Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 53
  1. #41
    dfosterf's Avatar
    dfosterf is offline Coach
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    987

    Re: allow more publicly owned teams

    I added after you quoted.

    I have "theorized" somewhat in "my" CBA thread about "opening the books", especially as it relates in modern times to such things as tax ramifications and loopholes for PSL revenues, etc. While that is in no way responsible for the original "Green Bay rule", it is POSSIBLE that it would be a potential obstacle for even exploring the possibility of a corporate owned team now or in the future.

    I have to go play Poker now, got my SB champion hat, and since my opponents are all Steeler fans (I'm in PA) I might put them all "on tilt" before a single hand is played. B)

  2. #42
    Caine's Avatar
    Caine is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    5,135

    Re: allow more publicly owned teams

    Quote Originally Posted by "dfosterf" #1089861
    The Green Bay rule

    It doesn't answer your question, but the article asks it better...or perhaps, a little more politely.


    Green Bay stands as a living, breathing, and, for the owners, frightening example, that pro sports can aid our cities in tough economic times, not drain them of scarce public resources.
    Take it up with the commish.

    What you characterize as "favortism" (I'm not gonna quibble about that recurring theme of yours) only puts the Packers on a footing roughly equal to the Vikings. The rest of whatever financial success they have achieved as a franchise can also be assigned to the fans and tax payers support of that franchise. For example, Forbes has the "cost per fan" in GB at 277. ea, taking into account the relative market size of ea. franchise. Go to the Forbes 2010 NFL article and compare that to your own team, on a cost per fan basis, or for that matter, ANY other team. That is an undeniable factor also.
    Let's see...my "recurring theme"? What would YOU call it?

    Only Green Bay can have a publicly held franchise.

    Only Green Bay can engage in post-TD celebrations taht involve entering the stands (The Lameblow leap).

    In the NFL, all of the franchises are SUPPOSED to follow the same rules. They're SUPPOSED to have rules enforced equally amongst them.

    But that doesn't happen. There are at LEAST two occassions in which Green Bay is EXEMPTED from a rule which affects EVERYONE else.

    If that's not favoritism, what is it?

    And PLEASE explain to me how exempting Green Bay from those two rules places them on - in your words - "a footing roughly equal to the Vikings".

    Would they suddenly become an inferior franchise if the Lameblow leap was outlawed like all of the other celebrations (Such as Jared Allen's "calf-rope")?

    Caine

  3. #43
    dfosterf's Avatar
    dfosterf is offline Coach
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    987

    Re: allow more publicly owned teams

    Quote Originally Posted by "Caine" #1089865
    Quote Originally Posted by "dfosterf" #1089861
    The Green Bay rule

    It doesn't answer your question, but the article asks it better...or perhaps, a little more politely.


    Green Bay stands as a living, breathing, and, for the owners, frightening example, that pro sports can aid our cities in tough economic times, not drain them of scarce public resources.
    Take it up with the commish.

    What you characterize as "favortism" (I'm not gonna quibble about that recurring theme of yours) only puts the Packers on a footing roughly equal to the Vikings. The rest of whatever financial success they have achieved as a franchise can also be assigned to the fans and tax payers support of that franchise. For example, Forbes has the "cost per fan" in GB at 277. ea, taking into account the relative market size of ea. franchise. Go to the Forbes 2010 NFL article and compare that to your own team, on a cost per fan basis, or for that matter, ANY other team. That is an undeniable factor also.
    Let's see...my "recurring theme"? What would YOU call it?

    Only Green Bay can have a publicly held franchise.

    Only Green Bay can engage in post-TD celebrations taht involve entering the stands (The Lameblow leap).

    In the NFL, all of the franchises are SUPPOSED to follow the same rules. They're SUPPOSED to have rules enforced equally amongst them.

    But that doesn't happen. There are at LEAST two occassions in which Green Bay is EXEMPTED from a rule which affects EVERYONE else.

    If that's not favoritism, what is it?

    And PLEASE explain to me how exempting Green Bay from those two rules places them on - in your words - "a footing roughly equal to the Vikings".

