PDA

View Full Version : Roethlisberger suspects 49ers targeted him


Hawaii 5-0
05-10-2012, 02:17 AM
Roethlisberger suspects 49ers targeted him

May 9, 2012

http://www.csnbayarea.com/common/medialib/223/758486.jpg

Linebacker Aldon Smith sacks Ben Roethlisberger in San Francisco's 20-3 victory last December. (US Presswire)

Pittsburgh quarterback Ben Roethlisberger stopped far short of accusing the 49ers of wrongdoing, but intimated Wednesday he suspected his bum ankle was being targeted during a game last season at Candlestick Park.

The topic turned to the New Orleans Saints' bounty scandal on The Dan Patrick Show when Roethlisberger made passing reference to the 49ers' 20-3 victory over the Steelers on Monday, Dec. 19.

After that game, Roethlisberger called himself "the 49ers' best player." He threw three interceptions, was sacked three times and fumbled twice.

"Sometimes you get guys —- things happen under piles and, you know, the little extra twisting of the ankles and poking, things like that," Roethlisberger said on Patrick's radio program. "But this whole bounty thing —- I don't know if I'd sit there and and say, 'Wow, that guy really tried to end my career.' Honestly, I don’t know."

Patrick asked Roethlisberger when the last time he felt a team was going after his knees, ankles or head.

"Um, wow, that's tough," Roethlisberger said. "I don't really complain about that stuff, either. But I think when we played San Fran, I felt like there were some things going on, some extra . . . Now, obviously, I did have the ankle and I was playing, so there was kind of a bulls-eye on there anyway. But for the most part, guys play tough and you go into a game expecting it. I expect to be tougher than them."

A 49ers team spokesman declined comment.

No 49ers players were penalized or fined for any illegal hits in the game.

Roethlisberger's status for against the 49ers was in question through pre-game warmups after he sustained a badly sprained left ankle in the Steelers' previous game.

"I really wasn't paying attention in pre-game, but with the injury he had, it wasn't really too easy for him to come back the next week and be 100 percent," said 49ers pass-rusher Aldon Smith after the game in which he recorded 2 1/2 sacks. "So it was definitely something we all had in mind."

http://www.csnbayarea.com/football-san-francisco-niners/niners-talk/Roethlisberger-suspects-49ers-targeted-h?blockID=705078&feedID=2800

tony hipchest
05-10-2012, 02:45 AM
the author of this article needs to figure out that ALL teams target the QB. its kinda like a major part of the game.

duh.

Hawaii 5-0
05-10-2012, 02:48 AM
or maybe Ben "The Drama Queen" needs to understand this also...

wyn50
05-10-2012, 05:14 AM
Players attack opponents weaknesses. It happens in all sports. Nothing new about that. Every time Ben speaks about thing, it gets all blown up.

Galax Steeler
05-10-2012, 05:24 AM
It is what it is Ben needs to get over it and go on.

Bayz101
05-10-2012, 05:26 AM
It is what it is Ben needs to get over it and go on.

Yeah, I agree here. Not only is this old news, it's widely accepted that if your injured and on the field, the opposing squad will have a target on the spot that hurts.

Dalarin
05-10-2012, 06:34 AM
It's not like he came out and said the 49ers targeted my injuries. First of all this is the first time any media has said anything about it, and Ben tried to keep it from being blown out of proportion. Mission failed

Steelerfreak58
05-10-2012, 09:52 AM
He shouldn't have played in that game.

SteelCityMom
05-10-2012, 10:33 AM
I honestly didn't see what he said as complaining about it, he just told the (obvious) truth. The questioning was stupid. Of course They're going to target his injuries. He knew it was going to be a part of the game...so did everyone else. The writer of this article is just being Captain Obvious.

But I agree with SteelerFreak, he shouldn't have even been in the game to begin with.

Steelers>NFL
05-10-2012, 10:40 AM
He shouldn't have played in that game.

BINGO!

FanSince72
05-10-2012, 10:44 AM
I think the bigger story is not that the 49ers targeted his bad ankle (duh!) but rather that our O-line was unable to stop that from happening (not that SF had to try all that hard to blow past them).

