The Pats wanted Harvin!

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from bubthegrub2. Show bubthegrub2's posts

    Re: The Pats wanted Harvin!

    How would life change if everyone just stopped.        

    It probably wouldn't have a huge effect on the planet. A lot of people would probably be grumpy for a wek or so. And, of course, shares of Frito Lay would drop dramatically!!! And it's not like it's having a huge affect on it as things are. Sure, there are isolated issues of abuse, but for the most part it's on par with having a few cold ones after work. To some like me, much less dangerous than drinking. I go to a bar to drink and need to drive home (no taxis here in the sticks), but I'd sit home if I were getting stoned. Just buy my munchies on the way home!
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Evil2009. Show Evil2009's posts

    Re: The Pats wanted Harvin!

    The irony of this post is awesome. You might not get it, but I find that someone taking a pro-marijuana stance who can't correctly punctuate a sentence is perfect irony.  Out of curiosity, just what do your co-workers do? Any company I've worked for where I had even the slightest bit of responsibility tested their workers for drugs. This includes major banking corporations and the US Government. Where do you find a job where they don't care what condition you show up in?
    Posted by EnochRoot


    Where does the dumb idea come from that if someone smokes some pot in their own home they go to work stoned? You like to drink a few beers? Do you go to work drunk? Because I got news for you. A person can get stoned get a good nights sleep and get up and go to work with no after effects. Can you say the same thing about someone who gets drunk?

    People who drink and jump on others for smoking weed are hypocrites.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from patsfaninpa420. Show patsfaninpa420's posts

    Re: The Pats wanted Harvin!

    More proof that smoking pot makes one paranoid and that it lessens the ability to process information. I am not sure that I lumped all pot smokers into the same category. If that is how you wish to read it to deflect any responsibility for your own choices, so be it.  You might recall (Maybe not in your case as THC impairs hippocampus functions. The hippocampus is responsible for learning, memory and sensory integration.) that you are the one who stated that you think you drive better when stoned.  My response to that, which still seems to evade you, is that when you are driving impaired, you are endangering others. Get it? This might have gotten lost in your "free to be me" speech. If you were to mistime a turn while stoned and run into a tree and kill yourself, I might read your story in the paper and think, "No great loss." but when you mistime your turn and sideswipe a mini-van with a family of six inside and kill 4 of them, then you deserve to put out of everyone's misery. I couldn't give a crud how well your floor work is. As you should understand, it really doesn't matter. You seem to want to focus on how your bad choices only affect you. They don't. Grow up.  If the point still hasn't gotten across your encumbered brain, please, oh, please find an article in the paper about someone who was killed by an impaired driver - any impairment will do - alcohol, drugs, texting, cellphone, etc... Then, go to the surviving members of their family and tell them that you are sorry for their loss but that you think it is OK to drive while stoned and point to your crayon-drawn chart about how you drive better. I have a feeling your desire to stand up for own personal choices despite how they affect others will wilt in the face of reality.  Finally, why is it OK for you to smoke pot, but not OK for Harvin? Should he only smoke pot when he drives? What is your beef with that?
    Posted by EnochRoot



    Well if insulting me makes you feel better go ahead I really don't give an eff what you think. I never said it wasn't ok for Harvin to smoke, i merely said it wasn't a well thought decision, being that he chose to do so not long before a drug test. Apparently you couldn't make that connection though, and you say my brains' encumbered.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnochRoot. Show EnochRoot's posts

    Re: The Pats wanted Harvin!

    Well if insulting me makes you feel better go ahead I really don't give an eff what you think. I never said it wasn't ok for Harvin to smoke, i merely said it wasn't a well thought decision, being that he chose to do so not long before a drug test. Apparently you couldn't make that connection though, and you say my brains' encumbered.
    Posted by patsfaninpa420


    You haven't understood anything I have written. When you smoke pot and drive you are driving impaired. That is not a well-thought out decision, either. Just like you say Harvin's wasn't well thought out.

    BTW, do you now have multiple brains?

    There. I guess it really does need to be spelled out for you.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnochRoot. Show EnochRoot's posts

    Re: The Pats wanted Harvin!

    Where does the dumb idea come from that if someone smokes some pot in their own home they go to work stoned? You like to drink a few beers? Do you go to work drunk? Because I got news for you. A person can get stoned get a good nights sleep and get up and go to work with no after effects. Can you say the same thing about someone who gets drunk? People who drink and jump on others for smoking weed are hypocrites.
    Posted by Evil2009


    I guess the "dumb idea" that people can't smoke pot at home and go to work unstoned comes from you because no one even hinted at that before you came along and wrote it.

    Please explain the hypocrisy of someone who drinks legally in their own home calling out someone who claims to smoke pot and drive and that they drive better under the influence of marijuana. 

    You seem to have some poorly thought out arguments for defending doing something illegal. Why don't you just take some responsibility, say you do it even though it is illegal and you know it. You and PA can rationalize this all you want. You can lie to yourselves all you want. Just please don't expect others to buy into it. I certainly won't.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Trox1. Show Trox1's posts

    Re: The Pats wanted Harvin!

    I guess the "dumb idea" that people can't smoke pot at home and go to work unstoned comes from you because no one even hinted at that before you came along and wrote it. Please explain the hypocrisy of someone who drinks legally in their own home calling out someone who claims to smoke pot and drive and that they drive better under the influence of marijuana.  You seem to have some poorly thought out arguments for defending doing something illegal. Why don't you just take some responsibility, say you do it even though it is illegal and you know it. You and PA can rationalize this all you want. You can lie to yourselves all you want. Just please don't expect others to buy into it. I certainly won't.
    Posted by EnochRoot


    You really are quite clueless about marijuana and the affects it has on the human body.  Have you ever used it? Let me guess you never have, but you read somewhere that it's really bad for you?  Perhaps you saw some BS government infomercial?  Guess what it doesn't do a whole helluva lot.  It relaxes you a little bit and that's about it.  

    The majority of people who smoke weed and drive are far safer drivers than people who don't.  The reason I say majority is because people who are inexperienced smoking or driving would probably be better off driving sober. Any experienced pot smoker is going to have no problems driving safely(probably safer than you).  FTR I don't smoke much at all.  You shouldn't believe everything you read or everything mom and dad told you.  

    Oh and I can't stand condescending douches like yourself.  

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriots. Show themightypatriots's posts

    Re: The Pats wanted Harvin!

    Guys guys guys.  Everybody chill.  Why are we attacking each other over something as harmless as pot?  Everyone come over to my place.  420 comm ave.  Bub, bring the doritos.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: The Pats wanted Harvin!

    Interestingly enough. I think good evidence for NE not wanting Harvin is in Patriot's all-access.

    I just watched it and compared it to the Twitter feeds. And it appears as if they were in the process of negotiating one of four trades before Minnesota was even on the clock.

    Now, if they thought they had Harvin, as Childress has suggested, one would assume that they wouldn't be shopping the selection.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from JohnHannahrulz. Show JohnHannahrulz's posts

    Re: The Pats wanted Harvin!

    I could be wrong on this one, but I thought the PATS might be targeting Robert Ayers (Tennessee) not Harvin. And once Ayers was off the board(Denver #18), BB & Co. starting sending out signs about trading down. I could be completely off on this one, but there is a minor possibility that the Pats coveted a specific player at #23 and when that player was off the board a trade down became inevitable (why pay 1st round money for a pick when you can pay 2nd round money and get close to the same value). Just a thought ! Comments !
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Evil2009. Show Evil2009's posts

    Re: The Pats wanted Harvin!

    I guess the "dumb idea" that people can't smoke pot at home and go to work unstoned comes from you because no one even hinted at that before you came along and wrote it. Please explain the hypocrisy of someone who drinks legally in their own home calling out someone who claims to smoke pot and drive and that they drive better under the influence of marijuana.  You seem to have some poorly thought out arguments for defending doing something illegal. Why don't you just take some responsibility, say you do it even though it is illegal and you know it. You and PA can rationalize this all you want. You can lie to yourselves all you want. Just please don't expect others to buy into it. I certainly won't.
    Posted by EnochRoot

    Remember that next time you excede ther speed limit or do any thing else illegal hypocrite.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from flasox. Show flasox's posts

    Re: The Pats wanted Harvin!

    I could be wrong on this one, but I thought the PATS might be targeting Robert Ayers (Tennessee) not Harvin. And once Ayers was off the board(Denver #18), BB & Co. starting sending out signs about trading down. I could be completely off on this one, but there is a minor possibility that the Pats coveted a specific player at #23 and when that player was off the board a trade down became inevitable (why pay 1st round money for a pick when you can pay 2nd round money and get close to the same value). Just a thought ! Comments !
    Posted by JohnHannahrulz
    I tend to agree with you. The Pats might have been targeting either English or Ayers with their pick. As others have said the Pats could have moved up to take Harvin if they thought he was worth it. Childress if he is still around after this season may regret baiting BB again .
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnochRoot. Show EnochRoot's posts

    Re: The Pats wanted Harvin!

    Remember that next time you excede ther speed limit or do any thing else illegal hypocrite.
    Posted by Evil2009

    I am getting the impression that you don't really know what hypocrisy means.

    You seem to want to call people who say you are lying to yourself about drug use and driving while under the influence as hypocrites because they drink at home or speed. From your responses, I would say that you aren't really big on taking responsibility for your decisions and are trying to deflect from that by pointing the finger at the potential yet unacknowledged behavior of others.

    If you can't man up, you can't man up. No worries. Don't blame me for it. As I said before, lie to yourself all you want. Just don't get self-righteous when people don't believe the lie.

    By the way, I haven't had a moving violation since my youth (and even then, I had only two.) and I have only been in one accident. That accident was also in my youth when a car hit me while I was stopped at a stop sign. Don't worry about my behavior. I am pretty good at taking care of myself and understand that there are other people in the world who could be adversely affected by my judgment.

    Out of curiosity, do you believe in accidents? I don't. 



     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from AZPAT. Show AZPAT's posts

    Re: The Pats wanted Harvin!

    This is a load of c r a p (they won't let you post that word, strange, isn't it?) propigated by Childress. Regardless of the failed test, they weren't going to select a WR at 23, anyway. I'm sure this rumor in no way came from any source in Foxboro (unless fat-boy Tomase is spreading more lies). Childress just wants to make an excuse for reaching for a player who was likely to slip quite a bit. And the combine test aside, this kid has a history of injuries. He may have been an explosive player in Gainsville, but so was another guy...Chad Jackson! I would bet money BB had no intention of taking this guy, especially at 23.
    Posted by bubthegrub2


    bub,

    That pick was a head scratcher for me. Why draft a WR when you have no freakin' QB? They alrady have a high powered running game, which is winning games for them (their passing game, such as it is, sets up the run). CHildress is a blowhard; says anything to make himself feel good. Good luck to him, in that division, now that the Bears seems to have a legit QB for the first time in 50+ years. Even if he can "convince" that other liar, Brent "I'm Retiring For Good, Thsi Time" Favre, he's hasn't upgraded the QB position enough to make it scary. SUr, Brent will toss a few TD's, but will also follow that up with just about as many INT's.


     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from AZPAT. Show AZPAT's posts

    Re: The Pats wanted Harvin!

    Dr. Z had the Pats taking Harvin at 23 in his Sports Illustrated mock draft and I thought it was one of those, "Look how clever I am, going against the grain" picks. Chilly can tell himself whatever he wants (he has no problem telling himself that Tavaris Jackson is an NFL quarterback), but if the Pats really wanted this guy they certainly had the picks to move up -- although I also read plenty of speculation that nobody ahead of the Pats would deal with them. Harvin may turn out to be an effective NFL receiver (although how he is going to do that in Minnesota, where there is no quarterback, escapes me), but the penchant for smoking weed when he knows he's going to be tested aside, this kid has "attitude problem" written all over him.
    Posted by prairiemike


    Dr Z... what a freakin' oke! He couldn;t predict a SB winner 1 hur AFTER the gave was over. I read his predictions because it's tough to find a MAD magazine in most airports. DR Z's articles = good bathroom stall rading material.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from AZPAT. Show AZPAT's posts

    Re: The Pats wanted Harvin!

    The irony of this post is awesome. You might not get it, but I find that someone taking a pro-marijuana stance who can't correctly punctuate a sentence is perfect irony.  Out of curiosity, just what do your co-workers do? Any company I've worked for where I had even the slightest bit of responsibility tested their workers for drugs. This includes major banking corporations and the US Government. Where do you find a job where they don't care what condition you show up in?
    Posted by EnochRoot


    Cab driver or a NY Jets front office. No, really, see: Al Davis, Oakland Raisera" for proof. He has a built in excuse, though. He can always claim he's senile instead of OUI.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from prairiemike. Show prairiemike's posts

    Re: The Pats wanted Harvin!

    In this day and age, I'm surprised that there is any job, anywhere that doesn't at least do an initial-hire drug screening. And I'm also a little bit concerned, reading through the various comment sections on this website, about the number of people who seem to think that correct spelling and proper punctuation are not important aspects of communication in this wonderful technological age in which we live. Personally, I think it bodes ill for the future of our society.


    Either that or I'm just old and too much set in my ways.   Cool

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from passedball. Show passedball's posts

    Re: The Pats wanted Harvin!

    According to CBS sports, the Pats wanted Percy Harvin.   Explains why they chose to just trade out of the 1st rd when Minn took him.  I'm happy they didn't get Harvin, this guy tested positive for marijuana use just before the combine, any player lacking that much discipline is bound to get into more trouble. http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/11688781
    Posted by Grogan77


    That's more NY media BS. BB already stated that WR's are hit & miss with the really great college receivers. So they aren't worth a first round pick.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from joe81b. Show joe81b's posts

    Re: The Pats wanted Harvin!

    bub, That pick was a head scratcher for me. Why draft a WR when you have no freakin' QB? They alrady have a high powered running game, which is winning games for them (their passing game, such as it is, sets up the run). CHildress is a blowhard; says anything to make himself feel good. Good luck to him, in that division, now that the Bears seems to have a legit QB for the first time in 50+ years. Even if he can "convince" that other liar, Brent "I'm Retiring For Good, Thsi Time" Favre, he's hasn't upgraded the QB position enough to make it scary. SUr, Brent will toss a few TD's, but will also follow that up with just about as many INT's.
    Posted by AZPAT


    Who is Brent Favre?  Brett Favre's cousin?
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from bubthegrub2. Show bubthegrub2's posts

    Re: The Pats wanted Harvin!

    In this day and age, I'm surprised that there is any job, anywhere that doesn't at least do an initial-hire drug screening. And I'm also a little bit concerned, reading through the various comment sections on this website, about the number of people who seem to think that correct spelling and proper punctuation are not important aspects of communication in this wonderful technological age in which we live. Personally, I think it bodes ill for the future of our society. Either that or I'm just old and too much set in my ways.  
    Posted by prairiemike



    90% of employers do make you take a pre hire test. But once that's passed, most won't make you take random tests unless the government specifies it (i.e. drivers). They're too expensive. Where I work if you're injured on the job they test you, and I'm sure that's common for insurance purposes. But it's also true most employers don't give a rat's azz if you smoke weed...as long as it's not on the job. I once had a job out in CA where the owner asked to borrow my zippo to fire up a joint (the bastid didn't want to share, though). And I'm with you on the spelling thing. I read all my e-mails before I send them, and even will edit a post here if I did a typo. The lack of literacy now in the workplace is atrocious! I won't call people out for it, but if a corporate manager sends a communication (which is often a documentation of some decision) and he can't spell or use coherent sentences it's troubling. Like they say the nuts running the asylum (that's what it's like at my work, which is a global billion dollar company). Here you can usually tell who is making typos and who is simply illiterate. I guess I'm an oldtimer, too.

    EDIT: Guess I shouldn't have blazed up before posting! Had to go back and fix atrocious!!!!!
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from unclealfie. Show unclealfie's posts

    Re: The Pats wanted Harvin!

    there's nothign wrong with smoking marijuana, i know plenty of co-workers who do and they do their jobs just fine, why should athletes be any different?
    Posted by scauma82


    If you don't understand the difference you shouldn't be posting on this site.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Trox1. Show Trox1's posts

    Re: The Pats wanted Harvin!

    If you don't understand the difference you shouldn't be posting on this site.
    Posted by unclealfie



    What exactly is the difference?  Is smoking a blunt in the offseason going to affect a players performance?  Is blazing occasionally during the season going to affect their performance? Did it affect David Givens performance when he was here? How about Kevin Faulk's?  While I agree if it was more than an occasional thing it may negatively impact the way they performed, but no more so and probably less than consuming alcohol.  Athletes have very stressful jobs. Who the hell are you or I to judge them on something so trivial as smoking a little weed?
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share