How would GB have faired against NE?

[Scott Campbell]

I haven't seen this much waffling since I had breakfast at IHOP.

[woodbuck27]

I haven't seen this much waffling since I had breakfast at IHOP.

Funny Scott.

[Cheesehead Craig]

Woodbuck -
I asked you explain a contradiction in what you wrote in some statements about the Packers and TT. You then attack me for some reason saying I have some hatchet when I simply asked for clarification.

You also talk about how great of a winner you are. Whatever the hell that has to do with the statements.

Then you ramble on about the Pro Pick 'Em and how you did. Whatever the hell that has to do with the statements.

Then you say you are humble and not arrogant. Which completely contradicts what was a good portion of your post.

Never once do you clarify why you can post both that we will never make the Super Bowl and that you thought we were going to the Super Bowl within minutes of each other.

Don't bother responding woody. I doubt I'll get any further clarification from you and if you tried I'm sure it would be some more nonsensical ramblings.

[woodbuck27]

Woodbuck -
I asked you explain a contradiction in what you wrote in some statements about the Packers and TT. You then attack me for some reason saying I have some hatchet when I simply asked for clarification.

You also talk about how great of a winner you are. Whatever the hell that has to do with the statements.

Then you ramble on about the Pro Pick 'Em and how you did. Whatever the hell that has to do with the statements.

Then you say you are humble and not arrogant. Which completely contradicts what was a good portion of your post.

Never once do you clarify why you can post both that we will never make the Super Bowl and that you thought we were going to the Super Bowl within minutes of each other.

Don't bother responding woody. I doubt I'll get any further clarification from you and if you tried I'm sure it would be some more nonsensical ramblings.

How's this then:

The explanation Cheesehead Craig.

I posted clearly, that I believed we would win not sure we would win.

I quote myself:

''I just believe not sure of a win,always just believe'' woodbuck27

There it is.

That I'm never totally sure of a Packer win.

ie Vs the New York Giants. That if we reached the Super Bowl we'd do well not. . .

that we'd win.

Is that better for YOU?

[Scott Campbell]

Re: How would GB have faired against NE?

I would have been just as disappointed if the Packers were there, but NE had lost.

I wanted the Pack to play NE too, but I'm not going to go quite that far.

[Scott Campbell]

You also talk about how great of a winner you are.

Winner? I thought he said weiner.

[woodbuck27]

You also talk about how great of a winner you are.

Winner? I thought he said weiner.

What's this Scott? Maybe a bad day with the wives, so your here to get rid of a little pent up frustration with your anal active pseudo calls for help posts.


Go see a shrink Scott, as that's better long term planning.

Short on cash? Try one of your wives cookie jars. Use some of your MAD money.

[woodbuck27]

Woodbuck -
I asked you explain a contradiction in what you wrote in some statements about the Packers and TT. You then attack me for some reason saying I have some hatchet when I simply asked for clarification.

You also talk about how great of a winner you are. Whatever the hell that has to do with the statements.

Then you ramble on about the Pro Pick 'Em and how you did. Whatever the hell that has to do with the statements.

Then you say you are humble and not arrogant. Which completely contradicts what was a good portion of your post.

Never once do you clarify why you can post both that we will never make the Super Bowl and that you thought we were going to the Super Bowl within minutes of each other.

Don't bother responding woody. I doubt I'll get any further clarification from you and if you tried I'm sure it would be some more nonsensical ramblings.

I went into a lot in that post to clarify that I am not just a member here that takes an opposing view, from the large majority, because that makes me feel great. My position means I have to endure a lot of pain fr. some rather sick people here at times.

I categorize only a few posters at PackerRats there.

[Scott Campbell]

You also talk about how great of a winner you are.

Winner? I thought he said weiner.

What's this Scott? Maybe a bad day with the wives, so your here to get rid of a little pent up frustration with your anal active pseudo calls for help posts.


Go see a shrink Scott, as that's better long term planning.

Short on cash? Try one of your wives cookie jars. Use some of your MAD money.

Uhhhh......no. Wasn't mad or any of those other nice polite things you said. I just thought you said weiner.

[Kiwon]

If the Pats and Pack had played in the Super Bowl I think it would have been a very good game.

That said, I think the Pats probably would have won for two reasons:

1. The experience of Bill Belichick and crew over MM and his coaches.

2. The Pats OL versus the Pack's front seven. I expect the Pats would have won that battle and a lack of a pass rush by the Packers would have given Brady just too much time to throw.

Of course, an injury or a fluke play could change the whole course of a game, but with everything being equal, I would expect the Pats to have won.

Still, it's a bitter shame that the Packers and #4 won't be on the field come Sunday. They were so close...............

[b bulldog]

It is a shame but THE PACKERS BLEW IT, WE DIDN'T