Beastly Dareus Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 (edited) I poked fun at a person with a disability? That's weird. I don't remember doing that. As for your last sentence, who better to judge the character of others than yourself? I'm happy for you that you have morals and real parents… and the ability to judge total strangers and and make insulting remarks to them. what? you clearly have either not read this thread or you just absolutely do not make any sense (maybe your drinking?). 1.) I never said you poked fun at someone with a disability, I said you are condoning it. and 2.) I haven't insulted anyone. Your the one that responded to me trying to insult me (because I had a typo) and supported the guys that were poking fun at a guy with a disability. In essence you were condoning it by responding negatively to my post. You had no business responding to my post, but you had to go out of your way to correct a typo of a word that was spelled correctly throughout the rest of the post. Edited April 4, 2012 by Beastly Dareus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beastly Dareus Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 (edited) I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure they aren't under the CBA until draft day. Hiring an agent wouldn't make me an nflpa member. Further, depending on what coverages are in place I'd venture what Claiborne has as far as recourse could vary hugely. If the nfl just tells its teams not to release it, but doesn't promise the players it won't be released.... Although theres still some expectation of privacy, I imagine it wouldn't be the same as entering a confidentiality agreement with the player directly. The person could be punished under their contract with the nfl for violating a workplace rule but that doesnt mean MC has a lockdown case (I really don't know the law there). And why did you quote a law that has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion at hand unless you thought it applied somehow? As an aside, it just doesn't make sense. Come on- read all of my post. Do I have to repeat myself for a 3rd time? If you look back through the thread, someone asked "Is there a federal law that protects test score secrecy?" Once again, I said "yes, the FERPA laws protect student privacy." Also, of course if you hired an agent, it wouldn't make you an NFLPA member, lol. But yeah, it probably would make more sense that the CBA doesn't cover draft eligible players until draft day. I thought I remember something about when a player hires an agent and declares for the draft, once they start going through the draft process then they are covered under the CBA. Its something, we could ask an expert like John Wawrow. But in the end, invasion of privacy doesn't require any promise to protect privacy anyways. I mean the defense could argue that there was no duty to care and that Claiborne assumed the risk of declaring himself for the draft. However, the fact that he has a learning disability is a private fact and has no business to be released. Its kinda like when a marketing firm uses a players likeliness or image to promote its product, the player can sue for invasion of privacy intentional tort of appropriation. Edited April 4, 2012 by Beastly Dareus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 The maturity of a bunch of people in this thread is really embarrassing. Do alittle research in the circumstances of the Claiborne case before insulting him. Grow the heck up people, some of you older people on this board are pretty darn incompetent and immature. Mo Claiborne has a known learning disability that has been known since he was a high school star. He received special help in reading and writing in both college and high school. That has not affected his play on the football field. He is a great character and a very talented CB. Also, Great defensive backs such as Darrell Revis scored a 9 on the wonderlick test and look at his play. Sean Taylor scored a 10. Patrick Peterson scored a 9. You don't need to be a genius to play CB in the NFL. Hall of Fame QB, Dan Marino scored a 14. Point is, I doubt many of these athletes care enough to seriously take the wonderlic test especially those who play positions where is doesn't really matter. Lastly, all the so called adults that made your insulting remarks in this thread should be ashamed of yourselves. God forbid that you guys have a child with a learning disability. And God forbid any of you even have children, I can sense the moral lessons you teach your children. What a shame today's society is. what? you clearly have either not read this thread or you just absolutely do not make any sense (maybe your drinking?). 1.) I never said you poked fun at someone with a disability, I said you are condoning it. and 2.) I haven't insulted anyone. Your the one that responded to me trying to insult me (because I had a typo) and support the guys that were poking fun at a guy with a disability. In essence you were condoning it by responding negatively to my post. You had no business responding to my post, but you had to go out of your way to correct a typo of a word that was spelled correctly throughout the rest of the post. If you read your first comment in this topic and subsequent ones, it's pretty clear how absurdly sanctimonious you're being. Presumably you don't know any of the people here and yet you represent yourself as somehow being a better person than others? How do you get to pass judgement on the character of others from the witnessing of one topic thread? Does it cross your mind that good people can sometimes do questionable things or that even an egregious act doesn't make someone a bad person. Spare me your proselytizing about my character or the character of others. On the topic of insults: I can't speak for the others on the comments you made about "immaturity," "incompetence," "being ashamed of ourselves," or raising children. As for myself, no I rarely drink and am not drinking at this moment. Yes I too have real parents. Yes, I was raised with a great deal of discipline. No, I'm not a "moron internet tough boy" although you calling me one certainly gives one pause to consider why you would call someone that pejorative name. No, I'm not "pathetic" and yes, I have a life, in fact a very good one which I've worked very hard and have been very fortunate to live. No, I'm not Mr Spell Checker. I typically correct the spelling of others only if they are