View Full Version : MoFo Fantasy Football 2009: Week 8
Powdered Water
10-29-09, 12:05 AM
"Eight, Eight, the burning eight. Between Sunday and Monday there lies a day so dark it will devastate."
"Look, if you want to torture me, spank me, lick me, do it. But if this poetry sh*t continues, shoot me now, please." ~ Tank Girl
Oh me oh my... that was a big loss last week. Bummer. My boys put up a nice little score but my hat's off to Mikeython's team. I need to finish strong as do several other Mofo's if we plan to live on to see the MoFo fantasy football postseason.
I also had another weak week (heh) picking games and I am now 30-19 on the year. Just goes to show ya why they go ahead and play them I reckon. One thing is glaringly apparent, I can't pick the winner of my game for sh*t! I am a pitiful 1-7 picking my own matchup. Just sad... It could possibly stem from the unknown fact THAT I AM SUPPOSED TO WIN EVERY WEEK! Oh, well. Here's to next week and another potential victim.
PW's Odd Squad vs. Hired Goons
Oh dear, the wonder twins are on a bye but 'purple jesus lite' is back in the fold and does he ever have a team to run that little bubble screen on this weekend. I hope he gets 50 this week. I think I'm going to need it. I'm going to probably stick a receiver that was lost and now is found again back in the swing spot by Sunday but it may or may not matter. I've got a funny feeling about the Sea/Dal game this week so I may have to do something crazy (like sacrifice a few children to ensure a Seahawk victory). We'll see... I may just be all talk.
Anyway, good luck Badger and I'm sorry ahead of time for the beat down that is about to unfold on you this Sunday.
My pick: Odd Squad, this time I mean it
11 Angry Men vs. Team Darcy
What a great game. Obviously my slim playoff hopes would like to see a Darcy loss here. And its certainly feasible. The Angry Men have been nigh unstoppable this year and I see no reason other than Darcy breaking 200 points that will slow this team down.
My pick: 11 Angry Men, still angry after all these years
Da Bears vs. TONGO
It boggles my mind how Yahoo comes up with these scores. Last week they the Bears at an estimated 122 points. This week with only Portis on a bye they have his team at only 97. Finley may or may not play so that accounts for some of it but whatever. He's still favored and probably rightly so. TONGO says he now has his winning lineup in tow and now he's ready for some really real fantasy football. We'll see.
My pick: Da Bears, cheese fries and polish sausage
Gadsden Flag vs. Flash
You know I hate to pick against a winning streak but I'm afraid I have to here. Gadsden's matchups look to good. This may be the week where Barber out performs All Day, going up against my Seahawks this Sunday. I hope not, but its pretty likely.
My pick: Gadsden Flag, I love Sims- Walker!
The Taterators vs. I-L-M-F
You know I'm rooting for you Tater but man-O-sakes alive do you have some major holes this week! 6 player out on bye... yeesh!
My pick: I-L-M-F FTW!
Wolverines vs. The Replicants
Mike has already set himself up a nifty little tree house out in the backyard in anticipation of this weeks big game. I wonder aloud if he'll need it though. Yahoo has this game as a total blow out and I gotta be honest. I completely disagree. McNabb has been struggling, Driver gets the Vikings and MJD goes to Tennessee. Tennessee is going to win a game eventually. I'm calling for an upset here.
My pick: Wolverines, "Mike, get your ass outta that tree and bring my favorite blanket back inside!"
Beantown Champs vs. Slug's Sweeties
Close, close game, tough call here. Both teams desperately need to win to stay in the hunt. I like Sluggo's matchups slightly better than Petey's
My pick: Slug's Sweeties, keepin' hope alive!
And there you have it folks. We're now past the halfway point and now its time for the home stretch. Who will shine? Who will fade. Time will tell. good luck to you all!
"
Gadsden Flag vs. Flash
You know I hate to pick against a winning streak but I'm afraid I have to here.
You dare make fun of My 1 game streak - thems fightin' words.
Just you wait till week 11, just you wait. ;)
Powdered Water
10-29-09, 01:41 AM
I thought you'd won two weeks in a row? No? Sorry about that... Must be all that crack I smoked after my last big loss.
upStomp
10-29-09, 08:33 AM
I thought you'd won two weeks in a row? No? Sorry about that... Must be all that crack I smoked after my last big loss.
That's me with the 2 game win streak :D
LT will be please with the predictions...
Nice writeup PW.
Some big, big matchups this week. All of the top four teams are facing each other! Darcy and I (5-2 and 6-1), and Mike and LT (both 5-2). Definitely the two biggest games this year thus far, other than perhaps MoFo Girlfight 2009.
Feeling very good about my chances. The Saints are up against Atlanta, who the Cowboys shredded through the air last week, and Steve Slaton's up against the worst -- literally, dead last -- run defense in football in Buffalo. Not coincidentally, they've given up more fantasy points to RBs per game than any other team.
But not all is well; Andre Johnson has a bruised lung and won't practice much this week, but should play anyway. But if he doesn't, I might have to slide Miles Austin into the WR role and move someone else into the Flex. Two interesting options there; LeSean McCoy, who looks likely to start in Westbrook's place but has a rough matchup (NYG), or Jerricho Cotchery, who's practicing again and was very reliable before his injury, but has been out for several weeks. Tough call, but hopefully Johnson recovers quickly and it becomes a non-issue.
I've still got things to worry about; Darcy's got Reggie Wayne and Michael Turner, both capable of taking over games, and the Tennessee pass defense makes a solid guy like David Garrard look absolutely fearsome. Here's hoping PW's prediction of a Titan win comes to pass. Like that prediction, by the way; bold, makes sense, and this team can't possibly be as bad as they've looked. Can they?
Anyway, good luck to everyone. We're going to have a much clearer picture of the playoff scenarios for a lot of teams after this week.
"He's on his final hole. He's about 455 yards away, he's gonna hit about a 2 iron I think.
Cinderella story. Outta nowhere. A former greenskeeper, now, about to become the Masters champion. It looks like a mirac...
IT'S IN THE HOLE It's in the hole! It's in the hole!"
- Fantasy Golf with Carl Spackler
"Man I was drafted onto a team that can only be described as a jungle, and then they just dropped me. I was doing real good on some odd team that picked me up, then got traded away to the same jungle team that drafted me! They gave me up for some old timer! Before I got my bags unpacked Ive been traded back to the same team, and now I got to fight for playing time against the oldtimer! I dont even know if I should call a realtor and stop living in efficiencies"
- Nate Burleson on his plight in our league
TONGO Vs DaBears
Mikey is guaranteeing victory over Tongo, but the ape has had enough. Philip Rivers will definitely put up big #'s, BUT what if the Raiders decide to play?! What if... Doesnt matter because Deangelo is up against the Cardinals #1 run defense, Roddy White will get shiut down by the Saints because everyone knows the Falcons gameplan it seems, the Giants will stiffle Desean because the Eagles just arent better, and Devon Hestor will be okey dokey. I think my Johnny Knox though will be better. Im 1-6, will never make the playoffs, but Im going to win more than I have...starting with DaBears TONGO punts DaBears
Gadsden Flag Vs Flash
I think Flash will get the upset. I know it doesnt make sense as you can see the gleaming players amongst the rough called Flashs' roster (those are Colts youre seeing), but Jays Flacco is up against Denver - ouch! The Colts are playing the 49rs you say? Theyre tough huh? The NFLs measuring stick (Peyton Manning) hasnt been matched to San Franciscos Defense yet so until they shut down Peyton theyll be shut up. Speaking of Defense....St Louis Flash?! I know its a crap position but theyre so bad they might give the other team points...Flash takes the other teams flag!
Beantown Champs Vs Slug's Sweeties
Every player on Beantowns roster I believe has the possibility of scoring way low on a gameday, and has happened. Theyve all had ups, but alot of downs. Just no confident stability anywhere. As Chef Ramsey would say "Not good enough! Slug take over!
11 Angry Men Vs Team Darcy
Whenever you play 11 we all do the same thing, and see who the Saints are playing. Atlanta Falcons are ranked 26 on pass defense. Im sorry Darcy, it shouldnt be so easy to decide, there really are alot of things that could happen against the Saints, but such are the daydreams of analysts everywhere trying to look important.
11 Angry Men stay cranky.
The Taterators Vs I.L.M.F.
Glad Bobby changes his lineup dilligently, hes shown hes responsible, were all equal, blah blah blah... Tater get Michael Bush out of your lineup! Hes a RB cancer with no worth make me an offer Ill give you Jamal Lewis quick, and you have time to run him before Sunday! FFS people Tater has Kelley 4th on WR list Washington somebody trade him a good WR youll never use! Spudracer must not lose! Taterators will win, and we all should guarantee it Yes Im serious
Hired Goons Vs PWs Odd Squad
The dreaded New England Bye week. Yoda barely won his, and by less than one point! Taters greatest moment by far. I like Green Bay this weekend, and am so confident GB will win Im benching Favre, and maybe Harvin too. Will it be enough?! Hasselbeck isnt a confidence inducer. Im sorry PW...Hired Goons pound the Odd Squad odder.
Wolverines Vs The Replicants
This matchup should have been, and would have been awesome. Wolvies strength altogether looks like its on a Bye. Replicants beat the 2nd string
Spud your position is 4 in waivers. I think youd get Jerome Harrison no problem, and hes as good as Jamal. Hes ALOT better than Michael Bush.
Yodas right. Try and grab KC RB Jamaal Charles cause hes taking Johnsons place for one game.
Would definitely go Charles there. He'll get carries, if nothing else.
Mrs. Darcy
10-29-09, 10:53 PM
*sniff* Thanks for the support, guys, 'preciate it :p. Just remember that hell hath no fury...
I'll see you on the StatTracker on Sunday, dudes.
*sniff* Thanks for the support, guys, 'preciate it :p. Just remember that hell hath no fury...
I'll you see you on the StatTracker on Sunday, dudes.
the StatTracker - sounds like a bar, and a damn cool name for a bar it is. ;)
Oh, I'll be there. Believe you me. But I won't be alone; I'll be flanked by Andre "I Coughh Up Blood and Still Play the Next Game" Johnson and Marques "I'm Actually the Second-Most French-Sounding Guy on the Team" Colston.
Also, Drew "I Am Really Good At Playing the Quarterback Position" Brees.
Brees has a bad day - sry
but bad is 12 points
I just have to post this as an aside, because it is so silly.
This is my starting line-up in my other league:
Aaron Rodgers
Andre Johnson
Vincent Jackson
Jericho Cotchery
Steve Slaton
Ray Rice
Visanthe Shiancoe
NY Jets Def
Mason Crosby
On my bench I have Matt Forte, Rashard Mendenhall, Darren Sproles, Jay Cutler, Mario Manningham and Anthony Gonzalez...
Crazy depth in this league!
Yeah in one of two other Yahoo leagues Im in heres my silly powerfull lineup...
TONGO3
Jay Cutler
Andre Johnson
Desean Jackson
Sidney Rice
Maurice Jones-Drew
Ray Rice
Dallas Clark
On the bench this week is Tashard Choice, Hines Ward, Tim Hightower,
Knowshon Moreno, Alex Smith, & Kevin Smith
I prefer the competitive 14 team league as you really do appreciate who you get. Im giving a damn way more about getting Correlll Buckhalter off a trade, and hes available on waiver with Brett Celek and others in that la-la land league.
Its waffling time!
Oh dammit I think Im gonna play Favre Vs the Packers. Whats sad is I dont even think Minny will win, but at 1-6 I cant trust my gut hunch. Orton feels like a sure play vs Baltimore, but the Ravens losing a 4th in a row? Could happen. Favre had a huge day vs GB in their first game though.
I think Ill be a mark and go with Favre. This game has more significance than the first for hype and history purposes, if theres any QB in the league that wouldnt be affected by Lambeaus cold it wouild be Brett, and Minnesota's simply strong as hell. GB has to protect against the run w/Adrian Peterson about, and the Ravens will do everything in their power to screw Kyle Orton up. That in itself can be enough.
Farve should do well.
I am ready for football now - hurry up tomorrow.
mikeython1
10-31-09, 11:45 PM
the StatTracker - sounds like a bar, and a damn cool name for a bar it is. ;)
I would go there on Sundays. WiFi, special tables with laptops holders or built in laptops. The local Guru tending bar. Lets do this.
Last-minute lineup doubt! Originally I thought the big decision this week would involve whether I'd have to sit Andre Johnson, move M. Austin to the WR spot and stick L. McCoy in the Flex. Now, it looks like Johnson will play and be close to his usual self, so it's all a no-brainer, yes? Nope.
Now, the big dillema is whether or not to sit P. Thomas for McCoy. Reasons for playing Thomas: he's flat-out better. The Saints figure to score lots of points against Atlanta. And McCoy has to play the Giants. Reasons for playing McCoy: he won't share time the way Thomas might, has no one likely to vulture his goal line carries, and should catch a couple more passes.
Very tough call. I like both for 10-15 points, so it might not matter, but you never know.
Westbrook hasnt been worth a damn due to an ankle injury, was yanked out 1st quarter for a concussion last game (Poor Slug). What did McCoy do with it last game cause Id assume the Giants would give him less. I say go with Thomas as McCoy you risk getting nothing. Theyll run Thomas over Bell or Bush.
Bell - Bell - Bell - ring it.
Well, obviously the Thomas/McCoy decision is predicated on the idea that Westbrook will be out. If he's not it's a no-brainer, but I'll be stunned if he plays. Last time he started he put up 16 I think. And actually, the closer I look the more I realize that the Giants aren't that great against the run (right around the middle of the pack). Very tough call.
Courtney, for the record, prefers Pierre Thomas, which might be enough to tilt the scales in his favor. :D
Looking at the line-ups, I am a bit nervous about my match-up vs LT. I look like the shoe-in on paper, but my people are playing some of the best defenses in the game, while she gets games against The Rams, Detroit, and The Browns...
*Gulp*
And... C Johnson is a game time decision. Normally, I would just play my healthy guy (Driver) and be done with it, but Megatron is a must-start vs The Rams 25th ranked pass defense if he plays. Driver has a much harder match-up vs MIN.
Piledriver
11-01-09, 12:21 PM
“Trick or Treat, smell my feet, gimme somethin' good to eat”. Thats how I feel going into Week 8, needing “something good to eat” so to speak. With only six teams making it to the post season and stuck in 7th, Beantown ain't feeling to “Champy” right now, and with the competition heating up, its looking like a major uphill climb just to move-up one spot. It will be interesting watching the top 4 spots beat on each other (especially the Replicant/Wolverine match-up, where it may actually get physical if LTIZZY doesn't like the outcome... ;) ) and it's too bad they couldn't all lose, for my sake that is, but there has to be a winner and a loser in every match-up and speaking of which, here are my picks for winners and losers in Week 8:
Wolverines vs. The Replicants -
Here we have another match-up of teams where the outcome can literally determined who sleeps the deep sleep of contentment and who sleeps on the futon with Morty the Cat beating on their squash all night. I started writing this match-up and I couldn't stop laughing, picturing how the day was gonna start off and envisioning how the day would end. Heres a little insight to what I believe will happen starting at 1:00...With the Wolverines starting all but one position at 1pm, her team will start racking up serious points, all the while busting Seds b*lls on how she is winning and he is losing and thats the way it should be. Then after the first round of games plays out, the Replicants team begins their games and then...*BAAAMMM!*... the Bots begin accumulating points. And gaining on the Wolverines. Then LTIZZY starts seeing the gap close in the score and she then realizes this isn't gonna go her way. By 8pm, Seds has a rather large goose egg sized lump on the side of his dome and is looking for a ice pack and is trying not to laugh or smile for the rest of the evening. I hope its worth it Mikey... :(
The Replicants win....painfully. Oh so painfully
The Tateraters vs. I-L-M-F -
Assuming Spud fills those vacant spots, he is still a major underdog going up against the Fox this week and, like me, needs alot of serious over-achievement from his players to make this one even close. Warner may rack up points against the Panthers pathetic Defense, but his other match-ups look tough and probably won't make much difference in the end. Romo should provide ample numbers for the Fox, and all 3 of his RBs should make enough points together to push the final outcome of the game in his favor.
