Seahawks Insider

Seahawks waive QB Josh Portis

Post by Eric Williams on May 21, 2013 at 10:00 am with 86 Comments »
May 21, 2013 10:00 am

The Seattle Seahawks announced that they have released backup quarterback Josh Portis this morning.

The third-year pro was arrested for driving while under the influence of alcohol earlier this month.

Categories:
Legal system
Leave a comment Comments → 86
  1. Darn it Josh, it was gonna be tough enough to stick with this team. Why’d you have to give yourself an excuse to get kicked off?

  2. And then there were three.

  3. Well, we will never know if he was as good as his one quarter against SD 3rd/4th stringers. Have fun in Canada Josh

  4. Jerrod Johnson was beating him out anyhow. But I feel bad for him. Still, given how thin the margin for error was, not a smart move getting busted for DUI.

    I still think he will ultimately plead it down to a lesser count.

  5. bird_spit says:

    In one word, “Bummer”. Good luck in your future (stay out of trouble).

  6. HawkFromDay1 says:

    From Brock Huard’s take, it didn’t seem that Brady Quinn was in great shape. Wonder if Jeron Johnson actually has an inside track on this…

    Could be interesting to see June 1 cuts though – could be some talent out there…

  7. HawkfaninMT says:

    Sounds like Quinns value to the team is as a study buddy to RW. Wonder if he would be opposed to being released then hired back at the same salary as Assistant QB Coach?

  8. sluggo42 says:

    Really curious to see JJ throw the ball after the injury and rehab.. It’s probably like retooling your golf swing. Takes a while for the new habits to form, but then after a while its golden. He is a big cat, too bad hell never see the field, but it’s nice that he is there. Odd that the mighty Quinn isn’t in top shape, I thought he was a total gym rat.
    Can’t wait for today’s post practice report. I’m guessing it will be something like RW lights up the entire field, and cristin blows past the d, and harvin is so fast he actually becomes invisible…

  9. SideWalkHawk says:

    Man don’t these guys have the pro athlete handbook on how to live life? I mean if my salary was dependent on keeping my self out of jail (which to a large degree it is), I would be making sure I stay far away from the line. Portis was scheduled to pull down over $400,000. Small in terms of NLF salaries, yet not alot of top execs or professionals are pulling that kind of money. Yikes, talk about a learning experience.

  10. “When I was 20 my father was the dumbest SOB I’d ever met,, when I turned 40 I was amazed at how much he had learned.” Twain

    Trust that JP still has learned next to nothing.

  11. Dukeshire says:

    Not a surprise.

  12. “Unfortunately if you go wrong, you get popped.”

  13. Gotta have value to survive a DUI. See Lynch, Marshawn.

    Avril with a plantar issue. Irvin suspended. Clem still on the mend. Not diggin the flow right now…and for the first time since Jan I’m saying “thank god it’s the offseason”.

  14. Figures. They can’t make an example of Irvin, Browner or Sherman….. but cutting a 3rd string QB is an easy way to send a message.

  15. chuck_easton says:

    blocis,

    He was fourth string. Already passed by Johnson per multiple reports.

  16. Bad timing for Portis. Bad judgment on his part for sure, no margin of error when you are a bubble player to begin with.

    Feel a little bad for the guy in that his BA was so close to the legal limit, there’s a good chance that his criminal case gets reduced to something less than a DUI.

  17. chuck_easton says:

    Well, if he wants to be able to cross the border and resume his career with the CFL he’d better hope it gets reduced to a traffic infraction.

  18. I don’t know if this was a ‘signal’ from Pete Carroll to the team that his tolerance has limits, but if it was, I like it.

    And, realistically, our 3rd quarterback will never see the field this year. The best 3rd QB is whomever can best run the scout team.

  19. sluggo42 says:

    Oh great, I just checked in with the NFL channel and they were calling the Hawks a bunch of cheaters…

  20. oldmanfan says:

    Easy scapegoat for the adderall epidemic that Carroll is allowing if not actively encouraging.

    I know, this was a DUI, not adderall, but Carroll couldn’t have any more news like this right now. He had to make a gesture to show he doesn’t condone this type of transgression, and it only costs him a player that might not have made the team anyway.

  21. Sluggo – that will teach you to stop doing dumb things like expecting good football reporting on TV. ;-)

  22. chuck_easton says:

    sluggo,

    Get used to it. If the team wins this year it will be because they cheated their way to the SB.

    Worse, if they don’t go all the way, we will get to listen to all the comments about how Seattle couldn’t even win by cheating.

    Either way, this is not going to be a pretty season from a National media perspective. Thicken up those hides and develop the ability of a duck to shed water of its back people. The fun is just beginning.

  23. ChrisHolmes says:

    “Not a surprise.”

    Exactly. I don’t know why this shocks anyone. It’s Portis. Those of us who were never enamored with him in the first place already knew he was susceptible to this sort repeat bad-decision making.

    And I don’t think this is a case of “making an example” out of someone. Portis has a history of bad decisions. This just proves he can’t stop making them.

    Good riddance.

  24. slicktoxic says:

    Yeah, gonna have to ignore all the comments that are going to be made.
    Bottom line is, the players that did the crime, paid the time….so hopefully there are no more incidents, and we can move on from here.
    Best way to shut people up (or stop caring what they say), is to follow up this year’s Super Bowl win, with a second one the following year.

  25. DanielleMND says:

    Funny how the Giants and the Bronocs each only have one fewer player suspended under the PED rule than the Seahawks since 2010, yet no one in the media is making a stink about those teams.

  26. sluggo42 says:

    I suppose they need to start churning up the reasons we demolish the 49-s because they can’t quit heaping praises on them now. They called getting boldin one of the best off season moves, without even a word of Harvin. I don’t recall Boldin being considered as the league MVP at the 1/2 point of the season last year…

    Now I want to beat them 75-0, but I’ll settle for 50-13

  27. sluggo42 says:

    Did you guys know that pip-squeak QB we have is now weighing in at 215? What is he 5-8 and 215? Them are some decent RB numbers…

  28. Seahawks22360 says:

    I hope they call us cheaters. I love being the “bad guy.” How long were we the squeaky clean, soft Seahawks? I’d take the hate over a good rep. This will only be more fuel to our fire. As if the “us vs the world” mentality wasn’t already prevalent. I see us delivering a lot of punishment on every team we play, as a message to the haters. GO HAWKS!

  29. Hard to be labeled as cheaters when we win because of our offense and Wilson is the face of that.

  30. It aint over til its over.

    Plenty more players will fail PED tests, and other teams will have PR struggles. After the Seahawks start pummeling some good NFL teams, no one will be talking about this stuff much. Sports fans memories are short.

  31. Sekolah says:

    “From Brock Huard’s take, it didn’t seem that Brady Quinn was in great shape.”

    That may seem like what he was implying, but really he was just complimenting Kam Chancellor. What Huard said was “Brady Quinn is no Kam Chancellor in terms of physique”. See, Quinn is a tall guy with a decent athletic build, but you stand him next to Chancellor and even though their height/weight numbers are very close, Kam still looks like Conan compared to Quinn, who looks like he needs to get familiar with Joe Weider formula.

    “Wonder if Jeron Johnson actually has an inside track on this.”

    I think Jeron Johnson had better find an inside track on learning to cover Percy Harvin. His spot on this roster may well depend on it. :)

  32. slicktoxic says:

    Yeah, but (almost) everybody likes to hate a winner, if you cheer for another team.
    There will be all kinds of criticism re our Hawks if they keep winning.

  33. SandpointHawk says:

    I’m sure the old Joe Weider formula would get you suspended from today’s NFL…

  34. slick, that’s true. The way things are going, our team has a chance of becoming as ‘hated’ at the Patriots or the Steelers. Oh, too bad. ;-)

  35. GeorgiaHawk says:

    It will be nice to win Super Bowl 50 in 2016 at San Francisco.

  36. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Sekolah- Brock Huard should know! One of the most overrated qbs to come out of the university of Washington.

  37. Brock has been able to laugh at his own expense about that fact. Being a husky I puked in my mouth a little bit when Holmgren drafted BH in the 3rd round.

  38. GeorgiaHawk says:

    BobbyK- what do you think of Portis being released? Lol.

  39. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Yes Galena. And now we have the unfortunate opportunity to listen to his dribble.

  40. The National Media.

    Some people really care how they or their teams are perceived externally. It may become a distraction, it may be used as motivation. Championships are not awarded by the media however so ultimately I only consider it to be entertainment. That’s it’s value, nothing more.

    Some players, many perhaps, let those external forces get to them. Very few are purely internally driven. Russell Wilson obviously is one of those guys. He is a God send for the Seahawks. Nothing is going to phase him, distract him or alter his dedication to greatness. I believe that even if a comet were to strike the Earth in 3 days time, ending life as we know it, Russell would still be at the VMAC preparing and improving his craft.

