First Call: Minkah Fitzpatrick magic; Le’Veon Bell loses after he says ‘I won’ |
Breakfast With Benz

First Call: Minkah Fitzpatrick magic; Le’Veon Bell loses after he says ‘I won’

Tim Benz
New York Jets running back Le’Veon Bell talks to teammates as he warms up before an NFL football game against the Cleveland Browns Monday, Sept. 16, 2019, in East Rutherford, N.J.

In Tuesday’s “First Call,” a reason to embrace Minkah Fitzpatrick already. Le’Veon Bell looks depressed. Jalen Ramsey wants out of Jacksonville.

Love him already

Do you like the Pittsburgh Steelers trade for Minkah Fitzpatrick?

Eh, I don’t really understand it. Why make a move to win now in a season when you just lost your starting quarterback? Why is a team who hates trading first-round picks doing so in a year where they might have their highest natural first-round pick since 2004?

But I do love the player. If for no other reason, I like Fitzpatrick because he can do something no Steelers player has proven capable of doing.

He can intercept Tom Brady in Foxborough. Look. Here’s proof.

Great. Now if only the Dolphins had thrown in a time machine as part of the trade so we could go back to Week 1.

Regarding Ramsey

While the Steelers were trading for Fitzpatrick, another star defensive back in Florida has yet to move.

ESPN is reporting that Jalen Ramsey has asked for a trade from the Jacksonville Jaguars.

Ramsey had a tiff with head coach Doug Marrone Sunday.

That’s where a lot of this angst likely originated.

Well, that and the fact that Jacksonville is 5-14 since they won at Heinz Field in the 2017 playoffs.

Bell’s boo-boo face

During an ESPN interview that aired before the “Monday Night Football” game between the New York Jets and the Cleveland Browns, Le’Veon Bell said he was a winner because he ended up in New York via free agency.

So, to be clear, Bell’s idea of winning is failing to meet the alleged goal of resetting the running back market, likely walking away with less money than he would’ve gotten over three years in Pittsburgh, and vacating $14.5 million.

Despite Bell’s characterization above, that’s still what happened. What’s next? Does he get to declare that his rotten rap album won a Grammy, too?

If this is winning, what does losing look like?

Oh. I guess it looks like this.

That was Bell after his fumble during a 23-3 loss to the Browns. Bell had 68 rushing yards and 61 receiving yards on 31 touches. The Jets are 0-2.

Look away!

Part of the reason why the Jets struggled on offense so much is that they played much of the game with their third-string quarterback.

Luke Faulk had to get on the field because starting quarterback Trevor Siemian suffered this ugly-looking ankle injury.

Caution. This video is not for the faint of heart.

On “Monday Night Football,” that was referred to as “an apparent leg injury.”

Apparently. Yes. Indeed.

Siemian was forced to start because first-stringer Sam Darnold was out with mononucleosis.

Faulk went 20 of 25 for 198 yards. Siemian was 3 of 6 for 3 yards.

Which one is Phoebe?

ESPN tweeted out the Browns remake of the “Friends” show open.

In Chandler Bing parlance, “could it BE any more lame?”

I’m left wondering, which one gets to keep the pet monkey? And, in the Browns’ version, is Freddie Kitchens “ugly, naked guy?”

Tim Benz is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Tim at [email protected] or via Twitter. All tweets could be reposted. All emails are subject to publication unless specified otherwise.

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.