PDA

View Full Version : Aren't you glad the Packers did not sign Terrell Owens?


oregonpackfan
10-01-2006, 12:04 PM
During the off season, there was heated discussion as to whether the Packers should sign Terrell Owens. The advocates cited T.O.'s tremendous strength, speed, and game-changing abilities.

The detractors listed several points including: T.O.'s verbally attacking his teammates and coaches, his media-seeking attention, and his self-centered mindset.

This morning, TV sports commentator and former LB Tom Jackson mentioned the observation that no matter what team T.O. played for, he was a major distraction for that team. This distraction factor is proving to be true with the Cowboys with the hamstring and finger injuries and certainly, the alleged suicide/medication allergy reaction.

Mark me down as someone who never wanted T.O. to join the Packers and as someone who is glad he never joined the organization. Can you imagine this circus atmosphere if he was a Packer during this time? This present situation would be aggravated by the fact that the Packers have a rookie Head Coach rather than an established Head Coach like Bill Parcells.

As Packer fans, what is your opinion on this situation. Would you still want to see T.O. wear the green and gold?

OPF
MadtownPacker
10-01-2006, 12:17 PM
Yes I was pro-TO. I was truly a fool and I am glad I am not a GM.

If only his Granny had let him play with other kids......
Tarlam!
10-01-2006, 12:22 PM
I wanted T.O.

I'd still take him. The reason?

Brett Favre. Favre would have just squinted his way and all would have been said....

Yes, I believe in Santa. Why do you ask?
Packers4Ever
10-01-2006, 05:17 PM
No way, OPF !! That was the first thing I thought of too, when
the story broke the other day. How soon would the trouble start
if he became a Packer? Sure didn't take him long in Dallas. It
would have been the same no matter where he went.
motife
10-01-2006, 07:28 PM
Ron Wolf once said his best descisions were deals he tried to make that fell through and didn't happen.

It was also a good decision not to sign Lavar Arrington. And apparently a waste of money to sign Charles Woodson.
DannoMac21
10-01-2006, 07:46 PM
It's 3 games into the season. If Woodson has an INT for a TD tomorrow night you're going to be saying "WHAT A SIGNING! WHAT A SIGNING!", because that's something Carroll could never do, especially under the lights and pressure.

Anyways, I always wanted T.O. Yes, he's a distraction, but he's a gamechanger and a true player who always wants to get on the field and give it his all. If anyone deserved more money of players holding out, it was him. Look at the Eagles WITH him, then look at the Eagles' season last year without him. He is a gamechanger. Even with McNabb last year, they weren't good.

Although, I was thinking the other day, what if that suicide report came up in Green Bay. We would've all been saying "Why did we sign this guy?"
Harlan Huckleby
10-01-2006, 09:40 PM
well, hell, I'd love to have TO on the Packers. Randy Moss too. It would keep things interesting.
Kiwon
10-01-2006, 10:22 PM
During the off season, there was heated discussion as to whether the Packers should sign Terrell Owens.

As Packer fans, what is your opinion on this situation. Would you still want to see T.O. wear the green and gold?

OPF

Count me as one that wanted T.O., but I'm glad now that he isn't here. Great talent, but simply too big a distraction.
the_idle_threat
10-02-2006, 12:29 AM
Big-time credit to Parcells for keeping his team focused ... a blowout win does wonders to quell the old "T.O. distraction" problem.

I like M3 so far, but I don't think he has the necessary gravitas, being a rookie HC and all, to keep a team focused in the face of a T.O.-grade distraction. Parcells is in a different league in that respect. But we will see if the distraction proves too big even for Parcells when the game is against a better opponent.
Tony Oday
10-02-2006, 01:20 AM
Id take him. Imagine Jennings on a nickle back :) lol he would have 150 yards per game and 3 TDS
Packers4Ever
10-02-2006, 11:25 AM
well, hell, I'd love to have TO on the Packers. Randy Moss too. It would keep things interesting.



HARLAN !! :shock: Surely you jest, :D
Patler
10-02-2006, 11:28 AM
well, hell, I'd love to have TO on the Packers. Randy Moss too. It would keep things interesting.

Do we just not hear about it because of the distance, or has Randy Moss become better behaved?
FritzDontBlitz
10-02-2006, 12:37 PM
yes, they would have been better off by signing him.

and while we're on the subject, we would have been better off keeping terry glenn too.
MJZiggy
10-02-2006, 12:54 PM
well, hell, I'd love to have TO on the Packers. Randy Moss too. It would keep things interesting.

Do we just not hear about it because of the distance, or has Randy Moss become better behaved? He must be better behaved, or at least quieter about misbehaving. The media love bad boy behavior way too much for everyone not to hear about it. I mean, Clarrett's not even in the league anymore and we all know everytime he gets caught drunk with a weapons cache in his vehicle... :roll: