Wow!!! Colt Lyerla participating in rookie camp

[GoPGo]

IMO this is a very ignorant statement. First of all drug addiction is a disease, not a life style.

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.

 

[GoPGo]

I remember the special on James jones story. That was a good one. He stayed on track and never had any of this sort of "problems"

All I can say is if we sign him, the first thing the Packers need to do is set him up with a good shrink because the kid needs some serious counseling before he's read for the pressures of an NFL career.

 

[Sunshine885500]

How about just letting the coaches do their jobs and trust in their judgement. One thing that really bothers me is everyone who thinks they know best about a person based on a few incidents. The young man made some very bad mistakes and has paid the price. To hear him being compared to Aaron Hernandez is just asinine. Hernandez was involved in some very serious crimes even when in college. Tell me one thing this kid was involved in that even comes close to brandishing a weapon and threatening to kill someone.

Okay the kid grew up without a father which is a major setback for some. He made mistakes that hopefully now he can figure out. I think GB has strong veteran leadership on both sides of the ball. People who can not only teach him but also a guy like Hubbard on how to be a Pro and to take his craft as a man.

Would we have said the same thing about Najeh Davenport who after he was draft had to go to court and afterwards explain why he went into a girl's dorm room and took a sh*t in her laundry basket? Gi=uy do dumb things when there in college, but if a person hasn't committed a violent crime then don't put him into the same category of some who has.

 

[GoPGo]

I'm hoping those tweets were the product of cocaine/alcohol abuse.

More likely, they were the result of flat-out stupidity. I would be ashamed if a Packer ever said anything publicly that is so callous and hurtful... and I would be the first to call for that player to be removed from the team.

 

[GoPGo]

Bottom line is he is being given a chance, not a guarantee but a chance, to make something out of himself and turn his life around. If he does I personally think it will be a great story but if he doesn't he will have no one to blame other than himself.

It takes more than overcoming addiction and discipline problems to become a millionaire NFL player to have a "great story." It requires an attitude of servitude and helping his community in a well-organized and meaningful manner to become a great story.

 

[AmishMafia]

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.

well said. I have to remember I can say the same things sometimes without be such a sarcastic ***hole. Well, maybe that is my 'disease'.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

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.

well said. I have to remember I can say the same things sometimes without be such a sarcastic ***hole. Well, maybe that is my 'disease'.

I would really appreciate it if you would stop talking about something you obviously have no idea about. There´s a huge difference between a guy occasionally taking drugs because he enjoys being high and a drug addict.

Here´s some information for you from the National Institute on Drug Abuse and Addiction:

Many people do not understand why or how other people become addicted to drugs. It is often mistakenly assumed that drug abusers lack moral principles or willpower and that they could stop using drugs simply by choosing to change their behavior. In reality, drug addiction is a complex disease, and quitting takes more than good intentions or a strong will. In fact, because drugs change the brain in ways that foster compulsive drug abuse, quitting is difficult, even for those who are ready to do so. Through scientific advances, we know more about how drugs work in the brain than ever, and we also know that drug addiction can be successfully treated to help people stop abusing drugs and lead productive lives.

Addiction is a chronic, often relapsing brain disease that causes compulsive drug seeking and use, despite harmful consequences to the addicted individual and to those around him or her. Although the initial decision to take drugs is voluntary for most people, the brain changes that occur over time challenge an addicted person’s self control and hamper his or her ability to resist intense impulses to take drugs.

http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/understanding-drug-abuse-addiction

 

[FrankRizzo]

One may become "addicted".... which apparently can be classified as a "disease".

But unless one is a crack-baby type of person, it usually begins by an idiot being stupid and trying the drug in the first place.

I'm sure there are plenty of people here who are smokers. That's an addiction. So a disease?
Can you blame society or your parents for passing that disease on?

I don't think so either.

If someone has a "disease" from being addicted to ****, that's all their fault. There IS BLAME for those things, as with coke heads, purple drank (Jolly), and usually, alcoholics.

My only addiction is chocolate.
And I don't blame anyone for that.
And it's not really a disease.

