sschind
8 years ago

In a nutshell, here is my take on this BF crap. How would you like it if you found out your best friend/best man at your wedding, was sleeping with your ex-wife/ex-girlfriend?

Originally Posted by: packerfanoutwest 



So the vikings are your best friend? or are they your ex girlfriend?

Zero2Cool
8 years ago

So the vikings are your best friend? or are they your ex girlfriend?

Originally Posted by: sschind 



Yeah you see this whole analogy doesn't make any sense unless the girlfriend is Brett and he said he wanted to breakup and then said wait I want you back and when you said "no, I've moved on" and Brett says "fine give me your best friends number so I can pork their brains out and they can tell you what you're missing!". Hell, even adding that extra context to it still makes the analogy shaky at best.

Brett screwed up by deciding before he was ready to (ask any athlete, they will say the worst time to decide is within that first month or two of the end of season). The Packers screwed up by assuming he'd play the following season and pressuring him into a decision. And all of them screwed up big time with communication.

No one in the situation is without a large portion of failure. And yes, there is absolutely no doubt the Indianapolis Colts and Peyton Manning were fully aware of the disaster here in Green Bay. If they were not cognizant of it, then they are not all that competent. I'm not saying they wouldn't have handled it amicably because let us remember, Peyton was NOT demanding to be TRADED to a team within the division. That fact is what caused this whole mess. If Brett said trade me to another team outside of the division, then the Packers would have obliged. Believe me, the Packers did NOT want a war with the face of their franchise, but you don't freaking trade a quarterback to a team in your division that is precisely just a quarterback away from being a Super Bowl contender.

Brett wanting to show the Packers he could still play is where the separation between Brett and the Packers is immensely different than Peyton and the Colts.

That's just how I see it and the more I think about it, the more I recall about it and the more absurd it is for fans to hate Brett solely for what happened. I really think those who hate Brett for the whole wanting to be a Vikings player and then joining them are the same group that didn't like Brett to begin with. Which is fine, of course.



UserPostedImage
yooperfan
8 years ago

In a nutshell, here is my take on this BF crap. How would you like it if you found out your best friend/best man at your wedding, was sleeping with your ex-wife/ex-girlfriend?

Originally Posted by: packerfanoutwest 



Speaking of crap, you just said a bunch.
That kind of thinking is ridiculous.

buckeyepackfan
8 years ago
All of this is the reason I am glad they decided to do this now.

Some never saw a reason to have to live on, some have moved on, and others will never move on.

Perfect timing, by the time TC starts it will all be put away, no distractions heading into the preseason.

Those of you who see their chance to vent one more time, let it out.

24 hours after There will be a new story for The media to jump on.


I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!
Barfarn
8 years ago

What he did say was that the Colts saw what happened in Green Bay and they didn't want that to happen to them so they handled it differently/correctly.

Originally Posted by: sschind 



Everything else is semantics, but scchind you hit the nail on the head with the above statement.

What is Favre saying was done differently/correctly by Colts that GB didn’t? There is only one possibility: Colts let Manning be a FA; GB refused to release Favre!

Manning was under contract; but if Colts didn’t pay $28M bonus at start of league year; he was a UFA. Colts didn’t “release” Manning; they simply chose not to pay the Bonus. And as was demonstrated in the other thread; the Colts did what was most fiscally responsible for the Colts. If Manning was signed to play, say for $1M, the Colts would not have released him either. This transaction was business and had NOTHING to do with GB...NOTHING.

For Favre to believe this and then actually publically announce this demonstrates a deep-seeded sociopathy; he truly believes everyone's thinking and the world revolve around him. I’d think him insane if I gave him credit for having an IQ above a turnip and a normal sense of worth. Maybe next Favre will say the rules committee considered his career when moving back the extra point or installing the play challenge system.

The Favre retirement drama-queen stuff is a red hearing. Only important fact is Favre eventually announced he was playing and the contract dictated the rest. Favre had 2 choices [retire or report] and the Packers were fine either way. If Favre reported the Packers had 3 choices:

1. Cut him;
2. Trade him; or
3. Let him “compete” and most likely back-up Aaron Rodgers [Pack was fine with this too].

The least fiscally responsible move for Ted Thompson was #1; Ted Thompson would have been a capologist moron to cut Favre. The most cap and long term team efficient thing to do #2. Wow, looky there: Ted Thompson did what was the best fiscally and practically for Teams’ viability-is anyone shocked by this? It’s business, what could Favre’s objection possibly be?

The Packers did NOTHING WRONG! The irrational “Favre lovers” desperately search for some way to justify his childish behavior. They call people with scholarly judgments like the foregoing as “Favre Haters” LOL [And yea, I despise Favre; but for Favre2’s [1999-present] BS on the field as a Packer and his off field crap]; and they red herring in the “divorce-card” to irrationally and confusingly cover Favre’s tantrum bullsh!t by proposing some feckless and factless idea that there’s fault on both sides. Folks, GB and Favre were not married...They had a CONTRACT! Here let me spell it...C-O-N-T-R-A-C-T. 1265, Indy-brass and Manning conducted their CONTRACTUAL business like gentlemen and businessmen and allowed the CONTRACT and their valid interests [IE as defined by the CONTRACT] to dictate their every move. Child Hick Boy got mad because he was not given his release in derogation of his CONTRACT; he expected 1265-brass to breach their fiduciary duty to the stockholders, so he could have his contract defying wish.

This is very simple!

PS: This is not a rehash of old stuff because Favre said what he said a few days ago. “The past” is only interjected to provide context for his comments.

PSS: Buckeye you're spot on about timing....LOL I noticed Aaron Rodgers had a previous engagement for the July thing...I'm waiting for Aaron Rodgers to announce he haa a previous engagement for T'giving Bears game, LOL.

nerdmann
8 years ago

Everything else is semantics, but scchind you hit the nail on the head with the above statement.

What is Favre saying was done differently/correctly by Colts that GB didn’t? There is only one possibility: Colts let Manning be a FA; GB refused to release Favre!

Manning was under contract; but if Colts didn’t pay $28M bonus at start of league year; he was a UFA. Colts didn’t “release” Manning; they simply chose not to pay the Bonus. And as was demonstrated in the other thread; the Colts did what was most fiscally responsible for the Colts. If Manning was signed to play, say for $1M, the Colts would not have released him either. This transaction was business and had NOTHING to do with GB...NOTHING.

For Favre to believe this and then actually publically announce this demonstrates a deep-seeded sociopathy; he truly believes everyone's thinking and the world revolve around him. I’d think him insane if I gave him credit for having an IQ above a turnip and a normal sense of worth. Maybe next Favre will say the rules committee considered his career when moving back the extra point or installing the play challenge system.

The Favre retirement drama-queen stuff is a red hearing. Only important fact is Favre eventually announced he was playing and the contract dictated the rest. Favre had 2 choices [retire or report] and the Packers were fine either way. If Favre reported the Packers had 3 choices:

1. Cut him;
2. Trade him; or
3. Let him “compete” and most likely back-up Aaron Rodgers [Pack was fine with this too].

The least fiscally responsible move for Ted Thompson was #1; Ted Thompson would have been a capologist moron to cut Favre. The most cap and long term team efficient thing to do #2. Wow, looky there: Ted Thompson did what was the best fiscally and practically for Teams’ viability-is anyone shocked by this? It’s business, what could Favre’s objection possibly be?

The Packers did NOTHING WRONG! The irrational “Favre lovers” desperately search for some way to justify his childish behavior. They call people with scholarly judgments like the foregoing as “Favre Haters” LOL [And yea, I despise Favre; but for Favre2’s [1999-present] BS on the field as a Packer and his off field crap]; and they red herring in the “divorce-card” to irrationally and confusingly cover Favre’s tantrum bullsh!t by proposing some feckless and factless idea that there’s fault on both sides. Folks, GB and Favre were not married...They had a CONTRACT! Here let me spell it...C-O-N-T-R-A-C-T. 1265, Indy-brass and Manning conducted their CONTRACTUAL business like gentlemen and businessmen and allowed the CONTRACT and their valid interests [IE as defined by the CONTRACT] to dictate their every move. Child Hick Boy got mad because he was not given his release in derogation of his CONTRACT; he expected 1265-brass to breach their fiduciary duty to the stockholders, so he could have his contract defying wish.

This is very simple!

PS: This is not a rehash of old stuff because Favre said what he said a few days ago. “The past” is only interjected to provide context for his comments.

PSS: Buckeye you're spot on about timing....LOL I noticed Aaron Rodgers had a previous engagement for the July thing...I'm waiting for Aaron Rodgers to announce he haa a previous engagement for T'giving Bears game, LOL.

Originally Posted by: Barfarn 



I'd have benched Favre at halftime of the 2007 NFCCG. And I said so at the time.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    dfosterf (12h) : Maybe
    Mucky Tundra (13h) : Yes
    Zero2Cool (14h) : No.
    Mucky Tundra (16h) : End of a Degu-era
    dhazer (16h) : Steelers sign Patterson because of new kickoff rule interesting
    Zero2Cool (19h) : Former #Packers TE Josiah Deguara is signing a 1-year deal with the Jaguars, per source.
    Zero2Cool (20h) : They do not do it for "content sake".
    dfosterf (28-Mar) : For the record, I enjoy Beast and Mucky drafts
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Haha
    Mucky Tundra (27-Mar) : No time for talking! Back to work beast!
    beast (27-Mar) : You saw only 4,201 of my mocks? 🥺 I think that means you missed more than half of them 😢
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : Does anyone know what Lambeau field improvements got put on hold? My guess would be for the 2025 draft
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : It's like listen, you made 4,201 mocks, no shit.
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Cuz during the draft "I had them mocked there!" as if it's amazing.
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : They're fun to do once in awhile. It's people who think they are "content" that annoy me.
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : Against tbd
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : Answer to your question is yes, it's a Thursday, will be the Chiefs aga
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : Luckily for all concerned, I don't post them. I did one, but that was like 25 mocks ago
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : NFL 2024 gonna start Sept 5th isn't it???
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Ugh... kids these days!
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : I'm gonna go do some more mock draft hell instead 🤪
    Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Did we do one of those prediction threads yet for 2024 season?
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : In my city, they are playing the nimby game, in order to keep some railroad tracks vs. 2 professional sports teams and a concert venue.
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : And/Or a city council, of which I haven't seen a good one in a very long time
    dfosterf (27-Mar) : That sounds like a Mayor, not a city.
    buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers halt scheduled 80mil upgrade of stadium until lease agreement talks are restarted
    Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : City of Green Bay puts Packers' Lambeau Field lease talks on hold
    buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers 1 of 3 teams to vote no on new kickoff rule.
    Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Packers sign another Kicker
    dfosterf (26-Mar) : Lengthy explanation at PFF if you click the link
    dfosterf (26-Mar) : Kickoff rules officially changed.ngthy explan
    Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : lol
    Cheesey (26-Mar) : 2009? No thanks! One open heart surgery is enough!
    dfosterf (26-Mar) : Good for you!
    Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Yes. That's the one.
    dfosterf (26-Mar) : Is that "Lady Dugan" per chance?
    dfosterf (26-Mar) : Crystal?
    dfosterf (26-Mar) : Please refresh my memory
    Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Alan posts. Crystal back in my life. It's 2009 all over again! Lol
    Mucky Tundra (26-Mar) : BAH GAWD! THAT'S CHEESEYS MUSIC!
    Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Gutekunst said early stages of Jordan Love contract being discussed.
    Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Shouldn't be penalized cuz official screwed up
    Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Yeah, challenge until you are incorrect twice.
    Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Fining them is the goal, per the people who made the rule anyway.
    dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still waiting on the kickoff rule changes. Did hear yesterday that the touchback proposal will now be the 30 yard line, not the 35
    dfosterf (25-Mar) : Probably speed of game issues with your proposal
    dfosterf (25-Mar) : Hopefully the refs don't get in the habit of throwing flags on this
    beast (25-Mar) : I think when it comes to Challenges should get two strikes, so unlimited challenges as long as they keep winning them, but 2 wrong then done
    dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still subject to the fines etc
    dfosterf (25-Mar) : Yes, I should have been more specific. Also, they are now saying it would be a 15 yard penalty. That makes more sense .
    Please sign in to use Fan Shout
    2023 Packers Schedule
    Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
    Bears
    Sunday, Sep 17 @ 12:00 PM
    Falcons
    Sunday, Sep 24 @ 12:00 PM
    SAINTS
    Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:15 PM
    LIONS
    Monday, Oct 9 @ 7:15 PM
    Raiders
    Sunday, Oct 22 @ 3:25 PM
    Broncos
    Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 PM
    VIKINGS
    Sunday, Nov 5 @ 12:00 PM
    RAMS
    Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
    Steelers
    Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
    CHARGERS
    Thursday, Nov 23 @ 11:30 AM
    Lions
    Sunday, Dec 3 @ 7:20 PM
    CHIEFS
    Monday, Dec 11 @ 7:15 PM
    Giants
    Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
    BUCCANEERS
    Sunday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
    Panthers
    Sunday, Dec 31 @ 7:20 PM
    Vikings
    Sunday, Jan 7 @ 3:25 PM
    BEARS
    Sunday, Jan 14 @ 3:30 PM
    Cowboys
    Saturday, Jan 20 @ 7:15 PM
    49ers
    Recent Topics
    7h / Around The NFL / beast

    12h / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

    28-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

    28-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

    27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    27-Mar / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

    27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

    25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    22-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    Headlines
    Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.