    Would they suddenly become an inferior franchise if the Lameblow leap was outlawed like all of the other celebrations (Such as Jared Allen's "calf-rope")?

    Caine
    You W I N !

    You are correct. This is how it is seen. We apologize. You are so smart.

    We can only one day aspire to your awesomeness and intellect.

    (therapy available upon request)

    Cannot believe you get support from your fellow Vikes fans, but if so, it represents the tragedy of your arrogance, both your team and you personally.... But again, you have this pegged over me, as always.

    as a small aside, you are just as done as always, we won 13, you have nothing and no prospects going forward, contrasted with us being loaded, but, as you have repeated, you got us.... Dayum, you bahsthads, lol lol lol

    Did I mention that from now on (without Brett) when you all collectively whine it will now be amongst yourselves?

    No?


    Well then, consider that EAT JOB too,lol...

    13th World Championship vs. Vikes one. See how nice I am? lol Since I did so, plan for foster to be a complete dick like you. The rest of the purple world would be wise to tremble at that concept, lol

  4. #44
    Caine's Avatar
    Caine is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    5,135

    Re: allow more publicly owned teams

    Quote Originally Posted by "dfosterf" #1089867
    Quote Originally Posted by "Caine" #1089865
    Quote Originally Posted by "dfosterf" #1089861
    The Green Bay rule

    It doesn't answer your question, but the article asks it better...or perhaps, a little more politely.


    Green Bay stands as a living, breathing, and, for the owners, frightening example, that pro sports can aid our cities in tough economic times, not drain them of scarce public resources.
    Take it up with the commish.

    What you characterize as "favortism" (I'm not gonna quibble about that recurring theme of yours) only puts the Packers on a footing roughly equal to the Vikings. The rest of whatever financial success they have achieved as a franchise can also be assigned to the fans and tax payers support of that franchise. For example, Forbes has the "cost per fan" in GB at 277. ea, taking into account the relative market size of ea. franchise. Go to the Forbes 2010 NFL article and compare that to your own team, on a cost per fan basis, or for that matter, ANY other team. That is an undeniable factor also.
    Let's see...my "recurring theme"? What would YOU call it?

    Only Green Bay can have a publicly held franchise.

    Only Green Bay can engage in post-TD celebrations taht involve entering the stands (The Lameblow leap).

    In the NFL, all of the franchises are SUPPOSED to follow the same rules. They're SUPPOSED to have rules enforced equally amongst them.

    But that doesn't happen. There are at LEAST two occassions in which Green Bay is EXEMPTED from a rule which affects EVERYONE else.

    If that's not favoritism, what is it?

    And PLEASE explain to me how exempting Green Bay from those two rules places them on - in your words - "a footing roughly equal to the Vikings".

    Would they suddenly become an inferior franchise if the Lameblow leap was outlawed like all of the other celebrations (Such as Jared Allen's "calf-rope")?

    Caine
    You W I N !

    You are correct. This is how it is seen. We apologize. You are so smart.

    We can only one day aspire to your awesomeness and intellect.

    (therapy available upon request)

    Cannot believe you get support from your fellow Vikes fans, but if so, it represents the tragedy of your arrogance, both your team and you personally.... But again, you have this pegged over me, as always.

    as a small aside, you are just as done as always, we won 13, you have nothing and no prospects going forward, contrasted with us being loaded, but, as you have repeated, you got us.... Dayum, you bahsthads, lol lol lol

    Did I mention that from now on (without Brett) when you all collectively whine it will now be amongst yourselves?

    No?


    Well then, consider that EAT JOB too,lol...

    13th World Championship vs. Vikes one. See how nice I am? lol Since I did so, plan for foster to be a complete dick like you. The rest of the purple world would be wise to tremble at that concept, lol
    Let's see...you make a statement I don't agree with, I provide a factual basis for my disagreement, you get your knickers in a knot, and "I'M" the asshole?

    And now, once again, you wish to trumpet your "13 Championships"? I think "Whoop-deee-doo" is the most appropriate response. I've already illustrated - again, in a completely FACTUAL fashion - why most of those "Championships" mean absolutely nothing to me as a Viking fan...my franchise wasn't even in existence.

    Further, I site fact after fact to support every position I take, and you call it ARROGANCE? I disagree. I simply believe it's absolutely pointless to agree with something that is "wrong".

    Then you seek to take a parting shot at the state of the Vikings? ROFL. Read a few more of OUR posts and you'll see that we're already well aware of how precarious our teams position is. But, speaking of arrogance, I love how you flaunt your teams alleged "loaded" status. Be careful, the Karma gods are a fickle lot...

    Plus, every ARGUEMENTATIVE point in this running train wreck was introduced by YOU.

    I merely stated - factually - that George Halas has saved the Packers franchise several times. You, it seems, couldn't handle that information, and went off the deep end.

    I never said Halas gave them money (And I have found no evidence to support that idea, although I have HEARD it...but that doesn't make it FACT, so it didn't get brought in) - YOU brought that in.

    I didn't care if Halas helped the Vikings get THEIR franchise. That wasn't the POINT. YOU brought that up to try and mitigate the other.

    I mentioned Packer favoritism, then asked you what else it should be called - since it ONLY affects the Packers, and no one else is ALLOWED to do it - and you chose to instead respond with insults.

    And, finally, I never let loose with personal attacks. You did. Go back through this entire train wreck and find one personal attack I made towards you? The closest you'll get is my R.I.F. comment (Reading is fundamental) when you misinterpreted a quote. But YOUR posts contain a variety of personal insults directed at me...alleging that my information is "BS", that I need therapy, and that my information is "creative" (implying "untrue").

    And yet, every single element I posted here was FACT.

    Every single one.

    And you dodged them all or tried to mitigate them all by throwing mud at ME, at the other members of PPO, and at the Vikings.

    And THAT is why I think that most Packer fans aren't worth the TP I used to wipe my ass today. You all LOVE to gloat about how great your franchise has been, but any time something less than perfect is mentioned - or any time a fact you don't like comes up - all you can do is fall back to personal attacks and blather on about how many Superbowls/Championships your team has.

    By way of comparison, ask any Viking fan about how dire our current team position is...we'll talk candidly about it. Ask us about the Love Boat? Ask us about losing to New Orleans? Ask us about the '98 NFCC game? Ask us about Mike Tice scalping tickets? Ask us about ANYTHING, and we'll candidly answer you.

    Yeah...right...WE'RE the arrogant bunch. WE'RE the assholes. WE traveled to YOUR website to insult YOUR team.

    Oh...wait....no. That was you.

    In closing, if this is how you chose to play, game on. But YOU chose this...not me.

    Caine

  5. #45
    Purple Floyd's Avatar
    Purple Floyd is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    16,646
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: allow more publicly owned teams

    Quote Originally Posted by "jargomcfargo" #1089836
    Quote Originally Posted by "dfosterf" #1089824
    Quote Originally Posted by "Caine" #1089820
    It's worth pointing out that the only reason Green Bay was publicly traded is because they couldn't maintain financial viability back in the early years. In fact, it's not widely known but George Halas saved the Green Bay franchise on more than one occasion.


    ...probably so he'd have 2 guaranteed wins per year...


    It's worth noting also that despite the alleged "success" of the Packers being publicly traded, no other franchise is ALLOWED to do so. Why is that? If it works so well there, why not allow other franchises to mirror that "success story"?

    Just another pro-Green Bay NFL contradiction to throw into the "Why I hate the Packers" bucket...


    ...like I needed more reasons...

    Caine

    The Green Bay Packers loaned Halas $1500 in 1932 in order to save the Chicago Bears franchise. He borrowed money from his mother, his mother-in-law, and the Pack.

    The Bears have never loaned the Packers a dime.

    Halas was instrumental in public relations in 1956 to convince Packer fans that it was wise to support their form of ownership. That is the FORM of his assistance... not anything financial. That is the "saved".

    Maybe it's the soft spot he held because without that loan way back in '32, the Bears would have folded right then and there.

    He did the same thing (public relations) in 1922 with the rest of the league as regards the Packers, having to do with their use of college football players. The league was going to ban the Pack, but he was guilty of the exact same rule infraction, including getting one of the players from the Pack, so in order to enforce prohibitions against the GB franchise, they would have had to do the same to the Bears.

    Those are your "saved" the Packers, and I guess to Norse mythologists, they are totally legit.

    Or maybe that one Bears fan buddy you have (Caine) that told you the Bears didn't try in week 17, thereby making that a fact (to you), lol

    Now, for some real facts. The team that Halas helped the most?

    YOURS.

    He was THE driving force for the NFL bringing a franchise to Minneapolis.
    I would favor mythology over revision I suppose.
    Fact is, The Chicago Cardinals and N.Y. Giants played a regular season NFL game at the Metrodome in 1959. Over 26000 fans showed up.

    Max Winter had been attemting to get an NFL team in the twin cities for a few years without success.

    The decision was made to start a new football league. And there was a meeting in Mpls. by those interested.

    In addition, the Chicago Cardinals were considering moving to the twin cities.

    The NFL was concerened about a competing league and decided to grant teams to Minnesota and Dallas.

    As Paul Harvey used to say, that's the rest of the story.

    Given your expertese in early NFL history, we probably should allow you brag about those 6 championships your team won before World War II!
    Holy cow, I didn't even think the Metrodome was around in 1959. I guess it is due to be replaced.

  6. #46
    Purple Floyd's Avatar
    Purple Floyd is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    16,646
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: allow more publicly owned teams

    Quote Originally Posted by "dfosterf" #1089863
    I added after you quoted.

    I have "theorized" somewhat in "my" CBA thread about "opening the books", especially as it relates in modern times to such things as tax ramifications and loopholes for PSL revenues, etc. While that is in no way responsible for the original "Green Bay rule", it is POSSIBLE that it would be a potential obstacle for even exploring the possibility of a corporate owned team now or in the future.

    I have to go play Poker now, got my SB champion hat, and since my opponents are all Steeler fans (I'm in PA) I might put them all "on tilt" before a single hand is played. B)
    the reason they won't open their books is because the host cities would see how badly they are getting fleeced by subsidizing the teams and because they use the teams as a way to hide assets and disburse losses.

  7. #47
    dfosterf's Avatar
    dfosterf is offline Coach
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    987

    Re: allow more publicly owned teams

    Quote Originally Posted by "Caine" #1089869
    Quote Originally Posted by "dfosterf" #1089867
    Quote Originally Posted by "Caine" #1089865
    Quote Originally Posted by "dfosterf" #1089861
    The Green Bay rule

    It doesn't answer your question, but the article asks it better...or perhaps, a little more politely.


    Green Bay stands as a living, breathing, and, for the owners, frightening example, that pro sports can aid our cities in tough economic times, not drain them of scarce public resources.
    Take it up with the commish.

    What you characterize as "favortism" (I'm not gonna quibble about that recurring theme of yours) only puts the Packers on a footing roughly equal to the Vikings. The rest of whatever financial success they have achieved as a franchise can also be assigned to the fans and tax payers support of that franchise. For example, Forbes has the "cost per fan" in GB at 277. ea, taking into account the relative market size of ea. franchise. Go to the Forbes 2010 NFL article and compare that to your own team, on a cost per fan basis, or for that matter, ANY other team. That is an undeniable factor also.
    Let's see...my "recurring theme"? What would YOU call it?

    Only Green Bay can have a publicly held franchise.

    Only Green Bay can engage in post-TD celebrations taht involve entering the stands (The Lameblow leap).

    In the NFL, all of the franchises are SUPPOSED to follow the same rules. They're SUPPOSED to have rules enforced equally amongst them.

    But that doesn't happen. There are at LEAST two occassions in which Green Bay is EXEMPTED from a rule which affects EVERYONE else.

    If that's not favoritism, what is it?

    And PLEASE explain to me how exempting Green Bay from those two rules places them on - in your words - "a footing roughly equal to the Vikings".

    Would they suddenly become an inferior franchise if the Lameblow leap was outlawed like all of the other celebrations (Such as Jared Allen's "calf-rope")?

    Caine
    You W I N !

    You are correct. This is how it is seen. We apologize. You are so smart.

    We can only one day aspire to your awesomeness and intellect.

    (therapy available upon request)

    Cannot believe you get support from your fellow Vikes fans, but if so, it represents the tragedy of your arrogance, both your team and you personally.... But again, you have this pegged over me, as always.

    as a small aside, you are just as done as always, we won 13, you have nothing and no prospects going forward, contrasted with us being loaded, but, as you have repeated, you got us.... Dayum, you bahsthads, lol lol lol

    Did I mention that from now on (without Brett) when you all collectively whine it will now be amongst yourselves?

    No?


    Well then, consider that EAT JOB too,lol...

    13th World Championship vs. Vikes one. See how nice I am? lol Since I did so, plan for foster to be a complete dick like you. The rest of the purple world would be wise to tremble at that concept, lol
    Let's see...you make a statement I don't agree with, I provide a factual basis for my disagreement, you get your knickers in a knot, and "I'M" the asshole?

    And now, once again, you wish to trumpet your "13 Championships"? I think "Whoop-deee-doo" is the most appropriate response. I've already illustrated - again, in a completely FACTUAL fashion - why most of those "Championships" mean absolutely nothing to me as a Viking fan...my franchise wasn't even in existence.

    Further, I site fact after fact to support every position I take, and you call it ARROGANCE? I disagree. I simply believe it's absolutely pointless to agree with something that is "wrong".

    Then you seek to take a parting shot at the state of the Vikings? ROFL. Read a few more of OUR posts and you'll see that we're already well aware of how precarious our teams position is. But, speaking of arrogance, I love how you flaunt your teams alleged "loaded" status. Be careful, the Karma gods are a fickle lot...

    Plus, every ARGUEMENTATIVE point in this running train wreck was introduced by YOU.

    I merely stated - factually - that George Halas has saved the Packers franchise several times. You, it seems, couldn't handle that information, and went off the deep end.

    I never said Halas gave them money (And I have found no evidence to support that idea, although I have HEARD it...but that doesn't make it FACT, so it didn't get brought in) - YOU brought that in.

    I didn't care if Halas helped the Vikings get THEIR franchise. That wasn't the POINT. YOU brought that up to try and mitigate the other.

    I mentioned Packer favoritism, then asked you what else it should be called - since it ONLY affects the Packers, and no one else is ALLOWED to do it - and you chose to instead respond with insults.

    And, finally, I never let loose with personal attacks. You did. Go back through this entire train wreck and find one personal attack I made towards you? The closest you'll get is my R.I.F. comment (Reading is fundamental) when you misinterpreted a quote. But YOUR posts contain a variety of personal insults directed at me...alleging that my information is "BS", that I need therapy, and that my information is "creative" (implying "untrue").

    And yet, every single element I posted here was FACT.

    Every single one.

    And you dodged them all or tried to mitigate them all by throwing mud at ME, at the other members of PPO, and at the Vikings.

    And THAT is why I think that most Packer fans aren't worth the TP I used to wipe my ass today. You all LOVE to gloat about how great your franchise has been, but any time something less than perfect is mentioned - or any time a fact you don't like comes up - all you can do is fall back to personal attacks and blather on about how many Superbowls/Championships your team has.

    By way of comparison, ask any Viking fan about how dire our current team position is...we'll talk candidly about it. Ask us about the Love Boat? Ask us about losing to New Orleans? Ask us about the '98 NFCC game? Ask us about Mike Tice scalping tickets? Ask us about ANYTHING, and we'll candidly answer you.

    Yeah...right...WE'RE the arrogant bunch. WE'RE the assholes. WE traveled to YOUR website to insult YOUR team.

    Oh...wait....no. That was you.

    In closing, if this is how you chose to play, game on. But YOU chose this...not me.

    Caine
    You should hold a protest rally. Here's Roger Goodell's address:

    National Football League
    280 Park Ave
    New York, NY 10017

    Round trip bus fare from Milwaukee to New York is 238.48 I looked it up for you.

