suspended for the entire year. He hit a man in the head with his own helmet, that is assault no matter the circumstances. Not to mention a b i t c h move. Yet Gordon can’t play because why... he does drugs...the shame. 90% of the world is on some kind of drug.

Flyingsquad23":2cgd6p7f said:

Seems this thread was hijacked

If Rudolph was guilty there is no way his team would still accept him, Garrett gets the pass because he is an all time talent. Dude should’ve been suspended for the entire year. He hit a man in the head with his own helmet, that is assault no matter the circumstances. Not to mention a b i t c h move. Yet Gordon can’t play because why... he does drugs...the shame. 90% of the world is on some kind of drug.

Click to expand...

Game happened in Week 11 and Garrett sat for the rest of the year. I will say Rudolph's conduct immediately prior and after merited at least a two-week suspension from the tape.

What most fans of any sport do expect is that any game in particular deliver entertainment value, and there can be nothing more boring or dispiriting to that than having your team or the opponent not show out with their horses, the top of whom for most is the qb, not because they aren't healthy but because the game you paid to go see isn't worth it for them.

The situation Si described above is almost...unfathomable. It cost me about $400 all in to go see that Hawks@49ers game in person and largely that's because I wanted to see my favorite Hawks in person and expected the game to be actually a game played to deliver entertainment value.

\

SantaClaraHawk":3dxu9d77 said:

Uncle Si":3dxu9d77 said:

SantaClaraHawk":3dxu9d77 said:

Uncle Si":3dxu9d77 said:

Zero percent with playoffs ahead.. yes.thats what I said.

If there wasno chance at the playoffs, id sit every major player possible.

Many teams do this.

Click to expand...

I'll stipulate your football knowledge is greater than mine, so I'm asking, who are the "many" teams who have sat all their crucial pieces for next year for a worthless week 17 because they were assured over the past 10 years? Or even just sat their healthy QBs?

Click to expand...

Off top of my head..

Vikings last year against the Bears. Was at that game with my son.

No cousins, cook, diggs, thielen.

They will likely sit most if their bigger players who have had any type of injury this year

Click to expand...

Thanks for this evidence. I'll say that if I paid the Stubhub price for two tickets to go see Seattle@49ers for the last week of 2016, I'd be beyond pissed if Russ hadn't shown or there was no Sherman or other pieces of that time. And similarly I'd be even more angry if the Hawks lost 7-23 for lack of effort instead of winning 25-23.

And I would have been also irritated if the 9ers had not, at least, tried.

Most people view at home to the advantage of the league and the network/streaming airing them. For my time I'd still be irritated. It's a little too close to fixing a game, you know? If you know either side is going to healthy scratch or rest their crucial pieces, the game is boring...why watch it? Bet millions think the same--and hence there's actually an interest on the league's part to foster at least passable competitions.

Click to expand...

Thats not how it works though... which you are aware of if you watch sports.

The league fosters passable entertainment at nearly every level.. it has no issues charging full price for exhibition games though. It has no issue, nor should it, when charging full price for week 17 games with nothing on the line in which coaches and athletes take liberties with the roster.

Every sport does this.

Written like some newspaper headline,QB's are players and
all players fall on the field..
The drama about the helmet is over -time served ect besides
the helmet brushed him lightly and luckily ..It was stupid yes
but coulda and woulda doesn't work for me.