With all the troubles at WR, why didnt the packers...

[packers11]

Go after T.O more aggressively... PLEASE DONT FLAME, I know he his a hot head, but listen we only have one good solid receiver which is driver.... T.O and driver would be an insane combo and Dallas did the right thing by signing him to a three year deal because if he screws up no other team will give him a chance........ It just bugged me a lot that we are looking solid on defense and our offense with Favre (might be his last year) with not many weapons....
If you all remember correctly before last year most people were happy when Favre and company came out on offense and scared to death when the defense came out to play (T.O catch, 4th and 26)......
To bad times have changed, Favre doesn't have many dominant weapons , I know its to late to do anything, but the trade possibility for a good WR is still out there...

Thoughts??

[BallHawk]

I'd rather have a group of receivers that are willing to do what it takes to win, even if it means they don't get all the fame, than have one guy who just wants to get the ball to boost his ego.

[retailguy]

remember 2002? we didnt have receivers then either.... No more bad character guys. We've got enough problems.

[oregonpackfan]

Perhaps the Packers did not want a character cancer on the team is why they passed on T.O.

Just look at the divisiveness he caused the 49'ers and the Eagles. Who would want that to happen to the Packers other than Bears and Vikings fans?

[GrnBay007]

He would probably behave himself for 1 year. :D

[woodbuck27]

I certainly feel we missed the boat on that potential WR in Green Bay. I don't give a dam about his ego, the man can flat out be a difference maker in any game. He's arguably the finest WR in the NFL and definitely in the top three.

Besides that T.O. made it clear, as did Favre that they wanted one another. For the money we threw at Charles Woodson, I certainly would have liked that placed on a T.O. gamble, moreso then what I'm seeing with Charles Woodson.

Favre and DD and T.O. would have moved us into a much better place. Our offence would have upgraded over what we presently see. Look at the pre-season reviews that Dallas is getting early because of T.O.'s presence. Are the so called experts so wrong? I don't believe so.

[FavreChild]

Are the so called experts so wrong? I don't believe so.

Golly, I hope that is sarcasm. :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

[FavreChild]

I don't particularly yearn for T.O. in green and gold. But even with all his issues...I guarantee that if he WAS slated to be a Packer this season, y'all would be embracing him. 'Cause that's what fans do. And there would definitely be more enthusiasm - locally and nationally - for the Packers' chances with ol' Brett back at the helm.

However, *enthusiam* doesn't always equal success. Ask the '05 Eagles.

[woodbuck27]

Look at the pre-season reviews that Dallas is getting early because of T.O.'s presence. Are the so called experts so wrong? I don't believe so.

Golly, I hope that is sarcasm. :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

I'm pulling for T.O. to produce on the field as he is an amazing talent. He just has to shut up over his contract, get prepared and do his thing for HIS TEAM.

[FavreChild]

I don't disagree with you there, WB.

I *do* think the so-called experts are a bunch of blowhards, though. And I love when they're wrong, which happens almost with certainty. :mrgreen:

[Patler]

Besides that T.O. made it clear, as did Favre that they wanted one another.

So what if they wanted each other? Owens hand-picked Philadelphia as the team he wanted just two years ago, and he was a disruptive influence even in his first season there. Have you forgotten the sideline silliness that went on between Owens and McNabb?

So what if he and Favre wanted each other. What if Owens took the attitude toward the coaches that he did in Philadelphia? Have you forgotten his "Don't talk to me!" mandate to the Assistant coaches? Reid and his staff are pretty well respected, experienced and successful. I think it would have been a huge mistake to saddle a brand new staff in GB, with an inexperienced head coach, with the potential problems of Owens. I suspect Owens would have tried immediately to establish himself as the alpha male in the pack (or "on the Packers" :lol: ).

[GrnBay007]

No doubt TO would have been a "head case" and all. The head says no way to TO but there is a part of me that would have loved to see Favre and TO play together one season. :D

[woodbuck27]

Besides that T.O. made it clear, as did Favre that they wanted one another.

So what if they wanted each other? Owens hand-picked Philadelphia as the team he wanted just two years ago, and he was a disruptive influence even in his first season there. Have you forgotten the sideline silliness that went on between Owens and McNabb?

So what if he and Favre wanted each other. What if Owens took the attitude toward the coaches that he did in Philadelphia? Have you forgotten his "Don't talk to me!" mandate to the Assistant coaches? Reid and his staff are pretty well respected, experienced and successful. I think it would have been a huge mistake to saddle a brand new staff in GB, with an inexperienced head coach, with the potential problems of Owens. I suspect Owens would have tried immediately to establish himself as the alpha male in the pack (or "on the Packers" :lol: ).

It's easy to condemn T.O. based on his ego, but his ability as a WR is beyond reproach and we needed such a quality talent in Green Bay. His record as an accomplished WR is before us, and maybe the quiet confines of Green Bay was what may have worked? We'll never know now.

The way it is we can only speculate one way or the other, but my opinion is that it would have been better to ink him and wait and see how he reacted. The actual fact on this matter or topic, is that TT doesn't have it in his mind to win this season, so that's what we were really up against when TT could have gone out and got T.O.

I don't care if the entire forum opposes me on this issue. I wanted T.O. in Green Bay not Dallas. That is my position on T.O. and I bet he lights it up this season in Dallas. He is not in a position with HC Bill Parcells to screw up as he has in the past, and the same constraints could have been placed on him with us.

We needed T.O. on OUR roster.I want the Packers to win and T.O. would have served that objective,absolutely.

Besides all that who in "H" are any of us to judge T.O. He certainly is a law abiding citizen. He doesn't carry a gun nor does he lay a beating on the public or harass the police or get accused of sexual assaults.

He just flat out produces points on the board for whomever he plays for.

T.O. and Favre isn't T.O. and McNabb either Shamrockfan.

[Homer Jay]

Can somebody remind me of the last time a wide receiver was the difference between winning the super bowl or just getting close?

[woodbuck27]

Can somebody remind me of the last time a wide receiver was the difference between winning the super bowl or just getting close?

Here you go. Check out who the leading receiver was for the Eagles.It's at the bottom of the recap.

Super Bowl XXXIX

New England 24, Philadelphia 21

Alltel Stadium Jacksonville, Florida February 6, 2005
Attendance: 78,125 MVP: Deion Branch, WR, New England

Tom Brady's passing and Corey Dillon's running helped New England win its third Super Bowl.

Deion Branch had 11 receptions for 133 yards and the Patriots’ defense forced four turnovers en route to becoming the eighth team to post consecutive Super Bowl titles. The Patriots matched the Dallas Cowboys (XXVII, XXVIII, and XXX) as the only teams with three Super Bowl victories in the span of four seasons.

The Eagles threatened first, driving to the Patriots’ 8 late in the first quarter. On first down, Mike Vrabel sacked Donovan McNabb for a 16-yard loss and, after a penalty overturned an interception, Rodney Harrison stepped in front of a pass for an interception at the Patriots’ 4.

Early in the second quarter the Eagles drove 81 yards, keyed by Todd Pinkston’s 40-yard catch, and capped by McNabb’s 6-yard touchdown pass to L.J. Smith on third-and-goal for a 7-0 lead.

The Patriots responded by driving to the Eagles’ 4, but Tom Brady fumbled on a fake handoff attempt and Darwin Walker recovered. Later in the quarter, a 29-yard punt by Dirk Johnson allowed the Patriots to drive just 37 yards, keyed by Branch’s 7-yard catch on third-and-3, and capped by Brady’s pass to David Givens on the right side of the end zone to tie the game with 1:10 left in the half.

New England began the second half with a 9-play, 69-yard drive, including four receptions, two on third down, by Branch, and capped by Vrabel’s 2-yard catch.

The Eagles put together a 10-play, 74-yard drive later in the third quarter, keyed by Brian Westbrook’s 4-yard catch on third-and-3, and followed on the next play by his 10-yard touchdown catch to tie the game.

On the ensuing drive, Kevin Faulk caught screen passes of 13 and 14 yards, and had a 12-yard run, and Corey Dillon capped the possession with a 2-yard run with 13:44 remaining for a 21-14 lead.

The Patriots’ defense forced a three-and-out, and Branch’s 19-yard catch set up Adam Vinatieri’s 22-yard field goal with 8:40 to play. Tedy Bruschi intercepted McNabb’s pass at the Patriots’ 24 with 7:20 remaining.

The Eagles forced a punt, and beginning at their own 21 with 5:40 to play, needed 13 plays to drive 79 yards, capped by McNabb’s 30-yard touchdown pass on a post-pattern to Greg Lewis with 1:48 to play.

Christian Fauria recovered the onside kick, but the Eagles’ defense forced a punt. Dexter Reid downed Josh Miller’s 32-yard punt at the Eagles’ 4 with 46 seconds left, and Harrison intercepted McNabb’s pass three plays later to clinch the title.

Brady was 23 of 33 for 236 yards and two touchdowns. Branch earned MVP honors with his Super Bowl-record-tying 11 catches.

McNabb was 30 of 51 for 357 yards and three touchdowns, with three interceptions. Terrell Owens had nine receptions for 122 yards.

[Patler]

It's easy to condemn T.O. based on his ego, but his ability as a WR is beyond approach and we needed such a quality talent in Green Bay. His record as an accomplished WR is before us, and maybe the quiet confines of Green Bay was what may have worked.

The way it is we can only speculate one way or the other, but my opinion is that it would have been better to ink him and wait and see how he reacted. The actual fact on this matter or topic, is that TT doesn't have it in his mind to win this season, so that's what we were really up against when TT could have gone out and got T.O.

I don't care if the entire forum opposes me on this issue. I wanted T.O. in Green Bay not Dallas. That is my position on T.O. and I bet he lights it up this season in Dallas. He is not in a position with HC Bill Parcells to screw up as he has in the past, and the same constraints could have been placed on him with us.

We needed T.O. on OUR roster.I want the Packers to win and T.O. would have served that objective,absolutely.

Besides all that who in "H" are any of us to judge T.O. He certainly is a law abiding citizen. He doesn't carry a gun nor does he lay a beating on the public or harass the police or get accused of sexual assaults.

He just flat out produces points on the board for whomever he plays for.

T.O. and Favre isn't T.O. and McNabb either Shamrockfan.

He flat out produces points and absolutely tears at the cohesiveness and unity of the team. He is a disruptive force as strong as any in the NFL. He WANTED to play with McNabb. What makes you think he would be any better behaved with Favre? McNabb in 2004 was as good a QB as Favre in 2004, and better than what we saw from Favre in 2005. Favre WILL throw some ill-advised passes, its in his nature. He has a bond with Driver, and would likely look to Driver in situations that Owens would think HE should get the ball. Those are the kinds of things that turned Owens against McNabb iin 2004. If he tried to show up an icon like Favre, as he did with McNabb, it would tear the team at its core.

The Packers will be a very young team, with a very new coaching staff. Owens is the last thing they need as an example and as a headache, in my opinion. You seem to think Owens would make a difference, so do I. But I think the sum total of that diffeence would be detrimental to the Packers, both short term and long.

I don't believe it is speculation to think that Ownes would act in GB they way he has for the last 5 or 6 years in SF and Philadelphia. I think Parcells is one of the few coaches that is accepted as abrasive enough to deal with him. Parcells can get awaay with saying and doiing what other coaches might want to but would be criticized for. Parcells is accepted as a sometimes insensitive, politically incorrect, abrasive, yet successful coach. The Packer staff would not have that luxury, and you probably need it to deal with Owens.

[Patler]

Can somebody remind me of the last time a wide receiver was the difference between winning the super bowl or just getting close?

Here you go. Check out who the leading receiver was for the Eagles.It's at the bottom of the recap.

Super Bowl XXXIX

New England 24, Philadelphia 21

Alltel Stadium Jacksonville, Florida February 6, 2005
Attendance: 78,125 MVP: Deion Branch, WR, New England

Tom Brady's passing and Corey Dillon's running helped New England win its third Super Bowl.

Deion Branch had 11 receptions for 133 yards and the Patriots’ defense forced four turnovers en route to becoming the eighth team to post consecutive Super Bowl titles. The Patriots matched the Dallas Cowboys (XXVII, XXVIII, and XXX) as the only teams with three Super Bowl victories in the span of four seasons.

The Eagles threatened first, driving to the Patriots’ 8 late in the first quarter. On first down, Mike Vrabel sacked Donovan McNabb for a 16-yard loss and, after a penalty overturned an interception, Rodney Harrison stepped in front of a pass for an interception at the Patriots’ 4.

Early in the second quarter the Eagles drove 81 yards, keyed by Todd Pinkston’s 40-yard catch, and capped by McNabb’s 6-yard touchdown pass to L.J. Smith on third-and-goal for a 7-0 lead.

The Patriots responded by driving to the Eagles’ 4, but Tom Brady fumbled on a fake handoff attempt and Darwin Walker recovered. Later in the quarter, a 29-yard punt by Dirk Johnson allowed the Patriots to drive just 37 yards, keyed by Branch’s 7-yard catch on third-and-3, and capped by Brady’s pass to David Givens on the right side of the end zone to tie the game with 1:10 left in the half.

New England began the second half with a 9-play, 69-yard drive, including four receptions, two on third down, by Branch, and capped by Vrabel’s 2-yard catch.

The Eagles put together a 10-play, 74-yard drive later in the third quarter, keyed by Brian Westbrook’s 4-yard catch on third-and-3, and followed on the next play by his 10-yard touchdown catch to tie the game.

On the ensuing drive, Kevin Faulk caught screen passes of 13 and 14 yards, and had a 12-yard run, and Corey Dillon capped the possession with a 2-yard run with 13:44 remaining for a 21-14 lead.

The Patriots’ defense forced a three-and-out, and Branch’s 19-yard catch set up Adam Vinatieri’s 22-yard field goal with 8:40 to play. Tedy Bruschi intercepted McNabb’s pass at the Patriots’ 24 with 7:20 remaining.

The Eagles forced a punt, and beginning at their own 21 with 5:40 to play, needed 13 plays to drive 79 yards, capped by McNabb’s 30-yard touchdown pass on a post-pattern to Greg Lewis with 1:48 to play.

Christian Fauria recovered the onside kick, but the Eagles’ defense forced a punt. Dexter Reid downed Josh Miller’s 32-yard punt at the Eagles’ 4 with 46 seconds left, and Harrison intercepted McNabb’s pass three plays later to clinch the title.

Brady was 23 of 33 for 236 yards and two touchdowns. Branch earned MVP honors with his Super Bowl-record-tying 11 catches.

McNabb was 30 of 51 for 357 yards and three touchdowns, with three interceptions. Terrell Owens had nine receptions for 122 yards.

Woodbuck, you just made HIS argument for him. As good as Owens was in that game, Philadelphia still lost. In other words, he was not the difference between winning and getting close, they simply got close and did not win.

[woodbuck27]

Can somebody remind me of the last time a wide receiver was the difference between winning the super bowl or just getting close?

Here you go. Check out who the leading receiver was for the Eagles.It's at the bottom of the recap.

Super Bowl XXXIX

New England 24, Philadelphia 21

Alltel Stadium Jacksonville, Florida February 6, 2005
Attendance: 78,125 MVP: Deion Branch, WR, New England

Tom Brady's passing and Corey Dillon's running helped New England win its third Super Bowl.

Deion Branch had 11 receptions for 133 yards and the Patriots’ defense forced four turnovers en route to becoming the eighth team to post consecutive Super Bowl titles. The Patriots matched the Dallas Cowboys (XXVII, XXVIII, and XXX) as the only teams with three Super Bowl victories in the span of four seasons.

The Eagles threatened first, driving to the Patriots’ 8 late in the first quarter. On first down, Mike Vrabel sacked Donovan McNabb for a 16-yard loss and, after a penalty overturned an interception, Rodney Harrison stepped in front of a pass for an interception at the Patriots’ 4.

Early in the second quarter the Eagles drove 81 yards, keyed by Todd Pinkston’s 40-yard catch, and capped by McNabb’s 6-yard touchdown pass to L.J. Smith on third-and-goal for a 7-0 lead.

The Patriots responded by driving to the Eagles’ 4, but Tom Brady fumbled on a fake handoff attempt and Darwin Walker recovered. Later in the quarter, a 29-yard punt by Dirk Johnson allowed the Patriots to drive just 37 yards, keyed by Branch’s 7-yard catch on third-and-3, and capped by Brady’s pass to David Givens on the right side of the end zone to tie the game with 1:10 left in the half.

New England began the second half with a 9-play, 69-yard drive, including four receptions, two on third down, by Branch, and capped by Vrabel’s 2-yard catch.

The Eagles put together a 10-play, 74-yard drive later in the third quarter, keyed by Brian Westbrook’s 4-yard catch on third-and-3, and followed on the next play by his 10-yard touchdown catch to tie the game.

On the ensuing drive, Kevin Faulk caught screen passes of 13 and 14 yards, and had a 12-yard run, and Corey Dillon capped the possession with a 2-yard run with 13:44 remaining for a 21-14 lead.

The Patriots’ defense forced a three-and-out, and Branch’s 19-yard catch set up Adam Vinatieri’s 22-yard field goal with 8:40 to play. Tedy Bruschi intercepted McNabb’s pass at the Patriots’ 24 with 7:20 remaining.

The Eagles forced a punt, and beginning at their own 21 with 5:40 to play, needed 13 plays to drive 79 yards, capped by McNabb’s 30-yard touchdown pass on a post-pattern to Greg Lewis with 1:48 to play.

Christian Fauria recovered the onside kick, but the Eagles’ defense forced a punt. Dexter Reid downed Josh Miller’s 32-yard punt at the Eagles’ 4 with 46 seconds left, and Harrison intercepted McNabb’s pass three plays later to clinch the title.

Brady was 23 of 33 for 236 yards and two touchdowns. Branch earned MVP honors with his Super Bowl-record-tying 11 catches.

McNabb was 30 of 51 for 357 yards and three touchdowns, with three interceptions. Terrell Owens had nine receptions for 122 yards.

Woodbuck, you just made HIS argument for him. As good as Owens was in that game, Philadelphia still lost. In other words, he was not the difference between winning and getting close, they simply got close and did not win.

Oh come on now man. You are over the top there. Here is the question.

Can somebody remind me of the last time a wide receiver was the difference between winning the super bowl or just getting close?

The winning team was the Pat's and Deion Branch, WR, New England was the Games MVP.

The score was 'in fact' close at 24-21 Pat's and Eagles WR Terrell Owens pressed himself into service, and playing still injured, played outstanding in almost helping his team to vicory.

I clearly have demonstrated that a WR can make a diference in helping his team win a Super Bowl and also . . . almost win or get close to winning in the same Super Bowl.

shamrockfan . . waaaaannnnkkkkk !! :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

[Harlan Huckleby]

I'm not sure what the argument is here, but it's clear that teams don't get to the Super Bowl without excellent receivers.

[retailguy]

I'm not sure what the argument is here, but it's clear that teams don't get to the Super Bowl without excellent receivers.

What about the 2000 ravens that won the super bowl behind the eye popping 655 yards (entire season) of Quadry Ismail? The only one on the team with more receiving yards - Shannon Sharpe the TE with 810.

[Harlan Huckleby]

ok, if you have the best defense in the history of the NFL, you can win Super Bowl without much offense.

[Patler]

Oh come on now man. You are over the top there. Here is the question.

Can somebody remind me of the last time a wide receiver was the difference between winning the super bowl or just getting close?

The winning team was the Pat's and Deion Branch, WR, New England was the Games MVP.

The score was 'in fact' close at 24-21 Pat's and Eagles WR Terrell Owens pressed himself into service, and playing still injured, played outstanding in almost helping his team to vicory.

I clearly have demonstrated that a WR can make a diference in helping his team win a Super Bowl and also . . . almost win or get close to winning in the same Super Bowl.

shamrockfan . . waaaaannnnkkkkk !! :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Sorry Woodbuck, you just CONFIRMED that the wide receivers were NOT the difference makers, and you demonstrated absolutely NOTHING!.

Owens - 9 receptions for 122 yards, 13.6 avg., 0 TDs
Branch - 11 receptions for 133 yards, 12.1 avg., 0 TDs

You aren't suggesting that Branch's 2 receptions for 11 yards was the difference, are you? It simply shows the receivers are NOT the difference makers, in spit of Branch being MVP.

In youR immortal words, "woodbuck27 . . waaaaannnnkkkkk !!"
:mrgreen: :mrgreen:

[woodbuck27]

Oh come on now man. You are over the top there. Here is the question.

Can somebody remind me of the last time a wide receiver was the difference between winning the super bowl or just getting close?

The winning team was the Pat's and Deion Branch, WR, New England was the Games MVP.

The score was 'in fact' close at 24-21 Pat's and Eagles WR Terrell Owens pressed himself into service, and playing still injured, played outstanding in almost helping his team to vicory.

I clearly have demonstrated that a WR can make a diference in helping his team win a Super Bowl and also . . . almost win or get close to winning in the same Super Bowl.

shamrockfan . . waaaaannnnkkkkk !! :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Sorry Woodbuck, you just CONFIRMED that the wide receivers were NOT the difference makers, and you demonstrated absolutely NOTHING!.

Owens - 9 receptions for 122 yards, 13.6 avg., 0 TDs
Branch - 11 receptions for 133 yards, 12.1 avg., 0 TDs

You aren't suggesting that Branch's 2 receptions for 11 yards was the difference, are you? It simply shows the receivers are NOT the difference makers, in spit of Branch being MVP.

In youR immortal words, "woodbuck27 . . waaaaannnnkkkkk !!"
:mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Deion Branch acounted for 133 yards of Tom Brady's total of 236 yards through the air, or 56.4% of the Pat's passing yards in that Super Bowl win. Clearly those 133 yards and Branch's fine day with timely catch's, made a difference in the Pat's victory. Deion Branch was outstanding that day. Didn't you see that game shamrockfan?

Deion Branch was deemed the MVP of Super Bowl XXXIX. Because he was the MVP, he must have made an outstanding contribution to New Englands victory whether you agree with 'that fact' or not shamrockfan. That was a fact. He made 11 catch's in that game and all other players ( or 6 of them) made a total of only one more or 12 catch's. You do the math on that comparison.

On the other side clearly T.O. had the best day. Considering he was playing not in top form health wise. Any day a receiver goes over 100 yards it's considered a fine game for that WR. Well 122 yards in 9 catch's fits that billing. The closest any other Eagle receiver was to T.O.'s performance was Todd Pinkston, with 4 catch's and 82 yards.

I'm not going to get dragged into one of your circle jerk, twisting arguments shamrockfan. You can argue with semantics all you please, but you are losing this one shamrockfan, because of a man named Deion Branch in Super bowl XXXIX. :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Again, I have clearly demonstrated that a WR can be a difference maker in a Super Bowl game, and whenever that WR is voted as the Super Bowl MVP, some people obviously agreed with what I saw in that game. Deion Branch deserved his MVP. He was the difference maker in many fans eyes and in those who awarded him his MVP.

Again shamrockfan. Did you miss that game?

[PackerPro42]

You can't ignore T.O's talent but you also can't ignore his attitude. I think dallas was the perfect place for him because I think Parcells can keep him under rap.

[NewsBruin]

If it were the Holmgren years, I'd have pushed for TO on the team. But right now, I think we need team chemistry and lockerroom optimism more than we need great skill players.

I love Favre, and I think he's an ageless wonder at his position, but I don't know how much he wants to be the leader and Chief Image Rehabber in Green Bay's lockerroom yet again. I honestly think the seasons from Rhodes-present and pressure from being The Man for so long have worn down his desire to do more than do his job and have fun with his teammates.

We did a real good job with Andre Rison in our Super Bowl season. I remember sitting in a dorm room with some Cowboy fans, saying, "Pick up Rison? That would be a deal with the devil right there." And I remember, if for a little while, that Bad Moon looked like he was having fun on the field, including the first touchdown in the Superdome. Shoot, he went from no team risking a contract on him to getting a (I can't remember the terms) 3-year deal with the Chiefs afterward.

But that atmosphere was so different. Brett was an upbeat party guy, and everyone was along for the ride. Since then, we've seen the nagging toll of Chmura, Winters, (proud Baylor Bear) Santana Dotson, Reggie, LeRoy Butler, Freeman, McKenzie, Cletidus, Big Gilbert, and Javon's exits from the team. Rhodes turned our team into Animal House, and Sherman's era polarized people's view of the offense (and by extension, Brett) as the only thing that mattered.

We needed to bring back team unity and a happy lockerroom. What I wanted most, and what I was really impressed by with our draft, is that we picked up wide-eyed, enthusiastic players who think they can win, and who like the organization, especially on defense. For that reason, I was at peace with our decisions to let Javon go and sign A.J. Hawk over the freakish Verron Davis.

I honestly like TO, and it breaks my heart that someone as talented as he is has such a low opinion of his own worth. He can't stand the thought of not being good enough, he fears that people he cares about will abandon him, and he surrounds himself with a chief enabler (next question) who tells him that nobody respects, understands, or appreciates him. There's not enough money, receptions, touchdowns, wins, record celebrations, or public statements of support that can fill the hole in his heart.

If it were another time in Packer history, I'd say we could risk TO, but since Donnovan McNabb, Blessed With The Patience of Job, was unable to keep him co-existing with the team, I don't see how Brett could do that singlehandedly. I don't think our team or staff is established enough to handle that, and I don't think the town would much like everything TO would say about it when his low self-esteem started acting up again.

Maybe with a new environment, new friends, and a new coach, he'll work out, but I don't want to risk it here.

[NewsBruin]

P.S. Andre Rison is now trying out for arena teams.

[Patler]

Deion Branch acounted for 133 yards of Tom Brady's total of 236 yards through the air, or 56.4% of the passing yards in that Super Bowl win. Clearly those 133 yards and Branch's fine day with timely catch's, made a difference in the Pat's victory. Deion Branch was outstanding that day.Didn't you see that game shamrockfan?

On the other side clearly T.O. had the best day. Considering he was playing not in top form health wise. Any day a receiver goes over 100 yards it's considered a fine game for that WR. Well 122 yards in 9 catch's fits that billing. The cosest any other Eagle receiver was to T.O.'s performance was Todd Pinkston with 4 catch's and 82 yards.

I'm not going to get dragged into one of your circle jerk, twisting arguments shamrockfan. :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Again I have clearly demonstrated that a WR can be a difference maker in a Super Bowl game, and whenever that WR is voted as the Super bowl MVP some people obviously agreed with what I saw in that game. Deion Branch deserved his MVP. He was the difference maker in many fans eyes and in those who awarded him his MVP.

Yes, I saw the game, and I thought Owens was the better receiver.
I disagree that you have shown anything. Was Branch a difference maker when Owens had a game equally as good or even better?

Branch got the MVP simply because he set the Super Bowl record for receptions. His yardage was nothing spectacular, especially for the number of catches he had. No touchdowns? How impressive was that???

[Homer Jay]

Dieon Branch had a great game in that super bowl, no doubt about it. But, would the Patriots have made it to the Super Bowl, let alone win it, without Branch? I think the answer is a resounding yes. Could they have replaced Tom Brady? no. Tedy Bruschi? No. Dieon Branch was an important part of why the Patriots got there, but he wasn't a difference maker.

TO, had a great super bowl too. But, don't forget, the Eagles breezed through the playoffs without him, and, despite his great game, lost the game with him.

[woodbuck27]

Deion Branch acounted for 133 yards of Tom Brady's total of 236 yards through the air, or 56.4% of the passing yards in that Super Bowl win. Clearly those 133 yards and Branch's fine day with timely catch's, made a difference in the Pat's victory. Deion Branch was outstanding that day.Didn't you see that game shamrockfan?

On the other side clearly T.O. had the best day. Considering he was playing not in top form health wise. Any day a receiver goes over 100 yards it's considered a fine game for that WR. Well 122 yards in 9 catch's fits that billing. The cosest any other Eagle receiver was to T.O.'s performance was Todd Pinkston with 4 catch's and 82 yards.

I'm not going to get dragged into one of your circle jerk, twisting arguments shamrockfan. :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Again I have clearly demonstrated that a WR can be a difference maker in a Super Bowl game, and whenever that WR is voted as the Super bowl MVP some people obviously agreed with what I saw in that game. Deion Branch deserved his MVP. He was the difference maker in many fans eyes and in those who awarded him his MVP.

Yes, I saw the game, and I thought Owens was the better receiver.
I disagree that you have shown anything. Was Branch a difference maker when Owens had a game equally as good or even better?

Branch got the MVP simply because he set the Super Bowl record for receptions. His yardage was nothing spectacular, especially for the number of catches he had. No touchdowns? How impressive was that???

"Branch got the MVP simply because he set the Super Bowl record for receptions." shamrockfan 'the (I wonder) argument man' :mrgreen:

There YOU go ! You make my case for me - THANKS shamrockfan. Now imagine how impressed we would all be, if he had hauled in a touchdown pass. NOT ! Not. . if you saw that game.

The way he played it wasn't - all that mattered. He certainly helped big time to set things up to score. You can't paint a house before you purchase the paint. Eh !

Setting the ALL time record for receptions (tieing that record), would be considered a difference maker to most people. If your not one of them, I appreciate that for whatever is important to you man. Whatever floats YOUR boat, shamrockfan.

ref: circle jerk arguments

[Homer Jay]

I'd say the 4 forced turnovers by the Patriot defense was more of a difference maker than 11 catches. Branch had a big game, but he wasn't the deciding factor.

[Homer Jay]

I fear I did a bad job of asking my question. I'll try again.

When is the last time the signing of a big name free agent wide receiver put the team over the top and made them super bowl contenders?

[woodbuck27]

I'd say the 4 forced turnovers by the Patriot defense was more of a difference maker than 11 catches. Branch had a big game, but he wasn't the deciding factor.

Then how about last year's Super Bowl? WR Hines Ward winning that Bowls MVP?

Ward, caught five passes for 123 yards and a touchdown in the Steelers' 21-10 victory over Seattle in Super Bowl XL.

How soon we forget.

Then there was WR Jerry Rice winning the MVP in Super Bowl XXIII.Another WR with 11 catch's in a Super Bowl. His 215 receiving yards, on 11 catches, were a single-game best. Using Rice's talents and the most famous drive in Super Bowl history, the 49ers became the first NFC team to win three Super Bowls with their 20-16 victory over Cincinnati.

Following Stanford Jennings' kickoff-return touchdown that gave the Bengals the lead, Rice's 14-yard touchdown catch from Joe Montana tied the score at 13-13. A Jim Breech field goal with less than four minutes remaining gave Cincinnati the lead, but the 49ers one more shot. Moving 92 yards in 11 plays, including several key catches by Rice, the 49ers drove to the winning touchdown, a 10-yard pass from Montana to John Taylor.

Then in Super Bowl XI WR Fred Biletnikoff won the MVP. He helped Oakland win its first NFL title with a 32-14 victory over Minnesota. While Biletnikoff had only 4 receptions for 79 yards, three of his catches set up short Oakland touchdowns.

Finally in Super Bowl X, WR Lynn Swann won the MVP. Lynn Swann, who set a then Super Bowl record with 161 receiving yards on 4 catches and earned Most Valuable Player honors.

A 64-yard touchdown pass from future two-time Super Bowl MVP Terry Bradshaw to Swann late in the fourth quarter proved to be the decisive score.

Earlier in the game, Swann had made a couple of acrobatic catches. One of them, a juggling, tumbling, 53-yard catch in the second quarter, is one of the Super Bowl's greatest plays. Stumbling over a defender, Swann was horizontal, parallel with the field in midair when he caught the pass.

WR's certainly made differences in Super Bowl games.

[Patler]

Deion Branch acounted for 133 yards of Tom Brady's total of 236 yards through the air, or 56.4% of the passing yards in that Super Bowl win. Clearly those 133 yards and Branch's fine day with timely catch's, made a difference in the Pat's victory. Deion Branch was outstanding that day.Didn't you see that game shamrockfan?

On the other side clearly T.O. had the best day. Considering he was playing not in top form health wise. Any day a receiver goes over 100 yards it's considered a fine game for that WR. Well 122 yards in 9 catch's fits that billing. The cosest any other Eagle receiver was to T.O.'s performance was Todd Pinkston with 4 catch's and 82 yards.

I'm not going to get dragged into one of your circle jerk, twisting arguments shamrockfan. :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Again I have clearly demonstrated that a WR can be a difference maker in a Super Bowl game, and whenever that WR is voted as the Super bowl MVP some people obviously agreed with what I saw in that game. Deion Branch deserved his MVP. He was the difference maker in many fans eyes and in those who awarded him his MVP.

Yes, I saw the game, and I thought Owens was the better receiver.
I disagree that you have shown anything. Was Branch a difference maker when Owens had a game equally as good or even better?

Branch got the MVP simply because he set the Super Bowl record for receptions. His yardage was nothing spectacular, especially for the number of catches he had. No touchdowns? How impressive was that???

"Branch got the MVP simply because he set the Super Bowl record for receptions." shamrockfan 'the (I wonder) argument man' :mrgreen:

There YOU go ! You make my case for me - THANKS shamrockfan. Now imagine how impressed we would all be, if he had hauled in a touchdown pass. NOT ! Not. . if you saw that game.

The way he played it wasn't - all that mattered. he certainly helped big time to set things up to score. You can't paint a house before you purchase the paint. Eh !

Setting the ALL time record for receptions, would be considered a difference maker to most people. If your not one of them, I appreciate that for whatever is important to you maan. Whatever floats YOUR boat, shamrockfan.

ref: circle jerk arguments

I don't quite understand your "circle jerk arguments" comments. If you prefer that I do not respond to your arguments in the future, just say the word and I will be happy to comply. You will be the third member of this board to whom I will no longer respond, if you find my arguments that offensive. I'm not here to antagonize you, only to disagree with you!!!

To me, it defies logic to suggest that receiver "A" made the difference in the game by catching 11 passes for 130 yards when an opposing receiver "B" caught 9 passes for 120 yards. The difference between "A" and "B" is not sufficient to suggest either was a "difference maker". I don't believe those stats alone support an argument that either one was the difference maker on teams that had 331 and 369 yards respectively in total offense. Especially when neither had a TD. Branch's longest reception was 27 yards. He had a very nice game, but I just can not agree that he "made the difference" between winning and losing.

Brady's 23 of 33 with 0 interceptions for a rating of 110.2 was equally good

Heck, the Patriots punting was good all day, long with virtually no returns or touchbacks several times put the Eagles inside the 20. Perhaps the punter should have had more consideration of his "value" to the win.

In reality, as others mentioned the difference in turnovers was probably as much the "difference maker" as anything.

MVP awards should be "MMP" awards for "Most Memorable Player," not "Most Valuable".

[MadtownPacker]

Have you forgotten the sideline silliness that went on between Owens and McNabb?
I always laugh when I see this replayed. THIS is why the eagles lost in the SB. Not cuz of owens, cuz of mamaboy mcnabb! His throwing a tantrum on the sidelines had to bring the team down. I recall they got whupped up that game.

At the end of the SB mcnabb had a chance to drive down the field, win the game and make his name in history (not to mention that the 28-24 score would have won me the SB pool) but instead fell flat on his face with the most pathetic late game drive I have ever seen.

owens just needs a QB that is larger then life, someone like .. Brett Favre!!

[woodbuck27]

"To me, it defies logic to suggest that receiver "A" made the difference in the game by catching 11 passes for 130 yards when an opposing receiver "B" caught 9 passes for 120 yards. The difference between "A" and "B" is not sufficient to suggest either was a "difference maker"." shamrockfan

Your saying shamrockfan that A (almost ='s) B . . . therefore they cancel one another or more or less. That is a bogus argument and thus 'the circle jerk argument' response.

Each of these WR's, Branch and T.O. contributed alot to their respective teams hopes for a win, with great individual performances. To discount their respective contributions, by stateing, that one almost matched the other in performance, and then just forget those performances, as in ,they were not an impact on the results, is bogus in this discussion.

It doesn't compute.

I am not arguing with you shamrockfan. I rather disagree with your view. Is that OK with you?

Both Branch and Terrell Owens, made a huge contribution to their teams efforts during that Super Bowl game. They were difference makers towards a possible victory for either side.The difference in the score was a mere 3 points. Therefore 'the Pat's victory' weighed in Branch's favor, and he got the recognition he deserved. Game MVP. He was again, a difference maker to get that recognition

You can put whatever twist on it, that suits your need to have your view accepted, as you see fit. Whatever suits your needs shamrockfan. You don't have to fly off all indignant, because I disagree with you.

Lighten up PLEASE. :mrgreen:

Terrell Owens was also very strong for the Eagles and just having him in that game made it close. As you recall, he was doubtful right up to a day or so before the game, and he gave it all he had and played outstanding. His presence and performance, especially considering his condition of not being 100%, made that game as close as it was. He was a difference maker.

Branch 's performance was bigger in my eyes, as his team won.

Incidently Dan Ross also had 11 receptions for Cincinnati in Super Bowl XVI against the 49ers. San Fran 26 - Cincinnati 21.

Jerry Rice had 11 receptions in Super Bowl XXIII. San Fran 20 - Cin. 16.

[woodbuck27]

If it were the Holmgren years, I'd have pushed for TO on the team. But right now, I think we need team chemistry and lockerroom optimism more than we need great skill players.

I love Favre, and I think he's an ageless wonder at his position, but I don't know how much he wants to be the leader and Chief Image Rehabber in Green Bay's lockerroom yet again. I honestly think the seasons from Rhodes-present and pressure from being The Man for so long have worn down his desire to do more than do his job and have fun with his teammates.

We did a real good job with Andre Rison in our Super Bowl season. I remember sitting in a dorm room with some Cowboy fans, saying, "Pick up Rison? That would be a deal with the devil right there." And I remember, if for a little while, that Bad Moon looked like he was having fun on the field, including the first touchdown in the Superdome. Shoot, he went from no team risking a contract on him to getting a (I can't remember the terms) 3-year deal with the Chiefs afterward.

But that atmosphere was so different. Brett was an upbeat party guy, and everyone was along for the ride. Since then, we've seen the nagging toll of Chmura, Winters, (proud Baylor Bear) Santana Dotson, Reggie, LeRoy Butler, Freeman, McKenzie, Cletidus, Big Gilbert, and Javon's exits from the team. Rhodes turned our team into Animal House, and Sherman's era polarized people's view of the offense (and by extension, Brett) as the only thing that mattered.

We needed to bring back team unity and a happy lockerroom. What I wanted most, and what I was really impressed by with our draft, is that we picked up wide-eyed, enthusiastic players who think they can win, and who like the organization, especially on defense. For that reason, I was at peace with our decisions to let Javon go and sign A.J. Hawk over the freakish Verron Davis.

I honestly like TO, and it breaks my heart that someone as talented as he is has such a low opinion of his own worth. He can't stand the thought of not being good enough, he fears that people he cares about will abandon him, and he surrounds himself with a chief enabler (next question) who tells him that nobody respects, understands, or appreciates him. There's not enough money, receptions, touchdowns, wins, record celebrations, or public statements of support that can fill the hole in his heart.

If it were another time in Packer history, I'd say we could risk TO, but since Donnovan McNabb, Blessed With The Patience of Job, was unable to keep him co-existing with the team, I don't see how Brett could do that singlehandedly. I don't think our team or staff is established enough to handle that, and I don't think the town would much like everything TO would say about it when his low self-esteem started acting up again.

Maybe with a new environment, new friends, and a new coach, he'll work out, but I don't want to risk it here.


I appreciate your view in this post and welcome to OUR forum NewsBruin. :mrgreen:

GO Packers!

[Patler]

Why all the personal attacks Woodbuck? The only one that is indignant is you. I have not resorted to name calling as you have. I have only offered opinions that are contrary to yours. Is that OK with you, or am I compelled to agree with you???? I offered to not debate with you simply because you seem to find my reponses offensive for some reason, even though I have attacked only your argument and your reasoning on this particular subjuect, not you or your opinions generally, as you have with me. But whatever makes you feel in control, I guess. On to the discussion:

When similar performances result in a win for won and a loss for the other, I would suggest that performances from those positions are not "difference making" If they were the critical factors, why did the one lose?

I think a WR can be a difference maker, but not that often. To me it is a game in which he makes outstanding catches, outstanding runs after the catch, or otherwise performs unexpectedly with a bunch of TDs, getting open deep, etc. Its a game when he is an extraordinarily large part of the offense. Branch's 130 yards was not that in the Super Bowl. Merely catching a relatively large number of throws (for relatively unimpressive yardage in this instance) is not that impressive. Sometimes a QB simply locks onto a receiver because of certain matchups or patterns that are unususally productive in a particular game. I don't recall Branch doing anything especially impressive other than catching 11 balls that were thrown to him.

Look at Sterling Sharpe'e career for example. He was not a great receiver simply because he caught so many passes, after all many of his receptions were the very short patterns barely off the line of scrimmage that will be open all the time. If the QB throws it and he can catch, he will have a lot of receptions. Not an impressive thing. Sharpe was a great receiver because of what he did after those receptions. He abused DBs with his runs after the catch by both evading them and overpowering them. He also managed to get deep a lot, because DBs had to respect the short patterns with him. If they played too far off, he turned short receptions into very long gains. Because of that respect by the DBs, he could get past them and get open down field even though he was not particularly fast. For several years, Sharpe was the Packer offense.

[Partial]

I fear I did a bad job of asking my question. I'll try again.

When is the last time the signing of a big name free agent wide receiver put the team over the top and made them super bowl contenders?

Well, the Ravens, Eagles, and Cowboys were all supposed to be put over the top when TO arrived. Though he wasn't a free agent, Steve Smith took an average team and made them a contender returning from surgery on his leg. There are definitely more players, but its unfair to say that they have to come from A. Free Agency, and B. Have to put a team over the top.

TO is a difference maker. Barry Sanders was a difference maker. Brett Favre is a difference maker. It doesn't matter what position a difference maker plays, just so long as you have them. No doubt TO would have made the offense very, very good. He would have made DD one of the best #2 in the league, and we would have had a ton of ability to stretch the field, as well as go with the McCarthy WCO since TO has the size and speed desired. No doubt he is a valuable asset, but to me there is also little doubt that it is just not worth it. He's a pain in the ass that will tear your team apart after a year in the spotlight.

[Zool]

Cmon....This guy made the catch in 99 and you want him around? I will forever hate T.O. for that reason alone.

Oh and he's a grade A jackass. Doing situps in his front yard so the press can film him? He definately got weened from his mommy too early.

[Partial]

Cmon....This guy made the catch in 99 and you want him around? I will forever hate T.O. for that reason alone.

Oh and he's a grade A jackass. Doing situps in his front yard so the press can film him? He definately got weened from his mommy too early.

Anyone ever consider that he's on roids and thats why he's
A. such a physical specimen
B. recovers so fast from severe injury
C. such a jackass

[jack's smirking revenge]

What's one more headcase in G.B.? Seems like we have to deal with one each year. McKenzie and Walker come to mind. Seemed like great, level-headed players. Attitude turned on a dime when it came to cash. 90% of NFL players are egotistical, but can you blame them? The NFL is ENTERTAINMENT. They are entertainers. T.O. is a soap-opera character, just like Brett Favre. Yes, I said them in the same sentence. I'm not comparing the two, but they are similar in how the media flocks to them for a story or for a soundbyte.

I think chemistry is important. Right now, the Packers have very little with all of the new faces in the mix. T.O. could've come in and played his heart out and showed that he's a leader. Would he have adversely affected chemistry? Very possible. He's got a track record of it. But he's also got a track record of being one of the best WRs in the game in recent years.

What I've read has said Dallas will be one of the teams to beat in the NFC in 2006--primarily because of the acquisition of T.O. His attitude and talent are both undeniable.

The bottom line is that the point is somewhat moot: there's NO WAY he would've played in G.B., regardless of the fat cash that could've been offered. G.B. is too small for T.O.--from marketing and social perspectives. His endorsement deals would be limited if he decided to go to (currently) one of the worst teams in the league in one of the smallest markets in the NFL.

tyler

[cpk1994]

[quote=pack4ever]I fear I did a bad job of asking my question. I'll try again.

TO is a difference maker. Barry Sanders was a difference maker. Brett Favre is a difference maker.

And yet, only one of the three has a ring.

[cpk1994]

San Fran 20 - Cin. 16.[/b]

I would say John Talyor a differnce maker in that game as he caught the game winner.

[cpk1994]

OF course, these same experts picked the VIKINGS to win the NFC North last year after they spent all that money on defense. The "experts" mean nothing.

[woodbuck27]

The bottom line is that the point is somewhat moot: there's NO WAY he would've played in G.B., regardless of the fat cash that could've been offered. G.B. is too small for T.O.--from marketing and social perspectives. His endorsement deals would be limited if he decided to go to (currently) one of the worst teams in the league in one of the smallest markets in the NFL.

tyler

Concentrating on the original question.

My thought here tyler is that Favre to T.O - TOUCHDOWN - would have been very familiar to us in 2006 and maybe beyond this season.

T.O. playing with Brett certainly wouldn't translate to suffering for us on the scoreboard, as he would naturally have been conceded the #1 WR spot.Donald Driver would have still seen plenty of work. Then a player like Greg Jennings develops naturally in 2-3 seasons but many are saying he'll be OUR #2 WR.That is a heavy load to place on the head of any Rookie WR in the NFL.It takes time to develop and if it's Jennings at #2 WR what does that really say of the rest that Ted Thompson has available? Now in TT's favor I weigh in with the Javon Walker slap in the face fiasco but we didn't count on him in 2006 anyway coming off his leg injury.

These two players Favre and Owens, would both benefit from the other, raising their commercial status and commercial shoots and promo's are set up in the off season anyway in whatever location. Favre was just in Chicago for such a venture and he has been busy all off season making the BIG bucks.

You certainly don't see Favre suffer in the area of money from commerrcials as I believe he made about $15 million last year (near the top for all NFL players) and his popularity is on the rise now, despite the much talked about 29 picks. Weren't those 29 picks last year? Wern't T.O.'s problems in the past. If TT had of gone out and got him wouldn't we be behind T.O.?

It was an intriguing possibility that flew past us but T.O. and the Green Bay Packers was simply - my wish. It was Brett Favre's also.

I feel that we flat out missed the boat here,and to me that is sad given OUR present concerns at the WR position.I won't go into TT's dedication to winning in 2006 as it's obvious to me in his off season moves he wasn't interested in points up on the board. Maybe he felt Javon Walker would be OK and Green and Najeh back good and strong from injuries all, but that isn't generally going to happen.

We needed T.O.

[woodbuck27]

"Why all the personal attacks Woodbuck? The only one that is indignant is you. I have not resorted to name calling as you have. I have only offered opinions that are contrary to yours. Is that OK with you, or am I compelled to agree with you???? I offered to not debate with you simply because you seem to find my reponses offensive for some reason, even though I have attacked only your argument and your reasoning on this particular subjuect, not you or your opinions generally, as you have with me. But whatever makes you feel in control, I guess." shamrockfan

I am not attacking you. Try to get over YOURSELF please.

I am doing my best to understand your views shamrockfan, but feel that you are a tad heavy on the anti-T.O. prejudice, as a foundation for those views. You are against T.O. it would appear, and that is your perogative.

In the poll, slightly less than 50% agree with you in the question of should he be in Green Bay or not. Many disagree with my position and that is fair. I in no way, expect to sway you or anyone else opposed to T.O. I respect your opposing stances.

You and I simply disagree on the original question of T.O. in, or not in Green Bay. Your a NO and I'm a yes. End of that.

I am not arguing with you shamrockfan. I have done my best to defend my positions although they went off the original topic, and have attempted to do so with solid facts, decent manners and some humor shamrockfan. I don't want to be right but I do want to feel disappointed that T.O. isn't a Packer. Inspite of your stance shamrockfan, that T.O. and Green Bay would have been a destructive and disruptive relationship.

Now , after reading the remainder of your last post, I'll atempt to respond. I need to spend some time to understand it first. Your a different man and it won't be easy, for me to get the proper insight into your thinking. I'm not at all hip to your debating style.

A choice of weapons is pistols or swords not my sword against your sword and pistol shamrockfan.

[jack's smirking revenge]

Concentrating on the original question.



I agree we "need" T.O. based on our personnel gaps. Essentially, the marriage of Favre and T.O., just based on the pure skill of each, would have been an amazing pairing. But the original question is truly more complex than that. You need to consider chemistry, value, interests, ego, etc. G.B., regardless of Favre's support, was probably the LAST place T.O. wanted to go. I don't think we were ever really in the race for T.O. There are NFL football entertainers and then there's T.O. He's a man with amazing talent and an amazing ego, an ego which eclipses most teams and sucks up the spotlight like a black hole. Heck, there are even questions as to whether or not Parcells and Jones will be able to control him in Dallas. Two other teams haven't been able to and I believe Parcells is a helluva coach, but a T.O. project has yet to fully succeed for a team. T.O. gets his numbers, at the expense of everyone else.

There is no team with T.O. The Favre-T.O. matchup intrigues me, but I don't think it would've worked to the perfection you described. Wishful thinking. Never hurts to dream though.

tyler

[woodbuck27]

Concentrating on the original question.




There is no team with T.O. The Favre-T.O. matchup intrigues me, but I don't think it would've worked to the perfection you described. Wishful thinking. Never hurts to dream though.

tyler

The original question:

Would you have liked T.O on the packers for a 2 year contract?

Date: Thurs. 6 July,2006.

YES 53% [ 32 ]
NO 46% [ 28 ]

tyler:

I wanted T.O. in Green Bay obviously, because I believe that the reality I see, warranted a 2 year committment between T.O and the Packers. Why? Because of the potential good (not bad ) that prospect may have delivered on.

I don't hold that T.O. is really a BAD guy. His talent and productivity is outstanding and a two year commitment on both sides did intrigue me.

For that to happen, T.O. would have wanted to be with us, but TT had to want him and demonstrate that was the bottom line in his pursuit of T.O. in a reasonable sense. He didn't cost Dallas the bank.

As it's turned out, I feel we paid too much for the services of Charles Woodson and where has he been? T.O. is given errr in Dallas and we have Woodson. Both have ego issues but at least T.O. is demonstrating a positive committment . . . and we have Charles Woodson.

In a fantasy world based on all I see. I would trade Charles Woodson straight up now for Terrell Owens in a heartbeat. The upside that T.O. could have given to us is as I see it, greater than what Charles Wooodson is and will give us.

T.O. would have been a better acquisition for us given OUR needs today.

[Patler]

I am not arguing with you shamrockfan. I have done my best to defend my positions although they went off the original topic, and have attempted to do so with solid facts, decent manners and some humor shamrockfan.

Well, dear Woodbuck, apparently your idea of manners are different than mine. I have not called you or your arguments by a single derogatory term (except when I quoted you in reference to me) yet you referred to me as a wanker and my arguments as a circle jerk.

Some manners!

[Patler]

Now , after reading the remainder of your last post, I'll atempt to respond.

Don't bother. This topic is dead as far as I'm concerned. There isn't anything more to say. You want Owens, and think he could have helped. I think the young Packer team and coaches are better off without him, in spite of his talent. Our positions are pretty clear.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Woody, what Shamrock is saying is that you are dead to him.

[Patler]

Woody, what Shamrock is saying is that you are dead to him.

Harlan, you must suspect I am part of the Irish Mafia! :mrgreen:

Actually, I'm just T.O'd out!

[woodbuck27]

Now , after reading the remainder of your last post, I'll atempt to respond.

Don't bother. This topic is dead as far as I'm concerned. There isn't anything more to say. You want Owens, and think he could have helped. I think the young Packer team and coaches are better off without him, in spite of his talent. Our positions are pretty clear.

Exactly shamrockfan. We disagree on this issue and that isn't abnormal.

I respect your position on this issue. :mrgreen:

[woodbuck27]

Woody, what Shamrock is saying is that you are dead to him.

Harlan, you must suspect I am part of the Irish Mafia! :mrgreen:

Actually, I'm just T.O'd out!

Me too shamrockfan and the issue is actually moot in any case. Still an interesting debate.

I'm not a member of the Irish Mafia but I am Irish. :mrgreen:

[woodbuck27]

I am not arguing with you shamrockfan. I have done my best to defend my positions although they went off the original topic, and have attempted to do so with solid facts, decent manners and some humor shamrockfan.

Well, dear Woodbuck, apparently your idea of manners are different than mine. I have not called you or your arguments by a single derogatory term (except when I quoted you in reference to me) yet you referred to me as a wanker and my arguments as a circle jerk.

Some manners!

Dear Gaud! Isn't LIFE hard.

shamrockfan. I certainly never referred to you as a wanker. What iis a wanker?

My guess.

An arrogant Englishman presiding as a member of a panel of judges in any talent contest . ????

I symbolized blowing a horn on you as in waaaaannnkkkk (in jest)! Not refer to you as 'a wanker'. I hope that is clear to you now.

After clearly establishing credability in respect to supporting my position that WR's have made a difference in Super Bowl's, you decided to contradict my position. No problem, but I said, I would not get involved in any circle jerk arguments. I have no problem if you are opposed, indifferent or otherwise negative to my position.

OK?

In reference to your manner of arguing. I said I would not engage in such (an argument), as I feel, my position was fair and supported. If you disagree again that is fine by me.

Maybe you may realize that I was being fair, and a gentleman in accordance to you.

Disagreement is often good shamrockfan.

[Bossman641]

Of course wide receivers can be difference-makers in any game, including the Super Bowl of course.

I agree with the earlier post that the better question would be, "When was the last time a free agent WR acquisition lifted his team to a SB victory 1 or 2 years after joining the team?"

Just for the record, I wouldn't want TO on the team. He is an amazing talent but he has caused problems everywhere he has went. What makes you think he would change his ways now? AND he did this under Mariucci and Reid, two well-respected and established coaches. I just think that TO would cause massive problems to such a young team like ours with a totally unproven coaching staff.

I remember reading somewhere that Walsh tried to get Owens to go to a shrink when he was with the 49ers but TO refused. He's a great player, but he definitely has some issues.

[woodbuck27]

"He's a great player, but he definitely has some issues." Bossman641

I certainly wouldn't waaauuunnnkkk that statement.

Isn't that the TRUTH.

[woodbuck27]

For what it's worth. Owens states his case in a book.

Birds paying no attention to latest from T.O.

Bob Grotz, Of the Times Staff07/07/2006
Email to a friendPost a CommentPrinter-friendly

The Eagles are treating Terrell Owens’ controversial new book as if it’s history -- ancient history, at that. While Eagles fans, players and club employees clamored to find copies of "T.O.," the 200-plus page $25 book in stores but not scheduled to hit the streets until July 11, author Jason Rosenhaus, brother of Owens’ agent Drew Rosenhaus, painted the notorious ex-Eagle as the ultimate victim.


According to excerpts from "T.O.," Owens was wronged by, among others, the Eagles’ front office, for not rewarding him with a new contract after his courageous comeback in Super Bowl XXXIX following a serious ankle injury; quarterback Donovan McNabb, whom he accused of jealousy; and Richard Bloch, the arbitrator who upheld the Eagles’ four-game suspension of Owens last season for conduct detrimental to the team.


Owens intimated Andy Reid was ready to reinstate him following his Nov. 4 suspension until McNabb remarked after the team’s first T.O.-less loss, to the Washington Redskins, "We might be better off without him."

Owens accused McNabb of telling him to "Shut the bleep up" after he complained to his quarterback that he was wide open in a victory two years ago over the New York Giants at the Meadowlands. Owens said he was the primary receiver and that McNabb purposely threw to another teammate.

"Donovan was never the same with me again," Owens said in an excerpt. "Things were only going to get worse."

McNabb has denied the Meadowlands episode took place.

Attempts to reach McNabb for comment Thursday were unsuccessful.

Reid, Eagles owner Jeffrey Lurie and club president Joe Banner were on vacation and unavailable for comment.

Attempts to reach Eagles players, who report to training camp in two weeks, were unsuccessful.

Eagles football media relations director Derek Boyko said the organization is looking ahead -- not in the rearview mirror.

"We were aware the book was coming out and that it would be controversial," Boyko said Thursday. "But we’re not going to worry about last year. We’re going to focus on this year. The team is focused on only the 2006 season. Everything that happened in the past we will keep in the past."

Cut by the Eagles, Owens signed with the Dallas Cowboys a few months ago. The teams get together Oct. 8 at Lincoln Financial Field. The Eagles play at Dallas Christmas day.

By then McNabb will have addressed much of Owens’ criticisms, including the contention that an unnamed Eagles offensive coach cautioned the wide receiver that "Donovan can get nervous and tight in big games" prior to a super-hyped game at Pittsburgh two seasons ago.

Owens maintains the offensive coach "wanted me to be there for Donovan and help him get through it." Owens demonstratively paced the sideline yelling at McNabb during the disappointing blowout loss, the quarterback turning away from the receiver again and again.

Owens had flattering things to say about a handful of teammates that stuck by him. The list is headed by Pro Bowl middle linebacker Jeremiah Trotter, and includes wide receiver Todd Pinkston, practice squad player Justin Jenkins and running back Correll Buckhalter. All but Trotter sat out the 2005 season with injuries.

Owens also spoke of his training room altercation with Hugh Douglas, the former Eagle acting as the team’s "ambassador." Owens said Douglas accused him of faking an injury.

[Packers4Ever]

Besides that T.O. made it clear, as did Favre that they wanted one another.

So what if they wanted each other? Owens hand-picked Philadelphia as the team he wanted just two years ago, and he was a disruptive influence even in his first season there. Have you forgotten the sideline silliness that went on between Owens and McNabb?

So what if he and Favre wanted each other. What if Owens took the attitude toward the coaches that he did in Philadelphia? Have you forgotten his "Don't talk to me!" mandate to the Assistant coaches? Reid and his staff are pretty well respected, experienced and successful. I think it would have been a huge mistake to saddle a brand new staff in GB, with an inexperienced head coach, with the potential problems of Owens. I suspect Owens would have tried immediately to establish himself as the alpha male in the pack (or "on the Packers" :lol: ).

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

I'm with you and all others 'voting' no, Sham. TO in Green and Gold? Barf !!! It would only be a matter of time before TO would be testing
out our new and inexperienced coaches and demanding the respect which he feels is due him. Let the 'Boys have him, they have a coach who will stand for none of TO's ego display.

[the_idle_threat]

This is a debate with some merit on both sides. However, I would think the weight of the evidence yields a clear "No" answer.

On one hand, we have a top-notch football talent who could elevate the Packer offense. Assuming all stay healthy, a Favre-TO-Driver combo could be near unstoppable.

On the other hand, we have a guy who is completely out of touch with reality, and nobody can tell him "no". His me-first attitude is polarizing in the locker room, and everything we know about Brett leads me to believe the two would end up on opposite sides when sides are taken. Even when one, the other, or both have departed, the rift would remain until the roster is turned over completely.

The potential short-term gain is simply overwhelmed by the inevitable long-term consequences. Let T.O. break up the Cowboys instead. Although I like and respect Bill Parcells' ability to lead, I see things ending badly there nonetheless. T.O. is just that far out there ...

[woodbuck27]

This is a debate with some merit on both sides. However, I would think the weight of the evidence yields a clear "No" answer.

On one hand, we have a top-notch football talent who could elevate the Packer offense. Assuming all stay healthy, a Favre-TO-Driver combo could be near unstoppable.

On the other hand, we have a guy who is completely out of touch with reality, and nobody can tell him "no". His me-first attitude is polarizing in the locker room, and everything we know about Brett leads me to believe the two would end up on opposite sides when sides are taken. Even when one, the other, or both have departed, the rift would remain until the roster is turned over completely.

The potential short-term gain is simply overwhelmed by the inevitable long-term consequences. Let T.O. break up the Cowboys instead. Although I like and respect Bill Parcells' ability to lead, I see things ending badly there nonetheless. T.O. is just that far out there ...

Solid post the_idle_threat !

Very well put across and I respect that.

Now for all you who are trying or are successful in voting "NO' twice or more :mrgreen: I maintain my position that I wanted T.O. to get his next chance with OUR Team.

He and Brett Favre would have lit it up, and if he could have accepted his role with us. Donald Driver would have been even more than we saw last season !

Donald Driver made way over the top - too many receptions given that he was covered heavily as Favre's, only real go-to guy, and with T.O. on the line of scrimmage it would have really lent to improving the passing attack.

[Bretsky]

I'm down the middle on TO; if I was the GM and thought getting TO in could get us to the Super Bowl in the next two years I'd roll the dice. But you have to believe he can get you to a title because there is a huge risk.

I don't know of TT feels we're that close.

[woodbuck27]

I'm down the middle on TO; if I was the GM and thought getting TO in could get us to the Super Bowl in the next two years I'd roll the dice. But you have to believe he can get you to a title because there is a huge risk.

I don't know of TT feels we're that close.

Heck TT didn't even flat out know if he even had Brett Favre.

I really believe. Dam we would have been dangerous on Offence with Terrell Owens and Favre teamed up with DD wide on the other side. With a decent season from Bubba and a running back that could catch the pass and skoot, we would have given alot of teams misery.

[MJZiggy]

Perhaps Jennings will one day be the next TO and you'll be glad TT saved the money to pay him instead.

[woodbuck27]

Perhaps Jennings will one day be the next TO and you'll be glad TT saved the money to pay him instead.

REALITY.

That hope - or for another like him ( pure talent wise, and no ego issue attached like a tatoo ) to come along FOR us - is all I've got left Ziggy.

With all this greed for money I wonder how long we really have to wait?

[Packers4Ever]

I just thought of something else - supposing we did have TO and Brett had

a dynamite year, (he's due for it) given TO's thirst for praise, attention and

glory, could Brett's returning super star status cause TO to return to some

of his old ways, being demanding, accusing, etc... ? After all, there would

then be 2 super stars on the field and frankly I don't think TO's ego could

handle that. Before you know it, Brett wouldn't be passing to TO as often as

TO wanted the ball and here we go again with another ruckus, like the ones

before it. Couldn't you see this happening?

[Bretsky]

OR

Brett Favre's career could have been given a spark of fire with two awesome weapons to throw to and we make the playoffs and Favre throws 30TD's and he decides to play longer. So he comes back for another year after excelling this year again.

It could happen.

As a GM, though, I would not want to structure a long term deal with TO. I think he's a time bomb that will go off eventually. If you can get two good years out of him w/o him going off you did well.

[Packers4Ever]

Frankly I like your thoughts better than mine, Bretsky, :smile:

but I also agree that TO could very well be a time bomb waiting

to happen. Has all the earmarks.....

[MJZiggy]

They say the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. :shock:

[Bretsky]

More Classifieds... Merchandise Rummage Sales Tickets Contests JS ONLINE: SPORTS: PACKERS: E-MAIL | PRINT
THIS STORY



Packers helped birth legend of T.O.
Posted: July 8, 2006
SportsDay



Bob Wolfley
E-MAIL

For you Green Bay Packers fans who believe that Dallas Cowboys receiver Terrell Owens is the pastor of the Wonder of Me Church where many contemporary athletes worship, you're going to be disappointed about what he says in his new book, "T.O.," written with Jason Rosenhaus.

Owens writes that if it wasn't for one particular game, one moment in one particular game, he would not have become T.O., the irresistible football force, the immovable cultural icon he is today.

Without this moment, he'd be plain old Terrell trying to eke out a shabby existence somewhere, instead of the magnificent specimen of achievement in the National Football League he has come to represent.

This moment freed him to become the colossus he was destined to become. Without this moment, there would be no book.

Yes, Packers fans, your team is the one that caused T.O. to become all that he has become.

Who is to blame for giving birth to T.O.? Say it ain't so, T.O.

The Green Bay Packers.

"That game changed my career," Owens writes about the San Francisco 49ers' victory over the Packers on Jan. 3, 1999. "That one play turned me into a hero set on a path toward stardom. One play can really mean that much. This game is very unforgiving, and all it takes is one play to haunt a player for the remainder of his career. At the same time, one catch can make a player into a hero forever."

Owens is referring to the playoff game at 3Com Park in his third season, when he caught a 25-yard touchdown pass from Steve Young with 3 seconds left in the game to beat the Packers, 30-27.

"I gained a tremendous amount of confidence in myself and knew deep down now that I was a winner!" Owens writes.

The play that resulted in the touchdown was called the "all go double comeback" play, which "was designed for two receivers on the outside to run straight into the end zone by the sidelines and for two other receivers to slant inside toward the middle of the end zone," Owens writes.

Young had called the same play earlier, he says, and thrown to J.J. Stokes.

Young called it again.

Owens was having a terrible day with four dropped passes and a fumble. He had sprouted horns as the game's goat and was slouching to oblivion.

"When I got to the huddle, Steve looked at me when he called the play and I knew what he was thinking," Owens writes.

He ran the route to the inside.

"I wanted that ball like I never wanted anything in my life," Owens writes. "No one was going to stop me. As I jumped for it, I could see nothing but the ball, while the two defenders were coming to take my head off from both sides. They could have been armed with baseball bats and I was still going to get that ball.

"I made the catch! I scored! We won! Game over!"

For the record, the Packers defenders were safeties Darren Sharper and Pat Terrell. After the game, Sharper acknowledged he should have been in position to make a play on the ball.

Packers fans, if they are so inclined, can also blame the referees for creating the phenomenon now known as T.O.

Jerry Rice's only catch of the game, a 6-yarder with 46 seconds left, was really a fumble that Packers linebacker Bernardo Harris recovered. But there was no fumble call.

Maybe that's the best way out of this, green and gold nation.

Yeah, the refs.

The Packers didn't create the blight known as T.O., the refs did.

Yeah, that's it.

The refs.

[GrnBay007]

Remember how TO sat there on the ground cying like a baby after that catch? I suppose I would too! What a game.

[Bretsky]

Remember how TO sat there on the ground cying like a baby after that catch? I suppose I would too! What a game.

I'LL NEVER FORGET; I WATCHED THE GAME IN A BAR IN CALIFORNIA AFTER

WITNESSING THE MIGHTY UW MADISON FOOTBALL TEAM UPSET CADE MCNOWN AND THE MIGHT BRUINS.

I WAS TALKING SHIT MUCH OF THE GAME; ENDED UP EATING MY WORDS AND HAVING CALIFORNIANS VERBALLY RIDING ME TIL I LEFT

[MJZiggy]

Damn refs.

[GrnBay007]

LOL I can see it now......there will be the big "G" logo and the words....birth of a legend with TO's pic to folllow.........ugh!

[Packers4Ever]

LOL I can see it now......there will be the big "G" logo and the words....birth of a legend with TO's pic to folllow.........ugh!


PUH-LEEZE !!! :mrgreen:

Say - when does TO's book hit the bookstores ??
J/K

[woodbuck27]

Remember how TO sat there on the ground cying like a baby after that catch? I suppose I would too! What a game.

That was as close to a living nightmare I have ever endured as a fan of sports.

I sat in utter shock throughout that final series. It took really, the next day before my constitution could fully cope with the reality that was the T.O. catch to beat us. The shocker !

Upon waking the next morning after that game I layed in bed and asked myself - if that was just a nightmare. It was several minutes to fully come to grips that we were done for that season.