“I'll take the baked potato with sour cream, chives and put some bacon on that too”. Fox dines well in Week 8
Gadsden Flag vs. Flash -
While eating very delicious hamburgers and fries and downing a refreshing beverage, the Flag and I discussed this match-up at length, and we both determined that this is gonna be a lot closer than the Yahoo projected score suggests. This game has a lot of “Well if this happens...” potential and with Peyton Manning helming the ship for Flash, it could easily go in his favor. Dallas Clark should hook-up for a few TDs and some decent yardage, and I'm sure Garcon will get some looks too. Crayton and Moore may bear fruit, and if Jones somehow breaks free on the Dallas D, Flash could surely pull off the upset. Gadsden has several tough defensive matchups that could put a damper on his going 5-3, with Flacco facing a stingy Denver backfield and Peterson staring down a pumped-up Green Bay front line that wants nothing more than to crush the Purple People Eaters in the frigid confines of LAMBEAU FIELD. Barber needs to solidify his roll as the #1 tailback in Dallas, which means he needs a break-out day against Seattle and that equals a big smiley face for the Flag. As long as his receivers don't brain fart on him, Gadsden should weather the storm just fine.
Gadsden Flag plays the role of Ming the Merciless and slaps Flash around like Tom Cable on an assistant coach.
Hired Goons vs. PW's Odd Squad -
Oh man, no Tom Brady, no Wes Welker? What is PW to do? Thankfully, for PW that is, week 8 finds the Goons facing some tough defensive fronts at his major positions. Aaron Rodgers wants nothing more than to win this game, this is his Superbowl (cuz thats as close as Green Bays gonna get to one this year) and he needs to show the Packers they made the right choice in keeping him over Favre. I expect the Pack to throw everything and the kitchen sink at the Vikes, since the Packers running game probably won't be that successful against the Purple Wall of Doom. Rodgers and Jennings should make a dent in the scoreboard and I think Lynch, Davis and Royal will contribute, with McGahee throwing in a few points for good measure, but the Odd Squad looks posed for a 4-4 record with a rather well-rounded lineup. The only thing that could derail the PW train is the Seattle offensive line letting the Dallas D stomp on Hasselbeck and taking him out of the game early. That O-line does suck.....
PW gets to .500 and closer to the playoffs
Da Bears vs. TONGO -
Well I didn't think the projected score difference would be that large, even with Rivers facing Oakland, but I just found out Favre has been sick for 2 weeks with the flu and isn't “100%” according to John Clayton of ESPN News, so that may very well affect the outcome of this match-up. Other than LenDale “I'm not useless, I swear” White, Da Bears look pretty good at most of their positional match-ups this week and barring a freak outcome of the Vikings/Packers game, should win as predicted by Yahoo. Tongo may be the underdog this week, but I firmly believe his team has a very good chance at an upset with most of his match-ups having “break-out” potential, especially Mason at Denver and Johnny Knox at Cleveland, who both can create havoc for defensive backs and could just carry Tongo to a surprise victory.
Da Bears kick TONGO in the Bongos
11 Angry Men vs. Team Darcy -
So I'm watching an extended preview of “The Men Who Stare at Goats” and the whole time I'm thinking “If I stare at the Angry Men's avatar, will his team fall over?” Darcy lets try that. Ok, on three...1...2...3..Go! *Staring at avatar to the point of passing out*. Nope. That sumbitch just doesn't fall over. Personally, I need the Falcons to rock n' roll the Saints, so I hope Brees, Colston and Thomas don't do s**t, but since I just said that, of course they will all have HUGE numbers and on top of that, Dallas will probably crush Seatlle, with Witten and Austin getting all the TDs. Darcy I'm pulling for you and I hope you fed your squad all those Performance-Enhancing-Drugs I keep hearing about that are supposed to make you better (I keep drinking this Gatorade stuff and I can't seem to sweat that Orange, Green and Purple stuff like the dudes in those commercials), cuz thats my plan this week. If you can't beat'em, cheat I always say.
After blowing a hemorrhoid trying to get him to fall over, Angry Men still wins.
Beantown Champs vs. Slug's Sweeties -
Ok, Schaub will make Buffalo his b**ch and both Boldin and Breaston will go wild on Carolina, but isn't this the week Steven Jackson finally gets a touchdown and 200 + yards on Detroit? Shouldn't Kevin Boss pluck the Eagles for 9 catches and a score in Philly this afternoon? And don't I get any respect for Michael “ I swear I'm better than this” Jenkins facing the Saints? No? None? Well than screw you guys, I'm taking my damn ball and going home. At least I have Fantasy Hockey to make me happy...
Slug points and laughs, “You actually pee with that thing?”
So thats Week 8 in a nutshell kids, Good Luck and may the best teams win!!
Great writeup Beantowndriver. :laugh:
Yeah I know Im nervous about playing Brett, but fug it Id just howl in pain if he ended up being the highest scoring QB on my roster and he was on the bench especially for this game oi! For the 4:00 GB Minn game Ill be going to a friends house and they will here "Favre to Harvin! Favre to Harvin! Favre to Harvin" over and over again like some rabid Nostradamus.
Glad Im still enjoying this at 1-6, and this has been a lesson in patience + false expectations. Loved the Tom Cable crack, but ESPN is doing a hard piece on him, interviewing ex wives of his and hes a wifebeater. Fire his ass!
Edit in - Westbrook and Mario Manningham are out
Looking at the line-ups, I am a bit nervous about my match-up vs LT. I look like the shoe-in on paper, but my people are playing some of the best defenses in the game, while she gets games against The Rams, Detroit, and The Browns...
*Gulp*
And... C Johnson is a game time decision. Normally, I would just play my healthy guy (Driver) and be done with it, but Megatron is a must-start vs The Rams 25th ranked pass defense if he plays. Driver has a much harder match-up vs MIN.
Looks like Johnson's out. At least the decision's easier.
Meanwhile, really, really split on Thomas and McCoy, since Westbrook is out. Argh...hard to tell how good the Giants actually are against the run, or how often Thomas will get the ball. This is a tough one.
Powdered Water
11-01-09, 01:08 PM
ESPN just reported the Megatron is definitely out today.
Un-be-lievable the comments from Green Bay re: Viking Favre. I just dont get it. He gave them his best, and gave more than anyone ever gave Green Bay. He was wishy-washy, the organization made the right business decision, and hes successful now with Minnesota. $12 million dollars is not something you say no too if you still have love of the game, and Favre does. Just a shame the fans take this so personally.
Ok so let's all try to have a super day of football! I'm just going to say that it does not look to perdy here for my team....and I have neatly packed up some of Mikes belongings and put them by the door...also packed up Mortys belongings as well!!! I have some emergency beer in the fridge....well with that said lets get ready for some football!
Powdered Water
11-01-09, 01:14 PM
Don't worry about it LT, its in the bag.
Favre was more than just wishy-washy; he pretty much screwed them. Though this is based on rumors, apparently he really didn't take Rodgers under his wing or anything (I think his quote on the matter was something like "I'm not a coach"). He pretty clearly resented their very understandable desire to have a young guy ready when he finally retired.
Then, when he finally does, they give the reigns to Rodgers, and Favre puts them in a completely impossible situation by coming back and demanding the starter's job. At this point Rodgers has waited behind him patiently, the team has invested in him, and they've already promised him the job. It was really poor form and left the Packers with some very lame options.
I don't begrudge him the money or the desire to keep playing, but the way he did it really screwed with Green Bay, so I don't blame any Packers fans for being upset with him.
Thinkings about going McCoy last minute...gahhhh...
Powdered Water
11-01-09, 01:33 PM
Ever notice how Brett Favre has become almost a trademark unto himself? Try to say his name. I bet you can't say it without saying his whole name... It's bizarre. All the announcers do it most of the ESPN guys do it too. It's just weird. Brett Favre this and Brett Favre that. Some will call him Favre and once in a great while you will hear someone call him Brett.
Anyway... I notice stuff like that. What's my point? You figure it out.
It's some weird emphasis thing, like he's a living legend. It's kind of like the way they say "National Football League" when they want to emphasize how competitive it is. IE: "You need to make catches like that if you want to play in the NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE." I guess this is intended to stress its importance in a way that "NFL" can't.
It's some weird emphasis thing, like he's a living legend. It's kind of like the way they say "National Football League" when they want to emphasize how competitive it is. IE: "You need to make catches like that if you want to play in the NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE." I guess this is intended to stress its importance in a way that "NFL" can't.
LOL! Jim Rome was talking about that this week. Hilarious observation as nobody says National Basketball Association, National Hockey League, but NFL is always said in full.
Ever notice how Brett Favre has become almost a trademark unto himself? Try to say his name. I bet you can't say it without saying his whole name... It's bizarre. All the announcers do it most of the ESPN guys do it too. It's just weird. Brett Favre this and Brett Favre that. Some will call him Favre and once in a great while you will hear someone call him Brett.
Anyway... I notice stuff like that. What's my point? You figure it out.
Ah! The mystique vs the reality of his ability. I hate to tell you all something, but Brett Favre (oh i just did it!) has always played ugly football. His game vs Pittsburgh last week wasnt the worst Ive ever seen him, and I mean going back 5-10 yrs even.
Is Brett better than any QB the Vikings have had the past 20 yrs? I think so because in comparison Daunte Culpepper didnt have that many years of good ball in him. My gut is telling me not to play him so Im gonna.
Think I'm going McCoy. Really torn here, as the Giants have actually given up more fantasy points per game than the Falcons, but the Eagles don't run the ball a lot. But with Thomas probably falling in the 12-15 carry range, McCoy's chances of getting at least 10 points -- and of going off for 25 or something -- are probably better. Crazy tough call, but McCoy it is.
Re: Culpepper. Whether or not he had lots of great years in him is beside the point, isn't it? Favre (I did it!) isn't going to play for them for many years, either, because he's 40. They're not getting the 1998 Favre, so the comparison should be the actual production they'll get, and Culpepper gave them a few really great years. Favre is probably just going to give them a couple of decent ones.
WBadger
11-01-09, 01:56 PM
I will sacrifice a Fantasy Football loss just to see the Packers win today.
That's dedication, people.
WBadger
11-01-09, 02:41 PM
Alright, so the first time I don't start Terrell Owens, he scores a touchdown.
:mad:
I hate fantasy football !
Powdered Water
11-01-09, 06:24 PM
But we love you and there's nothing you can do about it. :D
On a personal note: This is weird, I like the Colts and Steelers and another unmentioned team. Normally I would be so glad the Colts won and I would be all smiles and cocky innuendoish. I mean despite Mannings sub-par performance (which really was not all that bad, sure got the yardage like he always does) they played a great game today, as a team. I am glad they won definitely, but somehow the way they won made me a little ticked because of FF. All I can say is: I love it!!.
Favre delivered in spades, and Percy Harvin too. Funny I went against my gut, and Yahoo in playing Favre and it paid off.
IF Roddy White Vs The Saints, and the Saints Defense dont score a combined 16.70 then ill win. Its a longshot, but better odds than what Ive been getting. Ill be on stattracker tomorrow. Ill be the spazzy guy you cant miss me.
As for Favre retiring then wanting to come back...he tried to come back to Green Bay..they said no...why the hate?! Not taking Rodgers under his wing? Wow I think Favre looked at the guy that was groomed to take his spot, and wanted nothing to do with it. Favre was maybe flawed in how much he was involved in his development, but he mightve been correctly looking at Rodgers as a threat to his position. Green Bay made the right call. Them feeling he hasnt the right to play football for an old rival or otherwise is delusional. There was no betrayal other than their own feelings for him.
WBadger
11-01-09, 10:04 PM
Aikman brought up an interesting point tonight which was...
Maybe Favre didn't really want to play for the Packers. It is something to consider.
Why are we still talking about this anyway?
BOO got owned today :( Was fun though !!
Farve (Not Brett Farve) is one of those players you have to hate or love to hate, unless of course you are a fan. I hate Farve, I mean I do, not like a personal hate, but a NFL hate. He reminds me a bit of Marino or Larry Bird (yes of the NBA variety). I hated Bird so much (I am a long time Laker fan I cannot help it) it hurt. The thing is, the reason I hated him so much: he was damn good. Farve was good, now he is just fair IMO. I certainly to not begrudge him of playing for anyone at anytime in the NFL, but I do think he is chasing a lost dream. Now that being said, I would do the same if I was him, why not? Anyway he sux like the cheesehead he will always be, but at the same time, kudos to him for making an awesome carrer of the NFL and being great at being hated. What a pro. :) You go Brett Farverah, you have built so many fans up Buttercup, only to let ' em down ;).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjzSIGt74T0&feature=PlayList&p=52307B5B539EDFAD&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=16
As for Favre retiring then wanting to come back...he tried to come back to Green Bay..they said no...why the hate?!
Because it didn't quite happen that way. He held them hostage a couple years in a row in the offseason, then finally retired, let them give Rodgers the job, and then came back and demanded to either return as QB or be traded. He put them in an impossible situation which could have been avoided if he'd had a little more self-knowledge, or had been willing to go out more gracefully.
Not taking Rodgers under his wing? Wow I think Favre looked at the guy that was groomed to take his spot, and wanted nothing to do with it. Favre was maybe flawed in how much he was involved in his development, but he mightve been correctly looking at Rodgers as a threat to his position. Green Bay made the right call. Them feeling he hasnt the right to play football for an old rival or otherwise is delusional. There was no betrayal other than their own feelings for him.
Exactly, he felt him as a threat. That doesn't make him much of a teammate, if you ask me. I think you suck it up and do the right thing for the team, not for yourself. The dude's got a legacy and a ridiculous fortune; if he's a team player, he can help him along a little.
And it turns out his fear was completely unfounded, anyway, because Green Bay let him think it over year after year and didn't move Rodgers into his role until he'd retired. For all his fear, they sat a #1 draft pick for three years for him. Three years! That's unbelievable. It's difficult to overstate how much the "will he or won't he?" stuff can mess with a team's management decisions, salary cap, et cetera. The Packers were incredibly patient with this guy and let him leave when and how he wanted, and for all their patience and goodwill, he still kinda screwed them over.
I dunno who's saying he "hasn't the right to play football." But by the same token Packer fans have plenty of reason to be annoyed that he chose a division rival. How could they not?
And let's ditch the idea that the fans owe the players, and not the other way around. The Green Bay fans adored him and are directly responsible for making him rich and famous, and he put himself before the team in some pretty big ways in those last couple of years. I'd be kinda peeved, too.
That said, we'd all care about this a lot less if play-by-play guys weren't constantly gushing over his every minor accomplishment, or glossing over his flaws so egregiously. It's all just become a little too goofy for some of us, I think.
spudracer
11-02-09, 11:21 AM
So, can I get a do-over? I had family in town and totally forgot to update my roster. I mean, it's not like I was doing well to begin with. :D
Trouble on me team!
Booooooo
From reality back to fantasy (which is just as fun, no?). A few quick notes from yesterday's games:
Owen Daniels out for the year. Big blow for Seds, as replacement TEs can be tough to find, and Daniels was leading all of them in points, anyway. Tough break man.
I will never, ever, ever stop complaining about yesterday's HOU-BUF game. Slaton was up against the worst (worst!) run defense in football, but lost a fumble early and got benched for it. His backup ran for 120+ yards and 3 TDs. Against Buffalo, it's not a stretch to assume he'd have put up reasonably similar numbers if he'd been left in, but the coaching staff apparently had to make some goofy statement, even though he's still crazy talented and was on pace to put up 1,400 total yards for them. What was likely to be Slaton's best game of the year ends up being his worst. Ugh. High probability I will never get over this.
Chris Johnson goes off for Slug again, this time for 37.9 points. The usually silent Slug actually spoke before this one, saying on the league site (this is a direct quote): "I am going to destroy you." So far he's been good to his word; he's up 29 points, but Pete still has Matt Ryan, Reggie Bush, and Michael Jenkins going tonight.
Mike wins the much-hyped matchup with lady friend LTIZZY in convincing fashion, by exactly 40 points. MJD put up 30+ for the second straight game, and the third time this season. Sleeping on a futon is a small price to pay for pretend glory, my friend.
Bobby's I-Love-Megan-Fox-ers (?) administer a massive beatdown, besting Spud's Tateraters by almost 100 points. Spud left a couple of lineup spots blank, but this week it just didn't matter, as only one of Bobby's lineup slots failed to reach double digits.
To Be Decided
Five of the seven matchups are still up in the air!
Slug's Sweeties vs. Beantown Champs
As mentioned above, Pete has Matt Ryan, Reggie Bush, and Michael Jenkins still to go, and needs about 29 points. I think he'll get 'em.
11 Angry Men vs. Team Darcy
I've got D. Brees, M. Colston, and a 20-point lead, up against M. Turner and T. Gonzalez. I should be okay, unless the Saints passing game somehow gets completely shut down.
Gadsden Flag vs. Flash
Flash trails by 20 points, but has Lance Moore and Mike Bell going tonight. Very tough call. I think I'll say he falls just short, but Moore's pretty unpredictable at this point.
TONGO vs. Da Bears
Mikey's Bears need about 16-17 points, and have Roddy White and the Saints defense going tonight. I think he should get about 20+ from the two.
PW's Odd Squad vs. Hired Goons
PW trails by just over 1 point, and has Jeremy Shockey going tonight. Just needs a 3-yard reception out of him, basically, so yeah, I think he'll get it, and with it a much needed win to stay in the playoff hunt.
Because it didn't quite happen that way. He held them hostage a couple years in a row in the offseason, then finally retired, let them give Rodgers the job, and then came back and demanded to either return as QB or be traded. He put them in an impossible situation which could have been avoided if he'd had a little more self-knowledge, or had been willing to go out more gracefully.
Brett Favre didnt want to be anything but the starter, and I think he did want to play elsewhere. So the Packers organization goes thru some public hoopla, and they go seperate ways. Seriously its not like they were screwed by Brett because they did have a starter, and very ready to start.
Exactly, he felt him as a threat. That doesn't make him much of a teammate, if you ask me. I think you suck it up and do the right thing for the team, not for yourself. The dude's got a legacy and a ridiculous fortune; if he's a team player, he can help him along a little.
For someone who supposedly was ignored by Favre Rodgers was playing some great football early, and since too. I doubt Bretts a diva though the media gooshes like a rockstar mark over him like he is one, and just disbelieve he snubbed Rodgers. This is a business, and not some dojo where you take the peeble from the masters hand. Remember how good Joe Montana was treated for grooming Steve Young?! We shouldnt judge him so critically.
They dont own Favre. This isnt college football, and they shouldnt hate him. They should use that energy on insisting they get #1 a great running game which Green Bays rarely had, and #2 an offensive line which Green Bays rarely has had. Both rerasons why I think Favre wanted to play elsewhere too.
Brett Favre didnt want to be anything but the starter, and I think he did want to play elsewhere. So the Packers organization goes thru some public hoopla, and they go seperate ways. Seriously its not like they were screwed by Brett because they did have a starter, and very ready to start.
They were screwed because they were forced to deal him cheaply, because he issued an ultimatum. They had to trade the face of their franchise to another team. That's a big deal; this stuff matters. And, again, a lot of decisions about roster management, salary caps, etc., will be inevitably affected by any significant player's presence or lack thereof, let alone someone like Favre.
You can make a pretty good case that they let Favre leave when he was good and ready to avoid all that craziness, and then it happened anyway. If they knew Favre was just going to run off anyway, they might have opted to play Rodgers a lot earlier. Instead, they gave Favre a lot of flexibility and courtesy...which he did not extend back to them.
For someone who supposedly was ignored by Favre Rodgers was playing some great football early, and since too. I doubt Bretts a diva though the media gooshes like a rockstar mark over him like he is one, and just disbelieve he snubbed Rodgers. This is a business, and not some dojo where you take the peeble from the masters hand. Remember how good Joe Montana was treated for grooming Steve Young?! We shouldnt judge him so critically.
Sure we should; refusing to help along a young player because you feel threatened by them is pretty selfish behavior, and in Favre's case it's also just dumb. After the first two years you'd think he'd have realized that they weren't forcing him out.
Helping younger players along is something we praise veterans for, sure, but it's also expected. A young, promising QB that the Packers had invested a 1st round draft pick waited patientily for three years while Favre figured out what he wanted to do. They gave him all the time in the world to leave how and when he wanted; expecting him to actually, you know, do what's best for the team while he's playing for them isn't unreasonable.
Anyway, Rodgers played great early, but who's to say he wouldn't have played better? He may have done it in spite of Favre. Not that this is really relevant, anyway, because nobody thinks Brett Favre ignored Aaron Rodgers because he thought it would help him develop better.
They dont own Favre. This isnt college football, and they shouldnt hate him. They should use that energy on insisting they get #1 a great running game which Green Bays rarely had, and #2 an offensive line which Green Bays rarely has had. Both rerasons why I think Favre wanted to play elsewhere too.
I don't think being mad at Favre takes any "energy" away from improving the rest of the team. But you know what does? Having no idea if your star QB and presumably highest-paid player is going to come back for, like, two or three straight seasons. That makes it awfully hard to plan long-term.
I dont know Yoda. I admit Favre could have handled his exit alot better, but my point is Green Bay is still overreacting and carrying on needlessly. IF Rodgers wasnt ready that might have been the case. Facts were he was ready, and played better football than Favre when he was with the Jets. Wheres the deep gaping wound left behind by Favre?! Its in their head is where. No the organization wasnt like Al Davis, but too he gave more to Green Bay than any one player ever gave a franchise - ever.
After winning a superbowl Brett comes clean about painkiller addiction, in a sport thats riddled with it btw, and that maybe the most glaring bit of evidence that he isnt a self absorbed take machine. He was and always will be a stand up guy. Green Bay needs to forgive, get over it, and build a friggin team thats super bowl worthy. When Favre was their quarterback the organization seemed unmotivated to improve in other areas. He was getting the snot kicked out of him for years, always started, and hell he even played a season with a broken finger. He couldnt give them any more than what he did. He only had (or has - thats debatable) a few years left, and he wanted to play for another organization imo.
I laugh at how the broadcasters fawn over Favre, but I also laugh at his detractors. Soon there wont be any old guys out there that will play hurt, and show love for the game. When he does retire he will be missed, and Im glad hes finding success on a team thats a real super bowl contender. He deserves it.
Powdered Water
11-02-09, 08:25 PM
I wonder if you really know what it means to be a fan sometimes Tongo. Saying Packers fans just need to "get over it" doesn't wash.
I can speak for myself because I've seen several good to great players leave Seattle over the years. Some for good reasons and some for the wrong reasons. I am still bitter over several departures and may never get over it. I am a fan. Short for fanatic, look it up. Fans are unreasonable, some to the extreme. That's what makes us fans. I contend that if you don't have some deep seated issues like this in your personal closet somewhere then you're not really a fan. You're an outsider or a band wagon guy. Which is fine too. There's plenty of room for those types but they rarely understand how painful it is to be so emotionally invested in a team.
Sports teams WILL break your heart. Die hard fans know this and live with it. But to expect them all to be all logical and levelheaded is kind of silly if you truly understand what a fan is.
I wonder if you really know what it means to be a fan sometimes Tongo. Saying Packers fans just need to "get over it" doesn't wash.
I can speak for myself because I've seen several good to great players leave Seattle over the years. Some for good reasons and some for the wrong reasons. I am still bitter over several departures and may never get over it. I am a fan. Short for fanatic, look it up. Fans are unreasonable, some to the extreme. That's what makes us fans. I contend that if you don't have some deep seated issues like this in your personal closet somewhere then you're not really a fan. You're an outsider or a band wagon guy. Which is fine too. There's plenty of room for those types but they rarely understand how painful it is to be so emotionally invested in a team.
Sports teams WILL break your heart. Die hard fans know this and live with it. But to expect them all to be all logical and levelheaded is kind of silly if you truly understand what a fan is.
Nope! I can be a very loyal fan and not "hate" a departing atlhlete. My Buccaneers have lost more grade A talent than any other franchise in the history of the NFL. Even Trent Dilfer got a super bowl ring ffs! Im desensitized by the Bucs, a franchise that still practices self destruction, and know the Green Bay fans loved Brett. He just wanted to play for a different team....thats it. Seriously he deserves a pass, and to be forgiven the slight.
If he wins the Super Bowl with the Vikings, and Green Bay fans hate him for it that would be truly sad. Fact is he could never have done it with Green Bay again, and that's the black eye to the organization. They need to let go of Favre and go get the next Adrian Peterson. I like the Packers, like the fans. but Im afraid for my Bucs this sunday against them.
I'm not sure what the Packers are doing to make anyone think they're hung up on this. I'm the one lambasting Favre's behavior here, not them. And I don't recall saying anything about a "gaping wound." I'm not making the case that this was some crime against humanity, or that the franchise was destroyed when he left. Not at all.
The case I'm making is this: he behaved selfishly, and he behaved in a way that hurt the Packers for no good reason. My reasons for thinking this are: a) veteran players are expected to help younger players along, and he shouldn't have snubbed Rodgers, b) Favre seemed to feel threaten by Rodgers, despite the fact that he had no earthly reason to be after the first season or two, and c) Favre retired just long enough to let the Packers make other plans before coming back and forcing their hand, when he simply could have stayed with the team to begin with, or else found a way to leave amicably. His timing and handling of things with Rodgers and the team were just horrendous, and sometimes downright irrational.
You believe he simply wanted to play for another team; that's a reasonable theory, and a reasonable thing to want, perhaps. But if that's the case, then that means he pretended to retire knowing full well he didn't want to, and knowing full well it was going to make life difficult for the Packers. That's even worse! If your theory is correct, then it means he wasn't just indecisive and inconsiderate, but practically sabotaging things, rather than being upfront about his desires.
I also don't think there's the slightest bit of evidence that they "weren't trying to improve" when he was there. Really, come on; this is an NFL team, and lots of people's jobs hinged on their success. They were trying plenty, as evidenced by the fact that they won one Super Bowl and went to another, and were in contention for many years. These teams are made up of many, many people, so let's drop the idea that the General Manager being frustrated with Favre is somehow taking away from player development or energies that otherwise would have improved the team. They can walk and chew gum at the same time.
WBadger
11-02-09, 08:53 PM
What the hell? I honestly don't know why people are still debating over this, especially the media. First of all, the decisions have been made by the Packers two years ago and I don't think much can be done about it at this point. Brett Favre announces retirement in 2007, cries at the official speech and announcement. Thompson and McCarthy start building and preparing for Aaron Rodgers to take over the team, but Favre thinks that he is so important that he can just join back on the team. And then he is angry at the franchise for not letting him comeback...? Come on, this is honestly unfair and egotistical. Though, the Packers didn't handle the matter very well, they could've you know just sat down with the dude and made some sort of understanding. You guys all know this, and this is how it all got started.
TONGO, Packer fans just need to get over it? It is a big deal for a city who depends on its football in order to have an alright mood. Brett Favre went to the Minnesota Vikings, for gods sake? It is a big deal. Let us not accept the media's portrayal of the whole situation and say that is how it is. As far as I'm concerned, the media doesn't have any way of talking about Minnesota Brett Favre without sucking on his neck. The divided line between Brett Favre and Packer fans has been pretty drastic, but Packer fans aren't concerned about Favre but are cheering hard for Aaron Rodgers. You have to feel bad for Aaron Rodgers for having to deal with this for most likely his whole career, though, he has been statistically excellent.
By the way, Brett is acting like a diva currently.
Powdered Water
11-02-09, 08:56 PM
Aside: Tony Gonzalez's with is hot. Like smokin', even.
Certainly something we can all agree on.
http://blogs.ajc.com/atlanta-falcons-blog/files/2009/04/tony-and-october2.jpg
Powdered Water
11-02-09, 08:59 PM
She was just on ESPN, damn...
WBadger
11-02-09, 09:00 PM
Perhaps the best thing on ESPN lately.
Powdered Water
11-02-09, 09:01 PM
She definitely puts Erin Andrews to shame.
"The case I'm making is this: he behaved selfishly, and he behaved in a way that hurt the Packers for no good reason."
THEY WERENT HURT! Thats the point Im making! They were upset he went on to play elsewhere! Thats believable, but not mature. Sure that shows great fan fervency, but cmon this is the NATIOBNAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE baby its big business. They got a great QB in Rodgers and Favres getting along fine too.
"You believe he simply wanted to play for another team; that's a reasonable theory, and a reasonable thing to want, perhaps. But if that's the case, then that means he pretended to retire knowing full well he didn't want to, and knowing full well it was going to make life difficult for the Packers. That's even worse! If your theory is correct, then it means he wasn't just indecisive and inconsiderate, but practically sabotaging things, rather than being upfront about his desires."
THEY WERENT HURT! Salary cap issues?! With who?! They had nobody they were paying big dividends too nor will they in the forseeable future the way theyre looking lately. After their Super Bowl win and return the year after they seemed to give up on getting Reggie Whites or a real RBs cause Ryan Grant is a mediocre RB. Brett Favre sabotaging the Green Bay Packers?! No Id say leaving an organization that wouldnt let him go until he made them, and thats if he wanted to leave them in the first place. I could be wrong and the worst he was is wishy washy.
I saw on ESPN some old couple in Green Bay. The old guy had a tracheotomy from throat cancer. When in the hospital dying Favre came to them, and after the guys surgery he was in a photo when he was at their home for dinner. When he left Green Bay for New York they took the photo off the wall. ESPN asked the old guy why, and he said thru his voice box "Cause he was a traitor!" AUUUUGH! That just killed me! He did not betray Green Bay! He wanted to win a Super Bowl or was wishy washy but a traitor?! fugedaboudit
She definitely puts Erin Andrews to shame.
Hey now, let's not go overboard.
http://www.blazinbeauties.com/pages5/erin_andrews/images/erin-andrews-456fdg_jpg.jpg
http://www.bustedcoverage.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/erin_andrews_zebra.jpg
WBadger
11-02-09, 09:13 PM
Favre doesn't seem like the type of quarterback that would coach and help the new rookie quarterback who is supposedly going to replace him.
He has also been a pretty big jerk to the organization this year, which is a reason to dislike him. And when I say dislike, I mean as a part of the Viking organization. Brett Favre said, "This is the best team I've ever played for." YEAH, PACKER FANS SHOULD JUST GET OVER IT AND JUST BE A-OK WITH THIS COMMENT.
Okay, say what you want, but as a Packer fan I can't help but feel betrayed. There are 32 teams in the NFL, he went to the Vikings and has been disrespectful to the organization that he played for for 16 years.
WBadger
11-02-09, 09:13 PM
Gonzalez's Wife > Erin Andrews
:yup:
Powdered Water
11-02-09, 09:14 PM
I'm just not a fan. Sorry. She's about as overrated as they come. That whole made up home video thing never sat well with me either. And yes I said made up, I don't believe for a second that she was, "violated".
Have I mentioned that I'm a bit of a cynic?
Powdered Water
11-02-09, 09:16 PM
I saw on ESPN some old couple in Green Bay. The old guy had a tracheotomy from throat cancer. When in the hospital dying Favre came to them, and after the guys surgery he was in a photo when he was at their home for dinner. When he left Green Bay for New York they took the photo off the wall. ESPN asked the old guy why, and he said thru his voice box "Cause he was a traitor!" AUUUUGH! That just killed me! He did not betray Green Bay! He wanted to win a Super Bowl or was wishy washy but a traitor?! fugedaboudit
That's a fan T, You really have no idea do you?
THEY WERENT HURT! Thats the point Im making! They were upset he went on to play elsewhere! Thats believable, but not mature. Sure that shows great fan fervency, but cmon this is the NATIOBNAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE baby its big business. They got a great QB in Rodgers and Favres getting along fine too.
You're kinda trying to have it both ways here, though. When talking about Favre as a person, it's all about how he just wants to win, loves the game, yadda yadda yadda. But when the Packers or their fans bring any emotion into it, it's "hey, it's a business." The fact is, if this was a pure business decision, that's fine, but Favre sure isn't admitting it. The NFL is team-oriented. Players that don't put the team first get cut, benched, whatever. It's very big on the team-first ideal. Maybe Favre did approach this from a business-only perspective, but if so, it contradicts all the things he always says about helping the team and just trying to win football games.
As for "not mature." Being upset with your franchise player for jerking you around is plenty mature. Being threatened by your backup, snubbing him, then retiring and immediately changing your mind? Not so mature.
THEY WERENT HURT! Salary cap issues?! With who?! They had nobody they were paying big dividends too nor will they in the forseeable future the way theyre looking lately. After their Super Bowl win and return the year after they seemed to give up on getting Reggie Whites or a real RBs cause Ryan Grant is a mediocre RB. Brett Favre sabotaging the Green Bay Packers?! No Id say leaving an organization that wouldnt let him go until he made them, and thats if he wanted to leave them in the first place. I could be wrong and the worst he was is wishy washy.
Eek, tons of things wrong with this paragraph. I'll just run through them quickly:
1) NFL salary cap numbers are extremely complicated and lots of teams have to finagle things to get under, and not just because of superstars. Take a look at some NFL salaries sometimes; you'll be amazed how many guys you've never heard of make more than $1 million a year.
Not knowing whether or not you have to pay a star QB over the next few years -- AND having to pay a 1st-round QB while waiting for the guy to make up his mind -- limits your options. You don't think not knowing whether or not Favre's retiring or playing three more years (and getting paid a ton for it) has any influence on your free agent signings, or contract extension talks?
2) I have no idea how you're concluding that they "seemed to give up" on anything. Really, how does that make sense? You think the thousands of people who make up the Green Bay Packers, whose jobs and livelihood hinge on the team, and some of whom would be fired if they performed badly...they all stopped trying to get great players? Why on earth would they do that? It makes absolutely no sense.
3) They didn't stop trying to get RBs. They had Ahman Green, who topped 1,000 yards rushing for FIVE straight years, including a ridiculous 1,883 in 2003.
4) How have you concluded that they "won't let him go until they he made them," exactly? Why would they spend a #1 draft pick on a QB if they were totally unwilling to let him go?
5) No, at best he is wishy-washy. That's my point. If you're correct, and he actually wanted out, then it's incredibly dishonest to pretend he just wanted to retire, let the Pack go ahead with other plans, and then try to jump back in. If he wanted to play elsewhere, he should have just said so. So the best thing you can say about his behavior is that it was indecisive. The worst is that it was deliberately misleading.
I saw on ESPN some old couple in Green Bay. The old guy had a tracheotomy from throat cancer. When in the hospital dying Favre came to them, and after the guys surgery he was in a photo when he was at their home for dinner. When he left Green Bay for New York they took the photo off the wall. ESPN asked the old guy why, and he said thru his voice box "Cause he was a traitor!" AUUUUGH! That just killed me! He did not betray Green Bay! He wanted to win a Super Bowl or was wishy washy but a traitor?! fugedaboudit
He did win a Super Bowl with them. And then he went to the Super Bowl again. And the team he retired from? They were 13-3.
Here are their records AFTER going to back-to-back Super Bowls:
11-5
8-8
9-7
12-4
12-4
10-6
10-6
4-12
8-8
13-3
That's seven winning seasons in ten years, and two that were just short at 8-8. That's six out of ten where they had at least ten wins, three of them where they won at least 12. They had one losing season in a DECADE after going to consecutive Supre Bowls (probably because Favre was terrible that year). That's insanely good. The idea that Favre had to leave because the Packers weren't being competitive is nowhere near the truth.
Powdered Water
11-02-09, 09:49 PM
Quick TD for Turner already!
Oh well! If they, you, or anyone wishes to look at his departure from Green Bay as some awful backstabbing wretched act go for it. It wasnt, and he holds probaly nothing but love for the city, and fans. There were fans at Lambeau dressed in the green and gold cheering for Brett when he came out. They were in the minority, but are those Packer fans any less than the Booers? Nope. They forgave him if he needed it at all.
If Brett Favre said the Minnesotta Vikings are the best team hes ever played for then Green Bay needs to get it together. Aaron Rodgers is the goods, but he was looking like the Running Man out there sunday, and Jarred Allen was Leatherface. Their troubles never were, are, or ever could be on Brett Favre. They need to turn the page, and I hope theyd be glad if he did win a super bowl. Just seems petty is all.
WBadger
11-02-09, 10:15 PM
Why would I be happy if the Minnesota Vikings won a Super Bowl?
Don't you have any sense of hatred or rivalry when thinking about football teams?
And please don't turn this discussion into a Brett Favre-Aaron Rodgers team comparison. As a team, the Packers aren't as good as the Vikings yet. But, I only think the Packers will get better as will Aaron Rodgers. Just think of the atmosphere of the game on Sunday, that he is already playing in.
Improvement should be the word you are looking for.
I didn't call Favre leaving an "awful backstabbing wretched act," but he didn't behave well. He behaved in a fairly selfish manner, from what information I can see. And even your defense of him, if true, would mean all his talk about team play and trying to win is bunk. There's simply no combination of reasons or motivations in which he comes out of this looking like the Person of the Year you seem to want to think he is.
And sure, some of their troubles could absolutely be placed on Brett Favre. He's the QB, for crying out loud, and he had some bad seasons. He had 3-4 years that could be characterized as below-average, and at least one where he was very bad. He lead the league in interceptions three times, after all. That's the dirty little secret about Brett Favre: he wasn't always great. Sometimes he was great, but most of the time he was just really good. He's a living legend because he was really good for a long time in a sport that most people can't play for long. But longevity is difference than dominance, and he was bad almost as often as he was genuinely dominant.
As for the "they should be happy for him" part. They should be happy if a division rival wins the Super Bowl? You can't be serious.
I didn't call Favre leaving an "awful backstabbing wretched act," but he didn't behave well. He behaved in a fairly selfish manner, from what information I can see. And even your defense of him, if true, would mean all his talk about team play and trying to win is bunk. There's simply no combination of reasons or motivations in which he comes out of this looking like the Person of the Year you seem to want to think he is.
He isnt the person of the year, is overhyped, and is not a traitor. He bled too long for Green Bay to be called a traitor. A selfish athlete?! He cant even compare to alot of examples throughout the NFL, and especially other sports. He didnt come out of Green Bay smelling like a rose, I feel he deserved too though, and Green Bay shouldnt take it personally. What?! Say no to $12 million dollars, and have a real chance at the super bowl?! Hes not a traitor.
And sure, some of their troubles could absolutely be placed on Brett Favre. He's the QB, for crying out loud, and he had some bad seasons. He had 3-4 years that could be characterized as below-average, and at least one where he was very bad. He lead the league in interceptions three times, after all. That's the dirty little secret about Brett Favre: he wasn't always great. Sometimes he was great, but most of the time he was just really good. He's a living legend because he was really good for a long time in a sport that most people can't play for long. But longevity is difference than dominance, and he was bad almost as often as he was genuinely dominant.
It takes more than one person. Peyton couldnt do it till Dungy got there. Marino never did it. The organization, and management failed more than he imo. The proofs in the pudding with his success elsewhere. He isnt a Marino, Montana, or -insert statistical legend here-...Favre was a regular tough guy kinda like Bradshaw but with more ability.
As for the "they should be happy for him" part. They should be happy if a division rival wins the Super Bowl? You can't be serious.
I would think little kids that grew up cheering for him would still feel good for him, but Im obviously wrong. Just seems sad and unnecessary holding onto it all though. Green Bay is better than that.
He isnt the person of the year, is overhyped, and is not a traitor. He bled too long for Green Bay to be called a traitor. A selfish athlete?! He cant even compare to alot of examples throughout the NFL, and especially other sports. He didnt come out of Green Bay smelling like a rose, I feel he deserved too though, and Green Bay shouldnt take it personally. What?! Say no to $12 million dollars, and have a real chance at the super bowl?! Hes not a traitor.
Man, how do you fit so many non-sequiturs into one paragraph? :p I'll go quickly:
1) I'm not defending the idea that he's a "traitor." Take it up with the guy in the hospital, he's the one who said it.
2) Yeah, there are lots of selfish football players. That doesn't exonerate him. Especially when you seem to be suggesting that he's an especially good guy.
3) No one's saying he should say no to $12 million, but Packers fans don't like the Vikings, so obviously it bugs them when their biggest star plays for them. This is completely reasonable.
4) "Real chance at a Super Bowl"? Please go back and look at the Win-Loss records I posted earlier. He left a 13-3 team that had been consistently very good. And which is it; was the money too tempting, or did he want to win a Super Bowl? You've given about a half-dozen different reasons Favre left, and most of them don't make a lot of sense to me, or don't jibe very well with the others.
I dunno what else to say to the rest. I've explained why he conducted himself badly. You can keep saying he deserved this or that, but the facts concerning his behavior are still sitting there. If you have some kind of gut feeling that he's a totally awesome guy underneath it all, that's your prerogative, but it's really just speculation.
It takes more than one person. Peyton couldnt do it till Dungy got there. Marino never did it. The organization, and management failed more than he imo. The proofs in the pudding with his success elsewhere. He isnt a Marino, Montana, or -insert statistical legend here-...Favre was a regular tough guy kinda like Bradshaw but with more ability.
Okay, again...take a look at the W-L records I posted earlier. The Green Bay Packers were contenders almost every year for something like 12+ years. I dunno where you're getting the idea that they "failed" him.
That said, when I said Brett had played badly, I wasn't talking about wins and losses, I was talking about his own numbers. He's had several years where he put up bad numbers. If you're saying that these are the product of the team around him, I'm sure there's at least some truth to that, but the opposite is true, too. If he avoids blame for the bad numbers, he loses some credit for the good ones, too.
I would think little kids that grew up cheering for him would still feel good for him, but Im obviously wrong. Just seems sad and unnecessary holding onto it all though. Green Bay is better than that.
Green Bay is full of Packers fan, who root for the Packers. Which means they don't root for the other teams in their division. How is this supposed to reflect negatively on them? They're fans of the Packers. Brett Favre does not completely transcend and replace their team. They're not "holding onto" anything except being Packers fans.
Anyway, look: it's pretty obvious that you really, really like Brett Favre. That's fine. But the fact is that the Packers were consistently very good, had good running backs, and that Favre handled his last couple of seasons there very poorly. If you like him anyway, well, that's up to you, of course. It's the reasons I've gotta take issue with.
Brett Favre.
He won't quit until no team wants him.
Jerry Rice.
All those years with the 49ers and Seattle wouldn't even pass to him.
John Madden said he was a decoy.
I think Marino could have gone to the Vikings, but didn't.
Johnny Bench said he was most proud of only playing for one team, the Reds.
Mike Schmidt couldn't finish his last season.
How many times did Magic Johnson retire, come back, retire, and come back?
The dog killer Vick gets to play.
I guess it doesn't matter.
Sports are supposed to reflect real life.
Nothing beats the world series in November.
Anyway, look: it's pretty obvious that you really, really like Brett Favre. That's fine. But the fact is that the Packers were consistently very good, had good running backs, and that Favre handled his last couple of seasons there very poorly. If you like him anyway, well, that's up to you, of course. It's the reasons I've gotta take issue with.
Yeah Im a fan, and maybe fans are irrational....a lil deluded with some blinders on at times idk. I know of alot of the athletes that screw up in a major way publicly Favre is worth defending. He cant do anything about it now anyway. People just judge him too harshly, and the fact that hes not a Brees, Marino, or Peyton passing machine makes his success all sweeter. Im glad I can still enjoy that about him! Ill miss rooting for the gray haired tough gunslinger thats was just a good football player.
Okay, I'm at work and will have to read everything that's been posted already sometime later today. But on the argument of Brett Favre, I'm saying this:
I'm a Vikings fan. I like to think the rivalry with Green Bay is a friendly one, but this is just ridiculous. Packer fans have nothing to complain about. Green Bay has won three of four Super Bowl appearances, and since Favre joined the team in 1992, has suffered only one losing season.
Whatever misfortune they might claim comes nowhere close to the Vikings' ups and downs. Minnesota lost the Super Bowl four times in the 1970s and haven't been back since. They've struggled with quarterbacks and coaches far more than Green Bay, and in my lifetime, have only come close to the big game once - in 1998 - when a phenomenal 15-0 season ended just shy of the Super Bowl because Gary Anderson decided to miss his first field goal all year.
Packer fans can complain about Favre, but the fact of the matter is, Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy were right to move Aaron Rodgers up. He's a great quarterback and deserves to start. But you can't bench a guy like Brett Favre. If you're going to relegate him to second-string, you might as well cut or trade him to get him off your salary books, and let him play elsewhere. For everything he's done for Green Bay, he deserves that much at least.
And I'd almost appreciate the tongue-in-cheek humor of the mock funeral Packers fans held for him on Sunday, if I didn't think they were actually serious. Nobody seemed to care when he was traded to the Jets, but God forbid he go to the Vikings. Way to trash a guy for wanting to continue playing - the same guy who carried Green Bay for more than a decade and delivered 14 winning seasons and a Super Bowl.
5) No, at best he is wishy-washy. That's my point. If you're correct, and he actually wanted out, then it's incredibly dishonest to pretend he just wanted to retire, let the Pack go ahead with other plans, and then try to jump back in. If he wanted to play elsewhere, he should have just said so. So the best thing you can say about his behavior is that it was indecisive. The worst is that it was deliberately misleading.
Is it entirely clear that Favre didn't just say he wanted to play somewhere else? My understanding is that Favre retired, regretted it, attempted to return to Green Bay, and found that Thompson and McCarthy had committed to Aaron Rodgers as the starter (but would not grant Favre an unconditional release). Favre also claimed that prior to his first retirement, he was pressured by Packer management to make a decision (and considering his injury issues and age, rightly so).
But it's also entirely possible that McCarthy told Favre that Rodgers was moving up, regardless of his decision. So rather than suffer the indignity of holding a clipboard, it seems Favre opted to retire and preserve his legacy at Green Bay. If that's true, I can't fault the guy for still wanting to play. I just can't. Even if he played all those years for Minnesota and decided to jump ship to Chicago, I'd still want to see him continue his career.
And here I thought this subject was finally dead. :D Oh, how wrong I was.
I'm a Vikings fan. I like to think the rivalry with Green Bay is a friendly one, but this is just ridiculous. Packer fans have nothing to complain about. Green Bay has won three of four Super Bowl appearances, and since Favre joined the team in 1992, has suffered only one losing season.
Whatever misfortune they might claim comes nowhere close to the Vikings' ups and downs. Minnesota lost the Super Bowl four times in the 1970s and haven't been back since. They've struggled with quarterbacks and coaches far more than Green Bay, and in my lifetime, have only come close to the big game once - in 1998 - when a phenomenal 15-0 season ended just shy of the Super Bowl because Gary Anderson decided to miss his first field goal all year.
While I feel for the Vikings ('98 was particularly rough), I'm not sure I see the point here; who's denying that Favre was very good, or very successful? And why would the Vikings misfortunes factor into this? Heck, the Browns are even worse, but I wouldn't suggest you stop griping because Minnesota's had it better than they have.
Packer fans can complain about Favre, but the fact of the matter is, Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy were right to move Aaron Rodgers up. He's a great quarterback and deserves to start. But you can't bench a guy like Brett Favre. If you're going to relegate him to second-string, you might as well cut or trade him to get him off your salary books, and let him play elsewhere. For everything he's done for Green Bay, he deserves that much at least.
And I'd almost appreciate the tongue-in-cheek humor of the mock funeral Packers fans held for him on Sunday, if I didn't think they were actually serious. Nobody seemed to care when he was traded to the Jets, but God forbid he go to the Vikings. Way to trash a guy for wanting to continue playing - the same guy who carried Green Bay for more than a decade and delivered 14 winning seasons and a Super Bowl.
It's not "for wanting to continue playing," it's for snubbing Rodgers, keeping the team on pins and needles for years, making decisions with major implications without much thought (apparently), and then playing for a major rival. These are perfectly good reasons to be annoyed with the guy, if you're a Packers fan.
Now, the mock funeral is silly, of course, but that can't be used to discredit the idea that Packer fans should be upset with how Favre has handled things. The fact that some people are overreacting (though I think most of it is tongue-in-cheek) does not mean they shouldn't be reacting at all.
Is it entirely clear that Favre didn't just say he wanted to play somewhere else? My understanding is that Favre retired, regretted it, attempted to return to Green Bay, and found that Thompson and McCarthy had committed to Aaron Rodgers as the starter (but would not grant Favre an unconditional release). Favre also claimed that prior to his first retirement, he was pressured by Packer management to make a decision (and considering his injury issues and age, rightly so).
But it's also entirely possible that McCarthy told Favre that Rodgers was moving up, regardless of his decision. So rather than suffer the indignity of holding a clipboard, it seems Favre opted to retire and preserve his legacy at Green Bay. If that's true, I can't fault the guy for still wanting to play. I just can't. Even if he played all those years for Minnesota and decided to jump ship to Chicago, I'd still want to see him continue his career.
Sure, we don't know all the details here; I'm just going off of what we know, and what makes sense based on what we know. There's a lot we'll never know about it.
If Favre was told they wanted to play Rodgers, and demanded a trade based on that, that's understandable. I wouldn't have any issue with that. But why, then, would he retire, and then immediately unretire and demand the job back? He also said, in his own retirement announcement, that it had nothing to do with the Packers and that he didn't want to play any more. He went back on this four months later, of course. His indecision and apparent fear of being pushed out caused him to behave in some pretty irrational and inconsistent ways.
Really, you said it yourself earlier: you can't bench Brett Favre. That's what it comes down to, and that's a pretty crappy situation for the Packers to be in. His career was winding down, and they saw an opportunity to grab a great young QB late in the 1st round and had to take it. Favre decided to keep playing, and Rodgers sat their patiently (again, for three years...I cannot emphasize that enough) because, whether or not it was the right move, they can't bench Brett Favre.
Personally, I think refusing to help Rodgers along is probably the most egregious thing in this whole situation, though. That's pretty diva-ish.
We interrupt Fantasy Favreball to bring you a quick update on the effects of last night's game. As you may recall, a whopping five of the seven matchups this week were still up in the air heading into Monday Night Football. Some of the outcomes were pretty dramatic.
Here was what I posted yesterday for each matchup (got 'em all right!):
Slug's Sweeties vs. Beantown Champs
As mentioned above, Pete has Matt Ryan, Reggie Bush, and Michael Jenkins still to go, and needs about 29 points. I think he'll get 'em.And get 'em he did, but it was quite close. Pete's Beantown Champs were down just a single point with something like a third of the game left to go, and it looked like a sure thing, but a couple of Matt Ryan turnovers later, Pete was down about 3 points late in the 4th quarter. Amazingly, the Saints fumbled on a run-out-the-clock possession with less than 2:00 left, Ryan threw a couple of passes, and Jenkins caught a 16-yard pass to give him the lead, giving Pete a 4-point victory.
11 Angry Men vs. Team Darcy
I've got D. Brees, M. Colston, and a 20-point lead, up against M. Turner and T. Gonzalez. I should be okay, unless the Saints passing game somehow gets completely shut down.This ended up being correct. Forgot to mention I had Elam going last night, too. Elam put up 10, and Brees and Colston each put up 20, and I won by about 35. Turner had a great game and Gonzalez was solid.
Gadsden Flag vs. Flash
Flash trails by 20 points, but has Lance Moore and Mike Bell going tonight. Very tough call. I think I'll say he falls just short, but Moore's pretty unpredictable at this point.This was correct, as well, though it wasn't as close as I'd suspected. Moore pulled his disappearing act and Bell, while getting plenty of carries, didn't score and ended up with a mediocre YPC average. Jay held on by 14.
TONGO vs. Da Bears
Mikey's Bears need about 16-17 points, and have Roddy White and the Saints defense going tonight. I think he should get about 20+ from the two.Mikey took the win, as predicted, but got the 20 I expected from R. White alone, and another 15 from the Saints D.
PW's Odd Squad vs. Hired Goons
PW trails by just over 1 point, and has Jeremy Shockey going tonight. Just needs a 3-yard reception out of him, basically, so yeah, I think he'll get it, and with it a much needed win to stay in the playoff hunt.No-brainer; PW got the catch he needed and plenty more, and won by 11.
Pretty exciting week.
Big win for PW, who wouldn't have had any margin for error if he'd fallen to 3-5. There are now five teams at 5-3 and two at 4-4, so there's still a huge cluster in the middle. Those seven teams are fighting for four playoff spots. Points tiebreakers are going to be the difference for at least one slot, I'd imagine; PW has the edge there (3rd overall), followed by Darcy and Mikey.
While I feel for the Vikings ('98 was particularly rough), I'm not sure I see the point here; who's denying that Favre was very good, or very successful? And why would the Vikings misfortunes factor into this? Heck, the Browns are even worse, but I wouldn't suggest you stop griping because Minnesota's had it better than they have.
The Vikings and the Browns don't share a long-running rivalry (or a division, or a conference). The issue here is that Packer fans have outright called Brett Favre a traitor for defecting to the Vikings, and we can assume that's because they don't want Minnesota to have a valuable weapon to use against them in the division race - not least of which one they used to own.
So my point is, the Green Bay fans that want to turn this into a victim scenario should do well to remember that (a) this should be a friendly rivalry, and (b) they've enjoyed far more sustained success than their rival. I'm not asking Packer fans to be happy about it, or to cheer for Minnesota's success. I'm just asking them to stop being so petty and childish.
It's not "for wanting to continue playing," it's for snubbing Rodgers...
Snubbing Rodgers by being a good quarterback? By being the senior quarterback? (Nevermind the opportunity for geriatric Favre jokes, please.) I'm not sure that's even fair. Unless he routinely stuffs the guy in his locker, I can't see how Favre has hurt Rodgers. I know you're getting at the fact that he should have stepped aside because of his age, and let the new guy come in. And he did (for four months, at least). But this is a machisimo sport, and you can't expect a player like Brett Favre to just wither and die. I mean, *wink wink* it's obvious he can still play. ;)
...keeping the team on pins and needles for years...
Keeping them on pins and needles for a few years, you mean. ;) The threat of retirement isn't anything new in the NFL, a league that uses up players and discards them in favor of the newer and the better. If Green Bay thought they had a dying dinosaur on their hands and wanted to move on, they should have. I rather think it's nice that they kept giving him the start, and like you said, Favre left a 13-3 team - a team that reached the NFC Championship game, no less. It's not like they were struggling to figure out the future of the organization. They knew Rodgers was the guy.
...making decisions with major implications without much thought (apparently), and then playing for a major rival. These are perfectly good reasons to be annoyed with the guy, if you're a Packers fan.
Okay, you can blame the guy for retiring prematurely. You can blame him for being indecisive. You can blame him for looking at other opportunities. Disputes like these happen in the NFL, and yes, they suck. But it's clear that Thompson and McCarthy were looking past Favre toward the future, and in all fairness, Packer fans ought to point their aggression where aggression is due. I'm not saying they were wrong to do so; rather, the contrary. But if Favre wanted to continue playing and McCarthy wanted him to ride pine, I'd say Favre is entitled to move on. And since he was unsure whether or not he'd be able to start (much less on a good team), I can understand his apprehension and subsequent behavior. But Packer fans want to act like he was trying to stick it to them. That's ridiculous.
Now, the mock funeral is silly, of course, but that can't be used to discredit the idea that Packer fans should be upset with how Favre has handled things. The fact that some people are overreacting (though I think most of it is tongue-in-cheek) does not mean they shouldn't be reacting at all.
I never said they shouldn't be reacting at all. I just think they're embarrassing themselves by whining about it all the way into Week 8. Christ, they act like the Packers had nothing to do with his departure. In earnest, I believe Green Bay wanted to start Rodgers and hoard Favre. You don't just dump a guy like that, even at his age. But you can't expect him to just roll over and ride the bench out of team loyalty. He should be entitled to continue his career.
Sure, the funeral is silly. But I think this whole fiasco has shown a deep-seeded enmity in the Packers fanbase - one that Aaron Rodgers ought to heed while he can. And I know you'll say, "Well, that's probably true of every team's fans." Maybe. But that doesn't mean it isn't still childish and unfounded.
If Favre was told they wanted to play Rodgers, and demanded a trade based on that, that's understandable. I wouldn't have any issue with that. But why, then, would he retire, and then immediately unretire and demand the job back?
I don't know, maybe he went in and asked for one more year. Maybe he tried to appeal to McCarthy's sensitivity. That seems likely, since it wasn't long after he unretired for the first time that he started asking for an unconditional release from Green Bay. If he knew he still wouldn't be starting, why wouldn't he ask to be let go?
He also said, in his own retirement announcement, that it had nothing to do with the Packers and that he didn't want to play any more. He went back on this four months later, of course. His indecision and apparent fear of being pushed out caused him to behave in some pretty irrational and inconsistent ways.
See, this sounds to me like he was reverent of the organization enough to keep the argument out of the public. After all, he can't fault them for looking ahead. But he had to explain why he returned to find that he was unwelcome. He said that he understood Green Bay's decision to forge ahead with Rodgers, but believed that the team ought to give him an opportunity to play elsewhere. I'm not sure how making that public to entice other teams who might want to pick him up was irrational.
Really, you said it yourself earlier: you can't bench Brett Favre. That's what it comes down to, and that's a pretty crappy situation for the Packers to be in. His career was winding down, and they saw an opportunity to grab a great young QB late in the 1st round and had to take it. Favre decided to keep playing, and Rodgers sat their patiently (again, for three years...I cannot emphasize that enough) because, whether or not it was the right move, they can't bench Brett Favre.
And I agree with you. Green Bay needed to take Rodgers, and eventually, there would come a time when they wanted to make the switch. But it sounds like Favre understood this and attempted to step aside and retire. But he's a competitor, and like any man seeing his best years behind him, wanted one more shot, or the chance to play somewhere else. Fault him for that if you like, but I can't. The man can still play.
Personally, I think refusing to help Rodgers along is probably the most egregious thing in this whole situation, though. That's pretty diva-ish.
I think you're jumping to conclusions. There's no way of knowing that Favre "refused" to help Rodgers along. Favre has the reputation for taking players under his wing, so in all likelihood, Rodgers' successes as a starter are in some way a result of his apprenticeship under Favre.
WBadger
11-03-09, 04:37 PM
The number one reason Green Bay fans are glad that Brett is gone is:
We like our divas to be female.
-- Frank Caliendo as David Letterman
We like our divas to throw four touchdown passes against Green Bay. ;)
Sleezy......
http://theredzonereport.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/brett-favre-vikings.jpg
...you're my hero!
WBadger
11-03-09, 08:46 PM
You are an awful human being.
Well, I like you. Green Bay fans are usually more profane when they insult me.
Powdered Water
11-03-09, 09:20 PM
Wow, Sleezy I love ya, but you are completely off base here buddy. You are using all of your substantial level headedness here to try and assess a situation that has no bearing in a calm and level headed world. Football is the closest thing to war that we can muster without actually shooting people on the field of battle. People like yourself who try and come in and tell another teams fans how petty and childish they are being will only fuel the rivalry.
Surely you realize this. A fun little rivalry? Please. Green Bay/Minnesota is one of the oldest rivalries around. Perhaps and likely, it's not one of the more heated rivalries but things like this really tend to warm it up. You're completely missing it if you don't see this.
And what is this stuff about there's no way of knowing if Favre refused to help Rodgers and yet somehow Favre has a reputation for taking players under his wing? How can you arbitrarily dismiss one supposed rumor and then turn around and start another one in the same sentence? You live in Minnesota? Ask Tavares Jackson or Sage Rosenfels if he feels like "Favre took him under his wing" after they were all set to start the season and then Mr. Favre shows up right before the season started and took the job from them.
WBadger
11-03-09, 09:31 PM
Well, I like you. Green Bay fans are usually more profane when they insult me.
You're lucky I respect Movie Forums' rules.
Anyway, yeah, the rivalry isn't cute and sweet. It really doesn't make any sense for someone to say (maybe not you) that the Packer fans should be glad and be happy for Favre. It is a complete contradicition, actually.
No true Packer fan would ever cheer for the Vikings.
Snubbing Rodgers by being a good quarterback? By being the senior quarterback? (Nevermind the opportunity for geriatric Favre jokes, please.) I'm not sure that's even fair. Unless he routinely stuffs the guy in his locker, I can't see how Favre has hurt Rodgers. I know you're getting at the fact that he should have stepped aside because of his age, and let the new guy come in. And he did (for four months, at least). But this is a machisimo sport, and you can't expect a player like Brett Favre to just wither and die. I mean, *wink wink* it's obvious he can still play. ;)
Oh, I'm not saying that at all. The reference to snubbing comes from a quote floating around that Favre, when asked about mentoring Rodgers, apparently responded with something like "Why should I be a mentor to anybody? I’m not the coach." Rodgers also stated in an interview on the Michael Irvin show that he'd called Brett and never heard back; Favre say he didn't get a call, but didn't deny that he'd never made an attempt to reach out to him, either.
Obviously we don't know exactly what went down, but the bits and pieces we have seem to point to the relationship being a bit icier than you'd want it to be. Frankly, I think anything other than total support and a willing imparting of knowledge and experience is pretty petty.
Okay, you can blame the guy for retiring prematurely. You can blame him for being indecisive. You can blame him for looking at other opportunities. Disputes like these happen in the NFL, and yes, they suck. But it's clear that Thompson and McCarthy were looking past Favre toward the future, and in all fairness, Packer fans ought to point their aggression where aggression is due. I'm not saying they were wrong to do so; rather, the contrary. But if Favre wanted to continue playing and McCarthy wanted him to ride pine, I'd say Favre is entitled to move on. And since he was unsure whether or not he'd be able to start (much less on a good team), I can understand his apprehension and subsequent behavior. But Packer fans want to act like he was trying to stick it to them. That's ridiculous.
Well, let's not generalize about Packer fans. I don't know that we can even say that most of them "want to act" that way. I presume that's based on a handful of incidents, at most.
As for trying to stick it to them...Favre let slip in an interview with Peter King that "Part of me coming back last year, yeah, was to stick it to Ted Thompson." He made some weird attempt to make it sound like he didn't mean this, but then in the course of explaining himself sorta reiterated it. He said it "wasn't about revenge to begin with." The emphasis is my own. I dunno if this qualifies as wanting to "stick it to them," but it certainly points in that general direction, so I don't think we can call the idea ridiculous by a long shot.
I never said they shouldn't be reacting at all. I just think they're embarrassing themselves by whining about it all the way into Week 8. Christ, they act like the Packers had nothing to do with his departure. In earnest, I believe Green Bay wanted to start Rodgers and hoard Favre. You don't just dump a guy like that, even at his age. But you can't expect him to just roll over and ride the bench out of team loyalty. He should be entitled to continue his career.
Of course. And if he wants to do that, he should be upfront about it and be able to come to his decisions without making things difficult for the Packers, letting it affect his relationship with guys like Rodgers, etc.
Sure, the funeral is silly. But I think this whole fiasco has shown a deep-seeded enmity in the Packers fanbase - one that Aaron Rodgers ought to heed while he can. And I know you'll say, "Well, that's probably true of every team's fans." Maybe. But that doesn't mean it isn't still childish and unfounded.
I really don't know how we'd go about determining just how all Packer fans feel, here. You certainly can't draw conclusions about them as a whole based on scattered incidents like that one, which may not have been entirely serious, anyway.
But really, this isn't a discussion about whether or not every Packer fan's reaction is justified, or at least it shouldn't be. As I said before, you can point to plenty of fans overreacting, I'm sure. Nobody's defending them, that I can see. I'm just defending the ones that are a little peeved at how he handled everything; I think they've got good reason to be. If you want to keep pointing out that some of them are being silly about it, that's fine, but it's not really germane to the point I'm trying to make.
See, this sounds to me like he was reverent of the organization enough to keep the argument out of the public. After all, he can't fault them for looking ahead. But he had to explain why he returned to find that he was unwelcome. He said that he understood Green Bay's decision to forge ahead with Rodgers, but believed that the team ought to give him an opportunity to play elsewhere. I'm not sure how making that public to entice other teams who might want to pick him up was irrational.
Sure. But the thing about him playing for Minnesota is that it's simultaneously reasonable for him to do it, and reasonable for Packer fans to be kinda pissed about it.
As for reverence for the organization...eek, that's just about the least likely explanations, given what transpired later. If he was "reverent" of the Packers, that reverence sure bit the dust quickly.
And I agree with you. Green Bay needed to take Rodgers, and eventually, there would come a time when they wanted to make the switch. But it sounds like Favre understood this and attempted to step aside and retire. But he's a competitor, and like any man seeing his best years behind him, wanted one more shot, or the chance to play somewhere else. Fault him for that if you like, but I can't. The man can still play.
I don't think we have much evidence to suggest that this is how it happened. We're arguing about a fabricated possibility which has Brett Favre being pressured out, panicking, and retiring for no good reason. But that's the nicest possible explanation of what took place, and it's at odds with Favre's own retirement announcement.
Favre's own words are the firmest evidence we have, really, and Favre said that this wasn't about the team, and that he just didn't want to play any more. It's entirely possible that this was, well, a lie to save face or try to be a good soldier or something, but we don't have much reason to believe that. More likely, I think, is that he made a rash decision and then let his competitiveness get the better of him.
I think you're jumping to conclusions. There's no way of knowing that Favre "refused" to help Rodgers along. Favre has the reputation for taking players under his wing, so in all likelihood, Rodgers' successes as a starter are in some way a result of his apprenticeship under Favre.
I'm unaware of Favre's reputation for taking players under his wing; how's this known?
Wow, Sleezy I love ya, but you are completely off base here buddy. You are using all of your substantial level headedness here to try and assess a situation that has no bearing in a calm and level headed world.
And this is some kind of rational argument you're making?
Football is the closest thing to war that we can muster without actually shooting people on the field of battle.
Lol. :rolleyes: Football is a game people play. You're putting way too much into it. Maybe you like it that way, or you've been conditioned over the years to take football so seriously, but either way, it's pointless and ridiculous. There's quite a difference between being a fan, and being a fanatic. The latter is reserved for Little League dads who scream in the faces of umpires while their kids stand around and giggle.
People like yourself who try and come in and tell another teams fans how petty and childish they are being will only fuel the rivalry.
The rivalry is going to burn happily whether I say something or not. That's what happens when something like this continues for so long. If I really concerned myself with fueling the rivalry, then I just wouldn't bother saying anything at all. (Don't get excited. I don't. ;))
Surely you realize this. A fun little rivalry? Please. Green Bay/Minnesota is one of the oldest rivalries around. Perhaps and likely, it's not one of the more heated rivalries but things like this really tend to warm it up. You're completely missing it if you don't see this.
Oh, come on. Don't come in here all high-horse on me. You're better than this. If I didn't understand that it's a heated rivalry, then I wouldn't be in here complaining about Green Bay fans who have been whining since August. Fans on both sides are spirited, enthusiastic, and - yes - completely irrational. I'm not a moron. And you're not, either. Forget your inclination to take up arms over a rivalry that was forged before you or I even cared about football, and recognize that I'm no different than you, and that I've got all the same care and devotion to my team as you do yours.
