Jumpin Johnies Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 (edited) You're dreaming. NO WAY they hit on 3 out of 4 of their rumors. If you read every single story thay have in their Rumor Mill section, it's 25%...maybe 30%. Still, nearly one out of three Rumors proving accurate, is pretty decent. 1434785[/snapback] I guess you could prove me wrong. Here, we'll track it moving forward. Edited April 24, 2006 by Jumpin Johnies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Score 1 Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 PFT hits on a much higher %. I'd put it closer to 75%.1434754[/snapback] You're dreaming. NO WAY they hit on 3 out of 4 of their rumors. If you read every single story thay have in their Rumor Mill section, it's 25%...maybe 30%. Still, nearly one out of three Rumors proving accurate, is pretty decent. The NFL could've scheduled primetime games for the Eagles and Seahawks for any of the remaining 15 weeks of the season, but they decided to do it when they were to play Favre and the Packers. There's a cheesy story line to the Hawks game with Favre and Holmgren. The Eagles will suck next year. Who wants to watch a Favre-less Packers team take on the Eagles? 1434754[/snapback] I think you're selling the Packers & Eagles fan base short. Yes there's the cheesy storyline between Favre & Holmgren. But whether favre plays or not, there's the Cheesy storyline between the Pack & Holmgren & between the Pack & Hasselbeck. I really don't think the NFL schedule makers had some Top Secret memo saying Favre will play so schedule 3 Packers games for Prime Time. Too many people would know about it. Word would have leaked by now. But just because I don't think the NFL schedule is a credible barometer to say whether Favre's playing or not, doesn't mean you shouldn't. It's your opinion...and who knows...you could be right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumpin Johnies Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 Word would have leaked by now. 1434805[/snapback] Word has already leaked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Score 1 Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 I guess you could prove me wrong. Here, we'll track it moving forward.1434794[/snapback] Cool. You keep up with it and let me know Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumpin Johnies Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 Cool. You keep up with it and let me know 1434812[/snapback] Sure, so far they're 100% accurate. I'll let you know if anything changes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Score 1 Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 Word has already leaked. 1434810[/snapback] Credible source other than the rumors on PFT's Rumor Mill? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Score 1 Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 Sure, so far they're 100% accurate. I'll let you know if anything changes. 1434814[/snapback] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumpin Johnies Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 Credible source other than the rumors on PFT's Rumor Mill? 1434816[/snapback] Well Ted Thompson and Brett Favre haven't said anything public so far. So I guess we're stuck with PFT for the time being. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Score 1 Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 Well Ted Thompson and Brett Favre haven't said anything public so far. So I guess we're stuck with PFT for the time being. 1434820[/snapback] Cool and thanks JJ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted April 24, 2006 Share Posted April 24, 2006 Favre's holding out? Honestly if the Pack wanted a QB why didn't they show any interest in all the FA's this year? I don't see it. All I have heard is Rogers isn't ready yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 i'd say rogers is ready to fill favre's shoes this year. favre would lead the pack to about 3 wins, and i think rogers is good for at least 2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 i'd say rogers is ready to fill favre's shoes this year. favre would lead the pack to about 3 wins, and i think rogers is good for at least 2. 1435310[/snapback] Last year Favre lost his top 3 RB's and 2 of his top 3 WR's and his top TE for much of the year, but still were very close to winning several games. They lost one game by 1, one by 2 and two games by 3 points. 3 wins is way off imo with healthy players returning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiss Cheezhead Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Credible source other than the rumors on PFT's Rumor Mill? 1434816[/snapback] Well, no -- generally, "rumors" don't come from "credible sources". They generally come from "anonymous sources". Once a credible source confirms a story, it' s no longer a rumor. No matter how credible you consider PFT (30% vs 50% vs. 70%, etc.), my point remains. The rumors existed BEFORE this strange theory was suggested, so it's not a case of manufacturing evidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Say what you want, no one other than Favre has won the MVP three times. He also has a ring. As long as he's on the field, the Pack have a chance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Score 1 Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Well, no -- generally, "rumors" don't come from "credible sources". They generally come from "anonymous sources". Once a credible source confirms a story, it' s no longer a rumor. No matter how credible you consider PFT (30% vs 50% vs. 70%, etc.), my point remains. The rumors existed BEFORE this strange theory was suggested, so it's not a case of manufacturing evidence. 1435561[/snapback] Point. And PFT has indeed broken some big ones. Guess we'll wait and see. But say Favre does play and this whole time it was known that would be the case, do you think the principles in this subterfuge will ever admit that the whole Favre "Will or won't he retire" was just a charade? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiss Cheezhead Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Point. And PFT has indeed broken some big ones. Guess we'll wait and see. But say Favre does play and this whole time it was known that would be the case, do you think the principles in this subterfuge will ever admit that the whole Favre "Will or won't he retire" was just a charade? 1435597[/snapback] I don' t know. That's a more interesting question than I initially thought.... Reasons why they WOULD reveal the truth: Favre might want it that way. Given the backlash from the fans so far, he might want to "clear the air", so to speak, and let all his sudden critics know that he wasn't being as selfish as he seemed. It would remove one of the two public-relations blemishes of his career, which might be important to a guy who's considering his football legacy. Reasons why they WOULD NOT reveal the truth: Thompson is a secretive guy, by nature. He's one of those football guys who takes his job VERY seriously and believes that he should eliminate ANY possible advantage his competitors might have. To him, admitting that the team intentionally misled the rest of the league might take away future leverage in trade negotiations. "Hey, Al Davis -- if you don't trade up to our spot, we're going to take your player." "Yeah, right, Ted. You said that in 2006 and we ended up giving you guys 2 picks for no reason. Not falling for it again." Obviously, I'd say chances are that Thompson would never admit to such a thing, but, if it's true, it's the type of story that would get leaked eventually. Of course, the leaker would be anonymous and we'd be right back to where we are now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Score 1 Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 if it's true, it's the type of story that would get leaked eventually. Of course, the leaker would be anonymous and we'd be right back to where we are now. 1435617[/snapback] So it would be a rumor confirming a rumor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 ok what exactly does GB gain by everybody thinking favre might retire? other teams think they might draft a QB? that's it? i don't think anyone is buying that seems a lot more likely that favre is just trying to leverage the pack into signing more free agents or whatever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiss Cheezhead Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 ok what exactly does GB gain by everybody thinking favre might retire? other teams think they might draft a QB? that's it? i don't think anyone is buying that 1435846[/snapback] I don't think it's farfetched to think some teams who want a QB are worried that the Packers might take one at #5. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Men In Tights Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 From what we've seen the last 15 years, the GB draft strategy doesn't really scare anyone (Mandarick over Barry Sanders and Deion? Aaron Rodgers???? Passing on Randy Moss?). 1434485[/snapback] Mandarboobs was supposed to be the best LT in NFL history. A lot of teams passed on Randy Moss. I will admit that the genius that is Ron Wolf never drafted a great player in the first round, he succeeded in the 3rd round and after. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Men In Tights Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 I don't think it's farfetched to think some teams who want a QB are worried that the Packers might take one at #5. 1435941[/snapback] I agree and think TT will take the best available player at #5 regardless of position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 (edited) I don't think it's farfetched to think some teams who want a QB are worried that the Packers might take one at #5. 1435941[/snapback] well, if they WERE worried, they aren't now that the favre-faux-retirement conspiracy is out of the bag and being bandied about by a bunch of FF :nerd:s i can't believe you pack fans are buying this chit Edited April 25, 2006 by Azazello1313 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiss Cheezhead Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 i can't believe you pack fans are buying this chit 1436019[/snapback] No one is "buying" it. I just said it wouldn't surprise me. Knowing Thompson, I could see him trying to utilize every possible advantage. Speaking of "buying it", how 'bout those SuperBowls the Broncos "bought" with pretend salary-cap money! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Speaking of "buying it", how 'bout those SuperBowls the Broncos "bought" with pretend salary-cap money! 1436043[/snapback] that was random. you're not STILL sore about super bowl xxxii, are you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Men In Tights Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 that was random. you're not STILL sore about super bowl xxxii, are you? 1436079[/snapback] Elway did NOT win that Super Bowl, Terrell Davis did. And yes, we are still sore about that Super Bowl. Along with a certain play we refer to as the 4th and 26. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.