Wow!!! Colt Lyerla participating in rookie camp

[Pack995]

I think it great they are giving him a chance when i first saw the film on him he reminds me of jeremy shockey just hope we can get him sober like that for 3 years God im not asking for much but if we do get him at his best for three years we will win another super bowl

 

[GoPGo]

I think it great they are giving him a chance when i first saw the film on him he reminds me of jeremy shockey just hope we can get him sober like that for 3 years God im not asking for much but if we do get him at his best for three years we will win another super bowl

What the heck have you been smoking? Our Superbowl chances hardly live and die with a guy who has 34 catches in his college career!

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I didn't say he was good, just said they resigned him. The two CB's the Seahawks lost
in free agency, Thurmond and Browner, were quality players and I think will come
back to hurt them.

Browner didn´t even play after week 10 last season and the secondary didn´t miss a beat when they replace him with Byron Maxwell. They´ll miss Thurmond to some degree but I don´t expect them to fall apart because of it.

 

[paulska]

Drug addiction is not a disease. Nobody ever gets up one day and says, "OMG, I need to find some cocaine NOW!" No medical study has ever identified drug addiction as a disease. It is a pattern of behavior predicated on an inability of a person to control impulses and urges to do something the know is destructive. The idea of calling addiction a disease is a bad precedent because all it does is gives the addict another excuse to act out on his addiction. Instead of saying, "Crap, I screwed up again" after a binge, it allows him to say, "Oh well, it's okay because I have a 'disease'".

The whole disease model as applied to addiction is nothing more than a metaphor.

Under your premise, the hereditary proclivity towards addiction for children of addicts is also fiction?

I don't think anyone is suggesting that people don't have the power of choice to operate, but there are clear genetic markers that show that addiction in a family line can be passed to children. To dismiss addiction as failure to exercise cognitive power consistently is a wholesale ignorance of the fact that alcoholism is something that you don't just do to yourself and your loved ones laterally, it's something that you potentially pass along the family tree to descendants.

Science struggles to explain why one child in a family shows little temptation or lack of control as it pertains to avoiding a form of substance abuse that may have plagued a parent/aunt/uncle/grandparent, where another sibling raised in the same setting turns into a raging addict who struggles to achieve any measure of sobriety despite multiple attempts to detox/rehab. Addiction is a complex issue- reducing it to being weak willed isn't the most intelligent approach to dealing with it...

 

[TJV]

[IMO] The only single player the Packers' super bowl hopes ride on is Aaron Rodgers. The last title was won without the first string TE and with multiple players on IR. The Packers offense should be good enough to win it all. The huge question mark is on the other side of the ball.[/IMO]

 

[PFanCan]

Under your premise, the hereditary proclivity towards addiction for children of addicts is also fiction?...

This has not yet been proven to be a direct result of genetic makeup. If it has, please provide a link. A quick review of the links that Google provides through the various health organizations seem to show significant debate on this, but no consensus on whether this is fiction or fact.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that people don't have the power of choice to operate, but there are clear genetic markers that show that addiction in a family line can be passed to children. ...

Again, a Google search reveals that many studies do show that "addiction" is likely passed down, but it seems that all of us have this built in. It's actually a good thing in most cases ("like a certain food, search for it so can be eaten again"). Whether or not it is stronger in some than others seems to be still under study.

To dismiss addiction as failure to exercise cognitive power consistently is a wholesale ignorance of the fact that alcoholism is something that you don't just do to yourself and your loved ones laterally, it's something that you potentially pass along the family tree to descendants....

Interesting choice of words. I guess I must agree that it is a fact that you potentially pass genetic material on to your descendants that may cause them to be more apt to having uncontrollable addictions.

That's like saying it's a fact that I can potentially fly by flapping my arms.

So, it's also a fact that we potentially do not pass anything that matters genetically and why some people have addiction problems and some don't.

Science struggles to explain why one child in a family shows little temptation or lack of control as it pertains to avoiding a form of substance abuse that may have plagued a parent/aunt/uncle/grandparent, where another sibling raised in the same setting turns into a raging addict who struggles to achieve any measure of sobriety despite multiple attempts to detox/rehab. Addiction is a complex issue- reducing it to being weak willed isn't the most intelligent approach to dealing with it...

I agree with everything you state here. But, it doesn't make the statement, "An addict is weak willed" incorrect or necessarily fiction. It's simply unknown at this time what exactly plays a role in addictive behavior.

As of today, as far as I know, it is a fact that addictive behavior could potentially be mostly a result of a weak will.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Lyerla has a long way to go before making this Te, let alone being a threat.

I could see him focusing and keeping his nose clean, he still will only be on STs for 2 or 3 years. TE is difficult and he didn't play or practice it much, or as much as most TEs coming out. Add to that he doesn't sound to smart by all accounts and I think TE production is at best a few years away.

I can also see him relapsing and freaking out and trying to snort the 20 yard line chalk on the first day of practice.

I've seen Lyerla's Wonderlic score reported as 24 which is about the average for NFL QBs. A score of 20 (out of 50) is about the general population average. He might be misguided, but he's no dummy.

 

[HardRightEdge]

By the way, has anybody substantiated the claims repeated over and over in this thread that Lyerla is or has been addicted to anything?

 

[GoPGo]

Under your premise, the hereditary proclivity towards addiction for children of addicts is also fiction?

I don't think anyone is suggesting that people don't have the power of choice to operate, but there are clear genetic markers that show that addiction in a family line can be passed to children.

Genetics doesn't work that way. Genes can be activated and deactivated by certain events during life... or not. Genes do not determine behavior. We're not robots with predetermined actions based on internal programming. While there appears to be some correlation between certain genes and addictive behavior, anyone who has had basic statistic and/or sciences should have been taught that correlation is not causation. Obviously children are going to share a massive amount of genes with their parents. That doesn't mean that's what caused them to be addicted. You're aware that children learn both good and bad from parents, right? Do you know that there are also identified genetic markers that correlate to aggression and violence? Does that mean a guy who goes and shoots his neighbor has a "disease?" or that he can't help it?

To dismiss addiction as failure to exercise cognitive power consistently is a wholesale ignorance of the fact that alcoholism is something that you don't just do to yourself

By this ignorant comment it can be concluded that alcoholics bear no responsibility for their behavior.

it's something that you potentially pass along the family tree to descendants.

Potentially yes, we've already established that children learn from their parents. "Hereditary" is not synonymous with "genetic."

Science struggles to explain why one child in a family shows little temptation or lack of control as it pertains to avoiding a form of substance abuse that may have plagued a parent/aunt/uncle/grandparent, where another sibling raised in the same setting turns into a raging addict who struggles to achieve any measure of sobriety despite multiple attempts to detox/rehab.

No child experiences the same setting in life. They have different friends. They hold a different station in the family (1st child, 2nd child, oldest, youngest, etc) and they each vary in intelligence, physical abilities and health. Many parents also experience "parenting fatigue" with time, becoming more permissive and less effective with discipline. There is also a correlation showing that 3rd children and on have significantly higher chance of engaging in risky and addictive behaviors. Again, correlation does not equal causation, but there is no genetic explanation for this.

 

[GoPGo]

By the way, has anybody substantiated the claims repeated over and over in this thread that Lyerla is or has been addicted to anything?

What are the odds that the only time he ever tried cocaine he just happened to get caught doing it by police? Pretty slim I would venture. The most troubling thing about the cocaine incident is that he refused to enter a treatment program even though the court offered to drop a charge of interfering with a police officer on the condition that he enter the program. That tells me that A) he fails to recognize his own problems, and B) he had to be bribed to do what was in his own best interest, C) he STILL didn't accept responsibility and do the right thing. In other words, he thinks like a 14 year old.

There seems to be a lot of rationalizing going on with his signing. I have a strong feeling a lot of the people making the rationalizations wouldn't be saying the same things if a rival had signed him.

 

[AmishMafia]

By the way, has anybody substantiated the claims repeated over and over in this thread that Lyerla is or has been addicted to anything?

define "addicted "

 

[GoPGo]

I've seen Lyerla's Wonderlic score reported as 24 which is about the average for NFL QBs. A score of 20 (out of 50) is about the general population average. He might be misguided, but he's no dummy.

I think his actions and words speak louder than his Wonderlic score. There are strategies to boosting your Wonderlic such as taking a best guess if you can't answer a question conclusively within 20 seconds.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I've seen Lyerla's Wonderlic score reported as 24 which is about the average for NFL QBs. A score of 20 (out of 50) is about the general population average. He might be misguided, but he's no dummy.

I think his actions and words speak louder than his Wonderlic score. There are strategies to boosting your Wonderlic such as taking a best guess if you can't answer a question conclusively within 20 seconds.

Lyerla´s wonderlic score means he´ll be able to grasp an NFL playbook. It´s obvious he has the talent to turn into an impact player with the Packers. None of us has any idea about what his future will hold off the field (so discussing it over and over again doesn´t make any sense) but as long as he doesn´t mess up while being with the team I´ll root for him.

One thing has to be clear though, one strike and he´s out.

 

[paulska]

This has not yet been proven to be a direct result of genetic makeup. If it has, please provide a link. A quick review of the links that Google provides through the various health organizations seem to show significant debate on this, but no consensus on whether this is fiction or fact.



Again, a Google search reveals that many studies do show that "addiction" is likely passed down, but it seems that all of us have this built in. It's actually a good thing in most cases ("like a certain food, search for it so can be eaten again"). Whether or not it is stronger in some than others seems to be still under study.



Interesting choice of words. I guess I must agree that it is a fact that you potentially pass genetic material on to your descendants that may cause them to be more apt to having uncontrollable addictions.

That's like saying it's a fact that I can potentially fly by flapping my arms.

So, it's also a fact that we potentially do not pass anything that matters genetically and why some people have addiction problems and some don't.



I agree with everything you state here. But, it doesn't make the statement, "An addict is weak willed" incorrect or necessarily fiction. It's simply unknown at this time what exactly plays a role in addictive behavior.

As of today, as far as I know, it is a fact that addictive behavior could potentially be mostly a result of a weak will.

A google search hardly qualifies as a summary, bulletproof dismissal. I don't let high school students dare to use a google search as a means to legitimize a position regarding an issue that is the focal point of significant scientific or social inquiry/research- Google hardly begins to scratch the surface of what research does and doesn't say simply because so much of the relevant literature isn't visible or accessible via Google. So, even if I provided you with a reading list of relevant scholarly articles and dissertations on the topic, that material wouldn't be freely available to you to read outside of paid access to online research databases and clearinghouses.

That aside, the point is that the extant body of research concerning addiction demonstrates that addiction is, in part, attributable to genetic factors- I am not suggesting that addiction isn't impacted/exacerbated by others, not the least of which is the exercise of personal choice, and in reading research on the topic I have rarely encountered someone suggests the like either.

Achieving sobriety does require tremendous will, discipline and transparency. I don't have research in hand to support my opinion, but IMHO it seems that because of this it is widely accepted that addiction is largely a result of not exercising these things. I'm simply stating that the proof of this position is not even remotely clear cut, though I appreciate your attempt to be lighthearted and qualify what felt an awful lot like an absolute statement to be something more measured.

Based on having worked with troubled youth living in care of the government for a significant period of time and the cadre of support professionals who support and resource them, the impact of this lack of clarity and certainty on this issue means in best practice it's probably wisest not to treat everyone dealing with addiction with a one size fits all attitude, approach and degree of patience and empathy.

I also understand that in an era where highly paid, privileged and enabled athletes and celebrities regularly torpedo their personal good fortune through what appears to the naked eye to be a gross exercise in narcissistic self-pleasure and god complex stroking, it's really hard to apply this kind of empathy to said candidates.

I would tend to agree with those who have posted that this kid might earn the forbearance of fans if he can show the brain farts (drugs, sloppy practice habits, bizarre ideas expressed in the media) are indeed the immaturity of troubled youth and he has become a stable, responsible young man worthy of respect and the trust of Packer fans. Amazing talent isn't enough to star in the NFL- he's got to show, in short order, that he's got the other qualities to do that.

 

[paulska]

Genetics doesn't work that way. Genes can be activated and deactivated by certain events during life... or not. Genes do not determine behavior. We're not robots with predetermined actions based on internal programming. While there appears to be some correlation between certain genes and addictive behavior, anyone who has had basic statistic and/or sciences should have been taught that correlation is not causation. Obviously children are going to share a massive amount of genes with their parents. That doesn't mean that's what caused them to be addicted. You're aware that children learn both good and bad from parents, right? Do you know that there are also identified genetic markers that correlate to aggression and violence? Does that mean a guy who goes and shoots his neighbor has a "disease?" or that he can't help it?



By this ignorant comment it can be concluded that alcoholics bear no responsibility for their behavior.



Potentially yes, we've already established that children learn from their parents. "Hereditary" is not synonymous with "genetic."



No child experiences the same setting in life. They have different friends. They hold a different station in the family (1st child, 2nd child, oldest, youngest, etc) and they each vary in intelligence, physical abilities and health. Many parents also experience "parenting fatigue" with time, becoming more permissive and less effective with discipline. There is also a correlation showing that 3rd children and on have significantly higher chance of engaging in risky and addictive behaviors. Again, correlation does not equal causation, but there is no genetic explanation for this.

Genes have a profound role in behaviour- I'm not suggested that they are hardwired switches we can't avoid or reroute, but some people have far greater challenge in certain respects because of genetic makeup than others.

As for alcoholics not being responsible for their behaviour, I never suggested anything of the sort. To the contrary- my comment suggested that it is nearsighted for any alcoholic to think that what they are doing is to themselves alone in isolation. They create issues for those who live alongside them in the present, and those issues ARE passed to people yet to be in their lives (children born later, even after sobriety is achieved).

One of the fascinating aspects of genetics is looking at children who are given up for adoption as infants, never knowing their birth parents, or children of "***** banks" or donated ova. They are raised in settings where addiction is absent, but suffer from addictive behaviour tendencies that their biological but otherwise unknown parentage dealt with. Yes, sometimes addiction is learned by seeing how one becomes, and seeing it "normalized." Sometimes, a child inherits genetic markers long past the time a parent has been an addict, may never have seen a parent addicted or exposed to substance abuse at all- only knowing sobriety and temperance- and still ends up struggling with addiction.

I understand that having something in your family line doesn't mean you're doomed to exhibit that thing in your life, and you should just roll with hit. There is a complex relationship between genetics, environmental factors and others, to be sure, and again, no one is suggesting that anyone be let off the proverbial hook for the consequences of their actions on the basis of "my ________ (specify close genetic relative here) was a junkie, so I can't help it." On the other hand, that doesn't therefore mean that things aren't passed genetically, and that the reasons one person struggles with addiction are the exact reasons why another also does.

Your last paragraph is a great example of what I'm trying to say here- the laundry list of things that impact choice is ENORMOUSLY complex. I'm simply taking issue with the incredibly simplistic position that all addicts are weak willed losers who just need to quit cold turkey and get smart ASAP. In some cases, maybe this is fair. I'm just saying I think it behooves intelligent, compassionate people to operate with a little more understanding around this issue.

 

[paulska]

Lyerla´s wonderlic score means he´ll be able to grasp an NFL playbook. It´s obvious he has the talent to turn into an impact player with the Packers. None of us has any idea about what his future will hold off the field (so discussing it over and over again doesn´t make any sense) but as long as he doesn´t mess up while being with the team I´ll root for him.

One thing has to be clear though, one strike and he´s out.

This!

AND, TT isn't on the hook for major money to see whether he ponies up and earns a spot. It's not like we're deep in cap trouble a la Pac Man with the Titans, Aldon Smith, __________________ (add highly paid miscreant who failed deliver value on their massive contract here).

It's pretty rare we take a shot on a player with this kind of trouble in their past, but reservations about how TT manages aside, I have to credit him and the coaching staff with managing these "longshots" in a highly effective manner where players gave the team good value in terms of quality play on the field without shattering the locker room/team psyche with off field BS (Jolly, Robinson have both already been mentioned as exemplars).

Now we just have to see whether Lyerla is a young man or a kid. If he's the latter, TT will send him to playground league and we'll move on. I can live with that.

 

[GoPGo]

I'm just saying I think it behooves intelligent, compassionate people to operate with a little more understanding around this issue.

And I'm just saying that rejection of the disease model does not preclude one from being intelligent and compassionate. Nor does it represent a lack of understanding. I can tell you with absolute certainty from experience that those alcoholics and drug addicts who see themselves as having a disease have poorer outcomes than those who don't. The ones who think they have a disease almost invariably use that idea to justify further abuse. Those who define their addiction as a problem to be solved by and large have much better outcomes.

 

[GoPGo]

Now we just have to see whether Lyerla is a young man or a kid. If he's the latter, TT will send him to playground league and we'll move on. I can live with that.

Are we taking bets?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

AND, TT isn't on the hook for major money to see whether he ponies up and earns a spot. It's not like we're deep in cap trouble a la Pac Man with the Titans, Aldon Smith, __________________ (add highly paid miscreant who failed deliver value on their massive contract here).

Lyerla signed a three-year minimum contract without any signing bonus. So, no matter how the situation with him works out it will have no implications on the Packers cap situation.

 

[PFanCan]

A google search hardly qualifies as a summary, bulletproof dismissal. I don't let high school students dare to use a google search as a means to legitimize a position regarding an issue that is the focal point of significant scientific or social inquiry/research- Google hardly begins to scratch the surface of what research does and doesn't say simply because so much of the relevant literature isn't visible or accessible via Google. So, even if I provided you with a reading list of relevant scholarly articles and dissertations on the topic, that material wouldn't be freely available to you to read outside of paid access to online research databases and clearinghouses.

I said "quick search". I was simply challenging your original position by showing the massive Internet-based discussion/debate that is ongoing on this topic. Though I agree it's hardly something one would use to advance a research topic or PhD dissertation, a QUICK glance at sites such as apa.org and nih.gov is also not a horrible place to start.

Regarding my request for a source: When one takes a position that seems to come from known fact, it is expected to have a source listed. I am sure you ask your high school students to do the same. Btw, I am not interested in a reading list.

Also, regarding your comment on avoiding the use of links to privileged materials: As a result of my business activities, I have access to nearly every piece of written scientific, medical or legal document that has ever been published. Many people do today via a simple membership or two. It's not a rare thing.

That aside, the point is that the extant body of research concerning addiction demonstrates that addiction is, in part, attributable to genetic factors...

Paul, look am not trying to pick a fight here. I was just saying that no one knows whether addiction is a disease or not (depends on the definition used...) nor does anyone know the factors involved. As you say it's complicated. And, unknown. So, calling out someone's opinion as fact or fiction is likely baseless.

And, just to keep it light-hearted: Do you actually talk like you write? If so, wow.

 

[HardRightEdge]

define "addicted "

YOU'RE making all the claims...YOU define it.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I think his actions and words speak louder than his Wonderlic score. There are strategies to boosting your Wonderlic such as taking a best guess if you can't answer a question conclusively within 20 seconds.

I've taken the test recently just to see what it's like. You're correct in that there is no penalty for an incorrect answer so the strategy you suggest makes sense. However many of the questions are fill in the blank; guessing does not help in those cases. Random guesses on multiple choice answers will only get you 1 0ut of 5.

24 is a good score for a football player.

 

[HardRightEdge]

What are the odds that the only time he ever tried cocaine he just happened to get caught doing it by police? Pretty slim I would venture. The most troubling thing about the cocaine incident is that he refused to enter a treatment program even though the court offered to drop a charge of interfering with a police officer on the condition that he enter the program. That tells me that A) he fails to recognize his own problems, and B) he had to be bribed to do what was in his own best interest, C) he STILL didn't accept responsibility and do the right thing. In other words, he thinks like a 14 year old.

There seems to be a lot of rationalizing going on with his signing. I have a strong feeling a lot of the people making the rationalizations wouldn't be saying the same things if a rival had signed him.

So, let's say he did cocaine on several occasions. What evidence do you have that he's an addict?

I did not question whether he's a knucklehead...only whether he's an addict and whether he's too stupid to learn a playbook.

 

[SoonerPack]

Actually, it was sarcasm. You'd do well to learn to recognize it, Sheldon.

I normally have a pretty good nose for sarcasm. Guess I missed on this one. Being that I am pretty new here I have not had a chance to get a read on what everyone is about. No offense intended.

 

[jaybadger82]

Actually, it was sarcasm. You'd do well to learn to recognize it, Sheldon.

You've been pissing and moaning about Lyerla to the point of melodrama in this thread. You can't suddenly expect everyone to pick up on the sarcasm in one of your posts without some better tells.