 

[AmishMafia]

I would really appreciate it if you would stop talking about something you obviously have no idea about. There´s a huge difference between a guy occasionally taking drugs because he enjoys being high and a drug addict.

Here´s some information for you from the National Institute on Drug Abuse and Addiction:

Many people do not understand why or how other people become addicted to drugs. It is often mistakenly assumed that drug abusers lack moral principles or willpower and that they could stop using drugs simply by choosing to change their behavior. In reality, drug addiction is a complex disease, and quitting takes more than good intentions or a strong will. In fact, because drugs change the brain in ways that foster compulsive drug abuse, quitting is difficult, even for those who are ready to do so. Through scientific advances, we know more about how drugs work in the brain than ever, and we also know that drug addiction can be successfully treated to help people stop abusing drugs and lead productive lives.

Addiction is a chronic, often relapsing brain disease that causes compulsive drug seeking and use, despite harmful consequences to the addicted individual and to those around him or her. Although the initial decision to take drugs is voluntary for most people, the brain changes that occur over time challenge an addicted person’s self control and hamper his or her ability to resist intense impulses to take drugs.

http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/understanding-drug-abuse-addiction

I understand the nature and power of drug addiction. I vaguely understand the chemical processes within the body manufacturing the artificial dependence on the drug.

But a point I would like to make, is that by classifying it as a disease is a huge disservice to the addicted and the recreational users alike. By telling them it is not their fault you justify their situation as something they were born with and not a decision made in the first place. The removal of personal responsibility within our society already has huge negative impacts on the US both socially and financially and with things like this, it will continue to take its toll.

Artificially reducing the consequences of their decisions with expensive legislation and legal classifications is an additional burden on the economy as well as increasing the number of people willing to accept the risks of the lifestyle.

Just my perspective.


See? Don't you now miss the old sarcastic Amish Mafia?

 

[AmishMafia]

Colt signing imminent:

http://gnb.scout.com/2/1403575.html



There is a market here for a camp for troubled athletes. I would put it on 80 acres in northern Wisconsin and it would be part training facility and part rehab center. It would be completely removed from society by its remoteness and give a chance for these guys to better understand the fundamentals of life without the confusion of technology and current askew societal views. Teams would sign guys like Colt with the restriction that they had to live at the center for the next 2 years when away from football.

Hmmm, probably are places like this - but in California. Okay, who is in? I will probably need 5 investors at $1M each.

 

[HardRightEdge]

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.

Without getting into the medical implications of physical addiction, what evidence do you have that Lyerla is an addict?

 

[HardRightEdge]

I understand the nature and power of drug addiction. I vaguely understand the chemical processes within the body manufacturing the artificial dependence on the drug.

But a point I would like to make, is that by classifying it as a disease is a huge disservice to the addicted and the recreational users alike. By telling them it is not their fault you justify their situation as something they were born with and not a decision made in the first place. The removal of personal responsibility within our society already has huge negative impacts on the US both socially and financially and with things like this, it will continue to take its toll.

Artificially reducing the consequences of their decisions with expensive legislation and legal classifications is an additional burden on the economy as well as increasing the number of people willing to accept the risks of the lifestyle.

Just my perspective.


See? Don't you now miss the old sarcastic Amish Mafia?

There is no logical, medical nor legal basis for assuming that addiction is broadly considered per se "no fault". Treatment programs like AA focus on personal responsibility; jails are crammed with drug users and the occasional drunk who kills somebody with his vehicle or beats up somebody.

Just because the medical and legal professions often try to keep users out of jail is no indication of an institutional bias toward free lunches.

You've constructed a straw man.

 

[AmishMafia]

There is no logical, medical nor legal basis for assuming that addiction is broadly considered per se "no fault". Treatment programs like AA focus on personal responsibility; jails are crammed with drug users and the occasional drunk who kills somebody with his vehicle or beats up somebody.

Just because the medical and legal professions often try to keep users out of jail is no indication of an institutional bias toward free lunches.

You've constructed a straw man.

The thought process is Drug Addiction = Disease. Disease = biological. biological = out of your control. It should be Drug Addiction = poor choice.

ADA now extends protection to drug addicts. That does not seem right to me.

 

[HardRightEdge]

The thought process is Drug Addiction = Disease. Disease = biological. biological = out of your control. It should be Drug Addiction = poor choice.

ADA now extends protection to drug addicts. That does not seem right to me.

That's your straw man. That's not how it works in real life.

 

[TJV]

Thompson quotes from the Packer Report article linked by AmishMafia in post #45:

“We did a lot of work on Colt,” general manager Ted Thompson said during a Saturday news conference. “He’s a very talented athlete. We interviewed him at the Combine, we went through all those procedures, talked to a lot of people. He’s a young man that made some mistakes and we feel like he was worth bringing in and taking a look at.”

“You weigh it all,” Thompson said. “And every case is an individual case. We have always believed that — or I have always believed that — there are certain things that people can atone for, acknowledge their mistakes and get on with their lives. And I am a proponent of those kind of people that try to do that. And that’s where we’re at with Colt.”

 

[ThePerfectBeard]

You know I've been a supporter of Colt's for a very long time. I will continue to support him because he has amazing talent. I don't give a flying hell what the kid says or does as long as he comes to play football. Our locker room is strong and we've dealt with other cancers. The guy's has such a high ceiling that I'm willing to give him a chance. I know I'll get flamed for it, but if we can get a first round talent for nothing, I say go for it. For those who don't know, take a look.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[FrankRizzo]

You know I've been a supporter of Colt's for a very long time. I will continue to support him because he has amazing talent. I don't give a flying hell what the kid says or does as long as he comes to play football. Our locker room is strong and we've dealt with other cancers. The guy's has such a high ceiling that I'm willing to give him a chance. I know I'll get flamed for it, but if we can get a first round talent for nothing, I say go for it. For those who don't know, take a look.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

I agree..... sometimes, as they say here in Dallas with the famous Randy Galloway, sometimes a team has to "thug it up". That is to say you can't have all choir boys. Need some toughness...... not necessarily "criminal", but the team might benefit from adding some talent/baggage.

We passed on Dez Bryant for Bulaga, because of Dez's baggage.
Today, Dez is perhaps the NFL's #2 best WR. Bulaga has barely played over the past 2 seasons.

Lyerla is more troubled, I think, than even Dez was.
But has has a ton of talent.
At a position we are weak at.
And he came free. Not a first round pick or even a 7th round pick.
Free.

I endorse this move.

 

[adambr2]

Zero risk?! You can't be serious. What happens if he stays clean until we sign him and then in his 2nd year goes all in on the cocaine and becomes the next Aaron Hernandez? I'm not saying that will happen, but the idea of "zero risk" is highly naive.

So "don't give troubled players a chance in Green Bay or they might go out and kill people?" That's kind of silly logic, don't you think?

Even if he did get in any trouble while he was here, it doesn't hurt anything to just cut your losses then. The Patriots did so, quickly, and I don't think anyone holds it against them that they had Aaron Hernandez on their team at one time or that it affects them in any way going forward.

You say that the idea of "zero risk" is highly naive. A "risk" is a gamble that exposes us to damage or loss if it doesn't go our way. What exactly is our damage or loss if Lyerla doesn't work out for us? If he runs into trouble, they'll cut him. What's the problem?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I understand the nature and power of drug addiction. I vaguely understand the chemical processes within the body manufacturing the artificial dependence on the drug.

But a point I would like to make, is that by classifying it as a disease is a huge disservice to the addicted and the recreational users alike. By telling them it is not their fault you justify their situation as something they were born with and not a decision made in the first place. The removal of personal responsibility within our society already has huge negative impacts on the US both socially and financially and with things like this, it will continue to take its toll.

There´s no doubt that a person is responsible for taking drugs, addiction is a disease though. Two completely different things we´re talking about here.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

There is a market here for a camp for troubled athletes. I would put it on 80 acres in northern Wisconsin and it would be part training facility and part rehab center. It would be completely removed from society by its remoteness and give a chance for these guys to better understand the fundamentals of life without the confusion of technology and current askew societal views. Teams would sign guys like Colt with the restriction that they had to live at the center for the next 2 years when away from football.

That´s probably one of the worst ideas I´ve heard in recent history.

 

[brandon2348]

Bottom line is that if he comes in and performs well on field and contributes while keeping his "nose clean", everyone will jump on his bandwagon real quick. They will cheer him more then Johnny Jolly. All the sudden he will be a "Fan Favorite". TT will be called a genius.

 

[FrankRizzo]

Let's be real here for a moment.
There are drunk drivers on the roads at all time.
Be in the wrong place at the wrong time, you and your family can be wiped out. We, sadly, see it all the time.

Lyerla's only threat is really to himself here. He's not an alcoholic as far as we know.
The Packers have had bad people in the organization before.

We have more than our share of good guys, choir boys. If this guy can help us win games, can give us any edge against teams like Seattle, San Francisco, New York, Chicago, I'm all for it..... but that means he's going to have to stay clean. The team would be smart to provide resources to helping him stay on the straight & narrow, as Dallas has done with Bryant.

HEY CHECK THIS MOCK DRAFT out from last September, from Matt Miller, the lead NFL writer over at Bleacher Report. http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...t-matt-millers-nfl-week-1-projections/page/27

 

[brandon2348]

Let's be real here for a moment.
There are drunk drivers on the roads at all time.
Be in the wrong place at the wrong time, you and your family can be wiped out. We, sadly, see it all the time.

Lyerla's only threat is really to himself here. He's not an alcoholic as far as we know.
The Packers have had bad people in the organization before.

We have more than our share of good guys, choir boys. If this guy can help us win games, can give us any edge against teams like Seattle, San Francisco, New York, Chicago, I'm all for it..... but that means he's going to have to stay clean. The team would be smart to provide resources to helping him stay on the straight & narrow, as Dallas h
as done with Bryant.

HEY CHECK THIS MOCK DRAFT out from last September, from Matt Miller, the lead NFL writer over at Bleacher Report. http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...t-matt-millers-nfl-week-1-projections/page/27

Yeah I agree. The guy got caught with some cocaine and ranted on twitter over a controversial topic. I'm not condoning what he did but that's nothing compared to what a lot of the guys in the league are getting caught doing. Plus he made these mistakes being so young.

There going to sign him and I am sure he is going to have some "special conditions" involved. I think he immediately is a more athletic option to what Kuhn does in certain situations. I see that as a spot he could contribute immediately. I like me some John Kuhn but I am not sure he can even Lambeau leap any more.

 

[jaybadger82]

I would really appreciate it if you would stop talking about something you obviously have no idea about.

That describes about 98% of the content around here.

But a point I would like to make, is that by classifying it as a disease is a huge disservice to the addicted and the recreational users alike. By telling them it is not their fault you justify their situation as something they were born with and not a decision made in the first place. The removal of personal responsibility within our society already has huge negative impacts on the US both socially and financially and with things like this, it will continue to take its toll.

Artificially reducing the consequences of their decisions with expensive legislation and legal classifications is an additional burden on the economy as well as increasing the number of people willing to accept the risks of the lifestyle.

Just my perspective.

I agree with many of the points you've been making about personal responsibility in the context of substance abuse. But I don't think calling addiction a "disease" is about dodging blame or avoiding consequences. Rather, I think the term has been widely adopted because it accurately suggests that addiction is a problem that must be cured through treatment and taking personal responsibility is usually one of the central tenets of any substance abuse treatment program. Also, just my perspective.

 

[brandon2348]

That describes about 98% of the content around here.



I agree with many of the points you've been making about personal responsibility in the context of substance abuse. But I don't think calling addiction a "disease" is about dodging blame or avoiding consequences. Rather, I think the term has been widely adopted because it accurately suggests that addiction is a problem that must be cured through treatment and taking personal responsibility is usually one of the central tenets of any substance abuse treatment program. Also, just my perspective.

Well then why doesn't everyone just meet in the middle and call it a "treatable disease". Moving Forward.