DFT

Absolutely. The “shake it off and get back in there” kids are the target audience. In a rough estimation, it’s suspected that nearly 65% of high school players transitioning to college have had either an unknown or undocumented concussion. Ask any scout, personnel guy or medical rep assigned to the transition (high school to college & college to Pros), and they’ll give you a well-rounded list of flags they look for. This is gaining more and more steam and rightfully so. What’s happening to these gentlemen after football, is horrific. It shouldn’t be a focus on the fame of the player. It truly needs to be a broad-based application. Really hoping for some big things over the next 2 years that are being worked on. the approval of Memantine to treat concussions and concussion-based atrophy was huge, as well. Big things!!!👍

Right now, Neuroquant technology can help us see atrophied states in comparison. Through Duke and Wake Forest, we’re seeing incredible advancements in early detection of CTE and Alzheimer’s disease Through Neuroquant, but admittedly, it’s still VERY early. There’s so much emphasis on this and for good reason. Great post!

Exactly. When we start making convenient assumptions based off our opinion (in this case, heavily swayed) and not based solely off of facts presented, well... We become the cancel culture we all hate. The danger of quoting “anonymous sources”, is it doesn’t allow the accused the chance to confront the accuser. It’s a he-said she-said scenario where the only stakes in it belong to the accused. While this doesn’t constitute illegal, our 6th amendment was put into place for this very reason. What’s happening today is people are bypassing the “proof” aspect when accusing. It’s called a baseless claim. No witnesses or evidence, yet those who don’t like the accused say “Guilty!”. I Know Kemp and others are trolling, but I truly hope those that have already decided guilt for someone they hate because it “sounds right”, never find themselves in such a scenario.

I believe otherwise which led me to change my stance several months ago when it seemed to come to a head. I believe that what is motivating Jill is something much more unfortunate. She wants to protect her husband’s and son’s livelihoods and legacies from what could be uncovered by the Ukraine investigations and other political controversies that are unraveling in front of America. It’s the only thing I can put even limited sense around her reasoning to be so complicit.

Name calling those that choose to believe the OVERWHELMING evidence that the reports are false, isn’t the best way to be civil and have a conversation, Kemp. I say this having had to remove your post from my ignore list given your propensity to spam your point across multiple threads. You choose to believe the reports you wish. Some choose to believe the evidence that says otherwise. It makes none a “moron”.

Someone got it!!!! #winning

I won’t speculate, but I definitely recognize it. It’s on par with what I see in my profession among college players and pros. My political beliefs will never outweigh my humanity. My heart genuinely hurts for Mr Biden. I hate what I’m seeing. In my conversations (here and elsewhere) about the reality of CTE and what the average retired NFL player is known to endure, my passion gets the better of me because I’m “close to the content” where the average fan’s opinion may be more powerful than their understanding of the subject. That’s what I’m seeing with Mr Biden. Regardless of his flaws, faults or my perceptions of how evil it is to use him this way (my opinion), I genuinely hope that what I suspect is wrong. But it’s getting harder and harder to watch and not be assured otherwise.

I find some of what he (and you) say and share to be disgusting and baseless. That’s the unfortunate encounter one can expect to find on a message board. But I thank and greatly respect Tiberius for his service. With that said, I see a lot of humility in this thread. My hope is you’ll join in sharing that sorely-missed quality among political conversationalists.

I welcome any and all opposing views and thoughts. I’ve admittedly stooped lower than I thought I could, engaging with posters who had ulterior motives (trolling). It’s unfortunate, but it’s what happened at BBB as well. Personally, I think the mods do an outstanding job on these forums. I mean that wholeheartedly. My hope going forward is for ppp to be the behind-screen release for many of us that can’t have these conversations in person. I’m committed to doing my part as long as I’m here. It doesn’t seem to be too forgone for us to get back to being civil in accordance with the rules. But admittedly, I’ve watched us get off track and at times, found myself being swept in the current instead of rising against it. I respect all viewpoints and won’t need that respect to give it. Personally, I just need to better adhere to the “ignore” list I’ve created and with respect to you all, be a better contributor. I’ve very much enjoyed my brief time here and thank everyone for what they do. 👍

Agree. and this comment especially is inaccurate to say the least... Criminal records are not just plentiful for those who unfortunately lost their lives that evening, but they’re awful to read. Did they warrant their death however? Of course not. But previous crimes committed are included always, to reference a person’s character and propensities. And the character and propensities of these victims (may they still Rest In Peace) was enough for me to delete my first thread in ppp, mourning them. Rittenhouse's victims do not appear to have had any record, and even if they did, he couldn't have known that at the time. You cannot insist a shoot was justified AFTER the fact because "that person was a criminal." Criminals have rights too, whether you like it or not, and it is enshrined in the very documents that built our country. If you don't like the constitution and bill ofrights, I don't know what to tell you.

Wow!!!!!

Oh C-section...

Hoax.

your thread title looks like an Antifa rally.

Still doesn’t acknowledge question; votes for candidate who also avoids questions

Logs back in; still doesn’t acknowledge question.

Billstime has entered the chat...

Accuses person of being weak; spends 4 years crying about “allegedly” weak person.

Hoax

Doesn’t acknowledge question; logs in to side personality.

If the sins of Politicians were visible under luminol, I’d wager you would gladly sleep well on Trumps mattress. Give me the candidate whose worst qualities are visible.

Asks a question (in the title); forgot where he put it; denies it; votes for Biden.

Asks a question; claims it as “inviting discussion”.

Asks a question of the group; doesn’t like responses and answers his own question.

I’m starting to think C-section has a bit of a schoolyard crush. It’s kinda gross, but not like “Pelosi breaking rules but it’s ok she’s on our side”, gross. I wouldn’t stand up however, unless you’ve given yourself ample time to stop thinking of Trump, because... well... nobody will believe it’s a pattern in the pleats.