    As to the personal attacks on you, I apologize. It was gin. Cheap gin, at that. You can blame me, but my wife bought it, so she is also responsible :P

  8. #48
    Caine's Avatar
    Caine is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    5,135

    Re: allow more publicly owned teams

    Quote Originally Posted by "dfosterf" #1089874
    Quote Originally Posted by "Caine" #1089869
    Quote Originally Posted by "dfosterf" #1089867
    Quote Originally Posted by "Caine" #1089865
    Quote Originally Posted by "dfosterf" #1089861
    The Green Bay rule

    It doesn't answer your question, but the article asks it better...or perhaps, a little more politely.


    Green Bay stands as a living, breathing, and, for the owners, frightening example, that pro sports can aid our cities in tough economic times, not drain them of scarce public resources.
    Take it up with the commish.

    What you characterize as "favortism" (I'm not gonna quibble about that recurring theme of yours) only puts the Packers on a footing roughly equal to the Vikings. The rest of whatever financial success they have achieved as a franchise can also be assigned to the fans and tax payers support of that franchise. For example, Forbes has the "cost per fan" in GB at 277. ea, taking into account the relative market size of ea. franchise. Go to the Forbes 2010 NFL article and compare that to your own team, on a cost per fan basis, or for that matter, ANY other team. That is an undeniable factor also.
    Let's see...my "recurring theme"? What would YOU call it?

    Only Green Bay can have a publicly held franchise.

    Only Green Bay can engage in post-TD celebrations taht involve entering the stands (The Lameblow leap).

    In the NFL, all of the franchises are SUPPOSED to follow the same rules. They're SUPPOSED to have rules enforced equally amongst them.

    But that doesn't happen. There are at LEAST two occassions in which Green Bay is EXEMPTED from a rule which affects EVERYONE else.

    If that's not favoritism, what is it?

    And PLEASE explain to me how exempting Green Bay from those two rules places them on - in your words - "a footing roughly equal to the Vikings".

    Would they suddenly become an inferior franchise if the Lameblow leap was outlawed like all of the other celebrations (Such as Jared Allen's "calf-rope")?

    Caine
    You W I N !

    You are correct. This is how it is seen. We apologize. You are so smart.

    We can only one day aspire to your awesomeness and intellect.

    (therapy available upon request)

    Cannot believe you get support from your fellow Vikes fans, but if so, it represents the tragedy of your arrogance, both your team and you personally.... But again, you have this pegged over me, as always.

    as a small aside, you are just as done as always, we won 13, you have nothing and no prospects going forward, contrasted with us being loaded, but, as you have repeated, you got us.... Dayum, you bahsthads, lol lol lol

    Did I mention that from now on (without Brett) when you all collectively whine it will now be amongst yourselves?

    No?


    Well then, consider that EAT JOB too,lol...

    13th World Championship vs. Vikes one. See how nice I am? lol Since I did so, plan for foster to be a complete dick like you. The rest of the purple world would be wise to tremble at that concept, lol
    Let's see...you make a statement I don't agree with, I provide a factual basis for my disagreement, you get your knickers in a knot, and "I'M" the asshole?

    And now, once again, you wish to trumpet your "13 Championships"? I think "Whoop-deee-doo" is the most appropriate response. I've already illustrated - again, in a completely FACTUAL fashion - why most of those "Championships" mean absolutely nothing to me as a Viking fan...my franchise wasn't even in existence.

    Further, I site fact after fact to support every position I take, and you call it ARROGANCE? I disagree. I simply believe it's absolutely pointless to agree with something that is "wrong".

    Then you seek to take a parting shot at the state of the Vikings? ROFL. Read a few more of OUR posts and you'll see that we're already well aware of how precarious our teams position is. But, speaking of arrogance, I love how you flaunt your teams alleged "loaded" status. Be careful, the Karma gods are a fickle lot...

    Plus, every ARGUEMENTATIVE point in this running train wreck was introduced by YOU.

    I merely stated - factually - that George Halas has saved the Packers franchise several times. You, it seems, couldn't handle that information, and went off the deep end.

    I never said Halas gave them money (And I have found no evidence to support that idea, although I have HEARD it...but that doesn't make it FACT, so it didn't get brought in) - YOU brought that in.

