Vet Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 I remember reading somwhere that the US workforce loses something like 350 million man-hours of productivity during the days immediately preceding and following the Superbowl (people wasting time talking about the game, etc.) Wait until the Bureau of Labor Statistics discovers how many man-hours have been wasted debating this rather meaningless topic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 No, on our flyers we put pictures of Charlton Heston holding a guitar with a pentagram on his head with text that says "see zoma, drink booze" 995768[/snapback] I like that. Packers helmets probably don't work too well down here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rellen13 Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 wow, this thread has deteriorated into a flame war... And is'nt that why we all keep coming back? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TripleW64 Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 wow, this thread has deteriorated into a flame war... 995795[/snapback] nice thread that turned into a pissing war about whether Bush should get Brett Favre to buy Javon an official hurricane Katrina knee pad. Oh the humanity!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 I like that. Packers helmets probably don't work too well down here. 995821[/snapback] na, i dont imagine they would... if your ever in deep ellum, and we're playing, find the bassist of zoma, I'll buy you some booze. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhino Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 Just curious. If MIrvin is saying that BFavre was wrong in getting into another player's business, then why isn't MIrvin wrong for getting into another player's business? If it's wrong for player A to get into player B's business, then why does player A always want more money because of what player B is making? How are these two things the same thing : (1) BFavre : "JWalker, get into camp. You're going about it all wrong." (2) BFavre : "JWalker, you get paid enough, and you should not get paid any more this year. So, get into camp." I saw BFavre state the former, not the latter. Maybe the reason BFavre didn't call out the GB mgmt was because he already knew the process, procedures, and guidelines they work from. "Calling out" the GB mgmt to work out a deal with a player that is holding out only sets a bad precedent that can only hurt the team further down the line with other players wanting more money. Last time I checked, JWalker agreed to a contract that included multiple years. He didn't agree with the first year of the multi-year contract. He agreed to all years of his multi-year contract. If he now disagrees with his current contract, he should learn from his mistakes and ask for a contract that has incentives in it. And why can't this be done with his new contract? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FightingEvil Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 na, i dont imagine they would... if your ever in deep ellum, and we're playing, find the bassist of zoma, I'll buy you some booze. 995835[/snapback] If that offer also extends to me, I just might take you up on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 If that offer also extends to me, I just might take you up on it. 995851[/snapback] yeah, whoever, just find me... we're playing sunday night in deep ellum, then taking a little break for a while. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 Just curious. If MIrvin is saying that BFavre was wrong in getting into another player's business, then why isn't MIrvin wrong for getting into another player's business? 995840[/snapback] 1. He's retired but more importantly: 2. He's a paid commentator. pirates when's the next time yer playing in Deep Ellum. Always looking for an excuse. Ever heard of Somsara? One of my good firends is the guitar player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 yeah, whoever, just find me... we're playing sunday night in deep ellum, then taking a little break for a while. 995862[/snapback] Where? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhino Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 1. He's retired but more importantly:2. He's a paid commentator 995866[/snapback] And how does that give him a season pass to crap all over the packers? Sounds like a black pot/kettle thing to me. I guess that puts me on the "Shut up, MIrvin" side of the house. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 Where? 995869[/snapback] Somsara's at the Curtain Club Sunday. Preston Grey is at the Liquid Lounge that same night. If I can get a babysitter maybe me and the better half can get down for a burger at the Angry Dog and catch some shows. I don't see you guys in the Observer listings on-line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 And how does that give him a season pass to crap all over the packers? Sounds like a black pot/kettle thing to me. 995904[/snapback] Generally commentators are paid to make comments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhino Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 Generally commentators are paid to make comments. 995928[/snapback] Well put. Got me there. I guess then, we can say, that QBs are paid to throw to their WRs. Which is hardly possible when they're holding out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 Well put. Got me there. I guess then, we can say, that QBs are paid to throw to their WRs. Which is hardly possible when they're holding out. 995941[/snapback] Agreed. Could we also agree it is the GM's job to get the hold-out resolved instead of the QBs? If we can you can continue to loathe and hate Irvin all you want. Of course now that Randy's a Raider I'd have thought you could appreciate Irvin some. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulOttCarruth Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 Profootballtalk.com article Not sure if this has been posted here. Don't feel like tredding through all the manure that's been posted on this thread. IRVIN WRONG TO RIP FAVRE For a guy who lives in a stained-glass and powdered-mirror palace, Michael Irvin sure loves to toss the boulders. His most recent target is Packers quarterback Brett Favre, whom Irvin blames for the current predicament facing receiver Javon Walker. Walker stayed away from the team's entire offseason program in protest of a rookie deal that pays him $515,000 in 2005 and $650,000 in 2006. Based on his 2004 Pro Bowl season (which came on the heels of two average-to-mediocre campaigns), Walker wanted to cash in, hoping to be paid (so we heard) like Randy Moss. Said Favre in early May, when Walker's intentions became clear: "If Javon wants to know what his quarterback thinks, and I would think he might, I'd tell him he's going about this the wrong way." Walker eventually showed up for training camp. And in the first game of the regular season, Walker tore an ACL. He's done for 2005, and likely won't see a new contract in Green Bay until he proves in 2006 that he is healthy and still effective. Irvin blames the whole thing on Favre. "Now, this is a story here," Irvin said Thursday, according to The Palm Beach Post. "This boy came back into camp because of Brett Favre. The great Brett Favre. This is not some rookie quarterback calling him out when he was asking for his money. This is the great Brett Favre. . . . "I love Brett, I appreciate Brett," Irvin added. "But Brett should know business is business. You don't mess with another man's business. "Now, what do you do, Brett? If I'm Brett, how you can walk in the room when you just did surgery to say, 'Hey, man, I'm sorry this has happened?' How could you do it? How could you look that man in his eyes?" We haven't been, won't be, and never will be Brett Favre sycophants. There are already too many of them out there. But on this point Irvin is way, way off. The flaw in Irvin's reasoning is that Walker showed up for camp because of Favre's comments. Not true, based on our knowledge of the situation. Walker didn't report because of Brett Favre, but because of the many thousands of dollars Walkers would have lost if he didn't show. For starters, the Packers would have been able to recover a big chunk of Walker's bonus money if he had breached his contract by not reporting to camp. Likewise, if Walker had failed to report by August 8, he would have lost a year's credit toward free agency. He also would have been susceptible to daily fines. If the holdout had lasted into the regular season, he would have lost more than $30,000 per week in game checks. And if he'd missed more than 10 regular-season games, Walker's contract would have been tolled for a year. The other flaw in Irvin's argument is the presumption that the Packers would have caved in and paid Walker if he had held out. The team, however, made it clear that Walker wouldn't get a new contract this year. The fact that Walker didn't hold out suggests that he and his agent found the team's commitment in this regard credible. So money talks much louder than does Brett Favre or anyone else. It's convenient for those of limited cognitive abilities (inherent and/or chemical-induced) to blame Favre, but we suggest that before Irvin or anyone else points to Brett as the reason for Walker's present twist of fate, they consider the facts. The facts, of course, don't always fit with the agendas of guys like Irvin, who never lets reality get in the way of yet another chance to draw attention to himself. And the notion of Irvin criticizing anyone is curious, to say the least. As one high-level league insider opined on Friday morning, "For a guy that has as many skeletons in his closet and past transgressions in life, the guy is awfully opinionated and judgmental about people. . . . [He] represents an angle of the game that is bad for football -- just like him supporting the two idiots that got into a brawl" prior to Monday night's Eagles-Falcons game. The whole thing makes us wonder why the NFL hasn't pressured ESPN to put a sweat sock in Irvin's stew shoot. Although we like the idea that someone/anyone is willing to actually express opinions other than "Michael Vick is the greatest quarterback ever to play the game," a guy spouting off takes that are misguided and misinformed isn't a good thing. If the NFL was able to squeeze Bristol's balls into dropping its former show Playmakers, our guess is that the league office eventually will suggest to ESPN that it might want to consider dropping a former playmaker who will only make more trouble if no one calls him out and/or shuts him up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 (edited) Last time I checked, JWalker agreed to a contract that included multiple years. He didn't agree with the first year of the multi-year contract. He agreed to all years of his multi-year contract. If he now disagrees with his current contract, he should learn from his mistakes and ask for a contract that has incentives in it. And why can't this be done with his new contract? 995840[/snapback] Hold outs are not new to the NFL. Favre shouldve minded his business. edit to add: I think Favre is a hall of fame top notch qb but its about time someone stopped the manlove that the commentators gush all over this guy. Edited September 16, 2005 by whomper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vet Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 Profootballtalk.com article Not sure if this has been posted here. Don't feel like tredding through all the manure that's been posted on this thread. 995958[/snapback] Who does this guy think he is? Who is he to rip Irvin??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 Nothing in that atricle makes me think Favre was right to say anything about Walker's hold-out. Particularly whe I see something like: Irvin blames the whole thing on Favre. I don't see where Irvin is blaming anything on Favre, I just see Irvin saying it wasn't Favre's business to stick his nose into Walker's business. Which, of course it wasn't. Sounds like they're a bunch of Brett Favre sycophants to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexandernevermind Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 Profootballtalk.com article Great article PaulOttCarruth, I too hope that very thing takes place based on the opinion of one person. What a precedent that would set; of course you know that would only be the beginning and Irvin could not be the only one jettisoned under this pretense. Pandora's box but what the hell... I like it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhino Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 Hold outs are not new to the NFL. Doesn't make it right. Playing out your contract isn't new to the NFL either. That's like saying arsons aren't new to the USA. Yet, one can still make his point without having to resort to arson. Favre shouldve minded his business. He was -- the business of winning in GB. Last time I checked, there's been no report on him in the negotiation rooms with JWalker, Drew, or the GB mgmt. I have not heard any reports of Favre opening up Walker's contract and taking part in any kind of negotiations. Did I miss something there? edit to add: I think Favre is a hall of fame top notch qb but its about time someone stopped the manlove that the commentators gush all over this guy. Agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 Come on pirates, where you playing? I'll buy my own beer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aiea Sparks Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 Really to sum it up noone was right. Walker was wrong to hold out, Favre was wrong to comment publicly on it, and Irvin was wrong to pass judgement on it. I can understand Brett's reasoning but the venue he chose was the wrong one. Call the guy up and tell him that not a gaggle of reporters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 That's how you spell Chao? 995807[/snapback] Yep, just like you, momotard. You have chosen to ignore FightingEvil. View this post · Squeeze me a little harder FightingEvil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted September 16, 2005 Share Posted September 16, 2005 Bitchen. 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.