They were still trying to gain yards, it's still the job of the defense to stop them from doing so.
Again, in a normal situation where nothing else happened in the play we would be PRAISING Garrett for playing buzzer to buzzer. It's part of trying to learn how to be a dominant team, taking no plays off, all those blissful cliches.
If the Steelers wanted to keep Rudolph upright, instead of attacking Miles garrett for playing football maybe #33 should have blocked Garrett. If you watch the play on the initial tackle #33 plays some weird game of patty-cake with Garrett and lets him run on by. It was #33's pathetic excuse for "block" that gave Garrett a lane in the first place and if this was our team we'd be roasting that guy alive.
What happened was that #33 was the intended receiver on a screen pass. Garrett read it like a book and came right after the RB gambling that he would be trying to get open rather than block, and it worked perfectly. Good read, good speed, great sack. The fact that it happened in the closing seconds just means that Garrett had a great play in the closing seconds, nothing more.
It was only after Rudolph wrapped up his helmet and tried to take his head off that Garrett responded violently. Because what Garrett ultimately wound up doing has no place in the NFL, but neither does retaliating against defensive players for legal plays.
So yes, I would suspend Rudolph. Because defensive players get the fuzzy end of the stick too much as it is when it comes to punishments and quarterbacks shouldn't have the privilege of acting like cowards and hiding behind the zebras when they pick the wrong target.