    In 2006 the Italian National Soccer team after much strife and scandal managed to pull it all together and win the World Cup. The Seahawks can use these negative events and turn them to positives. With DEAR LEADER at the helm I have no doubt that we will do just that.

  41. hawkfaninoklahoma says:

    shout out to bobbyk, you were right

  42. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Like I said before, the only Punks or Knucklehead’s that have the best chance to stay with this team are the ones with the freakish abilities.

    Lynch has it. Irvin has it. Portis? Unless you can convince you are the second coming of Cam Newton you don’t have it!

  43. GeorgiaHawk says:

    DanielleMND- East coast bias at it’s best. And don’t forget their beloved Redskins.

  44. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Nate, where have you been of late since Chuck kicked your ass on that last debate?

    Just kidding. I thought you both had very good points. No winners, just some good debate imo.

  45. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Stevos- do you think Wilson is taking PEDs?

  46. Wilson acts as a PEP for his team mates. A Performance Enhancing Person.

  47. GeorgiaHawk says:

    So true Galena.

  48. bbnate420 says:

    Georgia, he kicked my ass? LOL. Everyone’s got an opinion. People hardly ever change theirs. Still waiting for him to link a study published in a peer-reviewed scientific periodical that suggests that Adderall is a PED. Still waiting for a scientific basis for his comparison of Adderall and methamphetamine.

    With all my faults, I at least attempt to back up my opinions with logic and science. The French philosopher Descartes said, “I doubt, therefore I am.” Yes, many scholars believe it was mistranslated. If you can’t doubt your own opinions and come up with a reasonable and logical justification for it, then your opinion may have less validity than you believe. Maybe that’s why some people can’t handle having their opinions challenged? I defend my opinions with logic and objective data when possible. At least when it’s something I feel strongly about. I don’t try and claim that my opinion is valid because I believe it or that something is right because that’s the way it is, i.e. saying something like the rules are the rules. That’s akin to when a parent says because I said so. It means that they can’t come up for a real justification for what they want/believe.

    I try to treat the players the way I’d like to be treated. It’s easy to pad your own ego by criticizing the behavior of strangers through an anonymous medium. It’s easy to act like you are better than them. It’s truly amazing how many people we have here that haven’t made more than one or two mistakes in their life. It’s amazing how that happens when people are anonymous.

    I for one hope the Hawks grease the sides of the boat so that all of these fleeing rats can’t jump back on board once the ship stops sinking.

  49. SEA might start losing draft picks in 2014 if they get any more fines/suspensions for player use of PEDs or DUIs, etc this season. SEA faced fines of over $60K for player misconduct last season. Since fines may be looked at as a cost of doing business, they might go for draft picks instead. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/05/21/seahawks-likely-were-fined-more-than-60000-for-2012-suspensions/

    If M.Robinson plays FB for SEA again this season, it might be the same as last season, with only 2 QBs on the roster, with M.Rob as emergency backup. Does B.Quinn beat out J.Johnson and Z.Lee for the #2 QB? Looking at the minimal video he just seems to flip the ball out without any zip…

  50. bbnate420 says:

    klm, I don’t believe that the league could just choose to start taking draft picks unless it was in the CBA.

  51. GeorgiaHawk says:

    bbnate420- Yes Chuck kicked your butt, but don’t you worry because you have done your share of butt kicking on this blog.

  52. bbnate420 says:

    Well, you’re entitled to your opinion. Thanks for the feedback.

  53. GeorgiaHawk says:

    bbnate420 – No problem. You have kicked my butt a few times here, so no problem.
    Besides Chuck is making a come back here of extraordinary magnitude after his total whiff on Mr. Wilson. You know, the same guy you thought was best to sit and let Flynn lead.

    Gee, you and Chuck do have something in common.

  54. Why couldn’t we have it be June 3rd so that we could have a report about what happened today – After great reports yesterday I would love to see what today was like

  55. GeorgiaHawk says:

    I’m just jerking your chain nate. I enjoy all opinions here, especially Duikeshires, even though he is the hardest SOB to debate around here.
    If it wasn’t for my happy hour coming three hours before his, I would have a chance, however that will never happen unless I move to the west coast. Lol.

  56. GeorgiaHawk says:

    “Dukeshire”

    I can’t even spell right with spell check.

  57. mocarob says:

    Georgia, put away the bottle..

  58. bbnate420 says:

    Georgia, no problem. I do think tonight’s Happy Hour has skewed your memory though. I wasn’t one of the people advocating for Flynn to start. I wasn’t firmly in any camp before he season. I basically wanted the best QB to win and was willing to trust PC’s judgement, though I wasn’t pulling for TJack as I believed we had basically seen his ceiling. The more I saw and read about RW, the more I liked him. I even said multiple times that I thought RW should start if he was playing relatively close to Flynn, regardless of whether he was actually playing better than Flynn, if PC/JS were convinced that he had a significantly higher upside. If this was the case, I wanted them to allow RW to go through his growing pains in 2012 and be ready to rock in 2013. I don’t think anyone here knew that RW would end up having the season he did, even you. I certainly wasn’t calling for RW to definitely start as early as you were. Congrats.

  59. Macabrevity says:

    Didn’t sound to me like Brock was saying that Quinn is out of shape, just that his legendary guns didn’t stack up next to Kam is all….

  60. GeorgiaHawk says:

    I apologize for helping a Portis thread get 63 posts when a previous Wilson thread gets only 5. That should never happen here. Lol.

    Now I will go away for awhile and try to recover from my over happiness hour episode from yesterday.

  61. Its always more fun to debate and argue over negative things, or to gnaw the bone of others decision-making, then it is to backslap and agree on the positive. I mean, how much is there to say about Wilson and the fact that he’s possibly the greatest football mind since Peyton Manning?! Once he starts playing, then we will all be talking about what he does onfield, but in the offseason there isnt much to say. Of course Wilson is awesome–we all expect him to be nearly flawless.

  62. bbnate–My interpretation of a lot of your arguments in debating player behavior/mistakes is that you firmly believe none of us should form a negative opinion of a players character, nor of their guilt, unless and until a court of law has found them guilty.

    Chuck and I and others have a huge problem with that mindset.

    In this complicated world, it is imperative that we form opinions nearly instantaneously. We try to use all available information, past experience, and interpolation, but its still guesswork; in fact, no human mind can comprehend total truth, so everything is a guess. If we dont form opinions on everything we see, hear, feel, or touch, we cannot react quickly and decisively enough to function adequately with the complexity and dangers of life.

    Also, every single one of us judges instantly–even you, its proven–especially when first meeting people. It happens within one second, and you cannot stop it. All you can do is try to keep an open mind, one ready to instantly revise an opinion based on any and all relevant information.

    You know, Dont Believe Everything You Think.

    But this ability to form opinions nearly instantly is one of the things that enabled Humans to reach the top of the food chain, though of course there are downsides to this process. If you really want to get deep into this stuff, check out Heuristics. There’s a cool book called “Outsmarting Your Minds Hardwired Habits” (thats part of the title) that is a great intro to the study of these mental shortcuts that both help and hurt us each day.

    Its why I dont think its wrong to form a negative opinion of people like Lynch–or whole teams like Seattle–who have repeatedly been caught outside the law. Obviously Lynch is not the devil for his transgressions, nor is Carrol the king of cheaters. But both have some responsibility for the wrong things that have been done. And both will and should be judged for their mistakes, IMO.

    As for whether or not Adderall should be considered a performance enhancer, that is debatable. The fact is, it IS considered as such byt he league, and receives the same punishment, and every player and coach in the league is made aware of that.

    And there is plenty of room to debate whether it is or is not a performance enhancer. It may not make you stronger or faster, and it may or may not give you more energy, but it does help with focus and attention span and gives an edge there, or so many players who dont even have a pet doc’s prescrip wouldnt be taking it. And yeah, I am aware of the placebo affect.

    Bottom line is that its classified the same as any other PED by the NFL. You know I dont agree with marijuana being classified as a PED by the NFL, and I dont think its any of their business, nor the teams, if players use it. But the fact remains if a player is busted for it, they will be suspended–same as Adderall–and the results are the same. And players know they are both banned, so using them is cheating. Since I do believe Adderall can be a PED for those who dont need it, I consider it cheating to take it. And I consider it a breach of integrity and ethics to use any banned substance, and am not happy with any of the players who test positive for it.

  63. sluggo42 says:

    Did I miss a report from yesterday’s ota? I haven’t seen anything…
    Or was it just too boring?

  64. ChrisHolmes says:

    “As for whether or not Adderall should be considered a performance enhancer, that is debatable. The fact is, it IS considered as such byt he league, and receives the same punishment, and every player and coach in the league is made aware of that.”

    And that’s the important thing. It doesn’t matter what any of us thinks about Adderall or whether it scientifically can be proven to enhance performance in the classroom or concentration on the field. None of that matters.

    What matters is that it’s banned in the NFL, so if you take it, you’re breaking a rule.

    And when you’re trying to make a legitimate Super Bowl run, breaking rules is no good….

  65. chuck_easton says:

    Not to pile on, but:

    NFL: Adderall banned unless prescribed and aproved
    Ritilan banned completely

    MLB:

  66. chuck_easton says:

    MLB: same

    NHL: Adderall banned completely. Can’t even get a medical exemption for it.

    NBA: Adderall banned as a PED/Stimulant

    WADA: Adderall baned unless medical exemption.

    So, I may not be a scientist and have the ability to break down the chemical composition of the drug in question the fact that every major sporting organization has banned the substance based on what THEIR scientists tell them should indicate that there is a legitimate reason the ban is in place.

  67. sluggo42 says:

    Oh, and by the way bbpoindexter,

    You and your peer-reviewed scientific journals, which you base your existence on. You asked me for one that shows marijuana to be bad for you. You gave yourself a good cushion by excluding youthful use, which was good.

    I am not a college guy, never went, but apparently I did ok as I retired at 53. Not rich, but not poor. You called me numerous varieties of insults, punctuated with “retard”. Not being a college guy and not knowing what your dear peer reviewed journals were doesn’t make me stupid, just ignorant. But I imagine I know a few things on a few topics that you don’t, so does that make you a retard?

    You now claim you “won” against Chuck, because he has yet to produce a link to one of you beloved “peer reviewed” journals. Yet not many in here consider you to be the winner, and probably a few including myself consider you to be a pompous jackass. But a smart jackass, I’ll concede you that.

    So, my task was to find one peer reviewed scientific journey, which is going to be very difficult with my IQ of 40.

    So here is a few of them, 105 in fact, both pro and con. And yes you are right, pot smoking as youths is included in many of the “con studies”, but there are a few that aren’t.
    There is no doubt, and numerous of the “pro- studies” are specifically aimed in showing that “pain” can be significantly helped with pot use. I suppose one could cancel out the “medical goods” with the “adolescence bads” associated with pot.

    http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000884

    But at the end of the day Nate, your personal attacks and name calling is what will stick with me forever. I actually think it has more to do with my political stance, as I know you are a libtard, and you know I’m a repuglican.
    But the wole world loves a villain, and now you are mine in that regard.

    I don’t mind getting my ass handed to me in here in any debate, but when it goes to personal attacks and childish name calling to the depths you sank, it becomes personal. So, that is why will forever think of you as a total doushbag. I await your utter and complete destruction of me in another session of name calling and the such, but at this point I no longer give a flying duck about anything you have to say.

  68. sluggo–wow, dude. Tell the truth, I thought you, nate, and Chuck got out of line–all of you. It got way too personal, way to fast. Thats my two cents.

    Im left of center too in a lot of my politcal/social leanings (but certainly not a check-the-box “libtard” nor a radical conservatard (to borrow your inappropriate “slur”) either, and you and I have rarely if ever gotten humpty with each other–even though we occasionally disagree completely. Why?

    I think thats because I know to leave alone some areas of discussion with you that I know we wont see eye to eye on at all. The reason Ive let it be is that stuff has never been a major component of any of the opinions you’ve posted that I have been interested in. Plus I respect you and your opinion from long association on other blogs, so you get the occasional free pass from me. And that probably works both ways.

    Also, I dont pretend to think I know your personality, though I can make guesses, from the small sample of blog comments over the years, so I dont judge you as if I know you. I think the three of you need to take a step back and realize youre discussing intense, complicated social issues without knowing each others backstory and without the benefit of facial expressions, tone of voice etc, which can really hinder interpretation.

    Each of you has made points I whole-heartedly agree with, and each has opinions that I feel are neither logical nor correct. But I have not attacked any of you, and y’all shouldnt be doing that either. That goes for all three of you.

    I dig the discussion, and those who think its off-topic can suck lemons for all I care, but c’mon, we dont need a verbal war between three major blog contributors.

  69. To back you up though, I have read studies in the past (and newspaper and magazine articles about study results), though I cannot name them now, that prove negative affects of marijuana use.

    In the entire known universe, there is no free lunch. Everything has a cost, every action an equal and opposite reaction. The stuff can help in certain ways, and it can harm. Whether the cost-benefit analysis ends up on one end or the other should be on an individual basis, IMO.

    Especially considering the deleterious effects of prescription medication.

    The main point though is that players who are suspended for using banned substances–PED’s or otherwise–get the same treatment and hurt their teams and deserve to be taken to task for that.

  70. And before anyone points out that I have crossed the line before myself, I will admit it now as I have before. But unlike many, I apologize and rein it in pretty fast, and I would say that the vast majority of my comments are well within blog rules. I am not casting the first stone, as I am guilty of mistakes myself; but c’mon you guys…

  71. Dukeshire says:

    Hear, hear, STTBM.

  72. sluggo42 says:

    With that STTBM, I WILL ISSUE AN APOLOGY TO THE BOARD.

    I feel that Nate deeply crossed the line on me and so I reacted. I apologize to the blog.
    I however, do not apologize to Nate.

    I try to not throw any politics out either, but occasionally will slip up a bit, but I know this isn’t the place.

    So with that, I humbly hope y’all accept my apology.

  73. Well, I think you both should apologize and move on. I’d have to go back and re-read a ton of posts, I cant remember who crossed the line first.

    I thought you both crossed the line, as I said, but I cant even remember who instigated it. Thats what happens when more than one person loses their cool, fair or not. Everyone gets tarred with the same brush.

    Hopefully we can all get back on the same page and make peace.

  74. sluggo42 says:

    Slave, I suggested Nate get off his soapbox in response to his comments about a multitude of his opinions on the Irvin drug topic. His first reply to me was..

    “sluggo, you don’t know ANYTHING about pot. You think you do. But you’re a retard. You can THINK anything you want, but YOU’RE the one making a claim. That means that YOU have to back it up with evidence if you want anyone with half a brain to believe you. Waiting? Link an article from a peer-reviewed scientific periodical. Oh, you can’t? You’re too stupid to even know what a peer-reviewed periodical is?”

    So you tell me, who threw the first stone.?

  75. sluggo42 says:

    But even with that, I still apologize for losing my cool.

    I’m done with this topic

  76. I know, Sluggo, I remember that one. It was out of line. But I think you guys were going at it a bit heavy before that, unless I am very mistaken. Regardless, the rest is up to the three of you, Ive said my piece and any more and I will look like Im trying to be the arbiter of right, which I am most certainly not.

    Did you notice Crabtree is out for the year?

  77. Nate- The part where the player gets suspended and not paid for x-many games due to breaking the personal conduct policy (DUI, PED, etc.) stuff is covered by the CBA. The part where the teams have to pay half that players lost salary directly to the NFL was started by the NFL without any input by the NFLPA. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2008/10/17/cowboys-getting-fined-for-pacman-suspension/ It, (the rule about fining teams) seemed to have just cropped up outta nowhere. How Goodell treated NO saints for bountygate, seems like he can treat the teams (not so the players) just about any way he chooses, so long as he is seen by the majority of the owners as doing it for the good of the NFL brand. If Goodell deems that teams are not being proactive with their players enough to curb breaches in the personal conduct policy, (seeing the fines as just a cost of business-as-usual), I would not put it past Goodell to start adding more significant chastisements.

  78. bbnate420 says:

    STTBM, I don’t believe that I’ve ever said that any of you shouldn’t form a negative opinion of a player. That’s your prerogative. I just believe people shouldn’t distort the facts when doing so. Like when you said that Lynch has been accused of multiple DUIs when he hadn’t. I also am just trying to point out when peoples’ opinions of players aren’t necessarily based on fact or science. It’s fine to have whatever opinion you want to, but you should be able to differentiate between your view based on your own experience and actual empirical evidence. That is all. And it is really easy to criticize people anonymously over the internet. I bet most people here wouldn’t want millions of people peeking into their closets.

    You are right about people making quick judgements. I have my BA with a focus on history and sociology. I have taken a number of anthropology courses. They were and are necessary in certain situations. If a 6’6″ 300 pound man is walking up to your car window with a frown on his face, then you need to make an immediate judgement of whether he’s going to ask for directions or bash your face in. I don’t see either the PED situation or Lynch’s DUI charge in this light. No harm will come to anyone here by waiting for the facts and reserving judgement in these cases. You’re free to think what you will about them, as am I. I would just hope you wouldn’t use the same criteria if you’re ever on a jury.

  79. bbnate420 says:

    Chuck-Easton, I’m not sure that I really got personally insulting with you, but I already apologized if I did or it was perceived that way. It doesn’t seem that you have read all of my previous arguments. I already argued the fact that they are bad or PEDs simply because they are banned in major sports is lacking in logic. In fact, that’s what started this. I’ll paste it for you:

    “Look, the NFL, NBA, NHL, and MLB are NOT scientific organizations. The fact that they include ANYTHING on their lists of PEDs is proof of NOTHING! Good lord. Why are they concerned about marijuana and heroin? Are you going to claim that they are PEDs. It’s all about PR. Protecting the shield. Yada, yada. I’m fine with them prohibiting things like anabolic steroids that are proven PEDs, but they should have to actually have some proof that something is a PED to ban it. Especially if it is routinely prescribed for other reasons.

    As far as the Olympics, their testing is run by WADA. There is a ton of criticism of WADA and Dr. Wadler, the chump that runs it, in the medical and scientific communities. Feel free to look it up. He makes all kinds of non-scientific assumptions. Including those about the negative effects of anabolic steroids. WADA makes money off of testing people for these organizations. You think maybe that they’re biased about drugs that are claimed to be PEDs? Do you think that maybe they make more money by playing up the “dangers” of these drugs? They have a financial incentive and bias. It’s analogous to companies that treat addictions. They only make money when they treat you. Do you think that gives them a financial incentive to evaluate you as an addict? Especially if someone is court ordered to go there.

    P.S. Lumping marijuana in with alcohol or even Adderall is completely asinine. Feel free to link some scientific articles published in peer-reviewed periodicals that prove physiological damage anywhere close to what occurs with alcohol. And I’m not advocating that children be allowed to use marijuana. Extreme care should be taken in giving children, i.e. anyone whose brain is still growing, any drug. Adderall is started in MUCH lower doses in children.”

    And whether or not the NFL, NBA, etc. has scientists that believe they are PEDs doesn’t matter. That’s NOT how the scientific method works. Just because someone has a Ph.D. or other degree doesn’t make whatever they say right. My father has a Ph.D. in psychology. That doesn’t mean that every opinion he holds about psychology is fact. If he went to a psychology conference and just expected his colleagues to take his word for it, he would be laughed out of the conference. Scientific knowledge is built upon good studies, those that are random, double-blind, have a large sample size, etc., and that can have their results repeated by other researchers. It’s about evidence. Not personalities and degrees.

    I understand that players that are suspended hurt the team. I think they should refrain while these are the rules, but that doesn’t mean that the rules are logical, scientific, or right. That was my argument. The major sports AREN’T scientific organizations. They’re concerned about PR and making money. Not scientific accuracy. If you think the list of PEDs and other banned drugs is based on logic and science, you have another thing coming.

  80. bbnate420 says:

    Sluggo, I did get personally insulting with you, which I shouldn’t have, but I’m certainly not going to apologize to someone who starts their next post about me, 2 days later mind you, with an insult. I dropped it. I guess you couldn’t. Maybe some of what I said, not the insults, struck a nerve? Maybe on some level you know I was right? Regardless, feel free to ignore my posts. I likely will ignore yours after this post.

    This is what I said, “P.S. Lumping marijuana in with alcohol or even Adderall is completely asinine. Feel free to link some scientific articles published in peer-reviewed periodicals that prove physiological damage anywhere close to what occurs with alcohol. And I’m not advocating that children be allowed to use marijuana. Extreme care should be taken in giving children, i.e. anyone whose brain is still growing, any drug. Adderall is started in MUCH lower doses in children.”

    Where in that paragraph did I say that marijuana was GOOD for you? I didn’t, nor have I ever here. You had to result to a straw man argument, because you were unable to actually argue the merits of what I ACTUALLY said.

    You didn’t even follow a logical train of thought in your post here. I made NO claims about the medicinal value of marijuana, though I do think it probably has a few, limited uses, i.e. glaucoma and appetite enhancement. These were the only scientific studies you could find. Too bad they had nothing to do with what I said. Whether or not marijuana is bad for you has nothing to do with whether or not it has medicinal value. That’s just a non-sequitur.

    I don’t claim that marijuana is generally good for adults, just that it’s not that bad, especially if used in moderation. I don’t believe it causes ANY significant physiological impairments if used infrequently. Certainly nothing like drinking alcohol. But I haven’t made any 100% pronouncements about marijuana. People that say it is bad for you have the responsibility of proving it. They are the ones making claims. The evidence is severely lacking. I do believe that frequent marijuana use can cause some fairly minor memory and motivation issues from what I’ve read, but it definitely needs more study. The US Army in 1972 and a number of other Western countries have studied the issue of whether or not marijuana should be legal. The US Army one and all of the others I have seen suggest that the consequences of being arrested for marijuana use is worse than the use itself.

    Now good luck in life, Sluggo.

  81. bbnate420 says:

    And I did escalate the argument to where it didn’t need to go. I did feel insulted by his first post. I was likely being too sensitive. I don’t think I know everything. I do try and back up my opinions as much as possible with science and logic, and I expect others to do the same if they expect to sway my opinion. To me, acting all knowing is like what Yankinta did with his predictions. Acting like you know something when you clearly can’t/don’t. I don’t make predictions that I assume or claim are infallible.

  82. bbnate–Thats not how I remember it, but thats okay. And believe it or not, I do believe the letter of the law should be followed in court, and if asked to serve on a jury I would do my utmost to do so. While I am not a fan of our system of law, I realize it wont work if anyone goes rogue, and I do believe that in a court of law the facts and empirical evidence take precedence over all else.

    Your comparisons dont hold water. The thing about psychology is its as much art as it is science, so comparing your Dad and his opinions vs a medical doctor and his opinions is crabapples to oranges, if not apples to oranges. And all the psychological testing in the world, even with double-blind and random testing, can later be proven wrong as its too easy to miss contributing factors. Thats why psychology is so interesting to me, and so frustratingly inexact. The human mind is probably less understood than the rest of the universe combined.

    And you probably dont care, but I think you do owe Sluggo an apology. You went WAAY over the line, and even if you guys have been sniping on and off for months, its was uncalled for. Youre usually better than that.

    He probably tried to let it go, but your insults stuck in his craw and he got worked up all over again. I can understand that. And since you crossed the line, IMO he was due at least one response to you that was equally insulting. Whether he was more or less insulting in his response is a matter of opinion.

    But I let him have it for his response as well, just as I am belatedly letting you know I think you were way out of line and IMO owe him an apology. I hope you refrain from insulting anyone like that in the future, it puts a negative light on discussions like this that I feel are actually a good thing–when everyone behaves.

    Just so you know, Marijuana has been proven in early studies to slow the advance of Alzheimers disease. Look it up if you dont believe me. It has quite a few benefits in certain situations, for certain people. The problem is the results often are not consistent over large samples of people, and that is once reason the medical field distrusts it so.

    And I dont get your view on alcohol. Alcohol in moderation has been proven in study after study to have many benefits. Its the abuse of alcohol that leads to health problems. Its pretty much impossible to compare use/abuse of alcohol with use/abuse of marijuana, because the amounts for each criteria are so subjective.

    Alcohol can be a terribly addictive substance, but several studies have shown that long-term use/abuse of marijuana can also lead to addiction, and negative side-affects of marijuana are well-documented, though they often vary among groups of people, which is one reason its such a difficult substance to get a handle on, scientifically. Kind of like the field of psychology.

    Regardless, players who take substances banned by the NFL know better, and should face the consequences. And fans will always be pissed at the ones who are caught and busted. Thats normal.

  83. bbnate420 says:

    STTBM, there is some evidence that having 1-2 drinks a day can have a positive effect on the cardiovascular system. That’s it. It’s damaging to every other system of your body. It’s down right terrible for neurons, i.e. your central nervous system. Then there’s the effects on your liver, mucosal linings, etc.. I’m not telling anyone not to drink. I drink once or occasionally twice a week. It depends on what I have to do. But I understand that it’s not good for me.

    My comparison was not even apples to oranges. It was much better. It doesn’t matter what field of scientific inquiry you’re talking about, be it psychology, medicine, physics, etc., the standard is empirical evidence that results from a peer-reviewed study/tests that can be replicated by others in the field. Scientific understanding isn’t static in any discipline. The prevalent theories in even a “hard” science like physics are remarkably divergent from what they were 100 years ago.

    Medical doctors rely on medical research to inform the treatments they give their patients. In fact, many times a treatment must have substantial clinical data backing it up to be covered. My mother is an RN and works for an insurance company. I have talked to her about it many times. Treatments that aren’t scientifically proven in their minds are called investigational. And my older brother just finished medical school. Doctors can’t just order any treatment they like and expect it to be covered. It doesn’t work that way.

    As far as Sluggo goes, I admit that I escalated it far past where it needed to go, but I don’t think that his first post was without at least a veiled insult. He chose to go back and forth with the insults with me. I was willing to drop it. I didn’t have time to go over it immediately. I wanted to have time to go back over the posts and do a post-mortem on the fight so that I knew if I needed to apologize and what for. He chose to come back 2 days later and insult me in MULTIPLE posts without provocation. Honestly, he would’ve gotten an apology if not for that. I, as well as many others, have gotten into it with someone else on here to the point that it got personal. I can’t recall a time that I, or most other people here, have launched back into the insults days after it should have died down. There should’ve been a cooling off period. I laid out my position. I will ignore him from here on out, and he’s free to do the same.

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0