Count me among others who think that he should never have played in that game.
I'll go a step farther and say that if he sat for both the SF and Cleveland games, we might be bragging about a 7th Lombardi instead of talking about this.

lloydwoodson
05-10-2012, 12:45 PM
The 49ers did not target his ankle in any way, shape or form. Period. Go watch the replays of Aldon Smith's sacks... he didn't even LOOK at Roethlisberger's ankle.

tanda10506
05-10-2012, 01:42 PM
The 49ers did not target his ankle in any way, shape or form. Period. Go watch the replays of Aldon Smith's sacks... he didn't even LOOK at Roethlisberger's ankle.

So your 100% sure that they didn't target him because Aldon Smith doesn't appear to be looking at Ben's ankle on two plays? Read and see when and how Ben is saying it happened, clearly you wouldn't see small stuff like that.

Fire Arians
05-10-2012, 01:50 PM
of course they targeted him, you're supposed to try and get to the qb on every play lol

if i was ben i would suspect the browns. you ever notice every time ben has a serious injury it's against cleveland?

Sixburgher
05-10-2012, 02:23 PM
Count me among others who think that he should never have played in that game.
I'll go a step farther and say that if he sat for both the SF and Cleveland games, we might be bragging about a 7th Lombardi instead of talking about this.

Taking into account that the Ravens lost to San Diego earlier that weekend, which put the Steelers in the driver's seat as far as their playoff destiny was concerned, I wonder how many people would be second-guessing not starting Ben had Batch started and the outcome of that game been the same. A lot, I have a feeling. And considering the way the offensive line was getting beaten like a rented mule by the two Smiths, chances are Batch would have been injured in short order as well. It was a no-win situation for Tomlin.

Galax Steeler
05-10-2012, 02:30 PM
I think the bigger story is not that the 49ers targeted his bad ankle (duh!) but rather that our O-line was unable to stop that from happening (not that SF had to try all that hard to blow past them).

Count me among others who think that he should never have played in that game.
I'll go a step farther and say that if he sat for both the SF and Cleveland games, we might be bragging about a 7th Lombardi instead of talking about this.

I have to say I don't think we had a shot for the superbowl last year. The defense looked very poor and vulnerable, not to mention all the injuries . The offense couldn't block we just didn't have it last year.

4xSBChamps
05-10-2012, 03:55 PM
with the protection offered by the O-line last year, a Pittsburgh QB would feel threatened by the Slickville Elementary School Majorettes

Bayz101
05-10-2012, 04:02 PM
with the protection offered by the O-line last year, a Pittsburgh QB would feel threatened by the Slickville Elementary School Majorettes

:applaudit:

Bayz101
05-10-2012, 04:04 PM
I have to say I don't think we had a shot for the superbowl last year. The defense looked very poor and vulnerable, not to mention all the injuries . The offense couldn't block we just didn't have it last year.

Yeah...To even make a playoff run, you need to go into the playoff's hot as a pistol.

We went in injured and colder than Kanye West at the VMA's.

stb_steeler
05-10-2012, 04:20 PM
of course they targeted him, you're supposed to try and get to the qb on every play lol

if i was ben i would suspect the browns. you ever notice every time ben has a serious injury it's against cleveland?

Isnt that the truth...He gets beat up by the Browns more than any other team.
Maybe Cleveland has a bounty out on Ben...lol

FanSince72
05-10-2012, 07:05 PM
Taking into account that the Ravens lost to San Diego earlier that weekend, which put the Steelers in the driver's seat as far as their playoff destiny was concerned, I wonder how many people would be second-guessing not starting Ben had Batch started and the outcome of that game been the same. A lot, I have a feeling. And considering the way the offensive line was getting beaten like a rented mule by the two Smiths, chances are Batch would have been injured in short order as well. It was a no-win situation for Tomlin.

I wanted him to sit long before any other scenario's played out.

Look, we had an outside chance at best to win the division so it was pretty much a given that we would end up a six-seed anyway.
Since that was the most likely scenario, what sense did it make to play Ben in either of those games?

We could have lost both of them and still been in the playoffs and in any case, Ben would have had at least two weeks to rest up before anything really counted, which would have been the same thing as getting a bye and resting Ben for... (drumroll) Two Weeks!.

Tomlin bought into this "Winning the Division" crap and it cost us more in the long run. Sometimes you have to just strike your colors and back up a little before you can go forward in any meaningful way and Tomlin focused too much on winning small battles rather than winning the war.

Hawaii 5-0
05-10-2012, 09:27 PM
Doubt cast on Roethlisberger’s belief the 49ers targeted him

Posted by Michael David Smith on May 10, 2012

http://nbcprofootballtalk.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/benroethlisberger49ers.jpg?w=250

Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger struggled through last year’s loss to the 49ers on an injured ankle, and looking back on that game he thinks the 49ers gave him a little something extra because of his injury. But Roethlisberger’s belief may not hold up to close scrutiny.

Roethlisberger was asked on the Dan Patrick Show when was the last time he thought an opposing team was targeting him, and he answered that he thought the 49ers seemed like they were going after him when he played there last year.

“I think when we played San Fran, I felt like there were some things going on, some extra,” Roethlisberger said. “I did have the ankle and I was playing, so maybe there was kind of a bullseye on there anyway.”

However, Mike Sando of ESPN.com went back and watched every Steelers offensive play from that game, and he saw no evidence of the 49ers targeting Roethlisberger’s lower body, rolling onto his ankle, stepping on his foot or doing any of the other things that a defense might do when targeting a quarterback.

Roethlisberger struggled in that game, throwing three interceptions in a 20-3 loss. But there’s little reason to believe the 49ers did anything out of the ordinary to get to him.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/05/10/doubt-cast-on-roethlisbergers-belief-the-49ers-targeted-him/

Sixburgher
05-10-2012, 11:45 PM
Look, we had an outside chance at best to win the division so it was pretty much a given that we would end up a six-seed anyway.


How do you figure? If we'd have beaten the 49ers, we would have had a full one game lead on the Ravens and the division all but wrapped up.

We could have lost both of them and still been in the playoffs and in any case, Ben would have had at least two weeks to rest up before anything really counted, which would have been the same thing as getting a bye and resting Ben for... (drumroll) Two Weeks!.

Uh yeah. The extra game on the road always helps in a successful Super Bowl run. Especially when 3 more starters go down to serious injury in said extra game and another starter is held out because the venue for the extra game poses a possible risk to his life if he plays. Give me a break.

Black N' Yellow
05-11-2012, 12:29 AM
You guys missed what Ben said. He was talking about players targeting his ankle in the pile, not during a play. Those two are very different things...

tony hipchest
05-11-2012, 01:33 AM
How do you figure? If we'd have beaten the 49ers, we would have had a full one game lead on the Ravens and the division all but wrapped up.



Uh yeah. The extra game on the road always helps in a successful Super Bowl run. Especially when 3 more starters go down to serious injury in said extra game and another starter is held out because the venue for the extra game poses a possible risk to his life if he plays. Give me a break.

:yep:

i also agree charlie batch woulda been pulverized if asked to start vs SF. as for bens remarks about being targeted, i totally agree w/ SCMom. this shit is blown way out of proportion because he stated the obvious to a pretty obvious question.

in no way do i think ben is whining or pointing the finger, or accusing anyone of wrong doing. its just a shame that when he gives rediculous statements and commentary about the rosetta stone playbook etc, it hurts his credibility, and has everyone skeptical and critical of EVERYTHING he says.

Sixburgher
05-11-2012, 01:50 AM
as for bens remarks about being targeted, i totally agree w/ SCMom. this shit is blown way out of proportion because he stated the obvious to a pretty obvious question.

Everything the dude says is blown way out of proportion by somebody.

tony hipchest
05-11-2012, 02:19 AM
Everything the dude says is blown way out of proportion by somebody.and in some cases, deservedly so. some people say smart things, some people say dumb things, and some people do both.

anyone thinks marlin fans dont cringe anytime ozzie guillen speaks to the media.

a perfect example of this is belichick vs ryan.

belichick says smart things, very calculated, and bland by design. he gives the media absolutely nothing. for the most part, his players follow suit, or they know they will be shitcanned.

on the flipside is rex ryan who is applauded for "shooting from the hip", but autrasized for saying a bunch of controversial, inflamatory bullshit. for the most part, his players follow suit. his great cornerbacks are focused on money and calling tom brady an asshole (something we all know).

anyone think mike tomlin would ever come out and admit the steelers offense never practiced against 4-3 defenses? hell no! why would he when bruce arians was there to offer his wisdome to the press on a weekly basis. :footinmouth: the media hates tomlins cookie cutter answers, but they respect that behind belichick, he handles them the best.

loose cannons and those who speak before they think sell papers but what ben said in this specific instance is a complete non story.