I want to beat the Packers every year, because they're trouble for my Vikes, and that's where my enmity ends. For that, you can say I'm not a "true" fan all you like. I really don't care.
And what is this stuff about there's no way of knowing if Favre refused to help Rodgers and yet somehow Favre has a reputation for taking players under his wing? How can you arbitrarily dismiss one supposed rumor and then turn around and start another one in the same sentence?
Well, here's an article (http://www.nj.com/jets/index.ssf/2009/09/ny_jets_dustin_keller_grateful.html) about Jets WR Dustin Keller's gratitude for Favre's guidance. And he seems to be (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/254522-brett-favre-and-percy-harvin-the-start-of-a-beautiful-friendship) taking a liking to Percy Harvin in Minnesota. I don't know, maybe he's just got a thing for players who don't wear green and gold.
Look, this isn't Unsolved Mysteries. If he's a prick, he's a prick. I really don't care. Who isn't in the NFL? He's been Green Bay's golden boy since the early 90s, and he's been damn-near deified up there (at least until Favre-gate this past year). If you want to trash him now, go ahead. All I know is, my team is 7-1, and I've got Favre to thank in part for that.
You live in Minnesota? Ask Tavares Jackson or Sage Rosenfels if he feels like "Favre took him under his wing" after they were all set to start the season and then Mr. Favre shows up right before the season started and took the job from them.
Now don't you go talking to me about these two quarterbacks. Jackson and Rosenfels are a far cry from Aaron Rodgers. They've only got four or five years of real experience between them, and Jackson's time with the Vikings has been rocky at best. He got his shot last season, and Brad Childress was right to bench him in favor of Gus Frerotte, a 16-year veteran that could still outshine him.
Any Vikings fan - and Brad Childress himself - would argue that these two quarterbacks were not ready to compete for a starting position, much less lead this very capable team to a Super Bowl season. So you're crazy if you think Favre did any swooping in to steal the job. He's a phenomenal West Coast quarterback, and Childress studied under Mike Holmgren. I can't think of a better reason why he shouldn't have started.
You're lucky I respect Movie Forums' rules.
Lol, lucky me. I don't know how I'd even cope. :rolleyes:
Anyway, yeah, the rivalry isn't cute and sweet. It really doesn't make any sense for someone to say (maybe not you) that the Packer fans should be glad and be happy for Favre. It is a complete contradicition, actually.
It's a good thing I never said that Packer fans should be happy for Favre, then. What was your point again?
No true Packer fan would ever cheer for the Vikings.
You're right. And I'm saying the "true" Packer fans are the ones with their heads up their asses. Not because they're Packer fans, but because they're crying foul like JFK's been shot. I don't expect them to cheer for Minnesota. I don't cheer for Green Bay. But good lord, there are WAY more important things to get bent out of shape over. One of my best friends is a Packer fan, and although we josh each other now and then, we've never crossed one word over the rivalry.
It's pointless to fuel hatred and lose friends over something that, in the grand scheme of things, is hardly important. The Green Bay Packers aren't feeding your kids, and the Minnesota Vikings certainly aren't emptying your bank accounts. Lighten. Up.
Oh, I'm not saying that at all. The reference to snubbing comes from a quote floating around that Favre, when asked about mentoring Rodgers, apparently responded with something like "Why should I be a mentor to anybody? I’m not the coach." Rodgers also stated in an interview on the Michael Irvin show that he'd called Brett and never heard back; Favre say he didn't get a call, but didn't deny that he'd never made an attempt to reach out to him, either.
Obviously we don't know exactly what went down, but the bits and pieces we have seem to point to the relationship being a bit icier than you'd want it to be. Frankly, I think anything other than total support and a willing imparting of knowledge and experience is pretty petty.
Okay, fine. So he didn't want to mentor his replacement and expedite his exit from Green Bay. He must have known when Rodgers was drafted that the stage was set. Can you blame the guy? How does stonewalling one player negate an entire career of stellar play for the Pack? I know that's not what you're suggesting, but McCarthy has never denied telling Favre that he was getting benched. Given everything he's done for the team, you don't just tell him he's on second-string duty while forbidding him to play elsewhere.
And what'ya know? Here's a Packer fan (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/ABPub/2008/07/15/2008053549.jpg) who agrees with me. :)
Well, let's not generalize about Packer fans. I don't know that we can even say that most of them "want to act" that way. I presume that's based on a handful of incidents, at most.
Sure, I'm not one to generalize. But let's just say this. I saw more "Die Favre Die" signs in the crowd during last Sunday's telecast, and Packer fans have been quite vocal about their discontent that Favre jumped ship. Actually, it was kinda nice at the end of the game to see some Packer fans supporting him: "We Miss U Brett" and "Thank You 4 the Memories"
As for trying to stick it to them...Favre let slip in an interview with Peter King that "Part of me coming back last year, yeah, was to stick it to Ted Thompson." He made some weird attempt to make it sound like he didn't mean this, but then in the course of explaining himself sorta reiterated it. He said it "wasn't about revenge to begin with." The emphasis is my own. I dunno if this qualifies as wanting to "stick it to them," but it certainly points in that general direction, so I don't think we can call the idea ridiculous by a long shot.
Why wouldn't he want to stick it to Ted Thompson? If he was given an ultimatum - which seems likely - prior to his first retirement, then I can understand his frustration at wanting to find another team and having
Thompson refuse to release him. Wouldn't you agree?
And the thing about sticking it to Green Bay: I'm not one to cry media, but sportscasters like a good story, and that's been the order of the day for both match-ups. He might have been thinking in his head, "Gotta screw those Packers but good," but he certainly didn't play - or interact with his former players - like a guy with a vendetta.
Anyway, my comment about the fans still holds up. He might have wanted to stick it to the fans also, but come on, do we really believe that?
Of course. And if he wants to do that, he should be upfront about it and be able to come to his decisions without making things difficult for the Packers, letting it affect his relationship with guys like Rodgers, etc.
But Chris, I don't think you're seeing how this goes both ways. It's likely that Favre wasn't even considering retirement when Thompson and McCarthy informed him that his days as starter were numbered. So Favre retired. But you can't fault him for wanting to return, and Thompson stood by Rodgers and yet refused to release Favre. So the Packers are just as much to blame for stonewalling Favre as the other way around.
Sure. But the thing about him playing for Minnesota is that it's simultaneously reasonable for him to do it, and reasonable for Packer fans to be kinda pissed about it.
Okay, but if we're in the business of making distinctions now, I'd have to argue that there's a big difference between "kinda pissed" and flat-out murderous. "Kinda pissed" I can handle, and even understand. But you're also supposing a lot about why they're pissed. Sure, Favre-gate was silly and confusing. But Packer management had no intentions of starting Favre to begin with anyway. I think Packer fans are far and away more outraged that he went to Minnesota.
As for reverence for the organization...eek, that's just about the least likely explanations, given what transpired later. If he was "reverent" of the Packers, that reverence sure bit the dust quickly.
Again, it flows both ways. I think things were not quite right to begin with when McCarthy came in. There was certainly a mutual respect for past successes, but Favre wanted to play and the Packers wanted him off the field so they could move on with Rodgers. That was bound to come to a head. And that's what kills me about how fans have reacted: all this talk about loyalty and treason, but football is a business, and the Packers wanted Favre riding bench.
I don't think we have much evidence to suggest that this is how it happened. We're arguing about a fabricated possibility which has Brett Favre being pressured out, panicking, and retiring for no good reason. But that's the nicest possible explanation of what took place, and it's at odds with Favre's own retirement announcement.
Favre's own words are the firmest evidence we have, really, and Favre said that this wasn't about the team, and that he just didn't want to play any more. It's entirely possible that this was, well, a lie to save face or try to be a good soldier or something, but we don't have much reason to believe that. More likely, I think, is that he made a rash decision and then let his competitiveness get the better of him.
Sure, any one of these scenarios could be true. But I can't help but think that the one you're suggesting, in which Favre's behavior was rash and completely unprovoked, is contingent on the belief that he should just take the bench (like a good soldier) or retire quietly, which really isn't fair. If it isn't contingent on that, however, then the suggestion becomes that the Packers never had any intention of benching him, and he just went crazy, which I doubt very seriously was the case.
And if we're hanging our laundry on Brett's actual words, he told an interviewer in 2008 (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3486775) that he felt pressured by Green Bay to make a decision. Curious that both Thompson and McCarthy counter with "We always wanted Brett back," but declined to say whether that meant as the team's starter. Frankly, I can't see how it was anything other than Green Bay telling Favre that he was taking a seat, and subsequently refusing his request to play elsewhere. But hey, apples and oranges.
I'm unaware of Favre's reputation for taking players under his wing; how's this known?
See my cheeky comment above. He's certainly taken to receivers in recent years, and even throughout this whole fiasco, you haven't heard ill word one about Favre from any former or current Packer players (other than Rodgers, of course). So I would think that counts for something. No? Okay, fine. ;)
Powdered Water
11-04-09, 01:10 AM
And this is some kind of rational argument you're making?
Sure is, too much for ya huh? I listen to guys like you on the radio, day in and day out. Always gotta be the voice of reason. It's cool with me. I don't particularly like Green Bay or Minnesota, I'm just not a big fan of the Favre.
Lol. :rolleyes: Football is a game people play. You're putting way too much into it. Maybe you like it that way, or you've been conditioned over the years to take football so seriously, but either way, it's pointless and ridiculous. There's quite a difference between being a fan, and being a fanatic. The latter is reserved for Little League dads who scream in the faces of umpires while their kids stand around and giggle.
I'm putting way too much into it? Seriously? If its pointless and ridiculous, why have you even bothered to respond to this thread in the first place? Your team is 7-1 is why and you're here to gloat a little. And how is there a difference between a fan and a fanatic? Fan is short for fanatic after all. Now if you want to say there's a difference between a fan and a casual fan or bandwagon guy then we'd be in complete agreement.
The rivalry is going to burn happily whether I say something or not. That's what happens when something like this continues for so long. If I really concerned myself with fueling the rivalry, then I just wouldn't bother saying anything at all. (Don't get excited. I don't. ;))
Guess we'll just have to disagree here. I see it one way and you the other, no biggie.
Oh, come on. Don't come in here all high-horse on me. You're better than this. If I didn't understand that it's a heated rivalry, then I wouldn't be in here complaining about Green Bay fans who have been whining since August. Fans on both sides are spirited, enthusiastic, and - yes - completely irrational. I'm not a moron. And you're not, either. Forget your inclination to take up arms over a rivalry that was forged before you or I even cared about football, and recognize that I'm no different than you, and that I've got all the same care and devotion to my team as you do yours.
I want to beat the Packers every year, because they're trouble for my Vikes, and that's where my enmity ends. For that, you can say I'm not a "true" fan all you like. I really don't care.
Not on a high horse buddy, just calling it like I see it. Whether you care to admit it or not your comments are stirring up emotions that could have just as easily been left lying. I know you know that. I'm not here to tell you what kind of fan you are. You obviously pay attention. If as you say, you only want to beat the Packers every year then Yes, that seems a little strange to me. Do I live and die by the Seahawks every move? Of course not, but I am very interested in every little detail and I pay attention rigorously to most of the things that go on with the team on a day to day basis. Most of your comments below lead me to believe that you have much more than a passing interest in your team and you certainly don't mind kicking a little dirt in the "childish" Packer fans faces. So, yeah, you're a "fan" whether you want to be or not. :D
Well, here's an article (http://www.nj.com/jets/index.ssf/2009/09/ny_jets_dustin_keller_grateful.html) about Jets WR Dustin Keller's gratitude for Favre's guidance. And he seems to be (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/254522-brett-favre-and-percy-harvin-the-start-of-a-beautiful-friendship) taking a liking to Percy Harvin in Minnesota. I don't know, maybe he's just got a thing for players who don't wear green and gold.
I'm not much for google article wars. You win that round. I just don't have enough time to go searching for dispariging Brett Favre articles. I'm sure there out there but in the end its just not that big a deal to me.
Look, this isn't Unsolved Mysteries. If he's a prick, he's a prick. I really don't care. Who isn't in the NFL? He's been Green Bay's golden boy since the early 90s, and he's been damn-near deified up there (at least until Favre-gate this past year). If you want to trash him now, go ahead. All I know is, my team is 7-1, and I've got Favre to thank in part for that.
And there we have it. ;)
Now don't you go talking to me about these two quarterbacks. Jackson and Rosenfels are a far cry from Aaron Rodgers. They've only got four or five years of real experience between them, and Jackson's time with the Vikings has been rocky at best. He got his shot last season, and Brad Childress was right to bench him in favor of Gus Frerotte, a 16-year veteran that could still outshine him.
Any Vikings fan - and Brad Childress himself - would argue that these two quarterbacks were not ready to compete for a starting position, much less lead this very capable team to a Super Bowl season. So you're crazy if you think Favre did any swooping in to steal the job. He's a phenomenal West Coast quarterback, and Childress studied under Mike Holmgren. I can't think of a better reason why he shouldn't have started.
Right, I never said either of those two were great or even able to carry Favre's dirty undies around in a glad bag. I was merely illustrating a point.
And by the way, if you think you'll not be going through the same headaches that Green Bay went through for a few years, you may be in for a surprise. I think its very likely that Favre will retire and un-retire at least for one or two more seasons. It seems like no big deal now when you're sitting at 7-1 but how about next year when he says, "Awww shucks. I'm just not sure if I want to play next year, y'all go ahead on wothout me." and then a week and a half before the season he comes crawling back again, because all he really wanted was to skip all the training camps and team meetings and the wondeful training table dinners. No big deal now, sure. But what if you guys don't get that Superbowl win I'm sure you're already thinking about? And you team starts making plans for life after Favre... sort of like Green Bay did a few years ago, yeah?
You may very well be on here bitching about the guy in a year or two. We'll wait for ya. :cool:
Sure is, too much for ya huh? I listen to guys like you on the radio, day in and day out. Always gotta be the voice of reason. It's cool with me. I don't particularly like Green Bay or Minnesota, I'm just not a big fan of the Favre.
What do you have against him? You just think he's a pain because you're tired of hearing on the radio about whether or not he's retiring this week? I really want to know.
I'm putting way too much into it? Seriously? If its pointless and ridiculous, why have you even bothered to respond to this thread in the first place?
You're not following. I said it's pointless and ridiculous to get bent out of shape over this stuff. If you'll kindly re-read my first posts, you'll see that they're calm, sensible, and dotted with smileys. Thanks for coming in and making it personal.
Your team is 7-1 is why and you're here to gloat a little.
See, this is what pisses me off. Who are you to say that I'm gloating? You've got some nerve to take what I've posted thus far and suppose something like that. You might be used to having to defend yourself like this with your buddies, but I could care less about flaunting my team's record. All I wanted to do was argue a little bit about how goofy this whole Favre thing has gotten, and insert a glib remark or two with a *wink wink, nudge nudge* (you know, for the people who can laugh about it).
And how is there a difference between a fan and a fanatic? Fan is short for fanatic after all. Now if you want to say there's a difference between a fan and a casual fan or bandwagon guy then we'd be in complete agreement.
We can argue semantics if you want, but I really don't think every season ticket holder in Minnesota and Green Bay (which I would call "fans") are as crazy and war-hungry as you've described.
Not on a high horse buddy, just calling it like I see it. Whether you care to admit it or not your comments are stirring up emotions that could have just as easily been left lying.
Right, so I'm just supposed to keep quiet while other members lambast Favre and the Vikings, so nobody gets "mad." Sure. I'll do that. :indifferent:
I'm not here to tell you what kind of fan you are.
So you're only here to tell me how I think and why I post?
Most of your comments below lead me to believe that you have much more than a passing interest in your team
Thanks for being wrong about that. I was worried you had me pegged.
and you certainly don't mind kicking a little dirt in the "childish" Packer fans faces.
No more than Packer fans mind kicking a little dirt in our faces (like our good friend WBadger was doing before I got here).
And there we have it. ;)
You can call that gloating if you want, but I think you're just too defensive. Is it wrong to be happy about my team's record? Is it wrong to indicate so on these boards? Why is my post automatically a gloating one? If any Packer fans were injured by my comments, then they're salting their own wounds. That wasn't gloating, and I'll let you know when it is.
Right, I never said either of those two were great or even able to carry Favre's dirty undies around in a glad bag. I was merely illustrating a point.
Which was?
And by the way, if you think you'll not be going through the same headaches that Green Bay went through for a few years, you may be in for a surprise.
I never said I did. I'm not Minnesota's General Manager. We've signed Favre for two years, but if he doesn't like where he is, he'll up and move on. I know this. I just want to win a Super Bowl, and if he can help us, all the better.
It seems like no big deal now when you're sitting at 7-1 but how about next year when he says, "Awww shucks. I'm just not sure if I want to play next year, y'all go ahead on wothout me." and then a week and a half before the season he comes crawling back again, because all he really wanted was to skip all the training camps and team meetings and the wondeful training table dinners.
Wow, that was wonderfully lucid. And by "lucid," I mean that it ignored everything we know or can logically suppose about his departure from Green Bay. Obviously, Favre was a selfish brat and Green Bay was the innocent wittle team that just wanted to see him play. Yeah.
But what if you guys don't get that Superbowl win I'm sure you're already thinking about? And you team starts making plans for life after Favre... sort of like Green Bay did a few years ago, yeah?
Like I said, I'm not the general manager. Brett Favre is old, whether he wants to face it or not. Right now, he can play. Eventually, he won't. At whatever point Minnesota decides to move on, I'll support them. And because I'm not a hypocrite, I'll hope that they let Favre pursue other career interests... even if it's *gasp* back to the starting job at Green Bay.
You may very well be on here bitching about the guy in a year or two. We'll wait for ya. :cool:
Have fun waiting. :up:
upStomp
11-04-09, 08:42 AM
Me thinks all this Favre talk deserves all the benefits of having its own thread. ;)
Wow! When MoFos get going on a debate there is one common factor, and thats the post length can be measured in feet or inches.
So....if it had to be done all differently lets say GB drafts Rodgers, Favre trains him (This is just so rare in todays world, but I guess Favre has to be everthing all the time or hes not a good man), and then retires. Then he changes his mind and says "Trade me!" Green Bay would still have had a conniption. Sure he could have been smoother, but it wouldnt have mattered.
In reality he could not have given them any more than what he did nor should he have. It was and is Rodgers time there now. IF GB had said "Ok Brett we'll bench Rodgers for you to start" Then there would be real fuel for Favre detractors. Brett would have been more selfish then by staying. The real world isnt simple like the media wants us to believe. The point is Favres detractors are judging him waaaay too harshly.
Favre is a legend, and not a statistical one. Hes a legend for starting every football game no matter what, and giving 100% no matter what. Everytime, and all the time. Hes been an upfront guy to a heartless media, and that was even when he was tarnishing his own legacy with his GB departure or admitting painkiller addiction soon after winning the super bowl. I wasnt always a Favre fan, but as the years continued, and continued to roll on he took my respect.
I am a true football fan. Ive suffered many long years being a Raiders and Buccaneers fan. People can like Star Trek without being a Trekkie. People can like Green Bay, and like Brett Favre still too. Theyre right to.
So...Fred Davis... Seems like a cool guy and stuff...
;)
Let the Fred Davis days begin!
http://www2.pictures.gi.zimbio.com/Washington+Redskins+v+Cincinnati+Bengals+6fGgat6QFqAm.jpg
Okay, fine. So he didn't want to mentor his replacement and expedite his exit from Green Bay. He must have known when Rodgers was drafted that the stage was set. Can you blame the guy? How does stonewalling one player negate an entire career of stellar play for the Pack? I know that's not what you're suggesting, but McCarthy has never denied telling Favre that he was getting benched. Given everything he's done for the team, you don't just tell him he's on second-string duty while forbidding him to play elsewhere.
If he knew when Rodgers was drafted that the "stage was set," you'd think he'd have figured out otherwise when they benched him for three years so Brett could keep playing. We can talk about ultimatums and 'writing on the wall' and everything, but the fact remains that they sat Rodgers (a #1 draft pick) for a really long time.
I'm not sure what you mean by "McCarthy has never denied telling Favre that he was getting benched." McCarthy hasn't denied being a unicorn, either, as far as I know. Unless we have evidence to suggest that this happened -- and even if we did, Favre's behavior was still irrational -- then we have to assume he didn't.
Sure, I'm not one to generalize. But let's just say this. I saw more "Die Favre Die" signs in the crowd during last Sunday's telecast, and Packer fans have been quite vocal about their discontent that Favre jumped ship. Actually, it was kinda nice at the end of the game to see some Packer fans supporting him: "We Miss U Brett" and "Thank You 4 the Memories"
Well, the angriest people are almost unfailingly the loudest and noticable. I don't think any firm conclusions about Packer fans in general can be drawn from it.
Why wouldn't he want to stick it to Ted Thompson? If he was given an ultimatum - which seems likely - prior to his first retirement, then I can understand his frustration at wanting to find another team and having Thompson refuse to release him. Wouldn't you agree?
I'd agree that he'd have reason to want to stick it to Thompson if that happened, but I don't agree that an ultimatum "seems likely" at all. But it's kind of moot, anyway, because the point in question was about whether or not it was "ridiculous" for Packer fans to think he was out to get them. I think the language involved (which, let's not forget, is your own) is overstating things a bit, but it's far from ridiculous given what Favre's said.
And the thing about sticking it to Green Bay: I'm not one to cry media, but sportscasters like a good story, and that's been the order of the day for both match-ups. He might have been thinking in his head, "Gotta screw those Packers but good," but he certainly didn't play - or interact with his former players - like a guy with a vendetta.
Anyway, my comment about the fans still holds up. He might have wanted to stick it to the fans also, but come on, do we really believe that?
Probably not, but I don't think the distinction between sticking it to the fans of the team and sticking it to the team is a very meaningful one, either.
As for playing with a vendetta; I really don't know how this would be measured. He didn't get into any outright fights, if that's what you mean. :laugh: I will readily concede the point that he did not stab Donald Driver.
But Chris, I don't think you're seeing how this goes both ways. It's likely that Favre wasn't even considering retirement when Thompson and McCarthy informed him that his days as starter were numbered. So Favre retired. But you can't fault him for wanting to return, and Thompson stood by Rodgers and yet refused to release Favre. So the Packers are just as much to blame for stonewalling Favre as the other way around.
Okay, but if we're in the business of making distinctions now, I'd have to argue that there's a big difference between "kinda pissed" and flat-out murderous. "Kinda pissed" I can handle, and even understand. But you're also supposing a lot about why they're pissed. Sure, Favre-gate was silly and confusing. But Packer management had no intentions of starting Favre to begin with anyway. I think Packer fans are far and away more outraged that he went to Minnesota.
You're still operating under the assumption that this actually happened, though; that he was flat-out told "you're going to be a backup now." You seem to be basing this entire stance on something that I don't believe we have any evidence for. Correct me if I'm wrong, or am missing some crucial fact, of course.
Again, it flows both ways. I think things were not quite right to begin with when McCarthy came in. There was certainly a mutual respect for past successes, but Favre wanted to play and the Packers wanted him off the field so they could move on with Rodgers. That was bound to come to a head. And that's what kills me about how fans have reacted: all this talk about loyalty and treason, but football is a business, and the Packers wanted Favre riding bench.
Let's have some evidence of this. You've started with the theory that the Packers wanted him to move on, and now it's morphed into something you're treating like an established fact. It's certainly plausible, but is there anything to prove it?
Also, isn't this continued assumption kind of at odds with what you said before about how they'd never bench someone like Favre?
Sure, any one of these scenarios could be true. But I can't help but think that the one you're suggesting, in which Favre's behavior was rash and completely unprovoked, is contingent on the belief that he should just take the bench (like a good soldier) or retire quietly, which really isn't fair. If it isn't contingent on that, however, then the suggestion becomes that the Packers never had any intention of benching him, and he just went crazy, which I doubt very seriously was the case.
Why? They sat Rodgers for three freakin' years! Favre retired and unretired twice in back-to-back seasons, said the team wasn't why he retired, then contradicted himself, then said he wanted to get back at his old team, then tried to deny it but ended up reiterating it. His behavior has been erratic pretty much the whole time. I don't think this makes him "crazy," but it's a clear pattern of rash decision-making and rash words. Why would it be hard to believe that he simply hasn't been thinking things through? It seems far more likely than the alternative.
And if we're hanging our laundry on Brett's actual words, he told an interviewer in 2008 (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3486775) that he felt pressured by Green Bay to make a decision. Curious that both Thompson and McCarthy counter with "We always wanted Brett back," but declined to say whether that meant as the team's starter. Frankly, I can't see how it was anything other than Green Bay telling Favre that he was taking a seat, and subsequently refusing his request to play elsewhere. But hey, apples and oranges.
There are two things I'd say in response:
1) He said he was "pressured" to "make a decision." That's not the same thing as being threatened with benching. It's not even the same thing as being issued an ultimatum, really. Though I should point out that if the ultimatum was "hey, you need to decide whether or not you're playing so we can make decisions about the roster and our future," then it's a perfectly reasonable one.
2) He said the exact opposite when he retired. And given how often he's gone back on other things over the last few years, I don't see a compelling reason to pick this one statement over any other. Unless, maybe, the guy happens to be your team's QB these days. ;)
I kid, I kid.
See my cheeky comment above. He's certainly taken to receivers in recent years, and even throughout this whole fiasco, you haven't heard ill word one about Favre from any former or current Packer players (other than Rodgers, of course). So I would think that counts for something. No? Okay, fine. ;)
Heh; yeah, I don't think that counts for a lot, personally. Most football players know that getting a reputation for being a diva, or complaining, can end your career in a hurry. The really great talents can get away with it at times, to be sure, but a lot of guys can't afford to get that kind of reputation.
A fine point was made earlier; shall I move this Favretastic discussion off into its own threads?
A fine point was made earlier; shall I move this Favretastic discussion off into its own threads?
I think Favre would agree to having his own thread, I mean it would be the Favre thing to do.:)
I didn't see a Favre-specific thread, so I'll post my answer here. Once we've got a Favre thread, I'll portage over.
If he knew when Rodgers was drafted that the "stage was set," you'd think he'd have figured out otherwise when they benched him for three years so Brett could keep playing. We can talk about ultimatums and 'writing on the wall' and everything, but the fact remains that they sat Rodgers (a #1 draft pick) for a really long time.
Well, the Packers weren't really in dire need of starting a rookie quarterback right off the bat, either. The fact that Rodgers was benched for three years may have been due to poor performance at practice, or even the looming issue of confronting Favre about stepping down. There's no way of knowing, really.
I guess I feel like the fact that Favre knew he was getting into retirement age, and that the Packers took a promising QB in the first round, he could pretty much bet that the Packers were looking forward. My guess is that Green Bay hoped Favre would either concede to grooming Rodgers to replace him, or retire soon (thus negating the issue altogether). There's no telling.
I'm not sure what you mean by "McCarthy has never denied telling Favre that he was getting benched." McCarthy hasn't denied being a unicorn, either, as far as I know. Unless we have evidence to suggest that this happened -- and even if we did, Favre's behavior was still irrational -- then we have to assume he didn't.
I'm not sure that we do. In a court of law, yes, we can't consider what someone doesn't say. But you and I both know that team organizations, their representatives, and their players are usually extremely guarded when it comes to the press. If Favre was right - that McCarthy did pressure Favre into choosing the bench or retirement - then it doesn't surprise me that McCarthy hasn't confirmed or denied it. A confirmation would condemn him; a denial would be lying.
Conversely, if McCarthy didn't pressure Favre in this way, then you'd think he and Ted Thompson would want to set the public record straight. And yet, all we got was, "We wanted him back." A perfectly vague and conveniently innocent answer. Maybe they never had any intention of benching him, and maybe Favre lied. We'll never know. All I can say is, I feel like Green Bay had more motivation to bench him than Brett Favre did to unprovokingly call out his own (successful) team.
Well, the angriest people are almost unfailingly the loudest and noticable. I don't think any firm conclusions about Packer fans in general can be drawn from it.
I'm not sure I'm trying to draw any. I'm just pointing out that they seem to be the flagship voice on this issue at the moment.
I'd agree that he'd have reason to want to stick it to Thompson if that happened, but I don't agree that an ultimatum "seems likely" at all. But it's kind of moot, anyway, because the point in question was about whether or not it was "ridiculous" for Packer fans to think he was out to get them. I think the language involved (which, let's not forget, is your own) is overstating things a bit, but it's far from ridiculous given what Favre's said.
Like I said, maybe Favre does want to stick it to the fans, but he's never indicated any enmity toward fans whatsoever. Given the recent treatment he's received from countless, he could very well have lashed out in reproach. But to my knowledge, he has never spoken ill of fans.
My original comment was that Packer fans have acted like Favre is out to harm them personally by switching teams, which I believe stems only from frustration that he has. You brought up his comments about Ted Thompson, which has nothing to do with fans.
Probably not, but I don't think the distinction between sticking it to the fans of the team and sticking it to the team is a very meaningful one, either.
I believe it is. The fans didn't refuse to release him.
As for playing with a vendetta; I really don't know how this would be measured. He didn't get into any outright fights, if that's what you mean. :laugh: I will readily concede the point that he did not stab Donald Driver.
Okay, let's go to the extreme with this. Of course, he didn't stab anybody. Now let's come back down to the realm of actual possibility. Favre could have ignored Packer players, trainers, coaches, and staff. But he didn't. Favre could have bantered with fans and gloated about his plans to bury Green Bay, but he didn't. Favre could have come out gunslingling and showboating, but he didn't. You can say, "Well, that doesn't mean he wasn't thinking it." But given how much hype the 2009 Vike/Pack matchups have garnered from media and fans, the actual result looked hardly like the face-off people wanted.
You're still operating under the assumption that this actually happened, though; that he was flat-out told "you're going to be a backup now." You seem to be basing this entire stance on something that I don't believe we have any evidence for. Correct me if I'm wrong, or am missing some crucial fact, of course.
Sure, he have no evidence. But we can bandy like this all day. If this were a lawsuit, I'd have no case. For the sake of purely hypothetical discussion, however, I feel like it's valuable to point out that (a) Favre claimed he felt pressured to make a decision about staying or leaving, and (b) McCarthy and Thompson indicated that they were committed to Rodgers.
To me, that looks pretty strongly that Favre knew he was getting benched if he stayed; opted to retire and preserve his legacy (and his good relations with the team in public); un-retired soon after because he realized he wasn't ready in his heart to retire, and wanted to prove he could still play. I don't have blood spatter on the wall, but I've got what seems to me is the most logical truth.
Let's have some evidence of this. You've started with the theory that the Packers wanted him to move on, and now it's morphed into something you're treating like an established fact. It's certainly plausible, but is there anything to prove it?
Again, at this stage, anything is plausible. I guess I just feel like someone who exhibits wishy-washy behavior isn't necessarily guilty, and more than likely acted based on more complicated circumstances than just "oh, I felt like being a goober today."
Also, isn't this continued assumption kind of at odds with what you said before about how they'd never bench someone like Favre?
I never said Green Bay wouldn't bench Favre. I just said that you don't bench a future Hall of Famer like Favre, as a general rule. Obviously, you can, and I believe the Packers knew it was time for Rodgers to step up and Favre - if he chose to remain a Packer - to step aside. I just think it's something a team shouldn't do.
Why? They sat Rodgers for three freakin' years!
Well, to be fair, Rodgers was a rookie, and there have been plenty of good draft prospects ride pine for years before they finally got a breakout or left the league altogether.
Favre retired and unretired twice in back-to-back seasons, said the team wasn't why he retired, then contradicted himself, then said he wanted to get back at his old team, then tried to deny it but ended up reiterating it. His behavior has been erratic pretty much the whole time. I don't think this makes him "crazy," but it's a clear pattern of rash decision-making and rash words.
I'm not denying that his behavior has been rash, but I can't concede that he didn't have a reason. We might not have hard evidence, but given human nature and the few things we know about this whole fiasco, I think it's far more likely that Favre was acted upon. Maybe he was an insufferable jerk for years, but to my knowledge, he's never had that reputation.
Why would it be hard to believe that he simply hasn't been thinking things through? It seems far more likely than the alternative.
Why does that seem more likely? Because he's confused about where he wants his career to go? Because dymentia is setting in? I'm not sure I understand what possible motivation he'd have to retire after a stellar season, then unretire, then retire, then unretire, unless there were other mitigating factors. Brett Favre is no Michael Jordan.
1) He said he was "pressured" to "make a decision." That's not the same thing as being threatened with benching. It's not even the same thing as being issued an ultimatum, really. Though I should point out that if the ultimatum was "hey, you need to decide whether or not you're playing so we can make decisions about the roster and our future," then it's a perfectly reasonable one.
And I agree - the Packers should be able to do that. And apparently, so does Favre. He said he understood the team's desire to look forward. But I can't imagine this would have even been an issue if Favre knew he still had the starting job. I can't see him retiring unless he knew he was out.
2) He said the exact opposite when he retired. And given how often he's gone back on other things over the last few years, I don't see a compelling reason to pick this one statement over any other.
It's tough to go on, agreed. But I'd rather analyze what he says rather than ignore it because it's inadmissable in court.
Heh; yeah, I don't think that counts for a lot, personally. Most football players know that getting a reputation for being a diva, or complaining, can end your career in a hurry. The really great talents can get away with it at times, to be sure, but a lot of guys can't afford to get that kind of reputation.
By that same token, I don't think the players who garner these reputations are particularly good at mitigating their behavior for very long. If Favre is a diva, he's been a sleeping one, and that hardly ever happens - if ever.
Yoda Im sure this is making you more sick of Favre than you already were, and my hope of changing your tune on him has failed catostrophically.
Guys this debate is going on forever, and I think this really is a argument over a glass being half empty or full. An icon and legend wasnt what everyone thought, and be it a Packer fan or just a football fan people are critical. Yes Yoda I still think Favres a great human being besides a good football player. I actually think his character outweighes his career even. His indecisiveness wasnt a great show of strength or professionalism, but hey I like my heros flawed. At least hes not beating his wife, partying in strip clubs, hanging out with a criminal element, on tv advertisements left n right (though he could be), and crying like T.O. about management or talent to the media.
PWs comment of questioning my mettle as a fan kinda irked me. Ysee PW when I was a kid I was a huge Pete Rose fan. I even did a standup book report on Rose, while pretending to be him, in front of my class in high school. When Petes gambling came out talk about the ***** hitting the fan on that image. I dont respect him as a man, but I gotta respect Charlie Hustle. The Ty Cobb of our time. Maybe my respect for Rose is how I could endure being a Raider fan later on. After all if any football owner could have ever been in the mob it would be Al Davis.
Brett Favre is a better man than a Rose or Davis, and yet people jeered him with more fervency than those 2 ever will. People openly jeer that hes overrated, and a fake. No he doesnt deserve it, but he was keeping a smile off his face sunday because he knows he doesnt deserve it. A Terrell Owens might deserve it especially in Philly, but people dont judge the T.O.'s too critically like they do Brett.
Tom Jackson on ESPN was one of those critical of Favre, but when Minnesota beat St Louis with that last throw out of a b-rated movie Jackson commented he understood why he did what he did signing with Minny. The love of the game, and even his detractors should know he has it. It was the kid in him as Jackson put it. Having said that back when Tom Jackson was a player for the Broncos departing he also said no to the Raiders, and said no amount of money would have been enough. So its really just a persons individual interpretation of the same event. Either hes forgiven or not.
Powdered Water
11-04-09, 09:44 PM
Am I alone in thinking that Sleezy really needs to join our league next year?
What do you have against him? You just think he's a pain because you're tired of hearing on the radio about whether or not he's retiring this week? I really want to know.
To be honest, I'm to the point where I wish the guy would just go away, I'm tired of hearing about Brett Favre. I'm tired of saying Brett Favre. I'm tired of the soap opera. And I know, you'll try and convince me what a great teammate he is but I'm also tired of guys who think they're more important than their teams. The guy has become his own name brand, you'll never convince me that deep down he puts the team first.
You're not following. I said it's pointless and ridiculous to get bent out of shape over this stuff. If you'll kindly re-read my first posts, you'll see that they're calm, sensible, and dotted with smileys. Thanks for coming in and making it personal.
Not making it personal, you may be choosing to take it personal because apparently you just can't understand why these lame-o Packer fans can't just get over it or why others might defend them. Which was all I was really trying to do from the beginning. I do believe you were the first one to point out that I had no point by saying, "And this is some kind of rational argument you're making?" Maybe I'm a moron after all because I thought it was a perfectly valid point. I applaud you for living in a town where all of the fans are very cerebral and don't take the game so seriously. It's my experience that the majority of fans do however.
See, this is what pisses me off. Who are you to say that I'm gloating? You've got some nerve to take what I've posted thus far and suppose something like that. You might be used to having to defend yourself like this with your buddies, but I could care less about flaunting my team's record. All I wanted to do was argue a little bit about how goofy this whole Favre thing has gotten, and insert a glib remark or two with a *wink wink, nudge nudge* (you know, for the people who can laugh about it).
Fair enough, I admit that was a cheap shot. I'm sorry. It may interest you to know that I don't have to defend things to my friends or do much flaunting either. I am a sad sack Seahawk fan. Sure, we had some nice years this decade but sadly, those days are now behind us and once again we are now among the mediocre to terrible teams in the league. This is the only forum I post on so naturally this is where I talk football. And to be perfectly honest we here have been talking and sometimes lambasting Mr. Favre for quite some time, only now, he's on your team and now you've decided its time to stick up for the guy a little. I won't tell you you're out of your element Donnie, but you have jumped into the middle of a long running diatribe.
Right, so I'm just supposed to keep quiet while other members lambast Favre and the Vikings, so nobody gets "mad." Sure. I'll do that. :indifferent:
Of course not, and we welcome you to the discussion, again, I apologize if we got off on the wrong foot. However I can't remember when anyone was really lambasting the Vikings. I think the vast majority of the lambasting has been pointed in Favre's direction. It's a small point of interest but true nonetheless. And obviously I feel Favre deserves most of the attention he gets. In fact, I think he wants it. I truly believe that if he didn't crave all this attention then he would have retired and stayed retired. I mean really, the guy has had a nice career yeah? What more does he need to prove? He's won a Superbowl he's broken all kinds of records he's done lots of great things. I don't think anyone is disputing that. But, what irks some of us is the way he's ending up his time in the league. Who are we to judge? We are the ones who pay the ticket prices we are the ones who watch and listen to the media diatribe day after day. Who better to judge than us?
No more than Packer fans mind kicking a little dirt in our faces (like our good friend WBadger was doing before I got here).
How was Badger kicking dirt in your face exactly? I've seen him make some comments about Favre and his unwillingness to be happy for him now that he is doing so well on Badgers division rival and longtime foe. But how was he attacking you exactly? I'm pretty sure his comment about you being a "terrible person" was directed at Tongo.
All this being said Sleezy, I sure hope you give some thought to joining our fantasy league next year. You gotta admit, whether you think I'm a complete ass or not this is still fun yeah? God I love football.
I second the vote to let Sleazy in next year. Btw Sleazy Im also pretty sure Badger was directing his "awful human being" line towards me as he has before when I goosh about Favre.
WBadger
11-04-09, 11:27 PM
It was directed at both of you but I don't really think you should go about to say I was "kicking dirt in your face". To be honest, I laughed when I read that.
I am in strong disagreement, is all. And, it's enlightening to see a Viking fan defend Brett Favre.
http://rlv.zcache.com/4_brett_favre_viking_traitor_shirt-p235024882833685940qtdg_400.jpg
http://zingology.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/20090821_favre.jpg
http://uvtblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/brett-favre-is-a-dick.jpg
Guys this debate is going on forever, and I think this really is a argument over a glass being half empty or full. An icon and legend wasnt what everyone thought, and be it a Packer fan or just a football fan people are critical.
Yeah, it really can go on forever, and I don't want anyone to assume that my support of Minnesota is driving my defense of Favre. I'm not here to defend him as a beacon of goodwill and courtesy, but I don't think he's a vindictive prick either. I just think he's been overly criticized as a diva and traitor, when to me it just looks like he's struggling with his fading career, a team that wants to move on, and a still-burning personal desire to play.
To be honest, I'm to the point where I wish the guy would just go away, I'm tired of hearing about Brett Favre. I'm tired of saying Brett Favre. I'm tired of the soap opera.
And I think this might be part of the reason why people are so annoyed with him - they just flat-out don't like hearing about it. And I guess I have a thicker skin in that respect. I remember thinking that it was an unfortunate situation, given Favre's legacy in Green Bay, and I hoped it would get resolved. As much as I've hated to see Favre burn the Vikings in the past, I've still always respected him as a great quarterback.
And I know, you'll try and convince me what a great teammate he is but I'm also tired of guys who think they're more important than their teams. The guy has become his own name brand, you'll never convince me that deep down he puts the team first.
I won't try to convince you, but I remember Favre never being afraid to throw blocks or check on injured teammates. Again, I just feel like saying he was only interested in himself - based entirely on this retirement fiasco - is unfair. In a league populated by self-absorbed players like Chad Ochocinco and Terrell Owens, I can't see how Favre has acted any differently throughout his career than the players who have never been accused of self-absorbed behavior.
I do believe you were the first one to point out that I had no point by saying, "And this is some kind of rational argument you're making?"
In your first post, you claimed I was trying to find reason in an unreasonable football world. I beg to differ on the football world being unreasonable, but that's neither here nor there. I asked that question because I thought it ironic that you would preface an argument you were about to make by saying that this entire phenomen is irrational to begin with.
I applaud you for living in a town where all of the fans are very cerebral and don't take the game so seriously. It's my experience that the majority of fans do however.
It's curious that you mention my hometown. I live in Louisville, Kentucky, and college football and basketball are HUGE down here. I'm sure I don't have to tell you that the University of Kentucky and the University of Louisville share one of the most heated rivalries in college sports. So you can imagine what it's like here.
And yet, I've never - not once - seen anyone get bent out of shape over it (not whilst sober, anyway - are you guys drinking?). It's a heated rivalry to be sure, but at the end of the day, nobody comes to blows. It's just not worth the trouble. Perhaps it's because we're all citizens of the same city, but I doubt it. I'm a pretty nice guy, and I don't go out of my way to show more courtesy to Louisvillians than I do to people from any other place in the world.
And to be perfectly honest we here have been talking and sometimes lambasting Mr. Favre for quite some time, only now, he's on your team and now you've decided its time to stick up for the guy a little. I won't tell you you're out of your element Donnie, but you have jumped into the middle of a long running diatribe.
Honestly, I had never really taken an interest in talking football on Mofo until, just recently, I found myself bored at work, noticed the fantasy league down here, and decided to see how everyone was doing. Finding the discussion on Favre was coincidental, although I've obviously had my own feelings on the issue for some time. As far as the diatribe being long-running, I'm not sure that makes it any more valid. But I'm sorry if I've interrupted your agree-fest.
However I can't remember when anyone was really lambasting the Vikings. I think the vast majority of the lambasting has been pointed in Favre's direction. It's a small point of interest but true nonetheless.
Yeah, but when it comes to Packer fans, the two go hand-in-hand. WBadger was fuming over Favre's defection to the Vikings, and while I can understand frustration at seeing your star player go to the enemy, I can't see how that defection erases years of respect for the man who carried the team through so much success. And that seems to be what's happening on a far larger scale than I would have expected from Packer fans. If it were the other way around, I'd be upset too. But I'd also respect his desire to keep playing even if his time as a player for my team had passed. And I'd acknowledge his right as a grown man to play wherever he wanted.
I truly believe that if he didn't crave all this attention then he would have retired and stayed retired. I mean really, the guy has had a nice career yeah? What more does he need to prove?
See, I don't think retiring and unretiring is the same as craving attention. He's Brett Favre. He's going to get attention anyway. All we can really say is that he's guilty of indecision, and for that he's been labeled a primadonna and attention whore. I wonder, if Michael Jordan (among others) hadn't made this routine so tiresome already, would we really be caring so much right now?
Also, I'm inclined to believe Favre cares more about playing football (and not sitting at home, retired) than actually proving anything, simply because he really doesn't have anything left to prove. Maybe he wanted to prove to Ted Thompson that he could still play, but if they really were going to bench him, I can understand that. And come on, who are we to really say how many winning seasons are enough? How many Super Bowls? If the guy wants to continue to have a successful career, and can, who are we to say he should hang it up?
We are the ones who pay the ticket prices we are the ones who watch and listen to the media diatribe day after day. Who better to judge than us?
The fans aren't on the inside, and many are blinded by their perceptions and team allegiance, or their annoyance at hearing the name Brett Favre every day. I'd say those are stupendous reasons not to judge this man or his actions. Be angry about it, sure. But don't draw unreasonable conclusions just because you're pissed.
How was Badger kicking dirt in your face exactly? I've seen him make some comments about Favre and his unwillingness to be happy for him now that he is doing so well on Badgers division rival and longtime foe. But how was he attacking you exactly? I'm pretty sure his comment about you being a "terrible person" was directed at Tongo.
As you can see, he admitted it. Granted, I was being cheeky about Favre throwing four TDs on Green Bay last week, but that was before everyone got so serious. Like I said, I like giving a Packer fan a friendly elbow every once in a while, and welcome the same treatment from them. A "kicking of dirt," if you will. But when it gets personal, that's when I find this whole rivalry childish and unnecessary.
It was directed at both of you but I don't really think you should go about to say I was "kicking dirt in your face".
Yeah, because calling me an "awful human being" is just a little jab between friends. :indifferent: Honestly, this illustrates perfectly how unreasonable people get over this stuff. Who are you to say this to me, just because I don't think Brett Favre is the big, bad villain Green Bay fans want to believe he is? Disagree with me, jab me about how many Super Bowls Green Bay has won, whatever. But don't you dare tell me I'm an awful human being. That's just utterly low and uncalled for.
And, it's enlightening to see a Viking fan defend Brett Favre.
As if I'd somehow be betraying my allegiance to Minnesota if Favre still played for Green Bay. Yeah, that's not childish.
All this being said Sleezy, I sure hope you give some thought to joining our fantasy league next year. You gotta admit, whether you think I'm a complete ass or not this is still fun yeah? God I love football.
I second the vote to let Sleazy in next year.
Eh, we'll see. I've done them before and I think they're pretty fun, but my interest in following a bunch of stats and prospect reports only goes so far. If it's a little more casual than some others I've done, I might join in.
WBadger
11-05-09, 04:42 PM
Yeah, because calling me an "awful human being" is just a little jab between friends. :indifferent: Honestly, this illustrates perfectly how unreasonable people get over this stuff. Who are you to say this to me, just because I don't think Brett Favre is the big, bad villain Green Bay fans want to believe he is? Disagree with me, jab me about how many Super Bowls Green Bay has won, whatever. But don't you dare tell me I'm an awful human being. That's just utterly low and uncalled for.
Ah, come on. I wasn't trying to make a personal attack on your character or you personally, but you know as sports fans.
Sorry if I offended you, I didn't really expect you to take it that way.
No worries. I wasn't even going to press it beforehand. I just think there's a definite line between fan ribbing and personal attack. Obviously, there's no way of knowing who's going to take even the smallest jab personally, but calling someone an awful human being in person might have gotten you punched. ;)
Anyway, I don't want to whinge over this any longer. As you were.
Hey I love Favre.....dont be haters ! LOL Oh have I told you all how much I hate fantasy football? LOL (kidding)
On a side note Ive two more Fantasy Football Yahoo teams. In one league Im very strong, but in the other one not so strong. In the "not so strong" league (Yahoo Public 913799) Ive just traded all my key players away to fill my roster with nothing but Buccaneers! LOL! Im talking some stupid trade offers like Vernon Davis & Ricky Williams for Caddy and Winslow. Another one was Steven Jackson for Derrick Ward. There was one guy I offered Sims-Walker for Antonio Bryant...the guys said no! He said "Not good enough!" and asked for Vernon Davis instead! I already had Davis going to the guy that had Winslow, but just the audacity! I had to respect that, offered Larry Fitzgerald, and he snatched him up. Also liked dropping Rothlessberger to waivers to get Josh Freeman. Im sure the league now will interest me more than it ever had.
WBadger
11-05-09, 07:52 PM
Well, I'm sorry to bring this topic up again, but I just have to post this from The Onion, that is hilarious:
Brett Favre Avenges Storied 16-Year Career With Packers
GREEN BAY, WI—Brett Favre beat the Green Bay Packers on Sunday for the second time this season, his decisive 38-26 victory exacting some small measure of revenge for the adulation and hero worship heaped upon him by the city of Green Bay and the entire state of Wisconsin for the better part of two decades. "It feels good to finally get retribution from the team that gave me my first chance to start, believed in me despite the pitfalls of my early career, and ensured I will be a first-ballot Hall of Famer," Favre said at a postgame press conference. "And to do it in front of those fans, who unconditionally loved me through thick and thin while I struggled with a Vicodin addiction and disastrous interceptions, just made it that much sweeter. Sixteen long years of devotion, and they're finally getting what they deserve." Favre mentioned that when he does retire, he is looking forward to "really sticking it" to the wife and daughters whose loving presence has been the one constant during his playing career.
I just spent a foolish amount of time thinking this was for this year and wondered why P.W. was on crack.
WBadger
10-27-10, 05:38 PM
Oh, I thought this was a Brett Favre status bump.
...In a league populated by self-absorbed players like Chad Ochocinco and Terrell Owens...
fast forward a year and they are on the same team :eek:
vBulletin® v3.8.0, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.