insufferably judgmental and holier-than-thou or if I happened at the time to be poking fun at them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragonborn10 Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 But because he is a well rounded student athlete he gets a scholarship... Who took his SAT? Would love to see his college papers. He should be the test case for just paying these guys and end the farce of going to classes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beastly Dareus Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 (edited) If you read your first comment in this topic and subsequent ones, it's pretty clear how absurdly sanctimonious you're being. Presumably you don't know any of the people here and yet you represent yourself as somehow being a better person than others? How do you get to pass judgement on the character of others from the witnessing of one topic thread? Does it cross your mind that good people can sometimes do questionable things or that even an egregious act doesn't make someone a bad person. Spare me your proselytizing about my character or the character of others. On the topic of insults: I can't speak for the others on the comments you made about "immaturity," "incompetence," "being ashamed of ourselves," or raising children. As for myself, no I rarely drink and am not drinking at this moment. Yes I too have real parents. Yes, I was raised with a great deal of discipline. No, I'm not a "moron internet tough boy" although you calling me one certainly gives one pause to consider why you would call someone that pejorative name. No, I'm not "pathetic" and yes, I have a life, in fact a very good one which I've worked very hard and have been very fortunate to live. No, I'm not Mr Spell Checker. I typically correct the spelling of others only if they are insufferably judgmental and holier-than-thou or if I happened at the time to be poking fun at them. I find it funny, your the only person that found that post to be bad. A few others commented on how good of a post it was. And one person responded by on the argument that Bills fans might be questioning Claiborne ability because we don't want another mistake. If you believe that it is "ok" for people to sit here and poke fun and continue to insult someone with a learning disability, then no you do not have good character. I find it funny you consider me to be the bad guy for speaking out against it. I bet its also safe to say you would judge someone to speak up against bullying to being "absurdly sanctimonious" because they are "somehow being a better person than others." And you insult me because I'm proud that my moral and ethical nature would restrain me from making the types of comments that were made in this thread? Your the one who responded to a conversation that did not involve you. And you responded with an insult and immature "spell check" comment, which is indeed pathetic and a small personal slam. In response I defended myself. I never directed any comment at you saying you did not have real parents or weren't raised with discipline (maybe you could infer from my wording that's what I meant, but it was a slam to the people in this thread that were responsible for the comments about Claiborne). And yes you are an internet tough boy, stirring up arguments over the inter webs when my comment pertained to you. Maybe I shouldn't have said you have no life, that was uncalled for. However, yes I called you: immature and pathetic because that's exactly how you responded. Have a good day sir [NOTE: If you want to respond then send me a message, because I'm done responding to you here. Its a waste of energy.] Edited April 4, 2012 by Beastly Dareus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Formerly Allan in MD Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Student athlete. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reks Ryan Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Thank you San Jose. Give us break Beastly. The comments on Claiborne were pretty tame. learning disability or not, unless he can't read at all, he could still do a little prep and score at least a 10. Yes you can prep for standardized tests. Considering the Wonderlic is a known part of a multimillion dollar interview process, it's just lazy. The criticism is deserved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 You're trying to rationalize that you weren't insulting people when the fact is that you admonished people for what you consider their immature and incompetent behavior. Then you proceeded to call me names and again, you're rationalizing as to why you did so. Interesting world you live in. As for "responding to a conversation that did not involve me," correct me if I'm wrong but this is an internet message board. Do I need someone's permission to join a conversation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overseas Bills Fan Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 http://espn.go.com/page2/s/closer/020228test.html for example questions http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/04/03/claiborne-gives-birth-to-a-four-on-the-wonderlic/ for the report on this Ohhhhhkayyyy He can STILL tie his own shoes....right? I missed #11 because I am a horrible at math. 14/15. I guess my German Shepherd can also score a four. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrags Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 "see this shoe? It says ADIDAS!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 You're trying to rationalize that you weren't insulting people when the fact is that you admonished people for what you consider their immature and incompetent behavior. Then you proceeded to call me names and again, you're rationalizing as to why you did so. Interesting world you live in. As for "responding to a conversation that did not involve me," correct me if I'm wrong but this is an internet message board. Do I need someone's permission to join a conversation? Honest opinion - I'm guessing either he or someone close has struggled with a learning disability. Between the too close to home reaction and rattling off the protection act like second nature.... He's obviously got some connection to the issue. Though he's had some absurd comments, I'm leaning towards cutting some slack on some of the knee jerk comments. I could be wrong on that guess, but I don't think I am. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrags Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 I find it funny, your the only person that found that post to be bad. A few others commented on how good of a post it was. And one person responded by on the argument that Bills fans might be questioning Claiborne ability because we don't want another mistake. If you believe that it is "ok" for people to sit here and poke fun and continue to insult someone with a learning disability, then no you do not have good character. I find it funny you consider me to be the bad guy for speaking out against it. I bet its also safe to say you would judge someone to speak up against bullying to being "absurdly sanctimonious" because they are "somehow being a better person than others." And you insult me because I'm proud that my moral and ethical nature would restrain me from making the types of comments that were made in this thread? Your the one who responded to a conversation that did not involve you. And you responded with an insult and immature "spell check" comment, which is indeed pathetic and a small personal slam. In response I defended myself. I never directed any comment at you saying you did not have real parents or weren't raised with discipline (maybe you could infer from my wording that's what I meant, but it was a slam to the people in this thread that were responsible for the comments about Claiborne). And yes you are an internet tough boy, stirring up arguments over the inter webs when my comment pertained to you. Maybe I shouldn't have said you have no life, that was uncalled for. However, yes I called you: immature and pathetic because that's exactly how you responded. Have a good day sir [NOTE: If you want to respond then send me a message, because I'm done responding to you here. Its a waste of energy.] Um ok. How bout this for some thought. I could care less about the kids learning disability. If he foes in fact have one that you say he foes, then great for him for battling that and still succeeding to the point he is at today. But at the end of the day, I want smart, educated, good descision makers on my team. Not saying he's not one or all three, but I'd rather not take the chance. If you ran your own company and had to chose who to hire out of somebody that scored an 8 or a 90 on a simple test who would you chose? All things being equal of course. You can't say that he's a genuinely nice person, a great personality, a great player on the field as an argument because there are hundreds of other CBs coming out of college that you can say that about and they might have scored higher than a 4 on a simple test. All jokes and opinions aside at the end of the day you can get someone else with his skill, maturity, personality, etc... That doesn't have question marks. Just saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beastly Dareus Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 (edited) Honest opinion - I'm guessing either he or someone close has struggled with a learning disability. Between the too close to home reaction and rattling off the protection act like second nature.... He's obviously got some connection to the issue. Though he's had some absurd comments, I'm leaning towards cutting some slack on some of the knee jerk comments. I could be wrong on that guess, but I don't think I am. All three of my younger brothers have learning disabilities Also, absurd comments? I have only spoken up against the insults and questioned the moral and ethical nature of some people on this forum. And there were a few people that responded by saying my post was great. The absurd comments came from those poking fun at and further insulting someone with a learning disability. Um ok. How bout this for some thought. I could care less about the kids learning disability. If he foes in fact have one that you say he foes, then great for him for battling that and still succeeding to the point he is at today. But at the end of the day, I want smart, educated, good descision makers on my team. Not saying he's not one or all three, but I'd rather not take the chance. If you ran your own company and had to chose who to hire out of somebody that scored an 8 or a 90 on a simple test who would you chose? All things being equal of course. You can't say that he's a genuinely nice person, a great personality, a great player on the field as an argument because there are hundreds of other CBs coming out of college that you can say that about and they might have scored higher than a 4 on a simple test. All jokes and opinions aside at the end of the day you can get someone else with his skill, maturity, personality, etc... That doesn't have question marks. Just saying. Everything you said are very good points. And I haven't said otherwise. My argument is with those that were poking fun at and further insulting the kid with a learning disability. And there is no "if he has a learning disability" all you have to do is alittle research and you will see he has one. From just a simple search on google: http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/What-you-should-know-about-Claibornes-test-score.html http://gridirongrit.com/morris-claiborne-proves-college-athletes-arent-always-students-scores-four-on-wonderlic/ I agree, his intelligence may be an issue. However, hes a top 5 talent and has never struggled on the football field. You don't need to be highly intelligent to play CB. But certainly, it is a concern In the end the wonderlic scores of Darrell Revis, Sean Taylor and Patrick Peterson didn't seem to stop them. They all scored a 10 or lower. Edited April 4, 2012 by Beastly Dareus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Um ok. How bout this for some thought. I could care less about the kids learning disability. If he foes in fact have one that you say he foes, then great for him for battling that and still succeeding to the point he is at today. But at the end of the day, I want smart, educated, good descision makers on my team. Not saying he's not one or all three, but I'd rather not take the chance. If you ran your own company and had to chose who to hire out of somebody that scored an 8 or a 90 on a simple test who would you chose? All things being equal of course. You can't say that he's a genuinely nice person, a great personality, a great player on the field as an argument because there are hundreds of other CBs coming out of college that you can say that about and they might have scored higher than a 4 on a simple test. All jokes and opinions aside at the end of the day you can get someone else with his skill, maturity, personality, etc... That doesn't have question marks. Just saying. As the #1 guy coming out, his talent is rare. It's now a teams job to research if this will be an issue. If he can't read due to some sort of issue, but is great with diagrams and has I high iq, he could spell his name wrong and still be an all pro. The red flags raised and now it's time to start digging. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zulu Cthulhu Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 I still haven't seen anything or anyone claiming this test positively correlates to football success. Year after year they continue to give it, and every year kids' scores get leaked. Assuming it's the coaches and GMs in the league that continue to insist on administering this test even though at least a few players every year like Claiborne get publicly embarrassed, I'd like to hear more of their rationale behind giving the test. Can't link, but there was something call the Lyons study in '09 that found no link between general intelligence (which the Wonderlic claims to measure) and football success or performance. I'd just like to hear a counterargument publicly from a GM or coach that values this test - because Im starting to doubt the thing has any value at all. Fitz scored a 48, but led all starting QBs in interceptions last year. And all the "jokes" calling this kid a dolt and dumber than your dog? Not that funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 All three of my younger brothers have learning disabilities Also, absurd comments? I have only spoken up against the insults and questioned the moral and ethical nature of some people on this forum. And there were a few people that responded by saying my post was great. The absurd comments came from those poking fun at and further insulting someone with a learning disability. Fair enough. A few came off over the top, especially for the setting though. Obviously I could tell you had an emotional connection and not just strong morals here. There was some knee jerk anger in there. Doesn't mean I think your crazy or even all that wrong in the spirit of your point. Just noting how ready you were to fight on this one- which is understandable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Honest opinion - I'm guessing either he or someone close has struggled with a learning disability. Between the too close to home reaction and rattling off the protection act like second nature.... He's obviously got some connection to the issue. Though he's had some absurd comments, I'm leaning towards cutting some slack on some of the knee jerk comments. I could be wrong on that guess, but I don't think I am. The subject did seem to hit a nerve. I have a sibling with a mental health disorder and a nephew who is autistic. However as a flawed person, I felt the need to take this person to task because you don't insult others if you want them to act better. You appeal to their better nature. I found his original admonition to be very ironic… the way he chided people to act better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrags Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 As the #1 guy coming out, his talent is rare. It's now a teams job to research if this will be an issue. If he can't read due to some sort of issue, but is great with diagrams and has I high iq, he could spell his name wrong and still be an all pro. The red flags raised and now it's time to start digging. I DO agree with your point about teams digging and finding out the answers. I do agree that he may be ranked as the number 1 guy coming out as well. I also agree that his talent is rare. However people thought the same thing about Leodis when he came out too. Potentially the best CB to come out, yadda, yadda. I'm not comparing. I'm simply stating that just because someone is rated the best to come out doesn't make it a fact or a no brainer number 1. Jamarcus Russell, Vince Young and Adam Pacmam Jones all Say hi. Matt Leinert does too. All I'm saying is just because Mel Kiper says he's the best it don't mean squat. If the guy has issues reading, writing, learning playbooks, reading defenses, offenses, even handling himself in public properly it's not worth it to take a risk on that guy when the number 2 guy isn't much different on the field but might be impressively different off it. That's all I'm saying. And fwiw I wasn't intending to poke any fun at people with LD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 I DO agree with your point about teams digging and finding out the answers. I do agree that he may be ranked as the number 1 guy coming out as well. I also agree that his talent is rare. However people thought the same thing about Leodis when he came out too. Potentially the best CB to come out, yadda, yadda. I'm not comparing. I'm simply stating that just because someone is rated the best to come out doesn't make it a fact or a no brainer number 1. Jamarcus Russell, Vince Young and Adam Pacmam Jones all Say hi. Matt Leinert does too. All I'm saying is just because Mel Kiper says he's the best it don't mean squat. If the guy has issues reading, writing, learning playbooks, reading defenses, offenses, even handling himself in public properly it's not worth it to take a risk on that guy when the number 2 guy isn't much different on the field but might be impressively different off it. That's all I'm saying. And fwiw I wasn't intending to poke any fun at people with LD. So far, the only indication is he can't read. Before this score leaked, you wouldn't have questioned his IQ. Leodis had warning flags on intelligence all over the place. People can be very high functioning with a disability, but just plain dumb/lazy are hard to fix - with research we might find differently but.... So far he seems high functioning With isolated problems Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beastly Dareus Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 So far, the only indication is he can't read. Before this score leaked, you wouldn't have questioned his IQ. Leodis had warning flags on intelligence all over the place. People can be very high functioning with a disability, but just plain dumb/lazy are hard to fix - with research we might find differently but.... So far he seems high functioning With isolated problems Your 100% correct bud Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts