Page 11 of 19 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 184
  1. #101
    All Day's Avatar
    All Day is offline Training Camp
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    49

    Re: Here is why getting Favre would be a bad move on our behalf.

    I hate bret favre and the packers

    I love Tjack and the vikings

    honest to god i would rather have tjack as our starter week one than favre.. thats even if favre doesnt croke from old age before the season starts

  2. #102
    gagarr's Avatar
    gagarr is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,411

    Re: Here is why getting Favre would be a bad move on our behalf.

    "All" wrote:
    I hate bret favre and the packers

    I love Tjack and the vikings

    honest to god i would rather have tjack as our starter week one than favre.. thats even if favre doesnt croke from old age before the season starts
    I hate all Packers too, including Favre since technically he's still a Packer.
    If Favre is released, then my opinion changes to interested.
    If he goes to a team which may stop the Vikes winning the SB, I will hate him again.
    If he becomes a Viking then just as I love Sharper, Longwell, and Fergie, I will love Favre.

    Any player that can make the Vikings better should be embraced.
    Personal emotions should not get in the way.

    Just because I want Favre doesn't mean I hate TJ, I just want the best player possible.
    [size=12pt]
    Page 148.5 **Doleman 150.5 **Randle 137.5 **Allen 73+
    [/size]

  3. #103
    All Day's Avatar
    All Day is offline Training Camp
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    49

    Re: Here is why getting Favre would be a bad move on our behalf.

    the thing is for me is that i really do like tjack.. i think he has a ton of potential and showed alot of it here and there last year.. he has a cannon for an arm.. he is the most athletic qb in the nfl.. decision making is the only thing missing and that is something that can be fixed.. i really like tjack and our chance of winning when he is in.. sorry everyone else doesnt feel this way.

  4. #104
    Ltrey33 is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    8,618

    Re: Here is why getting Favre would be a bad move on our behalf.

    Take all of the emotion out of it, and then see what you think.

    One of the all time greats, who had a Pro Bowl year last year, wants to come suit up for your potential playoff team whose only major question mark lies at the quarterback position.

    That sounds like a pretty good deal to me.

    I have doubts about his age and he has a knack for throwing the big interception, but in my mind there isn't much doubt he'd give us a better chance at a Super Bowl title than Tarvaris.

    That said, I'm not rooting either way. I will cheer for whoever lines up under center on September 8.

  5. #105
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Bakersfield, CA
    Posts
    1,128

    Re: Here is why getting Favre would be a bad move on our behalf.

    "Ltrey" wrote:
    Take all of the emotion out of it, and then see what you think.

    One of the all time greats, who had a Pro Bowl year last year, wants to come suit up for your potential playoff team whose only major question mark lies at the quarterback position.
    That sounds like a pretty good deal to me.

    I have doubts about his age and he has a knack for throwing the big interception, but in my mind there isn't much doubt he'd give us a better chance at a Super Bowl title than Tarvaris.

    That said, I'm not rooting either way. I will cheer for whoever lines up under center on September 8.
    Isn't that what the Chiefs thought when they brought Joe Montana in.
    That was a huge success. :

  6. #106
    olson_10's Avatar
    olson_10 is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    4,215

    Re: Here is why getting Favre would be a bad move on our behalf.

    put it this way, initial reports from green bay are that the vikings showed interest or inquired..the front office obviously has some interest there, which shows that theyre at least exploring the possibility of going all out to win next year..i dont think at all that this means they abandon jackson, i just think the team understands where its at, and that they feel they could be one piece away from winning it all..jackson is still very much in the picture if they go that way because its obvious that favre is not a long term fix, hes simply a rental to try and win, and worry about the youth takeover later

    i dont think it will happen, and ive maintained that from the start, but i have however explained the positives involved, which insiders from wisconsin believe the front office must agree with..green bay will trade him to the AFC to a team that they wont have to play against in the regular season or pre-season in the next 2 years
    People who see life as anything more than pure entertainment are missing the point.

  7. #107
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,206

    Re: Here is why getting Favre would be a bad move on our behalf.

