Browns ‘embarrassed’ by ‘inexcusable’ Myles Garrett helmet swing |

Browns ‘embarrassed’ by ‘inexcusable’ Myles Garrett helmet swing

Chris Adamski
Chaz Palla | Tribune-Review
The Steelers and the Browns clear the benches after the Browns’ Myles Garrett ripped off Mason Rudolph’s in the fourth Thursday, Nov. 14, 2019 at FirstEnergy Stadium.

CLEVELAND — Myles Garrett didn’t offer any excuses. And neither did his teammates.

Across the Cleveland Browns locker room and at the postgame podium at FirstEnergy Stadium, there was unanimous admonishment for Garrett’s notorious helmet swing toward the bare head of Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback Mason Rudolph in the final minute of Cleveland’s 21-7 win Thursday night.

“He understands what he did,” Browns coach Freddie Kitchens said. “He understands what he did is totally unacceptable.”

Several Browns players seemed resigned that the NFL will suspend Garrett — and none of them suggested that it would be unfair or undeserved if the league did.

“There’s no way to justify it,” Browns receiver Odell Beckham Jr. said. “You just can’t do it. There’s no place in this game for it.”

The Browns locker room was closed for several more minutes than the league-mandated 10-minute “cooling off” period. Kitchens and players seemed to get on a common message of contrition for Garrett’s actions.

“It is inexcusable,” quarterback Baker Mayfield said. “He knows that.”

“I am embarrassed; Myles is embarrassed,” Kitchens said.

Garrett likewise said he was embarrassed by his helmet swing, which came after he ripped Rudolph’s helmet off of him after the two had tussled on the ground. Rudolph extended his leg in an apparent effort to push Garrett away as Garrett stood over him, so it could be interpreted that Rudolph “kicked” Garrett in the groin area. Rudolph also charged toward Garrett at one point.

In other words, Garrett and the Browns had ample opportunity to pass blame to Rudolph or the Steelers. But other than repeated vague references by Garrett to “watch the film,” Garrett joined his teammates in taking responsibility for his act, one that was by any interpretation the most egregious of any other moment in the scrum that occurred with 8 seconds to play in regulation.

“It’s embarrassing, foolish and a bad representation of who we want to be and what we are trying to do with the rest of the season,” Garrett said.

“I made a mistake,” Garrett said moments earlier. “I lost my cool, and it’s going to come back to hurt our team.”

Reporters asked Garrett if he feels as if he’d be suspended for the season. He said he didn’t know, but it was not treated as an outlandish question.

Beckham outright offered that Garrett “is going to lose a game, maybe two, you never know.”

“We don’t know the extent of what is going to happen to Myles,” Mayfield said, “but we have to roll with the punches.”

Kitchens and many Browns expressed regret that instead of talking about their second consecutive win — and the moribund franchise achieving victories against their bitter rivals Steelers and Baltimore Ravens in the same season for the first time ever.

“It feels like there are some things that are bigger than football that need to be addressed or needed to be addressed, in the locker room after the game,” linebacker Joe Schobert said. “It kind of tones down the enthusiasm of getting a win — a big-time win over a divisional opponent.”

Hey, Steelers Nation, get the latest news about the Pittsburgh Steelers here.

Chris Adamski is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Chris by email at [email protected] or via Twitter .

Categories: Sports | Steelers
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.