Eric Gordon

#201
#201
chattavol420 said:
Our current president has admitted to being a recreational pot smoker throughout his college years. And it impaired him so much he only finished at the top of his class...at Harvard law school. What a waste of talent.
Click to expand...

Ok, the current President was a bad example. (again this can explain some of his decisions)

Obviously, you are going to point out the exceptions. i.e. Bryce Brown was a bad 5 Star athlete so all 5 star athletes are bad

pg65.gif


*Definitions:
Education: Less than a high school education
Psychiatric: Diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder or severe depressive symptoms
Domestic violence: Severe physical domestic violence
Housing: Unstable or temporary housing
Health: Fair or poor health and scoring in the lowest quartile on health when compared with a national sample
Legal: Ever arrested
Low job skills: Little or no job skills

These are for welfare participants, but shows that those use drugs in the same situation don't seem to be reaching the same standard as those that don't.

Link
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#204
#204
UTProf said:
1. I'm not a tree-hugger.

2. I don't use drugs.

3. The drug war is a failure and even police admit it as much an many advocate for legalization of pot.

4. What is known about marijuana's long term effects is that it's bad for a developing brain as opposed to the developed brain (so long as usage is low or moderate) -- the same isn't the case for teenagers who are at risk of more damage. It's also known that daily heavy usage like alcoholism can have long-term negative effects on your brain. Again, developing brains are even more susceptible.

5. My post was in response to the assertion that potheads were all dumb. That assertion is simply not factual.
Click to expand...

What constitutes being a pothead? Does a pothead = an alcoholic? Or do you get to be a pothead if you just take one or two tokes on the weekend?
 
#205
#205
chattavol420 said:
Not calling him an "addict". Just stating that he, as well as probably everybody else on the list, used some form of drug at least recreationally. Because marijuana is illegal in part of the country, uninformed/ignorant people call anyone who uses marijuana an addict. that's not always the case
Click to expand...

Marijuana is illegal in the entire country. Just because Barry's DOJ won't prosecute, doesn't make it legal. Last I checked, Federal law trumps state law on drugs. But rock on 420....
 
#206
#206
chattavol420 said:
Our current president has admitted to being a recreational pot smoker throughout his college years. And it impaired him so much he only finished at the top of his class...at Harvard law school. What a waste of talent.
Click to expand...

Really? You have seen his transcripts? That's strange because no one else in the country has seen them. They are sealed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#209
#209
I wish Eric the best. He posted here last summer, hope he has logged in and got a bunch of laughs from this thread.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#211
#211
82_VOL_83 said:
Marijuana is illegal in the entire country. Just because Barry's DOJ won't prosecute, doesn't make it legal. Last I checked, Federal law trumps state law on drugs. But rock on 420....
Click to expand...

It is legal in the state of Washington. That is why the Huskies are picking up some recruits.:loco::tease2::focus:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#213
#213
Vol4life25 said:
Words cannot explain how stupid your posts are..
Click to expand...

Which explains why you give responses like this rather than making reasoned arguments backed up by facts I suppose?

You don't even know how to evaluate "stupid" properly. I may be "wrong" but "stupid" does not apply since I DO collate FACTS and develop rational arguments and points.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#214
#214
LWSVOL said:
there were 7 or 8 Fulmer commits (public / silent) that Kiffin pushed out the door. He pretty much changed the form of the class that CPF was working on.. When I get a chance I'll review the class to see which one's CLK retained from what CPF had.
Click to expand...
I remember a OL named Phillips I believe, Thigpen, and then Boyd. Boyd has done well but then again statistically Bray was better. Phillips ended up at FSU iirc and didn't even make it to or through the first season. Thigpen ended up at UCLA but I haven't heard of him doing anything of note.

I can promise you, CLK and CEO were more than cocky enough that they believed they could have dropped all of CPFs commits and gotten better players IF they felt they were not up to their standards..
Click to expand...
I don't doubt that. But the fact remains that Fulmer had not been getting great recruits on campus. His last several classes were either poor or performed poorly or else didn't even make it to the field.

I argued for Fulmer to get more time until that last season. I fully appreciate what he did over his whole career. I certainly have no personal angst toward him and in fact "like" him a million times more than Kiffin. But his ending was just bad in every way... especially the mess he left. Had he stayed, it would have likely gotten worse, not better. DT and OL recruits had pretty much stopped listening to him. His highly rated players were much more likely to make a police blotter than an all conference list. The roster was bad and in decline. He showed no signs of changing that trend.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#215
#215
darkgable said:
And he also maintained years of supremacy in the sec as well as the nation.
Click to expand...
No he didn't. Following '99, UT became an "also ran" 2nd tier program. They "appeared" in SEC CG's in a time when the East was nowhere near as competitive as it has become... but didn't win the game even when he "should" have. The game passed the guy by like a bullet train. I hate it but he never changed or even admitted that he needed to.

He also brought us a national championship.
Click to expand...
And that we should appreciate. But it does not mean he should be allowed to drive the program into the ground.

To be angry at a man who brought us some great memories that we still talk about and allow those last few years to over shadow that is not worth the energy. The times past him by but I am appreciative for the good times he gave us.
Click to expand...

I am not "angry" at him whatsoever. I am also not in denial about how the program got to where it was and is. I am very appreciative for what he accomplished and truly wish he had had the opportunity to leave more gracefully. But it was his ineffectiveness that prevented that and landed the program in trouble. He was ineffective in program discipline, recruiting, and coaching. And many would also argue he did a poor job of choosing and leading his staff.

Fulmer needed Cut. Their chemistry along with Chavis worked. But that ended and so did Fulmer's run.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#216
#216
Eric

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhh

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhh

Gordon
 
#217
#217
sjt18 said:
I remember a OL named Phillips I believe, Thigpen, and then Boyd. Boyd has done well but then again statistically Bray was better. Phillips ended up at FSU iirc and didn't even make it to or through the first season. Thigpen ended up at UCLA but I haven't heard of him doing anything of note.

I don't doubt that. But the fact remains that Fulmer had not been getting great recruits on campus. His last several classes were either poor or performed poorly or else didn't even make it to the field.

I argued for Fulmer to get more time until that last season. I fully appreciate what he did over his whole career. I certainly have no personal angst toward him and in fact "like" him a million times more than Kiffin. But his ending was just bad in every way... especially the mess he left. Had he stayed, it would have likely gotten worse, not better. DT and OL recruits had pretty much stopped listening to him. His highly rated players were much more likely to make a police blotter than an all conference list. The roster was bad and in decline. He showed no signs of changing that trend.
Click to expand...

I had no problem with them making a change at that time. Was handled very bad by Hamilton and of course his hires didn't turn out too well.

None of us really know though, how things would have went had Fulmer been kept or Kiffin had stayed.. We might be better or you might be right and we could be much worse..
 
#218
#218
Is he actually "off" the team? I read on TOS that his status had not changed and that the AD was still "supporting him."
 
#219
#219
82_VOL_83 said:
Is he actually "off" the team? I read on TOS that his status had not changed and that the AD was still "supporting him."
Click to expand...

he is not off the team. he is actually trying to complete classes to graduate. But most around the team do not expect him back this fall
 
#222
#222
pualsline said:
Ok, the current President was a bad example. (again this can explain some of his decisions)

Obviously, you are going to point out the exceptions. i.e. Bryce Brown was a bad 5 Star athlete so all 5 star athletes are bad

pg65.gif


*Definitions:
Education: Less than a high school education
Psychiatric: Diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder or severe depressive symptoms
Domestic violence: Severe physical domestic violence
Housing: Unstable or temporary housing
Health: Fair or poor health and scoring in the lowest quartile on health when compared with a national sample
Legal: Ever arrested
Low job skills: Little or no job skills

These are for welfare participants, but shows that those use drugs in the same situation don't seem to be reaching the same standard as those that don't.

Link
Click to expand...

So in other words, to prove your point, you took the people so poor they need to ask the Government for money and separated out the drug users and the non drug users. So in essence, all the non drug users are people that are on hard times, while the drug users are the ones that get skewed by the ADDICTS that are taking money from the Gov so they can afford their habit....Yea THAT doesn't seem skewed at all.

Ultimately, you and your fellow opponents to the legalization to Marijuana have insulted the people who have brought in their facts, then brought in skewed reports and disputed your own points.

We can all agree that abuse and addiction of any substance is bad, and can cause long term damage to a person on multiple levels. HOWEVER, unlike "hard" drugs i.e. Crack, Cocaine, Heroin, Meth, Acid, PCP and so forth, which all have no benefits to health in any form of moderation and cause significant bodily damage after even limited use, Marijuana has only shown severely damaging effects after heavy use, just like any other legal substance I.E. Alcohol, Caffeine etc. This is FACT, and one that lacks any form of skewing or bias. It is stripped bare and laid before you as is. Instead of treating the substance as the main problem, maybe you should look towards basic human abuse and addiction. It is proven that Marijuana holds no physically addicting chemicals to it. FACT. It is mental addiction and a completely human based error. Stop spending your time fighting this relatively harmless substance, which can also be used once again in its many helpful uses as well as the recreational use, and spend your time fighting addiction and abuse as a whole. It costs a whole lot less money, cause your going to spend money treating the addicts whether it is legal or not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#225
#225
Loweboy said:
It is legal in the state of Washington. That is why the Huskies are picking up some recruits.:loco::tease2::focus:
Click to expand...

Let me get this straight. You conclude that the Huskies have recruits because weed is legal inthe state. And you gained this information based off reasoning or actual knowledge?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top