Favre a GRAMPS! [Archive] - PackerRats.com

woodbuck27

02-02-2014, 02:29 PM

Infamous

02-02-2014, 02:36 PM

He looks and talks concussed!!
Not good....

mraynrand

02-02-2014, 02:44 PM

Yes ! I'll be cheering the loudest when I learn that Brett Favre is named as a First Ballot NFL HOFer. I can't wait for that inevitability much to the chagrin of Pack fans that are so weak as to actually despise to hate Favre. What a sad pathetic bunch you Packer fans are and you actually hope that the Packers are going back and winning another Super Bowl.

Somehow I believe that attitude works in terms of karma against that..."haters". Your attitudes combineto screw the team I and love and Brett Favre gave so much of his life to. Your negativity makes you the laughing stock of NFL fans who you simply amaze as they never have had such an amazing man to cheer for.

This is the kind of stuff you write that makes me dislike your posts. Try getting off your high horse.

FYI, I despise to hate Favre.

woodbuck27

02-02-2014, 02:46 PM

Keep it in the Favre thread! :)

Tit for Tat.

Do you have issues with Brett Favre and the honor bestowed on him by those that certainly understand respect for all that Brett Favre gave to the NFL?

You parade through this place like some fool political candidate. I see your running some kind of campaign in your signature. Don't you recall the RULES here RE: Politics !?

This isn't "State of The Nation". This is a Green Bay Packer Forum.

Rub out the political stances PLEASE.Thank You mraynrand and maybe try more to channel your inner Cleft Crusty.

He doesn't have some campaign sticker attached to his ass.

GO PACKERS ! GO PACK GO !!

mraynrand

02-02-2014, 02:51 PM

Tit for Tat.

Do you have issues with Brett Favre and the honor bestowed on him by those that certainly understand respect for all that Brett Favre gave to the NFL?

You parade through this place like some fool political candidate. I see your running some kind of campaign in your signature. Don't you recall the RULES here RE: Politics !?

This isn't "State of The Nation". This is a Green Bay Packer Forum.

Rub out the political stances PLEASE.Thank You mraynrand and maybe try more to channel your inner Cleft Crusty.

He doesn't have some campaign sticker attached to his ass.

GO PACKERS ! GO PACK GO !!

I see you can't stop with the nastiness. My signature is all Woodbuck. Are you running for office?

woodbuck27

02-02-2014, 02:53 PM

This is the kind of stuff you write that makes me dislike your posts. Try getting off your high horse.

FYI, I despise to hate Favre.

Let's get some clarity here before the membership @ Packerrats and all that view Packerrats that havn't yet joined.

Then your admitting before the Forum a dislike for my honesty?

Your admitting before the Forum as a result of that ... a certain prejudice against me?

It sure looks to me that's the case.

woodbuck27

02-02-2014, 02:58 PM

I see you can't stop with the nastiness. My signature is all Woodbuck. Are you running for office?

As soon as the Powers here see clearly what your doing and that signature.

That signature will for the good of Packerrats and in all fairness be removed.

That signature is again "just a clear example of your incompetence", to be simply a team player here. Another example of your need to run roughshod through Packerats and abuse as you feel you must. That's not happening here anymore mister.

Your going to have to be like the rest of us here, and act in compliance with "no Political agendas". The signature is a certain campaign propaganda scheme of your sick mind.

Clean up mraynrand. The please omitted as you don't deserve manners. Your a disgusting man. Behave like we all must here.

mraynrand your agendas are all focused on your silliness.

Your in violation of Packerats rules mraynrand. That signature "Will Be" removed by "you" soon.

That signature is "a FLAME' of the clearest disorder of your mind mraynrand.

mraynrand

02-02-2014, 03:00 PM

Let's get some clarity here before the membership @ Packerrats and all that view Packerrats that havn't yet joined.

Then your admitting before the Forum a dislike for my honesty?

Your admitting before the Forum as a result of that ... a certain prejudice against me?

It sure looks to me that's the case.

Your honesty? Sure, I believe you're being honest when you call people who disagree with you 'weak,' 'sad' 'pathetic' and 'laughing stock.'

It is your 'honesty' that I find the most offensive.

mraynrand

02-02-2014, 03:02 PM

As soon as the Powers here see clearly what your doing and that signature.

That signature will for the good of Packerrats and in all fairness be removed.

That signature is agin just a clear example of your incompetence to be simply a team player here.

mraynrand your agendas are all focuse on your silliness.

Your in violation of Packerats rules mraynrand. That signature "Will Be" removed by "you" soon.

The signature violates no rules, except perhaps rules against personal attacks and berating other posters. My signature includes only quotes from you. If you find that offensive, then to thine own self be true!

ThunderDan

02-02-2014, 03:12 PM

Here are the rules.

Signatures:

Signatures should not be excessively large in dimension and/or file size. Signatures cannot contain sexual themes, nudity, political content, or obscene language/gestures/objects/scenes.

While posts are typically not censored, avatars and signatures can be changed any time at the discretion of PackerRats.com. This helps members to read PackerRats without concern of NSFW (not safe for work) content outside of the Garbage can area.

woodbuck27

02-02-2014, 03:21 PM

The signature violates no rules, except perhaps rules against personal attacks and berating other posters. My signature includes only quotes from you. If you find that offensive, then to thine own self be true!

I'm not wasteing my time debating what is clearly wrong with you mraynrand.

The "clear proof in that", is this signature:

" mraynrand your a trolling/stalking, flaming, rotten/terribly bad mannered and angry/envious/jealous 'low esteemed' no decent account member at Packerrats, mraynrand. Your game is sick. You parade through this place like some fool. I want him forever gone from Packerrats. - Woodbuck "

The TRUTH in this statement overwhelmingly demonstrates your immature sicknes. Your inability to allow things to even simmer .....to die. Your damaged ego is bruised and your resentment now in regards to that is obvious.

You should of your own avail remove that signature above.

It's like dragging around a collar of stone. This is simply a clear symptom of your compulsive and self destructive mental condition. Not I'm now realizing; anything in your full blown neurosis that anyone here at Packerats but the POWER to be can deal with. Your a difficult member here that has to be dealt with in harsh terms. You otherwise simply don't get it mraynrand (Cleft Crusty). Your certainly possessed with a sickness that is all yours todeal with not me not the membership of Packerrats nor the owner of Packerats.

You simply must be banned.

If I had the POWER to do so I'd ban you in both memberships as mraynrand and Cleft Crusty forever. As the person you are.Ypu would NEVER enjoy the privilege of posting at Packerats.Your never going to change. You will become most predictively worse. Your a cancwer right now @ Pacerraqts and your coming and going needs to be stopped.

YOU SHOULD receive a LIFE TIME BANNING myraynrand and cleft crusty.

Your behaviours here "clearly justify" such a harsh punishment.

Your making yourself look sadly pathetic. Your breaking Packerrats rules running a hate campaign against me. That's a clear FLAME. I would recommend a couple of monts time off to think but your condition doesn't as I clearly see you warrant such leniency.

It's just like running through this Packer forum with a Pic Of the Late Senator Ted Kennedy as your avartar 'only' worse because it's obviously personal. Your running your over the top now agenda Vs me ..woodbuck27.

I wanted you to get rid of it. Before the Owner of this forum is involved again in your impetuous bullshit.

For mwe to simply ask that of you makes me the fool.You have to be banned mraynrand. aka Cleft Crusty and I certainly believe that now will be the case.

STOP BEING SO CREEPY SELFISH mraynrand. STOP being such a creep !

I HOPE and TRUST "you" WILL BE BANNED from Packerats FOREVER.

You don't deserve to post on Packerrats anymore mraynrand (aka Cleft Crusty). Both of your memberships most certainly must be banned as you are. You've done this to yourself. mraynrand.

The pain your in is intolerable here. I certainly believe yor time is over.

Have the BEST life you can. Seek proper mental health care.

Good Luck.

mraynrand

02-02-2014, 03:29 PM

I'm not wasteing my time debating what is clearly wrong with you mraynrand.

The clear proof in that is this signature:

" mraynrand your a trolling/stalking, flaming, rotten/terribly bad mannered and angry/envious/jealous 'low esteemed' no decent account member at Packerrats, mraynrand. Your game is sick. You parade through this place like some fool. I want him forever gone from Packerrats. - Woodbuck "

The TRUTH in this statement overwhelmingly demonstrates your immature sicknes.your inability to allow thing to even simmer to die. Your damaged ego is bruised and your resentment now in regards to that is obvious.

You really should of your own avail remove that signature above.

it's like dragging aroyund a collar of stone.

Your making yourself look sadly pathetic. Your breaking Packerrats rules running a hate campaign against me.

It's just like running through this Packer forum with a Pic Of the Late Senator Ted Kennedy as your avartar 'only' worse because it's obviously personal.

I want you to get rid of it. Before the Owner of this forum is involved again in your impetuous bullshit.

STOP BEING SO CREEPY SELFISH mraynrand. STOP being such a creep !

It's either that or I definitely want you banned from Packerats FOREVER.

Your call mraynrand......Your not in a winning position. How smart or dumb are you?

Everytime you post...YOU now FLAME ! You spray your stinking piss ass attitude on OUR Packer Home NOT yours.

^^^ what a healing attitude. I see you recognize zero responsibility and no remorse whatsoever for your role in this, or for calling people who disagree with you "sad" "pathetic" "haters" who "screw the team"

How smart or dumb are you? ...a Pic Of the Late Senator Ted Kennedy as your avartar

That's not Ted Kennedy, it's Clive Cluster!

mraynrand

02-02-2014, 03:34 PM

mraynrand your agendas are all focuse on your silliness.

I will give you some credit for getting this part mostly correct.

Rodgers12

02-02-2014, 04:26 PM

Brett Favre looked very good.

He was as usual honest and only somewhat candid or funny.

When asked by Steve Mariucci about the fact that Peyton Manning if he continues to play will threaten tpor brae allof Brett Favre's Al Time NFL Records.He mentiond specifically the total TD's record .Fvre smiled and responded :

"Well I hope he retires." He went on to say:

"That's what records are there for ...to be broken."

It was obvious to me just how very much the NFL.Com alalysts respected Bret Favre. :grin:

I never fail to be impressed with Brett Favre's modest and calm manners and behaviour since he retired as an NFL QB.

This time 2 years from now I'm going to be in my glory as a loyal Brett Favre Packer fan. They're some still alive and as dedicated (loyal) in Packer Nation. Yes ! I'll be cheering the loudest when I learn that Brett Favre is named as a First Ballot NFL HOFer. I can't wait for that inevitability much to the chagrin of Pack fans that are so weak as to actually despise to hate Favre. What a sad pathetic bunch you Packer fans are and you actually hope that the Packers are going back and winning another Super Bowl.

Somehow I believe that attitude works in terms of karma against that..."haters". Your attitudes combineto screw the team I and love and Brett Favre gave so much of his life to. Your negativity makes you the laughing stock of NFL fans who you simply amaze as they never have had such an amazing man to cheer for.

Brett Favre an amazing Green Bay Packer ! Brett Favre the "Special Guest" on NFL SUPER BOWL Morning on NFL Access.

That was too cool. :grin:

:rs: Brett Favre.:bclap:

Excellent post, WB.

Another thing:

The Colts were a moribund franchise prior to P-Mann's arrival. P-Mann won mutiple MVPs in Indianapolis. Turned the moribund franchise into a Super contender year after year. Led team to 2 SBs. Won 1 SB with Colts.

The Colts thanked Manning by honoring his request for an outright release.

Fucking Manning could've signed with another AFC South team if he wanted too! P-Mann signed with a conference foe and Colts fans still love him!

Now switch Colts with Packers and Manning with Favre. Same story....except an egomaniac son of a Polar Bear refused to grant Favre his outright release. The Polar Bear instead created a circus (release Favre outright, polar bear, and the Packers would not have deal with that circus!), turned weak-mind so-called Packers fans against Favre, and finally, shipped the greatest QB in Packer history to Siberia.

The Broncos are now playing in the SB (and will WIN) in Manning's 2nd year with the team. Logic says that our friend Rastak's favorite team would have a SB trophy in Favre's 2nd year with the Vikings if not for Favre's unjust layover in New York.

There's a lot of classy people in this world. Ted Thompson is NOT one of them.

mraynrand

02-02-2014, 04:32 PM

Wow!
http://l1.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/PpaqvhVaEpfV9g9ndQdhnw--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Zmk9ZmlsbDtoPTM0MztweW9mZj0wO3E9Nz U7dz02MzA-/http://l.yimg.com/os/publish-images/sports/2014-02-02/fadbf043-5cab-4022-81c7-417f668745f0_BrettFavreBeard22.jpg
http://s3.amazonaws.com/rapgenius/MV5BMjEwNzYyMDM4OV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwMjY5NTYyMQ@@._ V1._SY314_CR5,0,214,314_.jpg
http://resources3.news.com.au/images/2008/02/20/va1237292752730/Jason-Eaton-5898900.jpg

woodbuck27

02-02-2014, 04:40 PM

^^^ what a healing attitude. I see you recognize zero responsibility and no remorse whatsoever for your role in this, or for calling people who disagree with you "sad" "pathetic" "haters" who "screw the team"

That's not Ted Kennedy, it's Clive Cluster!

I'm clearly referring to the avatar that Mad asked you politely, to get rid of and you stalled and stalled; and then threw you little sissy fit over and took some time out of Packerrats.

You don't do anything not in compliance with your sick bad ass ways. Your a terrible low life person mister. Your a disgusting example of what's the worst and running your "slop agendas" in about everything you do. If people like you ever were taken serious what remains of a struggling humanity would go in the dumpster.

Your "ONLY' redeeming quality is that your sickness is so clearly obvious that anyone with half a brain can see you coming mraynrand. TThat doesn't EVER extend to allowing your abuse.

Your going to be banned mraynrand.

I'll bet a lot that's the case.

By the way your cowardly better run and hide game is over. Your cooked !

You tried to piss on a MAN...me ..woodbuck27.

That was dumb. That is a clear waste of all your brains. That is a clear example of neurosis trumping brains and common sense.

By the way. All that debating with me does is " LIGHT YOURSELF" up more.

Rutnstrut

02-02-2014, 04:41 PM

Excellent post, WB.

Another thing:

The Colts were a moribund franchise prior to P-Mann's arrival. P-Mann won mutiple MVPs in Indianapolis. Turned the moribund franchise into a Super contender year after year. Led team to 2 SBs. Won 1 SB with Colts.

The Colts thanked Manning by honoring his request for an outright release.

Fucking Manning could've signed with another AFC South team if he wanted too! P-Mann signed with a conference foe and Colts fans still love him!

Now switch Colts with Packers and Manning with Favre. Same story....except an egomaniac son of a Polar Bear refused to grant Favre his outright release. The Polar Bear instead created a circus (release Favre outright, polar bear, and the Packers would not have deal with that circus!), turned weak-mind so-called Packers fans against Favre, and finally, shipped the greatest QB in Packer history to Siberia.

The Broncos are now playing in the SB (and will WIN) in Manning's 2nd year with the team. Logic says that our friend Rastak's favorite team would have a SB trophy in Favre's 2nd year with the Vikings if not for Favre's unjust layover in New York.

There's a lot of classy people in this world. Ted Thompson is NOT one of them.

You know they'll run you out of the forum with pitch forks and torches for suggesting that TT is anything but a god. Then to top it off, you stuck up for Brett, they will probably ban you for life now. Please note my sarcasm in all of this.

Rodgers12

02-02-2014, 04:44 PM

You know they'll run you out of the forum with pitch forks and torches for suggesting that TT is anything but a god. Then to top it off, you stuck up for Brett, they will probably ban you for life now. Please note my sarcasm in all of this.

Don't worry, I've been "exiled" once or twice before. :) :(

mraynrand

02-02-2014, 04:47 PM

You don't do anything not in compliance with your sick bad ass ways. Your a terrible low life person mister. Your a disgusting example of what's the worst and running your "slop agendas" in about everything you do. If people like you ever were taken serious what remains of a struggling humanity would go in the dumpster.

More class from Woodbuck

pbmax

02-02-2014, 04:47 PM

mraynrand

02-02-2014, 04:47 PM

You know they'll run you out of the forum with pitch forks and torches for suggesting that TT is anything but a god.

That's not a straw man argument; not at all.

pbmax

02-02-2014, 04:49 PM

You know they'll run you out of the forum with pitch forks and torches for suggesting that TT is anything but a god. Then to top it off, you stuck up for Brett, they will probably ban you for life now. Please note my sarcasm in all of this.

No one has been run for this set of beliefs or for sticking up for Brett. Not even ignored. You have to move a step past that to get those kind of notices.

mraynrand

02-02-2014, 04:49 PM

All that debating with me does....

What exactly are you debating with your vitriolic name-calling?

mraynrand

02-02-2014, 04:52 PM

I'm clearly referring to the avatar that Mad asked yu politely to get rid of and you stalled and stalled and then threw you little sissy fit over and took some time out of Packerrats.

That was the classy Admiral Stockdale. Wasn't really making a political point, but you wouldn't have noticed that, because it was likely wedged in between forty pages of incomprehensible Woodbuck ramblings.

pbmax

02-02-2014, 04:53 PM

Fucking Manning could've signed with another AFC South team if he wanted too! P-Mann signed with a conference foe and Colts fans still love him!

Now switch Colts with Packers and Manning with Favre. Same story....except an egomaniac son of a Polar Bear refused to grant Favre his outright release. The Polar Bear instead created a circus (release Favre outright, polar bear, and the Packers would not have deal with that circus!), turned weak-mind so-called Packers fans against Favre, and finally, shipped the greatest QB in Packer history to Siberia.

The Broncos are now playing in the SB (and will WIN) in Manning's 2nd year with the team. Logic says that our friend Rastak's favorite team would have a SB trophy in Favre's 2nd year with the Vikings if not for Favre's unjust layover in New York.

There's a lot of classy people in this world. Ted Thompson is NOT one of them.

I think you are correct about the Packers behaving with suspicion instead of generosity.

But both sides can be slapped with the could have acted better label. Manning's public desire to continue his career and his ultimate destination are proof of that.

mraynrand

02-02-2014, 04:57 PM

I think you are correct about the Packers behaving with suspicion instead of generosity.

But both sides can be slapped with the could have acted better label. Manning's public desire to continue his career and his ultimate destination are proof of that.

Favre didn't have a neck injury, Peyton didn't display his member-ship, and Manning didn't express a deep desire to stick it to the Colts as the main reason to continue playing. The analogy kinda breaks down with these significant differences.

falco

02-02-2014, 04:57 PM

Oh, the hypocrisy...

woodbuck27

02-02-2014, 04:59 PM

The signature violates no rules, except perhaps rules against personal attacks and berating other posters. My signature includes only quotes from you. If you find that offensive, then to thine own self be true!

I do not shove any destructive agenda ever against your ways and manners; upon other members here at Packerrats.

With your signature and even taking an hour to remove it..... too long.

Your carting that signature around. Is a clear campaign against me. That cannot be refuted..as much of a lier and coward that you are.

Your extreme hostility and that propelled by your narcissistic pompous arrogance is so clearly your undoing mraynrand (Cleft Crusty).

I obviously cannot help you. I don't believe any layman can help you. You need proper mental health care.

Your disorder now is full blown. You will be banned from Packerrats of your own undoing. That's too obvious now. I havn't live on this goos earth as long as I have and stood strong against the likes of you to not be perfectly positive that is the TRUTH and you mister.

YOU will be banned by the owner of Packerrats. I hope it's a lifetime ban.

To both "you" as mraynrand and Cleft Crusty.

You must take full responsibility for your hostility and that isn't acceptable at Packerrats.

falco

02-02-2014, 05:03 PM

You must take full responsibility for your hostility and that isn't acceptable at Packerrats.

Here's looking at you, kid...

mraynrand

02-02-2014, 05:07 PM

I do not shove any destructive agenda ever against your ways and manners; upon other members here at Packerrats.

Are you debating again? Or are you just making another Woodbuck XXI ex cathedra proclamation?

So when you call people who disagree with you 'sad' 'pathetic' 'haters' who 'screw the packers' how is that not destructive and denigrating?

Debate, discuss...

woodbuck27

02-02-2014, 05:07 PM

Don't worry, I've been "exiled" once or twice before. :) :(

Your fine but PLEASE allow me to deal with member mraynrand (Cleft Crusty).

He's a piece of cake to handle. He's "out of control". He doesn't even know it.

He's going to get plenty of the rail birds come on here to prop up his tired "no game".

Please allow me to deal with any or all of them. I've certainly had to do so before and I am capable.

Rodgers12

02-02-2014, 05:10 PM

Manning didn't express a deep desire to stick it to the Colts as the main reason to continue playing.

That's was after Thompson shipped Favre to Siberia. Initially, Favre just wanted to play for the Vikings b/c they had the best RB in the NFL, a good defense and Darell Bevell.

I bet if my man, Woody, got you shipped to Siberia, you would come back as Krusty with desire to "stick" it to him. My advice is don't mess with Woodbuck. :)

woodbuck27

02-02-2014, 05:10 PM

Are you debating again? Or are you just making another Woodbuck XXI ex cathedra proclamation?

So when you call people who disagree with you 'sad' 'pathetic' 'haters' who 'screw the packers' how is that not destructive and denigrating?

Debate, discuss...

Why would I debate with a fool?

Why would I debate with a member that for al intents and purposes is about to be banned?

That would be like taking you to the ground and then kicking the living HELL out of you mraynrand.

Your done mister.

Now until such time that your dealt with;

Please check many of the other threads and the positive content that I do post here.I come here t be constructive and NOT as your are and run silly ass game low life and personal political agendas.

Your out classed going against yourself here mraynrand. See it's always "YOU" that "YOU" must contend with.

That's a horrid chore.

You have "ONLY" that and no sane contention with me. Because you don't get that ever...your going to finally end up banned. In your case that isn't even sad.

That measure is too obviously necessary.

Please don't post me. I'll not post you back.

I'll just look forward to tyou being removed from Packerats FOREVERV !

Have the best life you can have with help. Seek serious Professional HELP for yourself mister. :idea:

I'm finished with you. Your thankfully going to be done here soon mraynrand ... aka Cleft Crusty.

mraynrand

02-02-2014, 05:12 PM

Why would I debate with a fool?

Why would I debate with a member that for al intents and purposes is about to be banned.

That would be like taking you to the ground and then kicking the living HELL out of you mraynrand.

Your done mister.

I see you didn't answer the question. Just more name-calling. I assume you are surrendering. Why not just flip me the finger? That seems to be the extent of your ability to debate.

mraynrand

02-02-2014, 05:13 PM

That's was after Thompson shipped Favre to Siberia. Initially, Favre just wanted to play for the Vikings b/c they had the best RB in the NFL, a good defense and Darell Bevell.

How can you know this? It seemed once Favre was out of GB for sure, he definitely wanted to go where he could play against them. That pre-dated the Jets move.

Rodgers12

02-02-2014, 05:14 PM

I think you are correct about the Packers behaving with suspicion instead of generosity.

I think Thompson feared playing against Favre.

I mean, the Packers had already moved on with Aaron Rodgers; the train had left the station. There was no need for a circus.

mraynrand

02-02-2014, 05:15 PM

I think Thompson feared playing against Favre.

I totally agree. That's why I liked the trade to the Jets. Plus, when Favre was with the Jets, I had another team to follow. I truly enjoyed watching Favre play for the Jets that year until he got 'injured.'

mraynrand

02-02-2014, 05:18 PM

My advice is don't mess with Woodbuck. :)

Not really worried about it. It's not much of a challenge. Woody's name-calling is a pretty dull riposte.

Rodgers12

02-02-2014, 05:21 PM

How can you know this? It seemed once Favre was out of GB for sure, he definitely wanted to go where he could play against them. That pre-dated the Jets move.

Favre retired, unretired. Big fucking deal. Folks change their minds all the time.

Favre asked politely for his release. Thompson arrogantly refused. Favre had fly into GB during the lame Family Night scrimmage just to force Thompson's hand. After all Favre did for the Packers, and the fact that the toot-toot train had left the station, the right/just/moral/ethical move would be to just release Favre outright.

The Colts did that with Manning.

mraynrand

02-02-2014, 05:25 PM

Favre retired, unretired. Big fucking deal. Folks change their minds all the time.

Favre asked politely for his release. Thompson arrogantly refused.

Thompson wasn't being arrogant. He was just afraid of Favre playing for a rival - as you stated above.

Joemailman

02-02-2014, 05:27 PM

MJZiggy

02-02-2014, 05:30 PM

Favre retired, unretired. Big fucking deal. Folks change their minds all the time.

Favre asked politely for his release. Thompson arrogantly refused. Favre had fly into GB during the lame Family Night scrimmage just to force Thompson's hand. After all Favre did for the Packers, and the fact that the toot-toot train had left the station, the right/just/moral/ethical move would be to just release Favre outright.

The Colts did that with Manning.

Of course the Colts did that with Manning. He had a neck injury that there was no guarantee he was going to make it back from and they didn't want the responsibility if he paralyzed himself by playing, just like the Packers have done with several players. If the Packers had released a HOF players without getting ANYTHING at all for him, the earth would have shaken from the angst and screaming about it. TT was well within his rights to get what he could for him and to push him out of the conference. That was his prerogative and worked to the benefit of THE TEAM.

Patler

02-02-2014, 05:31 PM

Favre retired, unretired. Big fucking deal. Folks change their minds all the time.

Favre asked politely for his release. Thompson arrogantly refused. Favre had fly into GB during the lame Family Night scrimmage just to force Thompson's hand. After all Favre did for the Packers, and the fact that the toot-toot train had left the station, the right/just/moral/ethical move would be to just release Favre outright.

The Colts did that with Manning.

The Manning and Favre situations aren't similar from a contract perspective. The Colts owed Manning a $28 million option bonus that spring. They had no choice but to release him, especially since no one even knew if he could throw for sure.

Interesting how much more professionally Manning handled his departure, even though some reports are that he was royally ticked off about it. Favre was much less graceful, and seemed to hold a grudge for a long time.

Rutnstrut

02-02-2014, 05:35 PM

I think Thompson feared playing against Favre.

I mean, the Packers had already moved on with Aaron Rodgers; the train had left the station. There was no need for a circus.

I think you are 100% correct here, imo TT had an agenda and HAD to not only get rid of Favre, but start Rodgers and who HAD to be decent. Because if Rodgers sucked, no one buys into the whole TT draft and develop concept. Which is failing and is another story.

Rutnstrut

02-02-2014, 05:37 PM

mraynrand

02-02-2014, 05:37 PM

Because if Rodgers sucked, no one buys into the whole TT draft and develop concept. Which is failing and is another story.

Except that Rodgers is one of the best QBs in the NFL, the Packers have been in the playoff 6/9 TT years with a Superbowl win. If that's failing in the NFL, give me more failure.

Rodgers12

02-02-2014, 05:44 PM

Thompson wasn't being arrogant. He was just afraid of Favre playing for a rival - as you stated above.

Think Irsay wasn't afraid of Manning? Thompson wasn't just arrogant, he was a coward.

Patler

02-02-2014, 06:00 PM

Of course Manning had Favre to pave the way and show things not to do.

I can't buy that excuse for Favre. He knew how bad it had been in Philly with Reggie White, and for years said he would never do that. If the Packers didn't want him, he would retire. I'm not saying he had to retire, but once it became clear he wasn't wanted back, leaving more gracefully would have been nice. I can even excuse some of the off season crap as in the heat of the moment. But, it continued for months.

Guiness

02-02-2014, 06:19 PM

Tit for Tat.

No it isn't. Just keep it in the Favre thread.

This board went through enough tough times and I, for one, don't wish to see that again. For one, Rastak occasionally comes around and I'd prefer that continue.

/discussion

Bossman641

02-02-2014, 06:34 PM

Rehashing favre again...must be the offseason

woodbuck27

02-02-2014, 06:42 PM

The Manning and Favre situations aren't similar from a contract perspective. The Colts owed Manning a $28 million option bonus that spring. They had no choice but to release him, especially since no one even knew if he could throw for sure.

Interesting how much more professionally Manning handled his departure, even though some reports are that he was royally ticked off about it. Favre was much less graceful, and seemed to hold a grudge for a long time.

The so called Favre grudge was over by the end of his season in New York as a Jet.

After that to defeat a team that somehow cast you away is absolutely normal in Pro Sports. The "only' grudge I see is that on some Packer fans that havn't as yet got their collective nose back from being bent out of shape. Certainly TT and MM havn't got over the embarrassment of favre handing the Packers their asses on his return to the NFC and Vikings.What didn't they expect?

They certainly knew he had it. Sending him to Siberiaa New York Jets wasn't necessarily going to hold that man down. This is after all...... Brett Favre.

After tossing seven (7) TD's [B]Vs the Packers and leading his new team, the Minnesota Vikings to two wins over his former team the Green bay Packers by a combined score of 68-49. Favre was still holding a grudge? That makes no sense.

That Brett Favre was "holding a grudge" is highly unlikely.

Why would he hold a grudge? Why would that be necessary having handed the Green Bay Packers two solid defeats in the 2009 season?

Favre clearly said he wasn't aware of any grudge between himself and Ted Thomson/mike McCarthy in a press conference following the Final NY Jets game. A loss to the Miami Dolphins at the end of the 2008 season. That loss eliminating the NY Jets from the AFC Playoffs that season.

Brett Favre clearly only desired his freedom to play the game he loved when it was clear that his "only 'option as a Green Bay Packer was to hold a clip board as Aaron Rodgers backup. Favre wasn't going to be allowed to compete for the starting QB position as he would most likely have won that. it was time to change the guard at the QB position. TT and MM prudently had to start Aaron Rodgers or risk losing him as a Free Agent. it was definitely right for AR to get his start.

On the flip side:

Brett Favre was outstanding in 2007. I believe he was the outstanding offensive player in the NFC in 2007. He led the Green Bay Packers to a 13-3 record. Almost led the Packers to a Super Bowl berth as the team (was runner-up in the NFC and losing to the NY GIANTS in O.T.

The Giants went on to defeat the NE Patriots and win the Lombardi Trophy by a score of 17-14 in what is considered one of the greatest upsets in Super Bowl history. The Pats were 12 Point favourites.

Favre had T-Personal Best ...13 wins. Favre had a Personal Best 66.5% completion rate. He nearly won his 4th MVP award in the NFL that season. Except for the NE Patriots and Tom Brady with the assistance of a having WR Randy Moss and his ** "monster Season" ... 98 catch's for 1493 yards and 23 TD's that went a long ways to that end.

Tom Brady:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/B/BradTo00.htm

Randy Moss:

** http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/MossRa00.htm

Brett Favre:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/F/FavrBr00.htm

Bossman641

02-02-2014, 06:57 PM

The so called Favre grudge was over by the end of his season in New York as a Jet.

Yes sure after tossing what seven (7) TD"s Vs the Packers and leading the Vikings to two wins by a combined score of 68-49,Favre was still holding a grudge.

I post here that that's highly unlikely that Brett Favre waa still holding a grudge...as why would he hold a grudge having handed the Green Bay Packers two solid defeats in the 2009 season.

I don't even know why I bother cause your mind was made up on this long ago....

But why the fuck did Favre tell Julius Peppers to beat the Packers during the 2010 season? To recap, Favre got concussed and knocked out of the game in week 15 vs the Bears. After the game, he told Peppers to beat the Packers 2 weeks later in week 17. Knocked out of game, walking off the field for the last time, and his mind is on seeing the Packers struggle.

No grudge there right? Just like when he called Matt Millen out of the blue during the 2008 season and helped the Lions game plan against the Packers.

woodbuck27

02-02-2014, 06:58 PM

No it isn't. Just keep it in the Favre thread.

This board went through enough tough times and I, for one, don't wish to see that again. For one, Rastak occasionally comes around and I'd prefer that continue.

/discussion

I didn't post the thread.

The Tit for tat comment...has nothing to do with Favre and the Favre thread.

Let's be perfectly clear on that. Please read this thread carefully.

I ask that you be fair in this matter Guiness. I have ZERO issue with this thread being shifted wherever.

It doesn't change the water on the beans and mraynrand (Cleft Crusty) The person who posts under those handles. I want banned !

I want mraynrand (and Cleft Crusty) banned from Packerrats.

It's right there.

Don't sell me out Guiness.

How much clearer do I have to be in articulating that?

woodbuck27

02-02-2014, 07:08 PM

I don't even know why I bother cause your mind was made up on this long ago....

But why the fuck did Favre tell Julius Peppers to beat the Packers during the 2010 season? To recap, Favre got concussed and knocked out of the game in week 15 vs the Bears. After the game, he told Peppers to beat the Packers 2 weeks later in week 17. Knocked out of game, walking off the field for the last time, and his mind is on seeing the Packers struggle.

No grudge there right? Just like when he called Matt Millen out of the blue during the 2008 season and helped the Lions game plan against the Packers.

Your post is angry.

Please calm down.

The 'only silly grudge' associate with Brett Favre comes in the form of the likes of you Bossman641 ( I get you mixed up like Joemailman your so much alike) That is so so TRUE.

Bossman641 and Joemailman and holding a grudge VS Brett Favre are like clones. Many more in here at Packerats are also in your Brett Favre dislike to hate . . . grudge club.

Isn't that the TRUTH boys?

Is that clear !? :idea:

It's Packer fans like you that should make some more concerted efforts to get over your pettiness.

Grow up as a sports fan. Your attitude is simply foolish. Laughable.

See .....watch me laugh at you.

See me laughing ?? No you can't ! Imagine me laughing then .

For the sake of all reason grow up Bossman641 (Edit).

Teamcheez1

02-02-2014, 07:13 PM

Please keep watching the Superbowl game. The Manning pick 6 should be bringing you fond memories of Favre.

Bossman641

02-02-2014, 07:17 PM

Your post is angry.

Please calm down.

The 'only silly grudge' associate with Brett Favre comes in the form of the likes of you Joemailman. That is so so TRUE,

It's Packer fans like you that should make some more concerted efforts to get over your pettiness.

Grow up as a sports fan. Your attitude is simply foolish. Laughable.

See .....watch me laugh at you.

See me laughing ?? No you can't ! Imagine me laughing then Joemailman.

For the sake of all reason grow up Joemailman.

???

My name is not Joemailman. My post was not angry. I am not angry at Favre any more. I certainly was, but I am over it now.

Now please respond to my question, thank you. I am just looking for your take on that situation.

woodbuck27

02-02-2014, 07:18 PM

Please keep watching the Superbowl game. The Manning pick 6 should be bringing you fond memories of Favre.

I'll file that under the category...Petty Posts . :wink:

Joemailman

02-02-2014, 07:22 PM

Bossman641

02-02-2014, 07:28 PM

:lol: At least he didn't mistake you for mraynrand. Woody's been a little incoherent lately.

Define "lately"

mraynrand

02-02-2014, 07:34 PM

Your attitude is simply foolish. Laughable.

See .....watch me laugh at you.

See me laughing ?? No you can't ! Imagine me laughing then Joemailman.

For the sake of all reason grow up Joemailman.

Taking the high road again, I see. How noble.

mraynrand

02-02-2014, 07:37 PM

I am just looking for your take on that situation.

Good lord why?

falco

02-02-2014, 07:38 PM

Define "lately"

Define "incoherent"

:-)

falco

02-02-2014, 07:39 PM

When you make it a point to vilify everyone who disagrees you, there's likely to come a time when your numerous "enemies" begin to blur together.

woodbuck27

02-02-2014, 07:40 PM

???

My name is not Joemailman. My post was not angry. I am not angry at Favre any more. I certainly was, but I am over it now.

Now please respond to my question, thank you. I am just looking for your take on that situation.

see Post #57...I actually mix your style and Joemailman's style up.

Otherwise I meant no insult.

Enjoy the Super Bowl come back by Denver.

falco

02-02-2014, 07:40 PM

Also, why does this board allow editing? When you make _liberal_ use of the edit function, often well after the fact, it makes for further difficulty in following...

woodbuck27

02-02-2014, 07:42 PM

When you make it a point to vilify everyone who disagrees you, there's likely to come a time when your numerous "enemies" begin to blur together.

Now there's a member that can explain the TRUE meaning of the word grudge. :shock:

You disappear until there's any TROUBLE @ Packerrats. The thing is your often confused. Confused with your incredibly long memory for losing-losing... always losing.

falco ='s GRUDGE .

I'm not wrong am I falco? Now that's not a question that's this:

I'm NOT wrong ... about you.

You could never handle the TRUTH.

woodbuck27

02-02-2014, 07:52 PM

Also, why does this board allow editing? When you make _liberal_ use of the edit function, often well after the fact, it makes for further difficulty in following...

Hey we have members like mraynrand that actually would edit "your post"; if that served that members needs to screw anyone. That actually happens.

You havn't a clue. Your prejudices (bias) so STRONG your not creditable.

In terms of one of "your Boys" Vs woodbuck27 (me).

Your not around here enough to understand the dynamic of this falco.

woodbuck27

02-02-2014, 08:01 PM

mraynrand...

I put you on IGNORE.

Other than coaching the members here that actually kiss your silly ass, fill your boots.

I've no interest in any exchange with you. The air around you is dead.

How does that read. :-)

woodbuck27

02-02-2014, 08:07 PM

Replies: 70 and Views: 359 @ 9:04 PM EST

There's not anything here to really see. Actually that's not true.

Well there' one member that's looking like a pool of once upon a time ...jello.

Get him scraped up off the floor of Packerrats and into the ice box.

mraynrand

02-02-2014, 09:01 PM

woodbuck27

02-02-2014, 09:31 PM

???

My name is not Joemailman. My post was not angry. I am not angry at Favre any more. I certainly was, but I am over it now.

Now please respond to my question, thank you. I am just looking for your take on that situation.

I'm a Canadian..

In Canada we don't get all pissy bent out of shape because a member of a team is traded away and whatever "lights up" the former team down the road. That's how I look at that. TT and Packer fans had to simply be real. What would be ...would be. It was certainly time for Favre to retire or be traded. It was Aaron Rodgers time.

When he got a shot at the Packers there was always the chance with that man's will ... a chance to light up his former team. TT traded him away for the sake of all reality. TT did what he had to do and so did Brett Favre.

It should have shaked out 50/50.

Too many of you fellas had to act all indignant and in my eyes carry on like fools. I was raised to think things out clearly and always be fair. That and fairness has it's limitations ..limits. I've reached mine with a member here today.

You fellas cannot have it both ways. TT traded Brett Favre. We've beat that horse to death here.

Verify this:

It's just my understanding from stuff that I read that TT traded him evidently to the Tampa Bay BUC's . TT informed him it was either the BUCs or Jets. Which would you prefer TT to BrettFavre. Favtre well Tampa bay is close to home.OK then it'll be Tampa bay. A likely hand shake and good bye and good luck and when Favre lands home and Bus Cook is at the airport to meet him. WHAMMO !! No Brett It's thr Jets..You've been traded to the New York Jets.

Favre has to be like SHOCKED !

TT later realized that that wasn't cool or might be embarrassing as Favre would have a shot back at the Packers that season with that trade to Tampa Bay.

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2014020200/2013/POST22/seahawks@broncos#menu=highlights&tab=analyze&analyze=boxscore

SEE WEEK 4.

So could Ole TT after informing Favre that he was going to be a Tampa Bay BUC's and without the respect or decency to inform Favre of the difference or that he was "in fact" dealt to the NY Jets for a conditional draft pick.

Couldn't that be a tad annoying.

Your Brett Favre. How do you feel about a sudden change in an agreement. TT should have offered Brett Favre at least that respect but... NO and .....that's our GM.

Nice respect on TT's part Eh ! No. All TT cares all about is TT.

You will realize I am correct.

You will soon get that as a fact. This isn't extraordinary analysis on my part. This prediction shouldn't blow you out of the water.

Open your mind a wee bit. Read to understand NOT what supports your position. Just some fair advice that you may accept for you or NOT because you either have common sense or not.

TT shafted Brett Favre. One day the whole thing might come out. I don't really care if it does or not.

I simply will return to my position way back at what .....post # 3 this thread.

Favre handled himself with as usual total class. The respect he received as the special guest on NFL Super Bowl Morning was obvious and certainly well deserved.

Too many Packerfans don't have the parts to truly appreciate Favre as I and some other very brave to admit it here Packerrats must be because to many Packrrats have treated anyone that remained loyal to Favre less than that member deserves to be treated in terms of his/her will to be loyal. I condemn every Packerrat the has stood right there but now feel some need not to look so bad ass.

I am so happy NOT to be like a lot here. To be FREE to be a loyal person and if anyone here is annoid by that...deal with it inside of yourself. I'll never sell out to lunacy.

pbmax

02-02-2014, 09:34 PM

Your post is angry.

Please calm down.

The 'only silly grudge' associate with Brett Favre comes in the form of the likes of you Bossman641 ( I get you mixed up like Joemailman your so much alike) That is so so TRUE.

Bossman641 and Joemailman and holding a grudge VS Brett Favre are like clones. Many more in here at Packerats are also in your Brett Favre dislike to hate . . . grudge club.

Isn't that the TRUTH boys?

Is that clear !? :idea:

It's Packer fans like you that should make some more concerted efforts to get over your pettiness.

Grow up as a sports fan. Your attitude is simply foolish. Laughable.

See .....watch me laugh at you.

See me laughing ?? No you can't ! Imagine me laughing then .

For the sake of all reason grow up Bossman641 (Edit).

You know, when you don't actually have an answer to the point raised you can simply not post rather than engage in personal attacks that you claim to abhor.

mraynrand

02-02-2014, 09:52 PM

I simply will return to my position way back at what .....post # 3 this thread.

Favre handled himself with as usual total class.

Like QB, like Fan.

pbmax

02-02-2014, 09:53 PM

Favre retired, unretired. Big fucking deal. Folks change their minds all the time.

Favre asked politely for his release. Thompson arrogantly refused. Favre had fly into GB during the lame Family Night scrimmage just to force Thompson's hand. After all Favre did for the Packers, and the fact that the toot-toot train had left the station, the right/just/moral/ethical move would be to just release Favre outright.

The Colts did that with Manning.

Except in January/February, Peyton knew he wasn't getting his $28 million. It was either pay cut or release. Very cut and dried.

Favre waited until May/June to jam the Packers with his return and $10 million cap number. Prior to that the Packers would have taken him back and paid him.

As became usual under Sherman, Favre used his possible retirement as leverage to get the team to adopt his preferences for player acquisition. Sherman fell for it because he obviously feared being the man who lost Favre to premature retirement. Thompson was never moved that way.

Waiting until June, after having a chance to return to the team and then asking for your release is not the same as asking in January.

The Packers should have acquiesced. But that doesn't change Favre's determination to jam the Packers.

Rodgers12

02-02-2014, 10:17 PM

Except in January/February, Peyton knew he wasn't getting his $28 million. It was either pay cut or release. Very cut and dried.

Favre waited until May/June to jam the Packers with his return and $10 million cap number. Prior to that the Packers would have taken him back and paid him.

As became usual under Sherman, Favre used his possible retirement as leverage to get the team to adopt his preferences for player acquisition. Sherman fell for it because he obviously feared being the man who lost Favre to premature retirement. Thompson was never moved that way.

Waiting until June, after having a chance to return to the team and then asking for your release is not the same as asking in January.

The Packers should have acquiesced. But that doesn't change Favre's determination to jam the Packers.

Colts likely would not have released Manning if they didn't have the 1st overall pick. They would've restructured his deal.

Favre didn't wait til May/June to force Teddy's hands. I seem to recall Favre flying into GB to announce his "retirement" way fucking earlier than June. Heck, the Packers knew Favre was "retired" in April when they drafted the great Brian Brohm.

Favre gave the Packers a quick decision (I think Feb. or March). The train left the station without Favre on it. Aaron Rodgers became the starter. Favre was simply "retired." The Packers simply moved on. In June, months after he gave the Packers his two weeks notice, Favre changed his mind.

Remember, the train left the station without Favre on it. The Packers moved on. So since the train had left the station and the Packers had moved move on, why not just do the right thing and release Favre outright? The Packers didn't need Favre's service anymore. They had plenty of time to prepare for life after Favre.

Thompson arrogantly and cowardly refused to let Favre go. I mean, for fuck's sake, Favre single-handlily made the Packers relevant again!

MJZiggy

02-02-2014, 10:29 PM

pbmax

02-02-2014, 10:32 PM

Colts likely would not have released Manning if they didn't have the 1st overall pick. They would've restructured his deal.

Favre didn't wait til May/June to force Teddy's hands. I seem to recall Favre flying into GB to announce his "retirement" way fucking earlier than June. Heck, the Packers knew Favre was "retired" in April when they drafted the great Brian Brohm.

Favre gave the Packers a quick decision (I think Feb. or March). The train left the station without Favre on it. Aaron Rodgers became the starter. Favre was simply "retired." The Packers simply moved on. In June, months after he gave the Packers his two weeks notice, Favre changed his mind.

Remember, the train left the station without Favre on it. The Packers moved on. So since the train had left the station and the Packers had moved move on, why not just do the right thing and release Favre outright? The Packers didn't need for Favre's service anymore. They had plenty of time to prepare for life after Favre.

Thompson arrogantly and cowardly refused to let Favre go. I mean, for fuck's sake, Favre single-handlily made the Packers relevant again!

Well, that's quite a word salad you have tossed together there.

1. I agree with the mundane point that if the Colts were not perfectly positioned to grab the player they clearly decided was Manning's heir, they would not have been as likely to release Manning and would have been open to restructuring his deal.

2. Favre did wait until May/June. Retiring when someone can have both his job and collect his money is not leverage, its a choice. This situation is nothing like the Colts when he retires. The team would welcome him back at his salary. They won't draft and sign FAs as he wishes, but he can keep his job and salary.

3. Favre doesn't gain leverage back until he un-retires in May/June when he jams the Packers on his salary cap and the depth chart. The drafting of Brohm and Flynn add to the leverage he has gained by waiting until after most major personnel decisions are made.

4. The Packers probably should have released him and trusted in their original roster decisions, even when risking Favre playing them twice a year.

5. But Favre should have been upfront about his request well before late May. If he had never engaged in this game of chicken before, I would grant him the benefit of the doubt. But he had been playing that game since Sherman took over as GM. In 2001 he first talked about retiring if the Packers no longer wanted him to Peter King. His possible retirement after 10 years was his leverage and he used it each year. Some years, a little longer than others.

woodbuck27

02-02-2014, 10:34 PM

You know, when you don't actually have an answer to the point raised you can simply not post rather than engage in personal attacks that you claim to abhor.

Where is my personal attack pbmax? Are you not seeing it like me? That's OK because you obviously, like too many here. Don't see certain things or if you do...choose to ignore them.

Just as soon as wodbuck27 stands up for the EXACT right thing. Y'all jump right to the rescue of the clearly bad guy. What's with you people?

You allow mraynrand's CRAP to go on here for months and months on end. You conveniently are blind to that and as soon as I stand in for me. I'm "the really bad ass". How do you people live with yourselves? Is selling out a part of the general culture?

Where I come from right is right and wrong is wrong and if you must do right there cannot be any grey areas.

PLEASE Read the thread. Read it with an open mind, please.

My conduct is overall clearly assertive yes, but unmannerly...hardly. .

Do something right for Packerrats. Don't play the "reverse the blame" card.

Stand up for fairness please.

I want mraynrand banned for the reasons I state clearly in this thread that are clearly justified reasons.

Please support "just that" for Packerrats. Don't sell out to that terribly destructive, mean and selfish member.

woodbuck27

02-02-2014, 10:38 PM

Like QB, like Fan.

Well Thanks.

Strangely enough.

Your not qualified to give me that compliment so I cannot accept that.

See person that uses the handle mraynrand...your about the most classless human being I've ever encountered.

Rodgers12

02-02-2014, 10:41 PM

I suggest that Reggie White would beg to differ. As would all of the receivers, running backs, linemen, coaches and the rest of the defense. Oh, and Ron Wolf and Mike Holmgren.

There's a popular saying about the NFL: it's a QB league.

Sure, once in a blue moon, a Trent Dilfer or Brad Johnson wins a Super Bowl. But to be a consistent contender, you need an elite QB. Wolf himself admit that Favre was the reason he's not just another Jerry Angelo.

Bossman641

02-02-2014, 10:42 PM

Where is my personal attack pbmax.

You allow myraynrands CRAP to go on here for months and months on end. You conveniently are blind to that and as soon as I stand in for me I'm really bad ass.

Read the thread. Read it with an open mind please.

My conduct is overall clearly assertive yes, but unmannerly...hardly. .

Do something right for Packerrats. Don't play the "reverse the blame" card.

Stand up for fairness please.

I want mraynrand banned for the reasons I state clearly in this thread that are clearly justified reasons.

Please support "just that" for Packerrats. Don't sell out to that terribly destructive, mean and selfish member.

Let's see. You claim you meant no insult but call me foolish, petty, and tell me to grow up. You claim to hate personal attacks but throw them out there all the time. Maybe you should practice what you preach. If multiple posters have issues with your means of communicating the problem is probably with you, not them

woodbuck27

02-02-2014, 11:00 PM

Let's see. You claim you meant no insult but call me foolish, petty, and tell me to grow up. You claim to hate personal attacks but throw them out there all the time. Maybe you should practice what you preach. If multiple posters have issues with your means of communicating the problem is probably with you, not them

Check the RECORD. I hardly ever post you.

Count the number of times I've posted you in the last 12 months Bossman641.

Bring that number of times that I post you back to this thread, or forum, and then we'll go from there.

If you can't do that then I do believe I gave you a rather solid response out of respect to you.

Now what else must I do to satisfy your needs of me to be whatever? I cannot grant you more.

Bossman641

02-02-2014, 11:06 PM

Check the RECORD. I hardly ever post you.

Count the number of times I've posted you in the last 12 months Bossman641.

Bring that number of times that I post you back to this thread, or forum, and then we'll go from there.

If you can't do that then I do believe I gave you a rather solid response out of respect to you.

Now what else must I do to satisfy your needs of me to be whatever? I cannot grant you more.

I don't even know where to start. Yes, we don't have a long running feud but that has nothing to do with the question. You asked pb when you had resorted to personal attacks so I gave you your answer.

pbmax

02-02-2014, 11:08 PM

Where is my personal attack pbmax? Are you not seeing it like me? That's OK because you obviously, like too many here. Don't see certain things or if you do...choose to ignore them.

You say the following about bossman and those that agree with him:

1. He is angry.

2. He needs to calm down.

3. He holds grudges.

4. They (posters who disagree with you) are part of a grudge club

5. Because they share an opinion, they are clones.

6. The grudge is silly.

7. He is being petty

8. They are not truthful.

9. They are not clear.

10. They need to grow up.

11. They can only be laughed at.

You refute none of his contentions. In fact, you specifically avoid commenting on the very valid point he has made to the detriment of your own claim and insist on characterizing him as a person and poster rather than responding to the fact presented.

Rodgers12

02-02-2014, 11:08 PM

Well, that's quite a word salad you have tossed together there.

1. I agree with the mundane point that if the Colts were not perfectly positioned to grab the player they clearly decided was Manning's heir, they would not have been as likely to release Manning and would have been open to restructuring his deal.

2. Favre did wait until May/June. Retiring when someone can have both his job and collect his money is not leverage, its a choice. This situation is nothing like the Colts when he retires. The team would welcome him back at his salary. They won't draft and sign FAs as he wishes, but he can keep his job and salary.

3. Favre doesn't gain leverage back until he un-retires in May/June when he jams the Packers on his salary cap and the depth chart. The drafting of Brohm and Flynn add to the leverage he has gained by waiting until after most major personnel decisions are made.

4. The Packers probably should have released him and trusted in their original roster decisions, even when risking Favre playing them twice a year.

5. But Favre should have been upfront about his request well before late May. If he had never engaged in this game of chicken before, I would grant him the benefit of the doubt. But he had been playing that game since Sherman took over as GM. In 2001 he first talked about retiring if the Packers no longer wanted him to Peter King. His possible retirement after 10 years was his leverage and he used it each year. Some years, a little longer than others.

According to wiki, Favre formally retired from the Packers on March 4. That's not waiting til May/June.

Releasing Favre would not have cost the Packers' much, if anything at all, cap-wise. Otherwise, Vandermause would've reported something about the Packers absorbing $20 M or so in dead money.

Teddy didn't want Favre yet he refused to release him. Arrogance and cowardice.

pbmax

02-02-2014, 11:11 PM

Do something right for Packerrats. Don't play the "reverse the blame" card.

Stand up for fairness please.

I will.

Stop being a hypocrite and post the way you insist others post. Live by the same standards you hold for others.

Bossman641

02-02-2014, 11:14 PM

mraynrand

02-02-2014, 11:15 PM

My conduct is overall clearly assertive yes, but unmannerly...hardly. .

It's been a string of personal attacks, starting right from the very beginning:

I can't wait for that inevitability much to the chagrin of Pack fans that are so weak as to actually despise to hate Favre. What a sad pathetic bunch you Packer fans are and you actually hope that the Packers are going back and winning another Super Bowl.

Somehow I believe that attitude works in terms of karma against that..."haters". Your attitudes combine to screw the team I and love and Brett Favre gave so much of his life to. Your negativity makes you the laughing stock of NFL fans who you simply amaze as they never have had such an amazing man to cheer for.

People who disagree with your view of Favre aren't wrong in your opinion, they are "Weak" "Sad" "Pathetic" "Laughing Stock" "Haters" wanting to "Screw the team"

This is very nasty stuff. But at least you are honest.

pbmax

02-02-2014, 11:19 PM

According to wiki, Favre formally retired from the Packers on March 4. That's not waiting til May/June.

Releasing Favre would not have cost the Packers' much, if anything at all, cap-wise. Otherwise, Vandermause would've reported something about the Packers absorbing $20 M or so in dead money.

Teddy didn't want Favre yet he refused to release him. Arrogance and cowardice.

He waited for May/June to announce to the team he wanted to come back. That was his leverage. His cap number and his presence on a roster than had been altered because of his impending absence. Different from Manning, because he could have returned, no questions asked, for his current contract and current position.

Manning's leverage was to not agree to redo his contract before the new League year, which would have been in early March and likely would result in his release.

The retirement announcement was after the Packers had asked him for a decision prior to the draft. There has never been a report that Favre asked to be released before late June.

Rodgers12

02-02-2014, 11:19 PM

TT had an asset and obtained value for it, like any competent gm would do.

I guess the Colts had/have incompetent decision makers. They got nothing for Manning, except for maybe a freebie draft pick.

mraynrand

02-02-2014, 11:21 PM

I guess the Colts had/have incompetent decision makers. They got nothing for Manning, except for maybe a freebie draft pick.

They did hire Jim Caldwell after all.... But that was just to get Lucky!

mraynrand

02-02-2014, 11:23 PM

Where is my personal attack pbmax? Are you not seeing it like me? That's OK because you obviously, like too many here. Don't see certain things or if you do...choose to ignore them.

denial and projection leads to rejection

woodbuck27

02-02-2014, 11:27 PM

You say the following about bossman and those that agree with him:

1. He is angry.

2. He needs to calm down.

3. He holds grudges.

4. They (posters who disagree with you) are part of a grudge club

5. Because they share an opinion, they are clones.

6. The grudge is silly.

7. He is being petty

8. They are not truthful.

9. They are not clear.

10. They need to grow up.

11. They can only be laughed at.

You refute none of his contentions. In fact, you specifically avoid commenting on the very valid point he has made to the detriment of your own claim and insist on characterizing him as a person and poster rather than responding to the fact presented.

I errored. I clearly thought that I was posting Joemailman when I made that post...that should have been obvious as it was in the body of the post (Joemailman's name and NOT and Bossman641). it wasn't until some time later that I discovered my error.

I revised the name and I even indictaed that I was editing the name.

Didn't you see that pbmax?

I am being TRUTHFUL here.

In any case I do NOT have contentions with Bossman641. He posts a lot like Joemailman. I didn't realize we are in contention.

I wouldn't often write 25 words to Joemailman.

That would be a waste of my time. I'm not like some here or a fan of Joemailman. He and I aren't particularly alike at all in our ways of seeing matters Packers or I expect in life generally. Joemailman isn't exactly a person I'd want at my back.

Joemailman is Pro TT and MM to a fault as I observe him unless he's suddenly reverted to some better sense. I'm clearly a TT critique. I observe TT and MM as carefully and discerningly as I'm able for any possible insight into what their up to.

woodbuck27

02-02-2014, 11:30 PM

It's been a string of personal attacks, starting right from the very beginning:

People who disagree with your view of Favre aren't wrong in your opinion, they are "Weak" "Sad" "Pathetic" "Laughing Stock" "Haters" wanting to "Screw the team"

This is very nasty stuff. But at least you are honest.

Being honest is nasty?

Are you going to claim your the sensitive type mraynrand?

mraynrand

02-02-2014, 11:32 PM

Being honest is nasty?

I believe you are honest about the nasty personal attacks you are making. I thought I was on 'ignore' - were you being honest?

Rodgers12

02-02-2014, 11:33 PM

He waited for May/June to announce to the team he wanted to come back. That was his leverage. His cap number and his presence on a roster than had been altered because of his impending absence. Different from Manning, because he could have returned, no questions asked, for his current contract and current position.

Manning's leverage was to not agree to redo his contract before the new League year, which would have been in early March and likely would result in his release.

The retirement announcement was after the Packers had asked him for a decision prior to the draft. There has never been a report that Favre asked to be released before late June.

Sure, Manning had a big cap, and chances are, he would not have agreed to restructure it in a sign and trade deal, to say, the Washington Redtails (the Mannings don't even like being in the same conference). But rather than create a circus, a la Ted Thompson, the Colts graciously thanked Manning and sat him free.

Thompson should've done the same thing with Favre.

Bossman641

02-02-2014, 11:35 PM

I guess the Colts had/have incompetent decision makers. They got nothing for Manning, except for maybe a freebie draft pick.

As others have mentioned, situation wasn't similar at all. Manning was due a 28 million bonus and couldn't even throw. No team was going to trade for manning and pay 28 million when it wasn't even a given he would play again

woodbuck27

02-02-2014, 11:36 PM

Rodgers12

02-02-2014, 11:36 PM

Btw, the Colts could've traded Manning to a team with plenty of cap space. They didn't.

mraynrand

02-02-2014, 11:39 PM

Rodgers12

02-02-2014, 11:41 PM

As others have mentioned, situation wasn't similar at all. Manning was due a 28 million bonus and couldn't even throw. No team was going to trade for manning and pay 28 million when it wasn't even a given he would play again

A lot of times, a trade is revoked when a player does not pass his physical with the new team. The Colts could've traded Manning to a bottom-feeder team with lots of cap space like Tampa Bay.

woodbuck27

02-02-2014, 11:41 PM

I believe you are honest about the nasty personal attacks you are making. I thought I was on 'ignore' - were you being honest?

You were on IGNORE 'Only' while I tried to concentrate of some other threads here.

I had you on ignore and you like other times are posting away to me as obsessively as you get.

I felt it was 'only' fair to notify you that I had you on IGNORE so you might calm down.

Do I have to now notify you when I have you on IGNORE and then Off Ignore!?

That's not happening mraynrand.

Bossman641

02-02-2014, 11:43 PM

Btw, the Colts could've traded Manning to a team with plenty of cap space. They didn't.

You need 2 parties to make a trade. Again it wasn't even a given he would play again.

Also, if the Colts had paid the bonus and then traded him, his cap hit would have been 38 million rather than the 10 it was

Bossman641

02-02-2014, 11:46 PM

Anyways wb you never answered my question. If favre did not have a grudge as of 2009, why did he have the talk with peppers that he did at the end of the 2010 season

Rodgers12

02-02-2014, 11:48 PM

You need 2 parties to make a trade. Again it wasn't even a given he would play again.

Also, if the Colts had paid the bonus and then traded him, his cap hit would have been 38 million rather than the 10 it was

The point is if Manning couldn't throw (didn't pass physical), the trade would be revoked and the new team would not be responsible for Manning's contract. NOT a big risk.

Rodgers12

02-02-2014, 11:52 PM

I thought TT did OK, except for sending Favre's locker to him.

Ah, the locker thing is still funny.

To paraphrase the G.O.A.T himself, what the fuck does he need his old locker for?

Joemailman

02-02-2014, 11:52 PM

I thought TT did OK, except for sending Favre's locker to him.

Really? I always thought the Colts were cheap bastards for not sending Peyton his locker.

Bossman641

02-02-2014, 11:58 PM

The point is if Manning couldn't throw (didn't pass physical), the trade would be revoked and the new team would not be responsible for Manning's contract. NOT a big risk.

Passing a physical is a lot different than playing effectively. I don't think teams were lining up to fork over 28 million to manning. You obviously feel differently

pbmax

02-03-2014, 12:18 AM

Sure, Manning had a big cap, and chances are, he would not have agreed to restructure it in a sign and trade deal, to say, the Washington Redtails (the Mannings don't even like being in the same conference). But rather than create a circus, a la Ted Thompson, the Colts graciously thanked Manning and sat him free.

Thompson should've done the same thing with Favre.

Well, as we have attempted to point out, the Colts WANTED to part ways. Once they secured the #1 pick and knew Luck was the QB they wanted, they likely would not have taken Manning back for half his previous salary. Favre still could have returned.

On your last sentence, we can finally agree. I think Christl, while maddeningly simplistic about the entire episode being the fault of Bob Harlan no longer being President, otherwise made a good case for that very early in the whole contretemps. It was not entirely in the team's best interest, and most importantly, it might not be in your young QB's best interest, but it would have done less damage that summer/fall.

Its hard to predict the effect it would have had on Rodgers long term, if any. I can understand not wanting to visit that upon a young player. But McCarthy has proven very adept at handling distractions so I think it would have gone better than I would have imagined.

However, better for everyone would have been for Favre and Thompson to sit down and hash this out prior to March. Favre admitting that Thompson's approach was driving him back to drinking and Thompson admitting that Favre was driving Thompson back to Matt Hasselback. But as Andrew Brandt has pointed out, its in neither man's DNA to have uncomfortable conversations before they are forced to do so. So perhaps, it was inevitable.

pbmax

02-03-2014, 12:20 AM

Btw, the Colts could've traded Manning to a team with plenty of cap space. They didn't.

It doesn't work that way. All Manning has to do is make a stink. The theoretical team trading for him doesn't want to pay $28 million for an unhappy player on March 3rd, so he gets set loose again.

pbmax

02-03-2014, 12:22 AM

I errored. I clearly thought that I was posting Joemailman when I made that post...that should have been obvious as it was in the body of the post (Joemailman's name and NOT and Bossman641). it wasn't until some time later that I discovered my error.

I revised the name and I even indictaed that I was editing the name.

Didn't you see that pbmax?

I am being TRUTHFUL here.

In any case I do NOT have contentions with Bossman641. He posts a lot like Joemailman. I didn't realize we are in contention.

I wouldn't often write 25 words to Joemailman.

That would be a waste of my time. I'm not like some here or a fan of Joemailman. He and I aren't particularly alike at all in our ways of seeing matters Packers or I expect in life generally. Joemailman isn't exactly a person I'd want at my back.

Joemailman is Pro TT and MM to a fault as I observe him unless he's suddenly reverted to some better sense. I'm clearly a TT critique. I observe TT and MM as carefully and discerningly as I'm able for any possible insight into what their up to.

I do not see how it is relevant which poster was addressed when evaluating the quality of the post. No mention was made of the points of contention. You simply insulted another poster, something you insist others should not do to you.

woodbuck27

02-03-2014, 12:28 AM

You know, when you don't actually have an answer to the point raised you can simply not post rather than engage in personal attacks that you claim to abhor.

Do we live in entirely different worlds pbmax?

I went back and looked at this and holy cow.

I'll lay it out here:

Thread: If Rodgers really is the BEST.

Post # 93

" What happened to Woody today? Hope you didn't quit, Woodrow. Rodgers12 has your back. I feel bad, (or perhaps I feel devilishly happy, as the devil incarnate) that it seems that between you and me, you've decided to quit, to throw in the towel. I - and Clive Cluster - can't allow that to happen. Let's try it your way. You win. Packerrats is yours. This White-collar, trolling/stalking, flaming, rotten/terribly bad mannered, angry/envious/jealous 'low esteemed' no decent account member is going to take a break and get some treatment. Perhaps I can go back to my therapy with Dr. John Holmes, M.D. Ph.D. In our last session, over 8 years ago, I think we were working on regression back to my childhood, where my father finished beating me for speaking at the dinner table. Oh, if only I could work out my troubles!

The creep show is over!

Last edited by mraynrand; 01-29-2014 at 06:51 PM. Reason: MD! " mraynrand

Post #94:

" Sometimes you just never know what kind of turns a thread in here will take. (Happy Face of some sort)

That was some of Woodrow's best writing though. I actually read some of it." Joemailman

Post # 97

" I respect this decision and 'only this decision'. Member mraynrand (aka Cleft Crusty) needed to take time for help. If he changes his mind at 4 PM this afternoon that doesn't change the water on the beans. Might he....I wouldn't be one bit surprized nor shocked if he did.

mraynrand has issues ...part of his symptoms ...his bad ass games.

So for me it's actually a let's see now. His dropped message and it's sincerety...after two more weeks of him and no show...then I'll begin to buy into it.

This member has been absolutely relentless in some need he's built up inside of him to "only' harm himself Vs me. " woodbuck27

Look at Joemailman's reposnse.Couldn't he have done better than thatpbmax?

I woke up that night and went to the puter and packerats and read these posts #93 or mraynrands BS dismissal of himself as if that was going to be reality...he's ALL games

Then I read Joemailman's response and I got so pissed I blasted Joemailman for his fricken insensitivity. I made a case for that BS and Mad (that this crap gets tossed in his lap)and I actualy posted compassion for member mraynrand.Then I realized I was being naïve. For a moment I forgot just how bad ass mtaynrand is.

I revised my original response to what you see above but I was totally pissed off with member Joemailman...all the same. I don't deal well with two faced people = in my view Joemailman. So my opinion of Joemailman meansd what. . . . . . . zero. That doesn't mean that thee next time joemailamna makes what I see clearly to me as a fools play. Which I'm sure to >>> Joemailman is absolutely a hoot.

Joemailman is what I deem... and Ohh Nooo ! look pbmax ..out this is just awful...Joemailman is a classic "smartass', know it all, with little needed sensitivity to his surroundings...Joemailman is for Joemailman. He's all about Joemailman and blind to what's really happening around him.

I mean..how could this forum be blind to what mraynrand is? maybe I expected too much of a Joemailman?

I'm getting slayed by mraynrand and (his little group) and Joemailman judges me woodbuck27 and

frankly here... .a real zinger...Joemailman hardly has two clues. Joemailman declares I have a meltdownand all I'm doing is appealing for something reasonable forom this forum in terms odf stoping mraynrand.

Do I need to elaborate? Do I need to give you or answer more to you pbmax??

Open your eyes man. PLEASE.

pbmax

02-03-2014, 12:30 AM

What are you now pbmax?

The inquisitor here? In any case look at the words you list here:

Is it a case of the total impact of say 6-8 of those together are really very overwhelmingly awful words?

You cannot imagine the words that I'd use face to face with some members in here.

Are you very sensitive pbmax?

So let me get this straight, only awful personal attacks are out of bounds?

Does calling someone sick qualify?

pbmax

02-03-2014, 12:41 AM

Do we live in entirely different worlds pbmax?

snip

Open your eyes man. PLEASE.

I was referring specifically and only to your response to Bossman. Bossman quoted Favre's words back to you about telling Peppers to beat the Packers after you claimed that Favre's grudge ended after the Viking's return games.

You have still not responded whether you think Bossman had a point or there was some other reading of Favre's message.

I am not interested in any other piece of the thread. You say you want a dialogue with no personal attacks. You respond to a perfectly valid argument with ad hominem insults instead.

Rather than apologize for engaging in the very behavior you complain about frequently, we have more posts wondering what is wrong with everyone else.

woodbuck27

02-03-2014, 12:44 AM

So let me get this straight, only awful personal attacks are out of bounds?

Does calling someone sick qualify?

If a poster is behaving in a manner that is likely a symptom of some illness base on months of observation.

I get all sorts of CRAP and I'm very healthy and certainly pleased and grateful for that and I treat people in accordance with my good health.

Who are you defending pbmax? You sure as hell neglected me woodbuck27 If not that then your bias prejudice id=s overwhelming but before I decide that please names ! Do Noy ignore mraynrand's if he's one you must defend. Let's start with six members. Names please ? Are you a fair inquisitor? I trust that question is valid. I need to see some ground rules here also please.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6. Fill in the blanks with members names here and above...Thanks. SIX names to begin.

woodbuck27

02-03-2014, 01:30 AM

I was referring specifically and only to your response to Bossman. Bossman quoted Favre's words back to you about telling Peppers to beat the Packers after you claimed that Favre's grudge ended after the Viking's return games.

You have still not responded whether you think Bossman had a point or there was some other reading of Favre's message.

I am not interested in any other piece of the thread. You say you want a dialogue with no personal attacks. You respond to a perfectly valid argument with ad hominem insults instead.

Rather than apologize for engaging in the very behavior you complain about frequently, we have more posts wondering what is wrong with everyone else.

OK Lets go over this:

Post #55 ... this thread

" I don't even know why I bother cause your mind was made up on this long ago....

but why the fuck did Favre tell Julius Peppers to beat the Packers during the 2010 season? To recap, Favre got concussed and knocked out of the game in week 15 vs the Bears. After the game, he told Peppers to beat the Packers 2 weeks later in week 17. Knocked out of game, walking off the field for the last time, and his mind is on seeing the Packers struggle.

No grudge there right? Just like when he called Matt Millen out of the blue during the 2008 season and helped the Lions game plan against the Packers" . Bossman641

" I don't even know why I bother cause your mind was made up on this long ago...." Bossman641

That's correct

" but why the fuck."

Whatever as right thee bossman641 loses me

but I still hung in there and read the post and there's that same Ole same ole Julius Peppers plug.

The "out of the blue (supposed) Favre to matt Millen call?? I know ZERO about that....

Bossman641 isn't getting Dick all from me anyway as in the beginning I thought it was more of Joemailman.

Joemailman as I posted before, I don't want much of anything to do with. I don't care for Joemailman...the feelings "I'm sure are mutual" which makes our experience here in terms of one another just peachey. I also thought I had an agreement with Bossman641.

Bossman641 and I came to an understanding it seemed to me over a year ago.

I'm going in circles...but OK:

Your post is angry. ( I'm referring to the What the Fuck comment ...woodbuck27)

Please calm down.

The 'only silly grudge' associate with Brett Favre comes in the form of the likes of you Bossman641 ( I get you mixed up like Joemailman your so much alike) That is so so TRUE.

Bossman641 and Joemailman and holding a grudge VS Brett Favre are like clones. Many more in here at Packerats are also in your Brett Favre dislike to hate . . . grudge club.

Isn't that the TRUTH boys?

Is that clear !?

It's Packer fans like you that should make some more concerted efforts to get over your pettiness.

Grow up as a sports fan. Your attitude is simply foolish. Laughable.

See .....watch me laugh at you.

See me laughing ?? No you can't ! Imagine me laughing then .

For the sake of all reason grow up Bossman641 (Edit).

pbmax tha's in my very BEST analysis 100% accurate..or TRUTH. Bothof these members are up with Brett Favre or at least not so until Aaron Rodgers di the most noble act likely in opacker nation and stood in for Brett Favre against TT and MM who STILL DRAG THEIR ASS's ans respect for FAVRE.

Pretty soon Favre is going to be a 1st ballot NFL HOFER and Favre's Number NOT retired and Favre NOT in the Packers HALL and The Green and the Green Bay Packers will be the laughing stock of all NFL Teams.

I'm like I said very familiar with Pro Sports and some members on Packers foolishly believe that honor and respect and loyalty has to be all for the Green Bay Packers and screw the player.

I am simply a Packer fan. I see things as I do. I believe my club or the one I chose and fare is the best for me. You fellas formed your club. Don't chew on me because I disrespect your club. because I see into the poster in your club. Because especially seeing a man today that I admire so very much maligned by people that post here that are NOT as good as Brett Favre in terms of his status as an NFL player.

All of you that still have that sour Brett Favre taste in your mouths. Best I can do is advise you to try another piece of gum. I don't make you chew that one,

My gum is real sweet.

Patler

02-03-2014, 05:35 AM

According to wiki, Favre formally retired from the Packers on March 4. That's not waiting til May/June.

Releasing Favre would not have cost the Packers' much, if anything at all, cap-wise. Otherwise, Vandermause would've reported something about the Packers absorbing $20 M or so in dead money.

Teddy didn't want Favre yet he refused to release him. Arrogance and cowardice.

Favre was a corporate asset, in this case a very tradeable corporate asset. An executive's duty is to preserve and enhance corporate assets. When TT could acquire something of value for Favre, why should he just through it away?

I find it funny that at the end of most training camps, many fans think TT can and should trade players who are about to be cut for draft choices. In reality, only very infrequently can that happen for any team. A huge contingent thought he should have been able to franchise Flynn and then trade him for a high draft pick. In reality, the QB franchise salary made that a huge risk that almost certainly would have backfired. When TT has a player who was very, very tradeable, he was supposed to just give it away? Doesn't make good business sense.

Patler

02-03-2014, 05:39 AM

TT had an asset and obtained value for it, like any competent gm would do.

Sorry Bossman, you beat me to it. I entered a response to Rodgers 12 before I finished reading the thread, and before seeing that you made the same reply before me.

Patler

02-03-2014, 05:50 AM

A lot of times, a trade is revoked when a player does not pass his physical with the new team. The Colts could've traded Manning to a bottom-feeder team with lots of cap space like Tampa Bay.

What team in their right mind would trade for a player of questionable health, pay an immediate $28M bonus and commit to his then salaries for the remainder of his contract? The risk would that he passes his physical but then re-injures himself. That was the possibility that Denver specifically protected themselves against in their contract with him.

Manning was not tradeable, Al Davis was already dead then, wasn't he? :grin:

Bossman641

02-03-2014, 06:50 AM

What team in their right mind would trade for a player of questionable health, pay an immediate $28M bonus and commit to his then salaries for the remainder of his contract? The risk would that he passes his physical but then re-injures himself. That was the possibility that Denver specifically protected themselves against in their contract with him.

Manning was not tradeable, Al Davis was already dead then, wasn't he? :grin:

Patler, I pointed out the same thing to Rodgers. The other thing I'm wondering, which maybe you could help with, is whether Manning even would have passed a physical prior to the $28M payment on March 8. I have no clue how the physical process works. Is it just team doctors looking things over or is there an independent doctor there as well?

Assuming he couldn't pass a physical, the Colts would have had to pay the $28M and then try to trade him, taking a $38M hit to their cap that year. Is the additional $28M hit worth whatever picks they could have gotten for Manning (my guess, not much in the way of picks)?

Anyways, I guess this is just my long winded way of saying that the Manning and Favre situations were nothing alike.

woodbuck27

02-03-2014, 09:20 AM

[QUOTE=woodbuck27;773095]Do we live in entirely different worlds pbmax?

I made some typos and or spelling mistakes in this post (the original) Post #115 of this thread above) I'm going to correct those errors:

I went back and looked at this and holy cow. I'll lay it out here:

From Thread: If Rodgers really is the BEST.

In that thread posts:

Post # 93

" What happened to Woody today? Hope you didn't quit, Woodrow. Rodgers12 has your back. I feel bad, (or perhaps I feel devilishly happy, as the devil incarnate) that it seems that between you and me, you've decided to quit, to throw in the towel. I - and Clive Cluster - can't allow that to happen. Let's try it your way. You win. Packerrats is yours. This White-collar, trolling/stalking, flaming, rotten/terribly bad mannered, angry/envious/jealous 'low esteemed' no decent account member is going to take a break and get some treatment. Perhaps I can go back to my therapy with Dr. John Holmes, M.D. Ph.D. In our last session, over 8 years ago, I think we were working on regression back to my childhood, where my father finished beating me for speaking at the dinner table. Oh, if only I could work out my troubles!

The creep show is over!

Last edited by mraynrand; 01-29-2014 at 06:51 PM. Reason: MD! " mraynrand

Post #94:

" Sometimes you just never know what kind of turns a thread in here will take. (Happy Face of some sort)

That was some of Woodrow's best writing though. I actually read some of it." Joemailman

Post # 97

" I respect this decision and 'only this decision'. Member mraynrand (aka Cleft Crusty) needed to take time for help. If he changes his mind at 4 PM this afternoon that doesn't change the water on the beans. Might he....I wouldn't be one bit surprized nor shocked if he did.

mraynrand has issues ... part of his symptoms ... his bad ass games.

So for me it's actually a let's see now. His dropped message and it's sincerity... after two more weeks of him and no show. Only then will I begin to buy into it. (or more, explained: believe that he may be seeking some help).

This member has been absolutely relentless, in some need he's built up inside of him to "only' harm himself Vs me. " woodbuck27

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

Look at Joemailman's response or Post #94 (above). Couldn't he have done better than that, pbmax?

I woke up that night and went to the computer and signed onto Packerrats. I read these posts: #93, or mraynrand's BS dismissal of himself... as if, that was going to be reality. That wasn't going to happen as mraynrand's... ALL GAMES

Then I read Joemailman's response and I got so pissed I blasted Joemailman for his fricken insensitivity. I made a case for that BS and Mad. That this crap gets tossed in Mad's lap. I actually posted compassion for member mraynrand. Then I realized I was being naïve as I thought more about mraynrand's post #93. For a moment I forgot just how bad ass mraynrand is.

Once I came to my senses. Post #93 was just more of member mraynrand's style here. The slant I took on Joemailman ... I revised it.

Making that revision in no sense changed nor may it change in terms of Joemailman's manner and style of posting and me. ie Am I always wrong to Joemailman? When does Joemailman see mraynrand? I suspect that if he had to deal with mraynrand's overall posting me and just such hostility that mraynrand feels he must club me with. That Joemailman might feel towards mraynrand as I've been forced by mraynrand's constant stalking and flames to feel.

Do I exaggerate my complaint (s) RE: Packerrats mraynrand (aka Cleft Crusty) before Packerrats ...

I certainly do not believe that's the case.

I believe my complaints are certainly honest and justified. This is a virtual environment . I cannot deal with mraynrand as I would if this was he and I face to face mano -o-mano. I need Packerrats to deal with mraynrand.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/B]

I revised my original response to what you see above. All the same I was totally pissed off with member Joemailman. When I read posts #93 and his post #94.

I don't deal well with two faced or flippant people and in my view that may fit Joemailman. He has to resond to that inside of himself. I easily can void Joemailman. That poster serves me no grief. His personality here is basically football and he does very well with that. I compliment Joemailman and that. Joemailman outside of that may lack the skills I would hope from him.

It just may be this: Joemailman is flippant and that to an extreme sometimes on here over issues that he might rather exercise more seriousness as a member. Be more advantageously neutral or constructive in terms of his reactions. maybe just simply observe and learn. no Joemailman has to get too often his worthless (in my view) two cents worth out there.

So my opinion of Joemailman means what? As I see it here that means or equals "a zero". That doesn't mean that the next time Joemailman makes what I deem "a fools play". Which obviously to Joemailman is an absolute hoot. That's not going to bug the heck out of me.

Joemailman is what I deem... and pbmax; look out for this bad ass zinger for your chacterization of me (your weapon against me in your support for mraynrand, pbmax) ... look out as this is just awful:

Joemailman is a classic "smartass', know it all, with little needed sensitivity to his surroundings. Joemailman is for Joemailman. He's all about Joemailman and blind to what's really happening around him.

Am I awfully bad for making such an observation of Joemailman? Joemailman might rather "in fact", act with better sense in serious matters; and not post like he's in his late teens. I expect that Joemailman is maybe about the age of mraynrand or ballpark age (50 years)

The bottom line: I know Joemailman is sane. He's NOT an issue nor a problem. I deal easily and well with Joemailman. Joemailman isn't a real problem (issue) with me. I except for stances am NOT a problem for Joemailman. Like one another ...HELL NO. There are many posters in here damn near impossible to like. That is as they post. In reality they may be wonderful men and women. As posters I cannot get to all Rah Rah and some here.

Now if my honesty is BAD ASS! That last bit was a BAD ASS News Bulletin on Packerrats.

My issue is with one member and that's mraynrand (Cleft Crusty). NOT as you desire to direct this pbmax in your agenda.

In the case of Joemailman... I manage to read his posts and simply shrug my shoulders at a lot of them....immature tone and all. The proof of that. The fact that I don't find much in that members posts that enlighten me to respond with more than a yes or on the other side, short disagreeing response.

I want to focus this properly and squarely where it belongs:

Cont'd next post or post #125:

woodbuck27

02-03-2014, 09:32 AM

Cont'd from Post #124

How could this forum be so blind to what mraynrand is? Maybe I expected too much of a Joemailman? Maybe I expected too much of ""YOU" too pbmax?

I'm getting slayed by mraynrand and (his little group) and Joemailman does his little pile on thing like a lot of the members do rather consistently here at Packerrats. I always try my very best to hold my ass down and not get it bitten off by the bully mob mentality that this place can become. Where I come from if people act that way in some concerted effort the victim is too obvious. The angry mob is at fault. The mob needs to be quelled.

I'm guessing that's NOT the case here for whatever reason. Take falco for example. The 'only' time you see that member or at least I see that member if the hunt is on for a piece of woodbuck27. That shit is beyond clear. It's not easy to have to take on 6-8 members at once here pbmax. Yet have I ever wilted? The correct answer to that question .... is .... NO!

So it's your case that it goes down on me because I'm bad ass insulting.

That is far ... far from the TRUTH, pbmax. Being honest and posting as is sometimes necessary against the trong of posters here that "only" want damage inflicted upon me means I have to stand in tough.

The likes of a falco...piece of cake. Bossman 641 can demonstrate some real attitude.I at lest imagined that poster and I came to some understanding. Joemailman declares I have a meltdown .Ohh Yea another woodbuck27 "meltdown". That depended upon this or that ..that woodbuck27 might go all ape shit on him or maybe Bossman641.

Joemailman is a clear shit disturber. Joemailman's BEST game = Stir the pot. Check that claim out pbmax. Hey when shit happens... it's going down. This place has some very strong personality's. it's NOT and for sure :

ALL woodbuck27 bad ass. woodbuck27 isn't the meanest poster @ Packerrats and in fact I'll weigh in on the other side. As a positive overall contributor my performance here at Packerrats is well above average. I give my whole to Packerats.

My whole being is decent pbmax. If you find for mraynjrand Vs me/

you and I never have much more again in terms of any respect. You want to jumop inand save mraynrasnd and I can categorically inform you of this . no one but
mraynrand and consistent professional help can save mraynrand.

This issue isn't about woodbuck27 and any bad ass attitude. Don't for all that's TRUTHFULLY decent go there.

Last night it got to me and simply being a tad fatigued (tired). Your firing shots across my bow. My mind was on a lot more that a member that I categorically state again before this forum is major and bad ass. Don't ever imagine that characterization of mraynrand (Cleft Crusty) <<< that one person member >>> with two memberships and his agenda (s) ...mraybrand absolutely loves that. That I assume is a male member but I'm sometimes confused as "being male and manly" shouldn't be confused. That's a whole different discussion. The fact or TRUTH is this:

mraynrand loves to be just that...or "bad ass". He never had such a role in real life. I'll bet that for a good deal of member mraynrand's life he's been an academic. There's certain evidence I get from his posts that points to that being a fact. mraynrand has never been in fact one of the Boys yet here he fits t=right in!?

Is that because I'm a Canadian?

Is that because I chose to remain after all the dust cleared "LOYAL" to one of the best Green Bay Packers "ALL Time" ......... or Brett Favre?

Is it because I find fault with the way that Ted Thompson (Mike McCarthy) treated Favre, in terms of some certain decent respect. As they decided to, and about time, elected to start Aaron Rodgers. It was likely just that or lose him. TT and MM are really really both slow.

That's just one aspect of what TT and MM are overall and the actual keys to the green bay Packers success. Get used to me and this also. I wouldn't TRUST either of those two men. As there are many here that do. in my book that's merely a "so what" ! To each his own.

I will post here as honestly and TT and MM as I can. If I remain the critic of TT and MM isn't that exactly what Packerrats needs. Eventually most of you will see that I've been correct in terms of those two all along. When that's evident I won't inform you that [I]"I told you so". That's not my style.

I actually feel badly for some members here that are so deluded that they feel that with TT and MM the Green Bay Packers best interests are secure. Afterbthree failing seasons in a row. I'm hesitant to join that group. Is that OK with you pbmax?

Do I need to elaborate? Do I need to give you more or answer more to you pbmax?

What would satisfy your needs of me pbmax? You and I to my knowledge never had issues until well >>>here it is.

Why now pbmax? Are you actually going to lay down some defense posturing for members "in one person".. mraynrand and Cleft Crusty and in so doing attack and distort my by far superior contribution here at Packerrats even if on core issues I disagree on?

I request that you to support me and "Truth and Fairness" and dealing with member mraynrand. I don't need you attacking me in any re-direct that distracts form the core issue or problem...mraynrand (Cleft Crusty).

Cont'd next post or post #126:

Patler

02-03-2014, 09:38 AM

Patler, I pointed out the same thing to Rodgers. The other thing I'm wondering, which maybe you could help with, is whether Manning even would have passed a physical prior to the $28M payment on March 8. I have no clue how the physical process works. Is it just team doctors looking things over or is there an independent doctor there as well?

Assuming he couldn't pass a physical, the Colts would have had to pay the $28M and then try to trade him, taking a $38M hit to their cap that year. Is the additional $28M hit worth whatever picks they could have gotten for Manning (my guess, not much in the way of picks)?

Anyways, I guess this is just my long winded way of saying that the Manning and Favre situations were nothing alike.

I think it is up to the acquiring team to determine what passes their medical evaluation and what doesn't. I don't think there is any standard used. I've never heard of a dispute over it, the acquiring team says "He didn't pas OUR physical" and the trading team takes him back. That's what happened with the Packers when they tried to trade Flanagan years ago.

I don't remember exactly, but I think at mid-summer Manning was still working on getting his arm strength back. I think the bigger questions for many people were what would happen when he threw a lot, and what would happen when he was hit a few times.

Bossman641

02-03-2014, 09:56 AM

WB, I think you missed your true calling as a politician.

woodbuck27

02-03-2014, 10:10 AM

Cont'd from Post#125

Finally and sorry for the length yet I maintain this.

The problem here is specifically as I describe it in this thread. The issue is what are you and other members going to do to control mraynrand and more of his clearly lousy manners and ways.

I sit here at my keyboard as one member and stand tall as a man that has a rightful claim and issue with mraynrand's membership and conduct on my Green Bay Packer forum. My Packer Home. My Packerrats that I desire to share in some decent sense of harmony with every other member. As myraynrand exists here that cannot ever be IMO mraynrand won't allow such. mraynrand is clearly in my view a man possessed and it's his responsibility to fix that. Not arrive here as he so often is or all King mraynrandish. Pushing his silly power struggle attempts onto Packerrats. mraynrand acts too often as a bonehead arrogant, absolutely insulting, self gratifying pompous fool.

Yes I declare such against one of your fellow countrymen.

The shock of this that I call out maybe a man that resides in your city or community and all that doesn't make my claims against mraynrand unjustified. I'll not indignify myself to allow that member to take his absolutely rotten ways and manners down on me.

Look at the difference between mraynrand and woodbuck27. How much does mraynrand contribute that's decent and constructive compared to my overall very positive contribution. I give a lot here. I stand strong yes... as a poster. I never back away from things attacks (flames) and a certain number of clear insults.

The proof of that is just what is going down here and needlessly I must also claim if "the powers to be deal with mraynrand on the issues I have with him. His latest show. His fool ass parading that signature of his that cards him as the torn joker. See mraynrand hasn't a clue of what proper comportment is. He might hold a wonderful job or he might be disabled? I'll inform the membership of this fact as I view that member. He's far far from being a decent human being. mraynrand redefines the word arrogance and sadly as intelligent as I perceive him as being. He's one of "the very least smart" and intelligent men I have ever had the extreme displeasure of observing. You might dress him up but where are you ever going to take him...with you!? mraynrand is a clear disgrace to Packerrats as he presently is.

He comes our Green Bat Packer Home to make trouble and that's just about what he stands for. mraynrand = Big Bad Ass Trouble. mraynrand wants to be a mean man. He must for some sick ego search be "just that'.

mraynrand, gets pretty much right there as that's his agenda ,his primary focus.

Packerrats !!!! OUR PACKER HOME !!!!

Mine ( my home) and yours pbmax and Jomailman's and George Cumby's and Bossman641's and falco's and Patlers and Deputy Nutz's and JimX29's and denverYooper's and Cheesehead Craig's and striker's and digitaldean's and pittstangs's and Kiwon's and Little Whiskey's and Zool's and PaCkFan_n_MD 's and Mads and Guiness's and Upnorth's and MJZiggys and LEWCWA's and Rutnstrut's and Badgerinmaine's and KyPacks and hoosier's and Swede's and Rodgers12's and Team Spaulding's and MadScientist's and call_me_ishmael's and Iron Mike's and Easy Cheesy's and packer4life's and Tony Oday's and The Shadow's and packrulz's and and Brandon494's and red's and Justin Harrel's and Vegas Pack Fan's and mmmduk's (?) Smuggler's and Captainkickass's and Bretsky's and gbgary's and HowardRoark's and Teamcheez1's and skinbasket's and bobblehead's and channtheman's and run pMc's and Carolina_Packers and Smidgeon's and QMNE's and Wist43's and JohnMexico's and Pugger's and Fritz's and HarveyWallbangers's and Harland Huckleby's and Rastak's and 3irty1's and Freak Out's and essox's and sheepshead's (?) ThunderDans and Superfan's and wpony's and BZnDallas's .......

I cannot just now cannot recall any more members and in that I mean no insult.

PACKERATS Is OUR HOME! ALL of OUR Packer Home.

It's just not (mraynrands and Cleft Crusty's) to run roughshod through and do what ever that member damn well pleases to serve his bad ass needs.