Reported: Mason Rudolph accused of using racial slur prior to brawl-Steelers deny

[OZBILLS]

Just now, buffaloboyinATL said:

I was about to say the same thing. Crazy.

To be fair, what else can he do? Come out and admit he made it up?

 

All in!

[GoBills808]

2 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Yeah, in some ways that’s what I’m saying. I’m not saying “cave” as in not punish him. I’m saying “cave” as in they will allow him back at the start of next year. The NFL just doesn’t want this in the offseason:

 

 

You remember the guy who claimed Incognito called him some racial epithet a couple seasons back?

 

 

...yeah, me neither (actually it was Ngakoue, but still). And it went away in a week, like this claim by Garrett will likely do as well.

[LeviF]

2 hours ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

And I am certain that Rock Hill, SC, is exactly how it was 58 years ago...

 

Could have been Brett Mason Rudolph I who did it. I'm not sayin...but I'm just sayin...

 

With regard to Garrett doubling down and the "not for public dissemination" garbage: if it's true, what do you care if it gets to the public, Myles? 

Edited November 22, 2019 by LeviF91

[LSHMEAB]

I don't buy Garrett's story for a second. The timing is all wrong and it's almost impossible to believe an NFL QB would have used "that word" on an NFL field with several other players within earshot. 

 

I will say that IF this were to occur, it's serious business and the dismissive responses to the POSSIBILITY of this going down are odd. 

 

I'm pretty sure most wouldn't actually have the stones to go there, so why flippantly dismiss the seriousness? I'm beating around the bush here; bet you wouldn't say it to someone's face. That's the bottom line.

 

At any rate, it's also incredibly disgusting to toss those kind of accusations around precisely because of the reasons stated above. Very desperate, pathetic smear of Rudolph if my hunch is correct and this is bunk.

Edited November 22, 2019 by LSHMEAB

[Kirby Jackson]

12 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

You remember the guy who claimed Incognito called him some racial epithet a couple seasons back?

 

 

...yeah, me neither (actually it was Ngakoue, but still). And it went away in a week, like this claim by Garrett will likely do as well.

The difference is that Garrett won’t let it go. Ngakoue wasn’t suspended or anything like that.

Garrett is coming from a different place. He can continue to say that the “NFL is punishing him while allowing this racist mentality.” Rudolph is an admitted “MAGA guy” that loves Tomi Lahren and hates Jamele Hill and Kaep. His story will gain traction whether it’s true or not. Rudolph makes for the perfect poster boy for this accusation. Garrett will make some noise with this and have people that believe it.

 

From the NFL’s standpoint the sooner the race card leaves the better. They can come to Garrett and say “let this die and we will get you back for Week 1.” That accomplishes everyone’s goal. The NFL got to shut him down for the year and shut him up. Garrett got as little of a suspension as he could have hoped for. 
 

 

Edited November 22, 2019 by Kirby Jackson

[TakeYouToTasker]

[TakeYouToTasker]

5 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

It’s certainly risky but it’s the only hand that he had. It’s going to end up as he said, he said. They are going to try to pin Rudolph as a MAGA loving racist because of his political views. If Garrett is lying, I agree, they should add on. If he’s telling the truth it probably gets reduced (still think he’s done for this year) and Rudolph gets punished too. Rudolph should immediately file a lawsuit if it’s false. 
 

This was the only play that Garrett had to gain sympathy and back the NFL into a corner. It’s kind of like the Justin Fields situation at UGA (although that had further documentation). His waiver was going to be granted no matter what because the NCAA didn’t want to look complicit in any way. This accusation applies pressure to the NFL that they don’t want. This is a conversation and issue that they don’t want playing out in public.

His best hand was contrition, not lying, casting vile aspersions against the character of another man.

 

I hope he’s sued for everything he’s worth, and then never plays again.

 

Rudolph should also go after the Browns organization, and the NFL.  Force them to disavow Garrett.  Destroy him.

 

He’s garbage.  He deserves garbage.

Edited November 22, 2019 by TakeYouToTasker

[BringBackOrton]

6 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

His best hand was contrition, not lying, casting vile aspersions against the character of another man.

 

I hope he’s sued for everything he’s worth, and then never plays again.

 

He’s garbage.  He deserves garbage.

Agreed. Rudolph’s statement was on point. This is more detestable than swinging the helmet by far.

[Chaos]

If I had my choice of Myles Garret calling me any mean names he wants, or hitting me in the head with a helmet, I chose the name calling. 

[Punching Bag]

1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Again, it’s a cost - benefit analysis. “Is it easier to reinstate him week 1 or have him making more allegations?” The answer, imo, is it is absolutely easier for them to cut a deal with him that if he lets this go he will be back week 1. Garrett accusing them of racism certainly isn’t going to hurt his chance of coming back sooner. The longer he is out the louder he will get. This was the strategic play by he and his people. We won’t know how it will work out for a long time. He has nothing to lose but a little more dignity. He’s the guy that just hit someone over the head with a helmet. He didn’t have a lot of character stock to lose.

 

Once you pay blackmailer you will keep paying blackmailer and Garrett will not stop being stupid.

[hemma]

His lawyer should be disbarred. Horrible advice. 

Even Saul wouldn't go that low.

[Herc11]

Who told Garrett it was a good idea to consult Michael Bennett and Jussie Smollet about his appeal????

[Teddy KGB]

Ashamed of Garrett.      Don’t lower yourself to Bennett brother status. 

[Just in Atlanta]

Playing race cards like aces, baby. 

 

[RaoulDuke79]

2 minutes ago, Teddy KGB said:

Ashamed of Garrett.      Don’t lower yourself to Bennett brother status. 

The die has been cast. Next step when things start really going sideways is to claim mental instability caused him to commit assault and utter untruths. 

[HOUSE]

If the officials didn't hear it then it never happened

[RaoulDuke79]

Just now, HOUSE said:

If the officials didn't hear it then it never happened

Rudolph probably said it during pregame warm ups. The rage just finally boiled over with 9 seconds of game  left. ?

[Punching Bag]

Imagine how hard he would have hit him if Browns were the ones losing!

[RaoulDuke79]

Now I have to wonder about the validity of the story about the guy to stopped to take a picture with Garrett then punched him in the face. Whatever came of that anyway?

Edited November 22, 2019 by RaoulDuke79

[Mr. WEO]

1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Again, it’s a cost - benefit analysis. “Is it easier to reinstate him week 1 or have him making more allegations?” The answer, imo, is it is absolutely easier for them to cut a deal with him that if he lets this go he will be back week 1. Garrett accusing them of racism certainly isn’t going to hurt his chance of coming back sooner. The longer he is out the louder he will get. This was the strategic play by he and his people. We won’t know how it will work out for a long time. He has nothing to lose but a little more dignity. He’s the guy that just hit someone over the head with a helmet. He didn’t have a lot of character stock to lose.

Well, we have no idea what the “NFL list of concerns” looks like. That’s an assumption based on nothing. We do know that they want to “protect the shield.” That’s all-encompassing.

 

It’s not one or the other. “We don’t want players to hit each other over the head with helmets OR we don’t want to be considered racist.” They don’t want EITHER.

 

Did Trevor Siemien call him a racial slur too?

 

Look, Garrett's people just came umm with this "defense" for the appeal.  He threw the card down.....and the league swatted it away.  What will he say next year that will convince the NFL he is telling the truth??

 

And exactly how will Garrett credibly "accuse them of racism"?  His suspension has absolutely nothing to do with race.  To suggest so makes absolutely no sense.

 

The NFL wanted to end this "defense" immediately, and they did.  They do NOT want to set a precedent for defense off bad behavior in the future.  They risk nothing at all putting the hammer down on this guy and they absolutely know this.

 

I don't know they could made this clear today. 

[Kirby Jackson]

1 minute ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Did Trevor Siemien call him a racial slur too?

 

Look, Garrett's people just came umm with this "defense" for the appeal.  He threw the card down.....and the league swatted it away.  What will he say next year that will convince the NFL he is telling the truth??

 

And exactly how will Garrett credibly "accuse them of racism"?  His suspension has absolutely nothing to do with race.  To suggest so makes absolutely no sense.

 

The NFL wanted to end this "defense" immediately, and they did.  They do NOT want to set a precedent for defense off bad behavior in the future.  They risk nothing at all putting the hammer down on this guy and they absolutely know this.

 

I don't know they could made this clear today. 

There’s already people believing it (see Marcellus Wiley post earlier). There will be people that believe him. He has nothing to lose. He’s suspended indefinitely. If it drags out he can talk about how the league has enabled racists and people will buy it. You don’t need proof in 2019. He can allude to the punishment for Riley Cooper. People will be nodding their heads. He can drag the NFL through the mud. They don’t want that. It’s easier for them to just kill it. 

[SirAndrew]

I really miss when football was just a sport, and not a microcosm of the world we live in. Everything about this is gross, and terrible for football. 

[wppete]

Edited November 22, 2019 by wppete

[NoSaint]

1 hour ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

His best hand was contrition, not lying, casting vile aspersions against the character of another man.

 

I hope he’s sued for everything he’s worth, and then never plays again.

 

Rudolph should also go after the Browns organization, and the NFL.  Force them to disavow Garrett.  Destroy him.

 

He’s garbage.  He deserves garbage.

I mean, ultimately, we don’t know what happened. So it’s a bit of confirming our own biases to go hard in the paint like that.

[whatdrought]

1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Yeah, in some ways that’s what I’m saying. I’m not saying “cave” as in not punish him. I’m saying “cave” as in they will allow him back at the start of next year. The NFL just doesn’t want this in the offseason:

 

 

 

Must feel good to take a nice hot shower after a take that *****... 

[RaoulDuke79]

4 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

I mean, ultimately, we don’t know what happened. So it’s a bit of confirming our own biases to go hard in the paint like that.

In some cases I would agree, but if Rudolph really did use some type of slur, there is no way Garrett would or should have waited until this point to let it be known.

[Mr. WEO]

16 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

There’s already people believing it (see Marcellus Wiley post earlier). There will be people that believe him. He has nothing to lose. He’s suspended indefinitely. If it drags out he can talk about how the league has enabled racists and people will buy it. You don’t need proof in 2019. He can allude to the punishment for Riley Cooper. People will be nodding their heads. He can drag the NFL through the mud. They don’t want that. It’s easier for them to just kill it. 

 

Wiley bases his "belief" on no facts at all.  He makes clear that he thinks Garrett is believed SOLELY because Rudolph won't take any responsibility for escalating the fight.  He provides no fact to support his goofy argument.

 

It doesn't matter if a handful of people believe him now----there will not be a bunch more next year.  Pretty simple.  

 

If you think that the NFL, after CTE, after Kaep/kneeling controversy, after cheating scandals.....is suddenly worried about the last minute, desperate (and completely immaterial) and pathetic race card defense of a guy who abuses his own colleagues and how it will play 10 months from now------I don't know what to say.  

 

The NFL wants to end this very clear attempt at obfuscation immediately and for the future. And it just did, emphatically.  All of their actions today make untrue the things you are suggesting.

 

[NoSaint]

2 minutes ago, RaoulDuke79 said:

In some cases I would agree, but if Rudolph really did use some type of slur, there is no way Garrett would or should have waited until this point to let it be known.

what would have been the proper way? 
 

would those most angry have reacted with less skepticism and a more open mind if he had a press conference that night declaring mason called him a ********, instead of doing it at a closed door hearing? 
 

while I certainly get the skepticism and am not advocating for believing all reports... I’m simply saying I think 99% of the reactions would’ve been identical and reflected what “team” you are on regardless of the way the accusation came to light.

[Jpsredemption]

No he didn’t. Sickening by Garrett. 

[Mr. WEO]

14 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

I mean, ultimately, we don’t know what happened. So it’s a bit of confirming our own biases to go hard in the paint like that.

 

The irony is that it is not a defense at all.  

[RaoulDuke79]

4 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

what would have been the proper way? 
 

would those most angry have reacted with less skepticism and a more open mind if he had a press conference that night declaring mason called him a ********, instead of doing it at a closed door hearing? 
 

while I certainly get the skepticism and am not advocating for believing all reports... I’m simply saying I think 99% of the reactions would’ve been identical and reflected what “team” you are on regardless of the way the accusation came to light.

I'm not sure there is a proper way, but I would think if it did happen  he would have mentioned it at some point during the scrum within earshot of someone.

Edited November 22, 2019 by RaoulDuke79

[Kirby Jackson]

3 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Wiley bases his "belief" on no facts at all.  He makes clear that he thinks Garrett is believed SOLELY because Rudolph won't take any responsibility for escalating the fight.  He provides no fact to support his goofy argument.

 

It doesn't matter if a handful of people believe him now----there will not be a bunch more next year.  Pretty simple.  

 

If you think that the NFL, after CTE, after Kaep/kneeling controversy, after cheating scandals.....is suddenly worried about the last minute, desperate (and completely immaterial) and pathetic race card defense of a guy who abuses his own colleagues and how it will play 10 months from now------I don't know what to say.  

 

The NFL wants to end this very clear attempt at obfuscation immediately and for the future. And it just did, emphatically.  All of their actions today make untrue the things you are suggesting.

 

If you think that this is over you’re being naive. They have no reason to stretch it out. They don’t want the “racist NFL” conversation going into the offseason. I’m actually confused why anyone even thinks that’s an option? They want it dead. It is nothing to them to reinstate him week 1 of next year instead of week 5. They have so much less to lose by doing that than having to defend themselves. That’s the point. It isn’t about right or wrong, it’s about opportunity cost. The NFL can just cut a deal and everyone gets the desired outcome. 

[TakeYouToTasker]

14 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

I mean, ultimately, we don’t know what happened. So it’s a bit of confirming our own biases to go hard in the paint like that.

Nope.  Not interested in playing this game.

 

Feel free to permit Sharptonism in your own in your own views as you feel free.  I’m not playing.

[Mr. WEO]

4 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

what would have been the proper way? 
 

would those most angry have reacted with less skepticism and a more open mind if he had a press conference that night declaring mason called him a ********, instead of doing it at a closed door hearing? 
 

while I certainly get the skepticism and am not advocating for believing all reports... I’m simply saying I think 99% of the reactions would’ve been identical and reflected what “team” you are on regardless of the way the accusation came to light.

 

I think 99% of the so accused would have, if true, made this known as soon as possible.  One should not have to wait until he shows up at a hearing to produce this info.  

 

[whatdrought]

51 minutes ago, RaoulDuke79 said:

Now I have to wonder about the validity of the story about the guy to stopped to take a picture with Garrett then punched him in the face. Whatever came of that anyway?

 

That was 2020 Mason Rudolph with a time machine trying to hurt garret and prevent the whole thing because nobody in 2020 even remembers that he’s a professional QB. They all just call him that ball boy that Myles Garrett killed with a shiv that he snuck in in his helmet.

Edited November 22, 2019 by whatdrought

[wppete]

1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Yeah, in some ways that’s what I’m saying. I’m not saying “cave” as in not punish him. I’m saying “cave” as in they will allow him back at the start of next year. The NFL just doesn’t want this in the offseason:

 

 

Lost all respect for Wiley....

 

 

 

Edited November 22, 2019 by wppete

[TakeYouToTasker]

1 minute ago, Kirby Jackson said:

If you think that this is over you’re being naive. They have no reason to stretch it out. They don’t want the “racist NFL” conversation going into the offseason. I’m actually confused why anyone even thinks that’s an option? They want it dead. It is nothing to them to reinstate him week 1 of next year instead of week 5. They have so much less to lose by doing that than having to defend themselves. That’s the point. It isn’t about right or wrong, it’s about opportunity cost. The NFL can just cut a deal and everyone gets the desired outcome. 

Which is why Rudolph needs to attack the Browns and the League with litigation, in addition to Garrett.

 

QB helmets are mic’d.

[Kirby Jackson]

1 minute ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

Which is why Rudolph needs to attack the Browns and the League with litigation, in addition to Garrett.

 

QB helmets are mic’d.

I agree here. He should sue Garrett for defamation of character and slander. He should put Garrett on the defensive

[NoSaint]

4 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

If you think that this is over you’re being naive. They have no reason to stretch it out. They don’t want the “racist NFL” conversation going into the offseason. I’m actually confused why anyone even thinks that’s an option? They want it dead. It is nothing to them to reinstate him week 1 of next year instead of week 5. They have so much less to lose by doing that than having to defend themselves. That’s the point. It isn’t about right or wrong, it’s about opportunity cost. The NFL can just cut a deal and everyone gets the desired outcome. 

While I get your point I do push back a little that the controversy is almost never as big as we make it on a message board. 
 

would it catch some off hand mentions on Sunday morning Espn game preview marathons? Sure. Would it be a CNN story even 5 minutes from now? Probably not. 

[TakeYouToTasker]

1 minute ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I agree here. He should sue Garrett for defamation of character and slander. He should put Garrett on the defensive

And the Browns, and the League.

 

Force then to disavow Garrett.

 

Destroy him.

 

Forever.

 

Cant go out in public without everyone knowing he’s such a low character liar that he tried to destroy another man’s character (and thereby his livelihood and life, and that of his family) without people mocking him and rejecting him.

Edited November 22, 2019 by TakeYouToTasker