weeds
Fiber deprived old guy.
As I recall, Sam was one of THOSE "Ted" picks. Was a receiver in college and was converted to corner all but immediately. Bad call Ted. Couldn't you have known that he'd have concussion problems beforehand?
http://bfy.tw/9ygJWell that's a questionable source if ever I've seen one FWIW, I legit don't give a crap if people smoke weed and think it probably does help some people with various ailments. I do, however, like proper research and well-founded claims.
Also, OFFICIAL THREAD BACK ON TRACK moment! Beep beep.
Actually if I'm stating what I believe to be true, and you say it's not true. Its your job to prove to me its not, or is that only a Court of Law thing? Lol
Standard debate rule. The party who makes the positive claim is responsible for citing a source/providing evidence. You make the claim, you support the clean. The other party is in the default state of "unconvinced."
Now, the other party can say, "That is not true!" That is also a positive claim and would have the responsibility to support it with evidence.
The common example as why this is an absolute requirement is flying:
"I can fly!"
vs.
"Prove I cannot fly!
In the case of court, the state is making the positive claim. It is their responsibility to support the claim.
You're off topic! Delete! Delete!Amen. Have to say and not to get off the thread on here LOL. But props to the mods in this forum. I was having fun in the Falcons fan site after the Super Bowl, but what a train wreck of disorganization that site is......no wonder the Falcons fell apart, their fans can't even stay on task.
OK.....now back to Shields.
Actually you have it backwards.... in a court of law the burden of proof is on the plaintiff .... if you make a claim ... you must prove it... it is not incumbent on the defendant to prove their side ...Actually if I'm stating what I believe to be true, and you say it's not true. Its your job to prove to me its not, or is that only a Court of Law thing? Lol
This discussion had absolutely nothing to do with the legalities of weed. The claim was made that weed helps heal brain injuries. Since Shields is known to be a pot user with apparent brain issues associated with his multiple concussions, the discussion developed in a somewhat tongue in cheek manner. But again pot being legal.... or illegal has not been at issue here.I wanna know how this topic got derailed from Shields to discussing the legal ramifications of Marijuana.
If you want to make a thread about that sort of thing have at it. No more post about legality of weed in this thread please.
As I recall, Sam was one of THOSE "Ted" picks. Was a receiver in college and was converted to corner all but immediately. Bad call Ted. Couldn't you have known that he'd have concussion problems beforehand?
Shields was definitely a 10, but I'm coming up short thinking of anyone else (Tramon's a special case, of course) who even clawed up to a 2. Not worth much of an argument, but the rest of the UDFAs just seemed to come and go. Who am I missing?
"If the guy...needed to take a hit before having to go on an island against Megatron for 60 minutes then more power to him."Shields was one of my fav Packers and obviously one of TT's great pick ups. I would be more torn of this news but everyone saw this coming. The guy was barely 5'11 and 185lbs and played fearless against other teams 1's that were usually much bigger then him and he held his own. If the guy smoked weed and maybe needed to take a hit before having to go on an island against Megatron for 60 minutes then more power to him. He got results. If thats what works as there are guys doing much worse.
Replacing him wont be easy as already found out some. There is no guarantee a FA can come in and be as effective as he was and even less of a guarantee a rookie can. I have my two cents on this but good luck TT.
"If the guy...needed to take a hit before having to go on an island against Megatron for 60 minutes then more power to him."
I doubt that ever happened. Pot is not used as a performance enhancer. Anybody who's ever smoked pot (a good 40 years in my past) would tell you that.
Further, while there is certainly some percentage of players who are pot heads, daily smokers will get caught in a drug test sooner or later.
Here's the deal. ESPN the Magazine did a anonymous poll of about 250 NFL players, according to which the players said 40% of their peers were regular users of prescription painkillers. That's opioids. The players estimated 50% of their peers use marijuana. Many players reported better pain relief from pot than the opiods. Which would you use for pain relief if you figured out how not to get caught smoking, knowing that opioids are far more dangerous?
For most, pot is a Sunday night - Monday drug to get get past the pain and ready for Tuesday practice.
any player taking it upon themselves to stay away from the opioids and use marijuana care far more about themselves than the brain trust that shovels the prescriptions at them for pain management."If the guy...needed to take a hit before having to go on an island against Megatron for 60 minutes then more power to him."
I doubt that ever happened. Pot is not used as a performance enhancer. Anybody who's ever smoked pot (a good 40 years in my past) would tell you that.
Further, while there is certainly some percentage of players who are pot heads, daily smokers will get caught in a drug test sooner or later.
Here's the deal. ESPN the Magazine did a anonymous poll of about 250 NFL players, according to which the players said 40% of their peers were regular users of prescription painkillers. That's opioids. The players estimated 50% of their peers use marijuana. Many players reported better pain relief from pot than the opiods. Which would you use for pain relief if you figured out how not to get caught smoking, knowing that opioids are far more dangerous?
For most, pot is a Sunday night - Monday drug to get get past the pain and ready for Tuesday practice.
is this about shields or weed?
Never forget that game sealing int in Chicago.