    "Bkfldviking" wrote:
    "Ltrey" wrote:
    Take all of the emotion out of it, and then see what you think.

    One of the all time greats, who had a Pro Bowl year last year, wants to come suit up for your potential playoff team whose only major question mark lies at the quarterback position.
    That sounds like a pretty good deal to me.

    I have doubts about his age and he has a knack for throwing the big interception, but in my mind there isn't much doubt he'd give us a better chance at a Super Bowl title than Tarvaris.

    That said, I'm not rooting either way. I will cheer for whoever lines up under center on September 8.
    Isn't that what the Chiefs thought when they brought Joe Montana in.
    That was a huge success. :
    For the record, Joe Montana was traded to the Chiefs for a first round draft pick at the age of 36 after an injury (elbow, I think).
    He was expendable because Steve Young had been named MVP the previous season while Montana was rehabbing.


    Montana played for Kansas City for two years.
    The Chiefs won their division and reached the AFC Championship in 1993 and lost in the wild-card round in 1994.
    Kansas City hasn't won a playoff game since.
    They've had some regular season success, including a 13-3 record in 1995 with Bono at the QB position.

    The Chiefs weren't a bad team without Montana, but I think the trade has to be considered a success.
    At least it wasn't a failure, as it was the best year the Chiefs have had in the past 35 years.
    It also ended with a smooth transition at the QB position.
    When the age of the Vikings came to a close, they must have sensed it. Probably, they gathered together one evening, slapped each other on the back and said, "Hey, good job." - Jack Handey [Deep Thoughts]

  8. #108
    damien927's Avatar
    damien927 is offline Asst. Coach
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    610

    Re: Here is why getting Favre would be a bad move on our behalf.

    I personally think this "are we gonna get Favre" crap is helping me accept T-Jack.
    While I am hopeful, I still have my doubts about T-jack.
    With favre on the market possibly, it makes me think if I would rather have Favre or T-jack.... I think in the very short term it would be favre, but I would rather have T-jack in 2 years...... I guess that means Tarvaris is starting to grow on me..... which is a good thing.

    Thanks Lotza!

  9. #109
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,604
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Here is why getting Favre would be a bad move on our behalf.

    "damien927" wrote:
    I personally think this "are we gonna get Favre" crap is helping me accept T-Jack.
    While I am hopeful, I still have my doubts about T-jack.
    With favre on the market possibly, it makes me think if I would rather have Favre or T-jack.... I think in the very short term it would be favre, but I would rather have T-jack in 2 years...... I guess that means Tarvaris is starting to grow on me..... which is a good thing.
    Huh.
    Now that you say that, I am actually starting to feel the same way...
    Zeus wrote:
    When are you going to realize that picking out the 20 bad throws this year and ignoring the 300 good ones does not make your point?

    =Z=

  10. #110
    damien927's Avatar
    damien927 is offline Asst. Coach
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    610

    Re: Here is why getting Favre would be a bad move on our behalf.

    "NodakPaul" wrote:
    "damien927" wrote:
    I personally think this "are we gonna get Favre" crap is helping me accept T-Jack.
    While I am hopeful, I still have my doubts about T-jack.
    With favre on the market possibly, it makes me think if I would rather have Favre or T-jack.... I think in the very short term it would be favre, but I would rather have T-jack in 2 years...... I guess that means Tarvaris is starting to grow on me..... which is a good thing.
    Huh.
    Now that you say that, I am actually starting to feel the same way...
    Yeah I guess I have more confidence in him than I thought!

    Thanks Lotza!

Page 11 of 19 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Will the Favre move be considered a success even w
    By Marrdro in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 95
    Last Post: 01-12-2010, 11:11 AM
  2. Help! Where should I move???
    By jkjuggalo in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 01-29-2008, 12:26 AM
  3. Vikings tried to move up!
    By D-Sharp in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: 05-04-2006, 02:36 AM
  4. Vikes have the value to move up to #5
    By slinkey in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 99
    Last Post: 03-19-2006, 01:33 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
  •