IowaSteeler927
05-11-2012, 03:55 AM
or maybe Ben "The Drama Queen" needs to understand this also...

Really? What I read was an article where Ben's comments were blown out of proportion. I didn't read anything in there that should lead to him being called a drama queen. I bet you don't call him names when he throws TDs.

Steelersfan87
05-11-2012, 04:24 AM
I have to say I don't think we had a shot for the superbowl last year. The defense looked very poor and vulnerable, not to mention all the injuries . The offense couldn't block we just didn't have it last year.

Right, the defense that gave up less yards and points than anybody looked very poor and vulnerable.

TheVet
05-11-2012, 04:50 AM
the author of this article needs to figure out that ALL teams target the QB. its kinda like a major part of the game.

duh.

The first reply really said it all. "Duh" was the first word that occurred to me ...

He shouldn't have played in that game.

No question about it.

TheVet
05-11-2012, 04:58 AM
I have to say I don't think we had a shot for the superbowl last year. The defense looked very poor and vulnerable, ...
The defense wasn't the problem.

Galax Steeler
05-11-2012, 05:12 AM
The defense wasn't the problem.

Pittsburgh had given up an average of only 171.9 yards a game,

Tebow had 316 passing yards a career-high, they were the most given up by the Steelers, the NFL's No. 1 rated pass defense, all year.

Tebow rushed for 50 yards and 1 TD on 10 carries while completing 10-21 passes for 2 TD's

If our defense was playing so well then how did this happen?

Bayz101
05-11-2012, 05:37 AM
Pittsburgh had given up an average of only 171.9 yards a game,

Tebow had 316 passing yards a career-high, they were the most given up by the Steelers, the NFL's No. 1 rated pass defense, all year.

Tebow rushed for 50 yards and 1 TD on 10 carries while completing 10-21 passes for 2 TD's

If our defense was playing so well then how did this happen?

It was definitely the defense, but mostly the lack of a healthy defense, in my opinion.

Steelersfan87
05-11-2012, 05:40 AM
The Denver question has been answered on this forum so many times that it's not even worth reiterating.

Galax Steeler
05-11-2012, 05:45 AM
The Denver question has been answered on this forum so many times that it's not even worth reiterating.

It goes back to the point earlier in the thread could we have won a superbowl if Ben hadn't played the last two games.

TheVet
05-11-2012, 05:46 AM
Anyone who thinks our defense is the problem should wake up and look around the NFL. Being one of the very best for more than a decade makes you complacent.

Thankfully the Steelers are finally addressing the real problem, which is the embarrassingly offensive offense. New OC, and new OL. Knowledgeable fans are jazzed.

mikeyg
05-11-2012, 05:49 AM
the author of this article needs to figure out that ALL teams target the QB. its kinda like a major part of the game.

duh.

:thumbsup:

Galax Steeler
05-11-2012, 05:52 AM
Anyone who thinks our defense is the problem should wake up and look around the NFL. Being one of the very best for more than a decade makes you complacent.

Thankfully the Steelers are finally addressing the real problem, which is the embarrassingly offensive offense. New OC, and new OL. Those of us who watch the games are jazzed.

This thread is getting off topic quick. My point was we did not have a Super Bowl team last year even if Ben had not played the last two games and my answer was no. One of the reasons a gave was our defense and it showed in the Denver game. If we would have won that do you think we would have gotten by the Giants I don't think so they would have picked us apart.

FanSince72
05-11-2012, 11:02 AM
Uh yeah. The extra game on the road always helps in a successful Super Bowl run. Especially when 3 more starters go down to serious injury in said extra game and another starter is held out because the venue for the extra game poses a possible risk to his life if he plays. Give me a break.

Risk to his life?


Seriously?


And as far as the extra road game in a SB run goes, I seem to recall that we did just that about five years ago.

Ben had no business whatsoever playing in the SF game - period!
Do you honestly think he actually represented a better advantage over Batch the way he was limping around?
We scored a whopping 3 points for the whole game.
Do you think that Batch could have done any worse?

After that, there was the Rams (who Batch handled with no trouble whatsoever) and then Cleveland.
If Ben was rested for those games, there's a good chance he would have been in far better shape for the playoffs than he was.

But instead he plays (if "plays" is actually a word that could be used to describe what he was doing) against SF and does absolutely nothing.
Then we sit him against the Rams, but then he plays again against Cleveland in a meaningless game and further stresses his ankle.

WTF?

So instead of having as much as three weeks of rehab time, he gets the equivalent of none at all.

And that makes sense to you because...?

Riddle_Of_Steel
05-11-2012, 07:31 PM
That kind of thing happens after every play, even in high school.

In every game I played in, there was always one or two guys on the other team that would try to gouge eyes or twist ankles in the pile where the refs cannot see. I remember one game at center, I had three sprained fingers in a hand-splint on my left hand, and the nose tackle I was going against tried to grab them and twist them on every play while we were in the scrim.

Football is not, and never was intended to be a gentleman's sport. The bounties definitely go too far and bring the thug life to the NFL, but there is a fine line.

If Ben is was not affected by it in the game, he should not mention it.

lloydwoodson
05-12-2012, 01:09 AM
That kind of thing happens after every play, even in high school.

In every game I played in, there was always one or two guys on the other team that would try to gouge eyes or twist ankles in the pile where the refs cannot see. I remember one game at center, I had three sprained fingers in a hand-splint on my left hand, and the nose tackle I was going against tried to grab them and twist them on every play while we were in the scrim.

Football is not, and never was intended to be a gentleman's sport. The bounties definitely go too far and bring the thug life to the NFL, but there is a fine line.

If Ben is was not affected by it in the game, he should not mention it.

That is why I did not understand the "in the pile" reference- this is something that happens in the trenches between linemen. Roethlisberger ran one qb sneak. Bottom line is he was lead into a question that had a base in the bounty scandal. He should have downplayed it. That's just Ben. The bounty scandal is getting carried away.

Whodis
05-12-2012, 08:37 AM
Kind of hard not to go after a guy with a bum leg and an empty backfield.

lloydwoodson
05-12-2012, 08:43 AM
Kind of hard not to go after a guy with a bum leg and an empty backfield.

Hahaha so true. :rofl:

Hawaii 5-0
05-19-2012, 01:57 AM
Aldon Smith says 49ers never targeted Roethlisberger’s ankle

Posted by Josh Alper on May 18, 2012

http://nbcprofootballtalk.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/pittsburghsteelersvsanfrancisco49ersbf-qcbjukshl.jpg?w=250

In a radio interview last week, Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger suggested that the 49ers targeted his injured ankle during the December game between the teams.

He said he thought the 49ers were guilty of doing “some extra” when they came after him, presumably as part of an attempt to get him out of the contest. Roethlisberger made it through the entire game, but, ironically, there were plenty of people wondering whether that was a good thing. A hobbled Roethlisberger threw three interceptions in a 20-3 loss.

Mike Sando of ESPN.com broke down video of the game and found no evidence that the 49ers were doing anything out of bounds in regard to Roethlisberger’s ankle. And now 49ers linebacker Aldon Smith, who had 2.5 sacks of Roethlisberger that night with another wiped out by an illegal contact penalty downfield, has weighed in with a denial that there was anything going on but football.

“Our goal was to win the game,” Smith said. “We don’t go out and talk about hurting other players, their ankles or injuries or any of that. We were going out to win the game. The quarterback, he controls the game. So if he got hit, it happens.”

That last part is something to keep in mind. Quarterbacks, injured or not, are always going to be targeted by defenses and, many times, they are going to be hit by those defenses. Roethlisberger might have felt like the 49ers went too far, but he was a target every time he took the field last season and he will be a target every time he takes the field this season.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/05/18/aldon-smith-says-49ers-never-targeted-roethlisbergers-ankle/

berkeley bradshaw
05-21-2012, 05:25 PM
Saw that game in the Bay Area. All I can say is if you stand upright, can't move around the pocket at all, look robotic at X, and take Tylenol when you should have dosed with Vicodin or something like that; man, you should expect to be targeted. Naturally the defender is going to take advantage of the weakness provided. It's the breaks. Next time get a pain shot or painkillers.

Berkeley Bradshaw