Skip to main content

Originally Posted by boxedup:
 

There's no question the pattern is a concern, but he is still very young and it's premature to ostracize him for his mistakes. 

 

The Packers aren't ignoring Colt's past, they're just giving him a chance to demonstrate he has moved beyond it.

His behavior patterns may be due to the patterns he's seen growing up and in college. His father left him....and then so did his father-figure coach Chip Kelly when left to coach the Eagles. That impacts a young man in so many ways and at a critical juncture in his life as he morphs into an adult

 

His behavior pattern was "allowed" because of his great talent....so the lessons he's learned are that he can't count on anyone, and that no matter what you do you'll always be able to play football because of great talent - his behaviors didn't seem to have consequences

 

Wish him well. If it all worked out gloriously, I could see him becoming the next Kuhn ( not mentally, yet ) in lining up in the backfield and being a threat to run, block, catch or pass pro. That's just looking at it from a purely physical and athletic point of view and what Kuhn offers is obviously much more cerebral

 

But I wouldn't mind having this beast as Rodgers personal protector IF he can make the leap. No more late hits on Aaron or they'll have to answer to Colt 45.

 

 

This kid is very talented, any team that needed a TE would have given him a chance. There's no team made up 100% of choir boys, there are jerks and thugs and immaturity on all 32 teams. You think Saint Belichick didn't know Aaron Hernandez had some kind of shady background? And he knew about Ryan Mallett's drug usage before the draft. Ozzie Newsome knew Rolando McClain's background when he signed him and also Bryant McKinnie's. Like the Colt Lyerla situation, it's a low risk/high reward situation. Some seem to think it makes GB look bad to sign him or GB will look bad if he screws up, but right now GB is the magnanimous team that gave him a 2nd chance and combined with the minimal investment, GB won't look bad no matter what happens. 

Originally Posted by phaedrus:

I don't know what happened at Sandy Hook, but the event is full of anomalies, so he gets a pass from me on that one.

 

Gun issue could be a man standing up for his principles - even at a huge cost.

 

Cocaine?  That's another story.

I think you got it backwards: he is subject to random testing.  He uses, he's gone.  Easy as pie.

 

If he's a whack job, that's your different story.

 

Originally Posted by Pistol GB:
Originally Posted by phaedrus:

I don't know what happened at Sandy Hook, but the event is full of anomalies, so he gets a pass from me on that one.

 

Gun issue could be a man standing up for his principles - even at a huge cost.

 

Cocaine?  That's another story.

I think you got it backwards: he is subject to random testing.  He uses, he's gone.  Easy as pie.

 

If he's a whack job, that's your different story.

 

Just to be clear, the context of my reply was someone offering why he may not be in favor of the guy being offered a chance.

 

It seems to me your context is the criteria for banishment from the league.

 

Apples and oranges though I appreciate there is some overlap.

Originally Posted by Tdog:

I'm rooting for him to succeed and bring success to both the Green Bay Packers and more importantly himself.  is that rong? cuz I'm still gonna do it.

 

 

Of course not.  Hell, I'm going to root for the turd too.  At least he has the excuse of being young and dumb unlike others who regurgitate conspiracy idiocy.

Last edited by Henry

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×