    I didn't care if Halas helped the Vikings get THEIR franchise. That wasn't the POINT. YOU brought that up to try and mitigate the other.

    I mentioned Packer favoritism, then asked you what else it should be called - since it ONLY affects the Packers, and no one else is ALLOWED to do it - and you chose to instead respond with insults.

    And, finally, I never let loose with personal attacks. You did. Go back through this entire train wreck and find one personal attack I made towards you? The closest you'll get is my R.I.F. comment (Reading is fundamental) when you misinterpreted a quote. But YOUR posts contain a variety of personal insults directed at me...alleging that my information is "BS", that I need therapy, and that my information is "creative" (implying "untrue").

    And yet, every single element I posted here was FACT.

    Every single one.

    And you dodged them all or tried to mitigate them all by throwing mud at ME, at the other members of PPO, and at the Vikings.

    And THAT is why I think that most Packer fans aren't worth the TP I used to wipe my ass today. You all LOVE to gloat about how great your franchise has been, but any time something less than perfect is mentioned - or any time a fact you don't like comes up - all you can do is fall back to personal attacks and blather on about how many Superbowls/Championships your team has.

    By way of comparison, ask any Viking fan about how dire our current team position is...we'll talk candidly about it. Ask us about the Love Boat? Ask us about losing to New Orleans? Ask us about the '98 NFCC game? Ask us about Mike Tice scalping tickets? Ask us about ANYTHING, and we'll candidly answer you.

    Yeah...right...WE'RE the arrogant bunch. WE'RE the assholes. WE traveled to YOUR website to insult YOUR team.

    Oh...wait....no. That was you.

    In closing, if this is how you chose to play, game on. But YOU chose this...not me.

    Caine
    You should hold a protest rally. Here's Roger Goodell's address:

    National Football League
    280 Park Ave
    New York, NY 10017

    As to the personal attacks on you, I apologize. It was gin. Cheap gin, at that. You can blame me, but my wife bought it, so she is also responsible :P
    This was never about seeking to right a perceived wrong...this was about calling a spade a spade. I don't mind engaging in the debate, but let's be honest about it. Fact is, what is Goodell going to do? Revoke the Packer's exclusive deal? I hardly think so.

    And while I WOULD like to see a reversal of the Lambeau Leap exemption - or a revised definition of excessive celebration - Rodger has already shown himself to be somewhat hypocritical in other dealings...I don't see him suddenly bitten by the "fair for one, fair for all" bug.

    All hard liquor is a killer. There's a Marine Corps marching cadence song that essentially ends with the line, "Instead of bourbon, stick to beer". I took that to heart as a 17 year old recruit.

    Finally...of COURSE your wife is to blame. That's a given. Adam didn't say, "Hey,. Eve....grab me an apple, will ya?" He got suckered into it. And women have spent every moment since trying to figure out how to blame US for everything else...

    Caine

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8

    Re: allow more publicly owned teams

    Wow, I didn't expect my post to stir up so much controversy. It's true that just making it legal for more teams to be publicly owned would not compel Wilf to sell the team. However, I still think they should legalize that. In the event that he did choose to sell, the citizens of Minnesota would at least have the chance to buy. Legalizing public ownership would also allow the same possibility for other teams and for expansion ones. What if public ownership had been legal back in 2005 when the team was sold?

    In any event, I hope your team doesn't end up moving away. The Los Angeles Vikings would be ultra-lame! What the @#$% does sunny LA have to do with Nordic Vikings? If there's to be a team in LA, it should be done via expansion.

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8

    Re: allow more publicly owned teams

    And, btw, just how do you create a signature on this board?

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Vikings working on plan for publicly owned stadium
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: 12-22-2010, 10:16 AM
  2. Anybody who ever owned a N64, rejoice
    By i_bleed_purple in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 06-20-2010, 11:07 PM
  3. Who wants to buy a pre-owned Carr?
    By cajunvike in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 81
    Last Post: 03-24-2007, 08:36 AM
  4. The First Stadium To Be Publicly-Financed?
    By Benet in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-23-2006, 09:56 PM
  5. Owned
    By Del Rio in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 12-25-2005, 02:59 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •