U mad, bro? Fans torn on Ben Roethlisberger, shred Pirates bullpen, defend Stephon Tuitt

Steelers and Pirates fans shouldn’t be mad about anything. Because this week’s “U mad, bro?” is coming a day early.

I was looking at the rest of the week’s schedule and realized it was best if we just got our rage out a little earlier than normal. Because, apparently, a lot had built up in just six days.

In this week’s edition, readers go back and forth about Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger. I get responses to the story about Stephon Tuitt and the national anthem. Fans sound off about Antonio Brown and the Pirates bullpen.

Plus, what happens when “U mad, bro?” comes to life!?

On Friday, I wrote that Ben Roethlisberger’s return to football was the single biggest storyline on any team in Pittsburgh as sports began a slow return to play from the coronavirus shutdown.

Shawn seems underwhelmed.

The argument could be made the Steelers were just as successful, if not more, in the 10 years before Ben (1994-03) then they've been in the last 10 with Ben (2009-18)

— Beaker DeNiro (@PittShawnC) July 24, 2020

That argument could be made. Let’s see if it’s worthwhile to do so.

This study is obviously not counting 2019 as “with Ben,” since he only played six quarters.

Steelers (1994-03): Regular season record: 95-64-1. One Super Bowl trip, a loss. Four AFC Championship Game appearances. Six years in the playoffs (1994-97, 2001-02). Four years out (1998-00, 2003). Playoff record 7-6.

Steelers (2009-18): Regular season record 103-56-1. One Super Bowl trip, a loss. Two AFC Championship Game appearances. Six years in the playoffs (2010-11, 2014-17). Four years out (2009, 2012-13, 2018). Playoff record 5-6.

So, yes. The thesis holds.

A little more regular-season success in the last decade with Roethlisberger. A little more postseason success in the 10 years pre-Roethlisberger.

Now, let me advance another theory to you.

Take Roethlisberger off the 2009-18 teams and put him on the 1994-03 teams. I’ll bet you they make at least one more Super Bowl and actually win their fifth Vince Lombardi Trophy long before Super Bowl XL. If not two of them.

Conversely, take Roethlisberger off of the 2009-18 clubs. Now replace him with the likes of Kordell Stewart, Neil O’Donnell and Mike Tomczak. In an era where the quarterback is relied on significantly more so than was the case in their time as starters, I’ll bet you those teams miss the playoffs more often than they make them with those guys under center.

And probably never make a Super Bowl.

Is that an argument that could be made, as well?

A tweet from @DannyChez66 is more in the corner of Big Ben.

The biggest hit to our offense last year was the ability to change the play at the line. With Ben setting protections and changing plays, it adds at least a TD to our average scoring. If we had that last year, we win more games and make the playoffs.

— Persian and Bubbies Dad (@DannyChez66) July 24, 2020

I won’t argue those points, Danny. If Roethlisberger is the quarterback last year, the Steelers win at least two more games and make the playoffs at no worse than 10-6.

But to the greater point that I believe Shawn is trying to make, that wouldn’t have guaranteed postseason success. Would they have been at least a 13-win team, with one victory over the Ravens to get a tiebreaker atop the AFC North?

Maybe. But that’s a huge assumption.

Even if that happened, would the Steelers have won at least two — or three, if necessary — playoff games to make the Super Bowl? A decade’s worth of history suggests that just because Roethlisberger is present, you can’t assume such a result either.

With Roethlisberger’s window closing and the salary cap potentially deflating next season, the Steelers are getting in Super Bowl-or-bust territory this year.

Travis emailed me about the Pirates bullpen.

“This may be the best year not to have fans in the stands due to a lack of netting — in fair territory! I would hate for Bob Nutting to have to pay doctor bills for the fans who end up in the hospital from the frozen ropes hit over the fence.”

It’s true, Travis. The Pirates bullpen is so bad, it could blow a four-run lead to coronavirus.

The Pirates could have zero positive tests by the bottom of the sixth, and the whole bullpen could test positive by the bottom of the ninth.

JT Brubaker and Nick Burdi are intriguing. But if they have to be used so sparingly that the team needs to roll out Michael Feliz, Kyle Crick and Dovydas Neverauskas just to — unsuccessfully — get through a 5-1 lead in the fourth game of the season, they are sunk.

Tuesday’s “First Call” featured Stephon Tuitt. The Steelers defensive lineman says he won’t kneel for the national anthem.

Tuitt’s tweet about that issue came amid a flurry of other missives on various topics, with a lot more bite than I normally see from him.

Based on my experience, Tuitt tends to be a gregarious guy, which I pointed out in the story.

Harry emailed with a complaint about how I phrased the introduction to the post.

“You said you ‘didn’t know what got into him.’ Come on. The media and the violent crowd are disgustingly woke and downing the greatest country the planet has ever seen. That’s what got into him (and) got into me too!

His grandmother was a legal immigrant from the Caribbean who did great in America. I used to live in Jamaica and trust me there are no opportunities there like there are here, not even close. That’s why America is the destination of choice for immigrants around the world.

Good for Stephon!”

Woah, Harry! Simmer down.

What I wrote is, “I’m not sure what set off Stephon Tuitt Monday.” I wrote that because it’s true.

I don’t know what incident — or incidents — he was discussing when he fired off a few volleys about how players mismanage their money and trust the wrong people. Nor do I know how — or if — that ties into the anthem debate in his mind.

I just know the two thoughts were following each other on his Twitter feed. That’s it. I’m not arguing with you, or Tuitt at all.

Relax. Didn’t I say — twice — in the story I’m on his side?

Maybe the better question is, “What got into you?”

The anthem debate is a touchy subject. I get it. But maybe if we weren’t all so ready to be offended by it on both sides, discussions like these could go a bit smoother.

Tim from Brookville emailed with an item I posted about Antonio Brown. I suggested that the former Steelers star was right to complain about how the NFL was trying to stall him out of football by failing to rule on pending discipline issues against him.

“My only issue with taking AB’s side is, what makes you believe him at this point? With the way he has acted in the past year, do you really believe he’s done everything the NFL has asked of him? Why wouldn’t the NFL get the benefit of the doubt before him? I’m not saying the NFL isn’t doing all of this on purpose. But I’m not sure they shouldn’t.

If you’re in the NFL and can see how these court cases play out, maybe that’s not such a bad thing.”

No doubt, Tim. That’s entirely possible. And it’s 100% likely that you are thinking exactly in line with Roger Goodell.

I didn’t say it’s a bad strategy. I just questioned if it’s something, ethically, the NFLPA should be OK with Goodell doing.

Not that I feel sorry for Mr. Big Chest. I don’t.

I just wonder, especially in the covid-19 era, if a team is going to lose a few wide receivers and want to sign Brown and force Goodell’s hand before he’s ready.

Finally, Erik chimed in regarding last week’s rather tense “U mad, bro?”

“I enjoy your writing. And listening to you and Mark Madden. I always get a kick out of the negative comments directed towards you, and in reading them every week. I was curious if anyone has ever accosted you when you’ve been out in public?

I was in journalism for many years and have certainly come across some crazies who wanted to inform how unimpressed with me they were. Have you ever encountered any situations that actually made you nervous? You never know who you’re dealing with and was wondering how you deal with it if you’re in that situation?”

Sure, Erik. I’ve had people want to continue a debate or two when I see them in public. That’s no big deal. But no one who puffs their chest out online ever seems to be so confrontational in person.

I did have a guy tell me once, “You know, you look a lot taller on the radio.”

That’s true. I do look a lot taller … on … the radio.

Just like he looked a lot taller in my inbox.