OT: DeAndre Levy displays Harbaugh-like Tweet chops

Submitted by 1VaBlue1 on

So Lions LB DeAndre Levy subtweeted Colts owner Jim Irsay over comments Irsay made about CTE.  Irsay has been addicted to prescription pain killers, and faced drug charges over them.  He used the bodies reaction to aspirin as an analogy to the link between football and CTE:

"I believe this," he told the magazine, via ESPN. "That the game has always been a risk, you know, and the way certain people are. Look at it. You take an aspirin, I take an aspirin, it might give you extreme side effects of illness and your body ... may reject it, where I would be fine. So there is so much we don't know."

Levy's response was Harbaugh-esque:

"Frequent trips to the pharmacy makes you a medical expert on CTE?"

LMAO!! That's graduate level Twitter right there!  Here's the link to the story in the Freep, if you care...

SAMgO

March 29th, 2016 at 3:00 PM ^

I'm actually glad he's in charge of the Colts in particular. Not because I think Harbaugh would be tempted to leave for any NFL team, but because it'll make it easy to identify true idiots when Pagano is fired next year and the Harbaugh to the Colts rumors start up again. People are honestly dumb enough to think that after coaching under Jed York, Harbaugh would be willing to go into an environment controlled by Jim Irsay. It's incredible.

MGoPoe

March 29th, 2016 at 2:59 PM ^

I know it's not the same situation but is this CTE argument from the NFL pushing back and such on vets who come down with it, suppressing info on the subject, etc starting to feel a lot like Emmert and Co's defending of the amateurism of the NCAA?  Anyone?

turd ferguson

March 29th, 2016 at 3:20 PM ^

I wish the NFL would take a totally different approach, which is to embrace good, objective research and make the information about risks very public so that players can decide whether they want to accept the risks and play.  At this point I don't think there's any question that there's a link between football and CTE.  I also don't think the link is so strong that adults (NFL players) should be paternalistically told not to play football.  Just give them the information as it is and let them decide, while working your asses of to make the game safer and the risks more modest in the future.  I actually think it's fine (and not bad business) for the NFL to say, "Look, there are serious risks here, like there are in a lot of sports and activities, and people need to make their own decisions."

The situation is different for youth football, when kids aren't old enough to fully weigh the costs and benefits of playing, but the NFL isn't responsible for that.  Affected by it, but not responsible for it.

Brimley

March 29th, 2016 at 5:36 PM ^

There's absolutely no question that CTE is linked to contact sports, but you're right that the 91 brains at BU came from guys who suspected that they had it.  So, is there a 96% chance that playing football will lead to CTE?  I doubt it, but the percentage is certainly a lot higher than it is in guys who work in an office like me.  A good estimate won't be available for some time.

Sac Fly

March 29th, 2016 at 6:23 PM ^

But they tested the brains of people who had played at every level of football; high school, college and pro. They found CTE or signs of it in a large number of them, not just the NFL players.

They also tested the brains of people who had never played football and didn't find a single one with CTE.

1VaBlue1

March 29th, 2016 at 5:28 PM ^

If they did, the story would largely go away.  Take away the opposition, and you have no story - as much as the story would still be real.  The media needs that opposite view for attraction, reporting something that everyone agree's on doesn't sell.

The other thing the NFL must do, IMO, is provide anti-concussion helmets (and other safety gear) to junior levels of football - the pee-wee leagues and (especially) high schools.  Yeah, it would cost a billion dollars, but the NFL has that and wouldn't miss it.  The return in goodwill alone would be worth it for the league.  Alas, we'll never see that investment in the business...

Cake Or Death

March 29th, 2016 at 5:48 PM ^

Virtually no one who took up smoking after the cigarette companies put a warning label on their packages has a legal case.  Once the companies realized this they changed their tune and announced the risk loud and clear.  However you feel about them, they tell you smoking is bad for you... the decision is up to you.

NRK

March 29th, 2016 at 10:42 PM ^

The problem is the NFL is still fending off lawsuits from former players. So admitting a link is not in their interest until they have the need to do so, and can make that legally defensible argument that it is based on this new study which they now have knowledge of (helping refute the previous knowledge and cover up claims). You're right, ethically the sooner the NFL comes forward and gets behind research and helps bring everything out in the open the better it is for nearly everyone. But plain and simple, this is going to be done when the NFL feels it is best timed to do so, overwhelmingly likely at the advice of their very highly paid attorneys.

LSAClassOf2000

March 29th, 2016 at 3:20 PM ^

Very nice takendown indeed.

It is pretty sad to hear owners and the league occasionally make these sad comparisons in an attempt to marginalize the problem, and that's part of what makes Levy's reply awesome. As the article mentions, he's also doing quite a bit of work to help keep CTE in the forefront for players - here's the ESPN article with more of Levy's remarks (LINK).

 

UNCWolverine

March 29th, 2016 at 3:56 PM ^

While I think it's a nice jab I don't understand how it's LMAO!! worthy or in the same ballpark as what Harbaugh did. Graduate level Twitter? Come on now....

mGrowOld

March 29th, 2016 at 5:38 PM ^

Actually I was pleasantly surprised that it actually was good.  Seems like whenever an OP tells me something is "HILAROUS" or "100% THE BEST THING EVER"  it's usually some shitty comedy sketch you need to be totally high, drunk or both to endure - much less laugh at sober.

This one was pretty good actually.

Sac Fly

March 29th, 2016 at 4:23 PM ^

That's some stunning logic right there, because we all know that repeated head-to-head collisions carry the same risk as taking an asprin.

Clarence Beeks

March 30th, 2016 at 8:05 AM ^

I'm somewhat surprised at this point that the NFL doesn't just get it over with and acknowledge the issue. The longer they wait, the more players and former players have potential liability claims. After they do, they can hide behind an assumption of risk shield for all the players that come next (and plausibly can with most current and former players - since, well, repeated head trauma is pretty obviously a bad thing).



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad