Green Bay parts ways with Allen Barbre

Posted by Gregg Rosenthal on September 6, 2010, 8:05 PM EDT

On Saturday, the Packers placed guard Allen Barbre on injured reserve.

On Monday, they severed ties with him.

Per a league source, Barbe and the Packers reached an injury settlement, which means that Barbre and the Packers have parted ways.

The fourth-round pick in the 2007 drafted started seven games and appeared in 10 last year for a Green Bay offensive line that didn’t do a very good job at times of protecting quarterback Aaron Rodgers.

Permalink 58 Comments Feed for comments Back to top

58 responses to “Green Bay parts ways with Allen Barbre”

  5. This is the 4th round pick Thompson could have traded for Randy Moss. Just another top notch personnel move during TT’s mediocre tenure.

  6. I saw one game where two defenders lined up over him — at the snap, he just froze. It was like he had a meltdown; he turned to stone.
    I just don’t think he had it in him.
    Much like Pat Lee.
    Pat can’t help that he was selected in the 2nd round, but to be passed by Underwood (6th rounder) and Shields (undrafted) — C’MON !!!
    Why can’t Pat man-up and at least return punts — and prove he’s got something other than two lips ?

  8. Yet another BUST O-lineman from Thompson.
    Remember all ye Kool-Aid drinkers: Aaron Rodgers will only be 27 once. Then comes 28, then 29 and 30. When will he get the chance to be a pocket passer with no pressure like Peyton Manning has his entire career, save his rookie season???
    I nit-pick Green Bay because they’ve been “this close” for a few years and Thompson continues to ignore the O-line. He drafted 1st round this past draft, but it was only because he would have been lynched if he let a possible gamer get away again.
    Will Green Bay be a dominant offense in 2010? Against inferior opponents, yes, but they will run into problems – exactly like last year – when they face stingy defenses that have also have potent offenses to go with them.

  9. TheFALZ says:
    September 6, 2010 9:00 PM
    good one majik….like thompson’s team is not poised to be the best team of this decade……
    _________________
    You’re right, they definitely are not, they’re not even poised to be the best team in their division, but seriously, this decade? Both starting corners and starting tackles in the twilight of their careers, with no one lined up to replace them except for Baluga, who can’t even get on the field as a guard.
    Couple that with a shaky O line, and a porous defense that any average offense could hang 50 on at any time, the only thing this team is poised to do is win preseason championships, and fade away when the games matter.

  10. This is the 4th round pick Thompson could have traded for Randy Moss. Just another top notch personnel move during TT’s mediocre tenure.
    ———————–
    Really? He could have gotten Randy Moss with the 119th pick when Moss was actually traded for the 110th?

  12. Not to mention that Randy Moss did not want to play with the Packers as evidenced by his refusal to re-work his deal with them. Something that he agreed to do if he could go to New England. He was an extremely risky move at his contract price given his attitude and a few horrible years with the Raiders.
    But by all means let’s keep moaning about a deal that was never going to happen.

  13. appstate says:
    September 6, 2010 9:31 PM
    This is the 4th round pick Thompson could have traded for Randy Moss. Just another top notch personnel move during TT’s mediocre tenure.
    ——————– —
    Really? He could have gotten Randy Moss with the 119th pick when Moss was actually traded for the 110th?
    ______________
    Yes, really. The trade talks between GB and Oakland fizzled when Ted refused to give a 4th, as he was only willing to give a 5th. Then the Pats came into the picture and gladly gave up a 4th rounder.
    Honestly, don’t be so naive as to think it was the 9 spots that made this deal, as anyone who was paying attention knows Ted had 1st crack, and he blew it. And with Barbre gone, he has nothing to show for it.

  14. I could understand still being pissed about Moss if the Packers pass offense has been anemic the last three years, but the opposite has been true. Also there would have been a better chance of actually landing him if he along with everyone else would have known what Brett was going to do year by year. Do you really think he would have been happy in Green Bay if Favre would have retired right away with Rodgers at the time being a unproven talent?
    But even with how things have worked out Randy still isn’t happy in his situation. He never will be I’m afraid.

  15. # badfish69 says: September 6, 2010 9:49 PM
    “Not to mention that Randy Moss did not want to play with the Packers as evidenced by his refusal to re-work his deal with them. Something that he agreed to do if he could go to New England. He was an extremely risky move at his contract price given his attitude and a few horrible years with the Raiders.
    “But by all means let’s keep moaning about a deal that was never going to happen.”
    _____________
    Nice revisionist history. Favre wanted Moss; Thompson and the Packers (wisely) brass did not.
    Packer fans (myself included) wouldn’t have minded landing Moss in 2007. But after the way he dogged it in the Super Bowl vs. the Giants, and the breakout performance of Greg Jennings, most Packer fans are glad that trade never happened.
    The Packers just aren’t interested in Vikings castoffs. Vikings of course LOVE the Packer ash heap.
    12
    0

  16. Shows all the haters how much better Green Bay’s O-line is this year as compared to the patch work version of last season now that this stiff is gone.
    Green Bay’s O-line is SET this year with quality backups to boot. No more picking on inferior tackles this year Minnesota!! Get ready for an offensive EXPLOSION and it all starts in Philadelphia.

  17. I love it when packer fans include their NFL championships in their team’s winnings but forget to include the fact that the Vikings have 1 win from that era as well. But we don’t like to split hairs… We live in the now, not the past.

  18. # cusoman says: September 6, 2010 10:44 PM
    I love it when packer fans include their NFL championships in their team’s winnings but forget to include the fact that the Vikings have 1 win from that era as well. But we don’t like to split hairs… We live in the now, not the past.
    _____
    Minnesota failed to win a Super Bowl in 1969, well into the Super Bowl era. Deal with it. That’s how it stands…Then and Now. Do you hear Colts fans counting their “championship” from 1968, the one before they lost to the Jets?

  19. Face the facts Packer fans. Thompson doesn’t care about a winning football team. All he want’s is young good looking guys with long blond hair so he can ogle them in the shower. Once a guy gets around 30 he’s too old for Ted. This is why the Packers will always have the youngest team in the league.

  20. I love it when packer fans include their NFL championships in their team’s winnings but forget to include the fact that the Vikings have 1 win from that era as well. But we don’t like to split hairs… We live in the now, not the past.
    whoopee de-doo… the “best 15-1 non-Super Bowl team ever” Vikings are still 0-4 in the Big Game. No one has been counting Championships in the SB era, but the Viking fans do. They have too… they’ve got nothing else.

  21. I love it when packer fans include their NFL championships in their team’s winnings but forget to include the fact that the Vikings have 1 win from that era as well. But we don’t like to split hairs… We live in the now, not the past
    ————————————————–
    You forgot 1 more thing about the queens.
    I suppose you don’t remember, I do, when Jim Marshall picked up a fumble and ran the wrong way. Great Job Jimbo, but it wasn’t a touchdown, sorry!!!!!!
    GO PACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  22. cusoman says:
    September 6, 2010 10:44 PM
    I love it when packer fans include their NFL championships in their team’s winnings but forget to include the fact that the Vikings have 1 win from that era as well. But we don’t like to split hairs… We live in the now, not the past.
    *******************************
    LOLWUT?
    The Vikes won the National Championship in 1969, which earned them a berth in Super Bowl 4. Which Minnesota LOST, to the Chiefs.
    The Packers had won the first 2 Super Bowls, (or NFL-AFL Championships) which gives them a total of three Super Bowl wins.
    When Packers fans talk about about 7 previous Championships, they are talking about the pre-Super Bowl era… when they won everything there was to win in Professional Football.
    The Vikings have never done that.
    Seriously. Wow dude.

  23. “This is the 4th round pick Thompson could have traded for Randy Moss. Just another top notch personnel move during TT’s mediocre tenure.”
    One of Ted Thompson’s great moves was NOT trading for Moss.
    They’ve got the best wide receiver squad in the league. Their development would have been set back if Moss had been acquired.

  24. cusoman says: September 6, 2010 10:44 PM
    I love it when packer fans include their NFL championships in their team’s winnings but forget to include the fact that the Vikings have 1 win from that era as well. But we don’t like to split hairs… We live in the now, not the past.
    _____________________________
    One win, which proceeded the first of four Super Bowl losses. Let’s take a poll of unbiased, non-NFC North fans and see how many of them respect that as an actual title. Even you must already know what the results of that would be.
    Let’s do as you said and live in the now though. I can play along. So then… How many championships do you have “in the now”?

  27. Prior to the 1st Super Bowl, the NFL Championship was considered the “World Championship”. The first Super Bowls were referred to as “The AFL-NFL World Championship” ( I actually have that on reel-to-reel tapes I made at the time.) Thus, even though the Vikes DID win an NFL Championship, they’ve never won a World Championship…

  28. # cusoman says: September 6, 2010 10:44 PM
    I love it when packer fans include their NFL championships in their team’s winnings but forget to include the fact that the Vikings have 1 win from that era as well. But we don’t like to split hairs… We live in the now, not the past.
    __________________________________
    I have to agree. I see way too many post about our world championships. They are great history but lets focus on the Super Bowls. I mean, we have 3 of them which is plenty to brag. I just feel the championships are a reach, but the tradition is not.

  29. cusoman says:
    September 6, 2010 10:44 PM
    I love it when packer fans include their NFL championships in their team’s winnings but forget to include the fact that the Vikings have 1 win from that era as well. But we don’t like to split hairs… We live in the now, not the past.
    …………………………………………………………………………..
    BECAUSE YOUR PAST SUUUUUCCCCKKKKSSS – DOPE.
    ONCE YOU WIN IT, ITS ALREADY THE PAST!
    OOOO ONE WIN. GREAT – YOU GOT US . DANG.
    You dont like to split hairs,but…. you just did.
    You know the reason we bring it up??? Cause it pisses you OFF!!!
    I guess all of our history books should be thrown out also. There all about “the Past”!
    Idiots

  30. Majik Bullet says:
    September 6, 2010 9:51 PM
    appstate says:
    Yes, really. The trade talks between GB and Oakland fizzled when Ted refused to give a 4th, as he was only willing to give a 5th. Then the Pats came into the picture and gladly gave up a 4th rounder.
    Honestly, don’t be so naive as to think it was the 9 spots that made this deal, as anyone who was paying attention knows Ted had 1st crack, and he blew it. And with Barbre gone, he has nothing to show for it.
    ——————————————
    Put down the crack pipe. Moss had no intention of coming to Green Bay. Anyone with at least some knowledge of business and the NFL knows not to negotiate with only one team.
    TT knew Moss didn’t want to come. Why get into a bidding war for someone who won’t show up anyway?

  31. For everyone bashing TT for cutting the deal for Moss…How many Superbowls has he won in New England? I can’t quite remember. Oh yea, that’s right. A big f*cking ZERO! All you douchebag Vikings fans are just nitpicking right now because Green Bay will run away with the division.
    Go ahead take shots at our defense. Guaranteed it will be better than MNs this year. The only thing you guys have going for you is an aging (albeit badass) defensive line but after that the linebackers are solid but unspectacular and the secondary is in a shambles, from the starters down.
    The passing game for Green Bay is improving, which is hard to do, while MN’s is sinking with lack of explosive players (1 – Harvin) or 3rd down pass blocking running backs (Peterson blocks almost as well as Barbre did).
    Vikings fans are grasping at straws right now and it is nearly comical. Even though I wish he would, Brett will not make it through the season. Everybody knows the ankle will not hold up. Face, you guys are f*cked.

  32. # TheFALZ says: September 6, 2010 9:00 PM
    good one majik….like thompson’s team is not poised to be the best team of this decade……
    —————————————————
    Wow…. Not usually over here, but please, those Packer fans that are reasonable adults in here, tell me this isn’t really the prevalent opinion….
    Is this one of those guys who claimed two years ago that Barbre would be a PBer?

  33. And, since it was brought up…..
    First of all, correct me if I’m wrong, but is it not only fair to compare teams after the 1970 merger? After all, the players who played under Lombardi were drafted before the Vikings, Cowboys, AFL teams, etc were competing with them for players. That’s kind of like only letting 10 teams draft players and everyone else gets to pick from the leftovers, then wondering why those 10 teams are more successful. So I start my comparisons at the merger.
    Now, we all know that since then the Packers have won a SB and the Vikings have not. But does that really make the Packers the better franchise? After all, the Vikings have more wins, more playoff appearances, more playoff victories, more PBers, more HOFers….. Is claiming the Packers are the better franchise not the same as saying that Christian Okoye was a better RB than Eddie George because Okoye won a rushing title and George never did?

  34. Packer fans: I have a collector photo you may be interested in!
    A 10×14 black and white of Vince Lombardi Dutch Ruddering Curly Lambeau…… first $2 takes it…

  35. Brewdogg says:
    Now, we all know that since then the Packers have won a SB and the Vikings have not. But does that really make the Packers the better franchise?
    ____________
    Of course it does, why wouldn’t it?
    What a stupid question!!

  36. majik says:
    September 6, 2010 9:31 PM
    This is the 4th round pick Thompson could have traded for Randy Moss.
    ——————–
    Thankfully that never happened.

  37. # Beer Cheese Soup says: September 7, 2010 1:10 PM
    Brewdogg says:
    Now, we all know that since then the Packers have won a SB and the Vikings have not. But does that really make the Packers the better franchise?
    ____________
    Of course it does, why wouldn’t it?
    What a stupid question!!
    ————————————————
    Now answer the rest of it….

  38. Yeah Majik, it’s tough to get to sleep sometimes thinking about all the Super Bowls New England won with Moss which could have been ours instead.
    During the fifty years in which the Minnesota Vikings have existed, the Packers have been World Champions five times, and that means (1)being in the playoffs and (2) winning the last game you play. Now being a fair-minded guy, I’m certainly willing to keep the first two Championships out of the discussion, since the Vikettes were just starting out. But seeing as the next two involved a young team like Dallas along the way, I’m afraid the Lads in Lavender don’t get a pass there. All of you East Dakotans need to just deal with the fact that your team is the Chicago Cubs of the NFL – except for the “lovable” part – go have a latte in the Mall of America or something, and stop buzzing around the table like annoying flies.

  39. Brewdogg says:
    September 7, 2010 1:36 PM
    # Beer Cheese Soup says: September 7, 2010 1:10 PM
    Brewdogg says:
    Now, we all know that since then the Packers have won a SB and the Vikings have not. But does that really make the Packers the better franchise?
    ____________
    Of course it does, why wouldn’t it?
    What a stupid question!!
    ——————– ——————– ——–
    Now answer the rest of it….
    ……………………………………………………………………………
    Approximately 83,881 fans are waiting in line for season tickets to watch the Packers play football.
    Approximate wait time….. 40 years!
    Minnesota has no waiting list! I could purchase tickets today if I could stomach the idea settling for an inferior product! The Vikings are an inferior product.
    That said perhaps if you continue to repost your dribble over and over again you may be able to convince a few vikings fans that you really do have the superior franchise and add a few more fans to the stands their in Minnesota. In the mean time I’m gonna side with
    “Of course it does, why wouldn’t it?
    What a stupid question!!”

  40. Supersuckers says:
    September 7, 2010 1:10 PM
    majik says:
    September 6, 2010 9:31 PM
    This is the 4th round pick Thompson could have traded for Randy Moss.
    —————– —
    Thankfully that never happened.
    _______________
    You’re right, thankfully those 21 TD catches didn’t come GB’s way. There’s no way a game breaking WR would have changed anything for a team that came just short of a Super Bowl berth, right Super?
    BaySay, are you honestly so foolish and naive to think a player as dominant as Moss wouldn’t have been enough to push GB over the hump in ’07?
    Ted making that move would have changed the entire landscape of that season, and the next few. Think about it, Favre could have gone out on top, stayed retired, then he never would have come back to embarrass Super’s hero Ted. There would have been no 16-0, GB more than likely wins the SB in ’07, and now Rodgers would have Moss, Jennings, and Driver, and maybe he wouldn’t have fumble-punted away his only playoff appearance.

  41. Yeah Majik how far did the Patriots make it that year? Oh yeah they were actually in the Super Bowl with a team that was head and shoulders above everyone else in the league in talent, and yet still didn’t win. But keep acting like you know for sure that Moss would have put the Packers over the top that year. Maybe he would have. Then again maybe he would have been the same douche bag whiner he was in Oakland.
    Why do you care anyway? Your a Viking fan now. You should be happy it never happened.

  42. Thank you. I was hoping for something along the lines of both franchises have things to be proud of, and you certainly should be proud, but I feel no shame cheering for the Vikings. So I will leave you good people to your threads and go back to the Viking’s threads. To those who don’t come over to post on ours, good luck to you and yours. Cheers.

  43. bigdouche69
    Never said I knew for sure, just said it was very likely. I care because it directly affected the team I was rooting for. And if you truly believe GB is better off with Jordy Nelson instead of Randy Moss, which is what you Packer fans are saying when you say you’re happy it never happened, then you truly are complete morons.

  44. Brewdogg says:
    Beer Cheese Soup says:
    Of course it does, why wouldn’t it?
    What a stupid question!!
    ——————– ——————– ——–
    Now answer the rest of it….
    ____________
    Okay.
    –
    Brewdogg says:
    Now, we all know that since then the Packers have won a SB and the Vikings have not. But does that really make the Packers the better franchise? After all, the Vikings have more wins, more playoff appearances, more playoff victories, more PBers, more HOFers….. Is claiming the Packers are the better franchise not the same as saying that Christian Okoye was a better RB than Eddie George because Okoye won a rushing title and George never did?
    ____________
    I’ve heard a lot of arguments on here and elsewhere from a lot of Viking fans over the years, all attempting to denounce our many championships rather than holding their own team responsible for failing to get one themselves, but this has got to be the dumbest one ever to NOT have Pervy’s name attached to it.
    At the end of each season, one team wins. Every single other team loses. Obviously, the most recent winner is the Saints. Good on them, they earned that well-deserved win, and no one can ever take that from them (though you have certainly spared no effort in trying).
    We as Packer fans have been blessed. We’re lucky to have been that one winning team more often than any other. No one can take that from us either.
    The Vikings, as you well know, have never been that one team. They have essentially been tied for last each of the past 50 years.
    You’re right about plenty to be proud of. They may have the most 2009 Pro Bowlers, they have certainly had some extremely talent players over the years, and they have had a plethora of dominating regular season wins. However, no one cares who won the Monday Night game in Week 13 back in 1994. They only care who won it all, and THAT is why the Packers are far and away the superior team of the two, and will more than likely always be.

  46. THAT is why the Packers are far and away the superior team of the two, and will more than likely always be.
    ============================
    No Beer. That doesn’t make them the superior team, it means they have a superior winning tradition.
    What the problem is, is that you guys cannot accept the fact that the Viking had a better team when that happens.
    If the regular season does not matter, why keep track of the records? Why not just have a free for all tournament? I’m going a bit overboard, but you see what I mean.
    The falling back on “there is only 1 winner” is your way of justifying that the Packers didn’t do as well as the Vikings, couple that with the fact that if the Vikings perform better, most Packer fans have to fall back on the championship argument.
    It’s the same FRANCHISE, not the same TEAM.
    As I have stated before, I’m sure Rodgers and the boys are comforted by the fact that the franchise has 12 titles. I’m sure that takes the sting out of the WC loss. No. They want one of their own. I’m sure those titles mean nothing to them, why would they? They had nothing to do with them.
    It’s the inaneness of the posts that bother me, you guys just can’t give the Vikes credit for having the better team in any said year. We don’t envy the titles you have. We just get sick of the fact that you guys just can’t ever admit defeat, no matter how hard it kicks you in the balls.
    You Packer want to have it both ways. Just admit the the Vikes were better last year with out any qualifiers or yeah buts.
    To a man, you guys just can’t do it. That is why there will always be conflict between Packer and Vikings fans.
    I’m as big of trash talker as anyone, I will continue to do so. I don’t mind that from the other side.
    But, i have yet to meet a Packer fan that has not been able to admit a good Vikings season of say 12-4, when the Packers go, say 6-10, it’s obvious who the better team is, 1 makes the playoffs, the other does not, yet we will hear, “how many trophies you have”?
    It’s dumb. 1920-1996 has nothing to do with a recent team.
    I congratulate you on all those trophies, but it has nothing to do with the current team, how you Packer fans do not get that is beyond me.
    I guess it is willfull ignorance?
    I’m not trying to start a fight. But the Packers fanbase has to be the most obtuse around.
    Don’t ever give an inch though, i love to hate you guys.

  47. “Moss wouldn’t have been enough to push GB over the hump in ’07? ”
    —————–
    Absolutely not. He is a locker room cancer everywhere he has been. Even now in New England the true Randy is making his appearance. Green Bay would have been a worse “team” with Moss on it.

  48. cusoman says: September 6, 2010 10:44 PM
    I love it when packer fans include their NFL championships in their team’s winnings but forget to include the fact that the Vikings have 1 win from that era as well. But we don’t like to split hairs… We live in the now, not the past.
    ————–
    Sure, but even when the Vikings win they lose. The Vikings went on to lose the Super Bowl in 1970 after winning the NFL championship.
    So even when they won their championship they still ended their season with a loss. Can’t say that about the Packers. Face it: the 1970 NFL championship was basically an NFC championship game, nothing more. The Chiefs were the Super Bowl winners that year. The Vikings, although heavily favored in that game, choked and failed again.
    Thanks for the stroll down memory lane, though. It’s been fun.

  49. Supersuckers says:
    September 8, 2010 10:25 AM
    “Moss wouldn’t have been enough to push GB over the hump in ’07? ”
    —————–
    Absolutely not. He is a locker room cancer everywhere he has been. Even now in New England the true Randy is making his appearance. Green Bay would have been a worse “team” with Moss on it.
    ========================
    And if teddy teabag would have traded for him, you’d be singing his praises……
    How transparent can you be?

  50. Supersuckers says:
    September 8, 2010 10:25 AM
    “Moss wouldn’t have been enough to push GB over the hump in ’07? ”
    —————–
    Absolutely not. He is a locker room cancer everywhere he has been. Even now in New England the true Randy is making his appearance. Green Bay would have been a worse “team” with Moss on it.
    __________________
    Wasn’t Andre Rison considered a “cancer” when he signed on with GB and won his ring? What about Jeremy Shockey? He’s got 2 rings the last 3 years, and he is also considered a “cancer.” Ben Roethlisberger anyone? He’s had multiple teammates, team captains even, question his work ethic and toughness.
    I wonder if having known drug dealers, prostitute beaters, and drunk drivers would have any effect on team chemistry. Ted has no problems having those guys around, though.
    You can try those weak arguments in defense of your mancrush all you want, they don’t fly here. We were talking about Moss’ effect on the team in ’07, not what’s going on right now. Moss caught 21 TD’s, and there was no drama at all. He would have made the team better, and he sure as heck would have had more impact than Barbre, the guy they just cut.

  51. “And if teddy teabag would have traded for him, you’d be singing his praises……”
    ————-
    No I would not. I said it was bad news back when the rumors were going around that they were talking and was relieved when he went elsewhere. Ask Rags.

  53. Supersuckers says:
    September 8, 2010 1:42 PM
    “He would have made the team better”
    ———
    Absolutely not in the long run
    ____________________
    Again, I said 2007. He would have improved the 2007 Packers. In my opinion, and in many others’, he would have been enough to push them over the hump, and win it all. And just think, then you would actually have a recent Super Bowl win to point to when feeling the need to live in the past.

  54. Green Bay parts ways with Allen Barbre
    Posted by Mike Florio on September 6, 2010 8:05 PM ET
    On Saturday, the Packers placed guard Allen Barbre on injured reserve.
    On Monday, they severed ties with him.
    Per a league source, Barbe and the Packers reached an injury settlement, which means that Barbre and the Packers have parted ways.
    The fourth-round pick in the 2007 drafted started seven games and appeared in 10 last year for a Green Bay offensive line that didn’t do a very good job at times of protecting quarterback Aaron Rodgers.
    Permalink 53 Comments Latest stories in: Green Bay Packers, Home, Latest News and Rumors, NFL Mobile Exclusives – Rumors
    Previous: Holdout clause in Revis deal likely wouldn’t prevent a holdoutNext: Browns land Steve Vallos on waivers53 Responses to “Green Bay parts ways with Allen Barbre”
    PossibleCabbage says:
    September 6, 2010 8:12 PM
    “At times” covers “all the time,” right?
    jimmySee says:
    September 6, 2010 8:14 PM
    No surprise here.
    schooney says:
    September 6, 2010 8:22 PM
    he is off to Viking land to protec number 4
    robert ethen says:
    September 6, 2010 8:25 PM
    Barbre was playing like a goddam French hair stylist.
    Majik Bullet says:
    September 6, 2010 8:42 PM
    This is the 4th round pick Thompson could have traded for Randy Moss. Just another top notch personnel move during TT’s mediocre tenure.
    PkrNboro says:
    September 6, 2010 8:58 PM
    I saw one game where two defenders lined up over him — at the snap, he just froze. It was like he had a meltdown; he turned to stone.
    I just don’t think he had it in him.
    Much like Pat Lee.
    Pat can’t help that he was selected in the 2nd round, but to be passed by Underwood (6th rounder) and Shields (undrafted) — C’MON !!!
    Why can’t Pat man-up and at least return punts — and prove he’s got something other than two lips ?
    TheFALZ says:
    September 6, 2010 9:00 PM
    good one majik….like thompson’s team is not poised to be the best team of this decade……
    Hauschild says:
    September 6, 2010 9:06 PM
    Yet another BUST O-lineman from Thompson.
    Remember all ye Kool-Aid drinkers: Aaron Rodgers will only be 27 once. Then comes 28, then 29 and 30. When will he get the chance to be a pocket passer with no pressure like Peyton Manning has his entire career, save his rookie season???
    I nit-pick Green Bay because they’ve been “this close” for a few years and Thompson continues to ignore the O-line. He drafted 1st round this past draft, but it was only because he would have been lynched if he let a possible gamer get away again.
    Will Green Bay be a dominant offense in 2010? Against inferior opponents, yes, but they will run into problems – exactly like last year – when they face stingy defenses that have also have potent offenses to go with them.
    Majik Bullet says:
    September 6, 2010 9:24 PM
    TheFALZ says:
    September 6, 2010 9:00 PM
    good one majik….like thompson’s team is not poised to be the best team of this decade……
    _________________
    You’re right, they definitely are not, they’re not even poised to be the best team in their division, but seriously, this decade? Both starting corners and starting tackles in the twilight of their careers, with no one lined up to replace them except for Baluga, who can’t even get on the field as a guard.
    Couple that with a shaky O line, and a porous defense that any average offense could hang 50 on at any time, the only thing this team is poised to do is win preseason championships, and fade away when the games matter.
    appstate says:
    September 6, 2010 9:31 PM
    This is the 4th round pick Thompson could have traded for Randy Moss. Just another top notch personnel move during TT’s mediocre tenure.
    ——————– —
    Really? He could have gotten Randy Moss with the 119th pick when Moss was actually traded for the 110th?
    AJD says:
    September 6, 2010 9:48 PM
    Thanks for the heads up.
    badfish69 says:
    September 6, 2010 9:49 PM
    Not to mention that Randy Moss did not want to play with the Packers as evidenced by his refusal to re-work his deal with them. Something that he agreed to do if he could go to New England. He was an extremely risky move at his contract price given his attitude and a few horrible years with the Raiders.
    But by all means let’s keep moaning about a deal that was never going to happen.
    Majik Bullet says:
    September 6, 2010 9:51 PM
    appstate says:
    September 6, 2010 9:31 PM
    This is the 4th round pick Thompson could have traded for Randy Moss. Just another top notch personnel move during TT’s mediocre tenure.
    ——————– —
    Really? He could have gotten Randy Moss with the 119th pick when Moss was actually traded for the 110th?
    ______________
    Yes, really. The trade talks between GB and Oakland fizzled when Ted refused to give a 4th, as he was only willing to give a 5th. Then the Pats came into the picture and gladly gave up a 4th rounder.
    Honestly, don’t be so naive as to think it was the 9 spots that made this deal, as anyone who was paying attention knows Ted had 1st crack, and he blew it. And with Barbre gone, he has nothing to show for it.
    badfish69 says:
    September 6, 2010 10:14 PM
    I could understand still being pissed about Moss if the Packers pass offense has been anemic the last three years, but the opposite has been true. Also there would have been a better chance of actually landing him if he along with everyone else would have known what Brett was going to do year by year. Do you really think he would have been happy in Green Bay if Favre would have retired right away with Rodgers at the time being a unproven talent?
    But even with how things have worked out Randy still isn’t happy in his situation. He never will be I’m afraid.
    alphamail says:
    September 6, 2010 10:29 PM
    # badfish69 says: September 6, 2010 9:49 PM
    “Not to mention that Randy Moss did not want to play with the Packers as evidenced by his refusal to re-work his deal with them. Something that he agreed to do if he could go to New England. He was an extremely risky move at his contract price given his attitude and a few horrible years with the Raiders.
    “But by all means let’s keep moaning about a deal that was never going to happen.”
    _____________
    Nice revisionist history. Favre wanted Moss; Thompson and the Packers (wisely) brass did not.
    Packer fans (myself included) wouldn’t have minded landing Moss in 2007. But after the way he dogged it in the Super Bowl vs. the Giants, and the breakout performance of Greg Jennings, most Packer fans are glad that trade never happened.
    The Packers just aren’t interested in Vikings castoffs. Vikings of course LOVE the Packer ash heap.
    12
    0Green n’ Gold says:
    September 6, 2010 10:37 PM
    Shows all the haters how much better Green Bay’s O-line is this year as compared to the patch work version of last season now that this stiff is gone.
    Green Bay’s O-line is SET this year with quality backups to boot. No more picking on inferior tackles this year Minnesota!! Get ready for an offensive EXPLOSION and it all starts in Philadelphia.
    cusoman says:
    September 6, 2010 10:44 PM
    I love it when packer fans include their NFL championships in their team’s winnings but forget to include the fact that the Vikings have 1 win from that era as well. But we don’t like to split hairs… We live in the now, not the past.
    alphamail says:
    September 6, 2010 10:57 PM
    # cusoman says: September 6, 2010 10:44 PM
    I love it when packer fans include their NFL championships in their team’s winnings but forget to include the fact that the Vikings have 1 win from that era as well. But we don’t like to split hairs… We live in the now, not the past.
    _____
    Minnesota failed to win a Super Bowl in 1969, well into the Super Bowl era. Deal with it. That’s how it stands…Then and Now. Do you hear Colts fans counting their “championship” from 1968, the one before they lost to the Jets?
    PerryMason says:
    September 6, 2010 11:14 PM
    Face the facts Packer fans. Thompson doesn’t care about a winning football team. All he want’s is young good looking guys with long blond hair so he can ogle them in the shower. Once a guy gets around 30 he’s too old for Ted. This is why the Packers will always have the youngest team in the league.
    darth_vincent says:
    September 6, 2010 11:22 PM
    I love it when packer fans include their NFL championships in their team’s winnings but forget to include the fact that the Vikings have 1 win from that era as well. But we don’t like to split hairs… We live in the now, not the past.
    whoopee de-doo… the “best 15-1 non-Super Bowl team ever” Vikings are still 0-4 in the Big Game. No one has been counting Championships in the SB era, but the Viking fans do. They have too… they’ve got nothing else.
    Fred Finstad says:
    September 7, 2010 12:00 AM
    I love it when packer fans include their NFL championships in their team’s winnings but forget to include the fact that the Vikings have 1 win from that era as well. But we don’t like to split hairs… We live in the now, not the past
    ——————– ——————– ———-
    You forgot 1 more thing about the queens.
    I suppose you don’t remember, I do, when Jim Marshall picked up a fumble and ran the wrong way. Great Job Jimbo, but it wasn’t a touchdown, sorry!!!!!!
    GO PACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!
    Sacram3ntal says:
    September 7, 2010 12:40 AM
    cusoman says:
    September 6, 2010 10:44 PM
    I love it when packer fans include their NFL championships in their team’s winnings but forget to include the fact that the Vikings have 1 win from that era as well. But we don’t like to split hairs… We live in the now, not the past.
    ******************** ***********
    LOLWUT?
    The Vikes won the National Championship in 1969, which earned them a berth in Super Bowl 4. Which Minnesota LOST, to the Chiefs.
    The Packers had won the first 2 Super Bowls, (or NFL-AFL Championships) which gives them a total of three Super Bowl wins.
    When Packers fans talk about about 7 previous Championships, they are talking about the pre-Super Bowl era… when they won everything there was to win in Professional Football.
    The Vikings have never done that.
    Seriously. Wow dude.
    jimmySee says:
    September 7, 2010 1:26 AM
    “This is the 4th round pick Thompson could have traded for Randy Moss. Just another top notch personnel move during TT’s mediocre tenure.”
    One of Ted Thompson’s great moves was NOT trading for Moss.
    They’ve got the best wide receiver squad in the league. Their development would have been set back if Moss had been acquired.
    Beer Cheese Soup says:
    September 7, 2010 2:09 AM
    cusoman says: September 6, 2010 10:44 PM
    I love it when packer fans include their NFL championships in their team’s winnings but forget to include the fact that the Vikings have 1 win from that era as well. But we don’t like to split hairs… We live in the now, not the past.
    ____________________ _________
    One win, which proceeded the first of four Super Bowl losses. Let’s take a poll of unbiased, non-NFC North fans and see how many of them respect that as an actual title. Even you must already know what the results of that would be.
    Let’s do as you said and live in the now though. I can play along. So then… How many championships do you have “in the now”?
    FoF says:
    September 7, 2010 7:51 AM
    Yet another failed lineman under Ted Thompson’s regime.
    lebowski says:
    September 7, 2010 8:13 AM
    And Jared Allen’s season sack total just got cut in half.
    StarrToDowler says:
    September 7, 2010 8:24 AM
    Prior to the 1st Super Bowl, the NFL Championship was considered the “World Championship”. The first Super Bowls were referred to as “The AFL-NFL World Championship” ( I actually have that on reel-to-reel tapes I made at the time.) Thus, even though the Vikes DID win an NFL Championship, they’ve never won a World Championship…
    ClayMath52 says:
    September 7, 2010 8:34 AM
    # cusoman says: September 6, 2010 10:44 PM
    I love it when packer fans include their NFL championships in their team’s winnings but forget to include the fact that the Vikings have 1 win from that era as well. But we don’t like to split hairs… We live in the now, not the past.
    ____________________ ______________
    I have to agree. I see way too many post about our world championships. They are great history but lets focus on the Super Bowls. I mean, we have 3 of them which is plenty to brag. I just feel the championships are a reach, but the tradition is not.
    rudedog36 says:
    September 7, 2010 8:35 AM
    cusoman says:
    September 6, 2010 10:44 PM
    I love it when packer fans include their NFL championships in their team’s winnings but forget to include the fact that the Vikings have 1 win from that era as well. But we don’t like to split hairs… We live in the now, not the past.
    ……………….. ……………….. ……………….. ……………….. ……
    BECAUSE YOUR PAST SUUUUUCCCCKKKKSSS – DOPE.
    ONCE YOU WIN IT, ITS ALREADY THE PAST!
    OOOO ONE WIN. GREAT – YOU GOT US . DANG.
    You dont like to split hairs,but…. you just did.
    You know the reason we bring it up??? Cause it pisses you OFF!!!
    I guess all of our history books should be thrown out also. There all about “the Past”!
    Idiots
    mattgso says:
    September 7, 2010 8:43 AM
    Majik Bullet says:
    September 6, 2010 9:51 PM
    appstate says:
    Yes, really. The trade talks between GB and Oakland fizzled when Ted refused to give a 4th, as he was only willing to give a 5th. Then the Pats came into the picture and gladly gave up a 4th rounder.
    Honestly, don’t be so naive as to think it was the 9 spots that made this deal, as anyone who was paying attention knows Ted had 1st crack, and he blew it. And with Barbre gone, he has nothing to show for it.
    —————– ——————– —–
    Put down the crack pipe. Moss had no intention of coming to Green Bay. Anyone with at least some knowledge of business and the NFL knows not to negotiate with only one team.
    TT knew Moss didn’t want to come. Why get into a bidding war for someone who won’t show up anyway?
    zangy says:
    September 7, 2010 8:53 AM
    For everyone bashing TT for cutting the deal for Moss…How many Superbowls has he won in New England? I can’t quite remember. Oh yea, that’s right. A big f*cking ZERO! All you douchebag Vikings fans are just nitpicking right now because Green Bay will run away with the division.
    Go ahead take shots at our defense. Guaranteed it will be better than MNs this year. The only thing you guys have going for you is an aging (albeit badass) defensive line but after that the linebackers are solid but unspectacular and the secondary is in a shambles, from the starters down.
    The passing game for Green Bay is improving, which is hard to do, while MN’s is sinking with lack of explosive players (1 – Harvin) or 3rd down pass blocking running backs (Peterson blocks almost as well as Barbre did).
    Vikings fans are grasping at straws right now and it is nearly comical. Even though I wish he would, Brett will not make it through the season. Everybody knows the ankle will not hold up. Face, you guys are f*cked.
    Brewdogg says:
    September 7, 2010 9:15 AM
    # TheFALZ says: September 6, 2010 9:00 PM
    good one majik….like thompson’s team is not poised to be the best team of this decade……
    ——————– ——————– ———–
    Wow…. Not usually over here, but please, those Packer fans that are reasonable adults in here, tell me this isn’t really the prevalent opinion….
    Is this one of those guys who claimed two years ago that Barbre would be a PBer?
    Brewdogg says:
    September 7, 2010 9:46 AM
    And, since it was brought up…..
    First of all, correct me if I’m wrong, but is it not only fair to compare teams after the 1970 merger? After all, the players who played under Lombardi were drafted before the Vikings, Cowboys, AFL teams, etc were competing with them for players. That’s kind of like only letting 10 teams draft players and everyone else gets to pick from the leftovers, then wondering why those 10 teams are more successful. So I start my comparisons at the merger.
    Now, we all know that since then the Packers have won a SB and the Vikings have not. But does that really make the Packers the better franchise? After all, the Vikings have more wins, more playoff appearances, more playoff victories, more PBers, more HOFers….. Is claiming the Packers are the better franchise not the same as saying that Christian Okoye was a better RB than Eddie George because Okoye won a rushing title and George never did?
    Pervy *Harvin says:
    September 7, 2010 11:59 AM
    Packer fans: I have a collector photo you may be interested in!
    A 10×14 black and white of Vince Lombardi Dutch Ruddering Curly Lambeau…… first $2 takes it…
    Beer Cheese Soup says:
    September 7, 2010 1:10 PM
    Brewdogg says:
    Now, we all know that since then the Packers have won a SB and the Vikings have not. But does that really make the Packers the better franchise?
    ____________
    Of course it does, why wouldn’t it?
    What a stupid question!!
    Supersuckers says:
    September 7, 2010 1:10 PM
    majik says:
    September 6, 2010 9:31 PM
    This is the 4th round pick Thompson could have traded for Randy Moss.
    —————– —
    Thankfully that never happened.
    Brewdogg says:
    September 7, 2010 1:36 PM
    # Beer Cheese Soup says: September 7, 2010 1:10 PM
    Brewdogg says:
    Now, we all know that since then the Packers have won a SB and the Vikings have not. But does that really make the Packers the better franchise?
    ____________
    Of course it does, why wouldn’t it?
    What a stupid question!!
    ——————– ——————– ——–
    Now answer the rest of it….
    TheBaySay says:
    September 7, 2010 4:16 PM
    Yeah Majik, it’s tough to get to sleep sometimes thinking about all the Super Bowls New England won with Moss which could have been ours instead.
    During the fifty years in which the Minnesota Vikings have existed, the Packers have been World Champions five times, and that means (1)being in the playoffs and (2) winning the last game you play. Now being a fair-minded guy, I’m certainly willing to keep the first two Championships out of the discussion, since the Vikettes were just starting out. But seeing as the next two involved a young team like Dallas along the way, I’m afraid the Lads in Lavender don’t get a pass there. All of you East Dakotans need to just deal with the fact that your team is the Chicago Cubs of the NFL – except for the “lovable” part – go have a latte in the Mall of America or something, and stop buzzing around the table like annoying flies.
    That’s Mr Rodgers to you says:
    September 7, 2010 5:25 PM
    Brewdogg says:
    September 7, 2010 1:36 PM
    # Beer Cheese Soup says: September 7, 2010 1:10 PM
    Brewdogg says:
    Now, we all know that since then the Packers have won a SB and the Vikings have not. But does that really make the Packers the better franchise?
    ____________
    Of course it does, why wouldn’t it?
    What a stupid question!!
    ——————– ——————– ——–
    Now answer the rest of it….
    ……………….. ……………….. ……………….. ……………….. …….
    Approximately 83,881 fans are waiting in line for season tickets to watch the Packers play football.
    Approximate wait time….. 40 years!
    Minnesota has no waiting list! I could purchase tickets today if I could stomach the idea settling for an inferior product! The Vikings are an inferior product.
    That said perhaps if you continue to repost your dribble over and over again you may be able to convince a few vikings fans that you really do have the superior franchise and add a few more fans to the stands their in Minnesota. In the mean time I’m gonna side with
    “Of course it does, why wouldn’t it?
    What a stupid question!!”
    Majik Bullet says:
    September 7, 2010 5:26 PM
    Supersuckers says:
    September 7, 2010 1:10 PM
    majik says:
    September 6, 2010 9:31 PM
    This is the 4th round pick Thompson could have traded for Randy Moss.
    —————– —
    Thankfully that never happened.
    _______________
    You’re right, thankfully those 21 TD catches didn’t come GB’s way. There’s no way a game breaking WR would have changed anything for a team that came just short of a Super Bowl berth, right Super?
    BaySay, are you honestly so foolish and naive to think a player as dominant as Moss wouldn’t have been enough to push GB over the hump in ’07?
    Ted making that move would have changed the entire landscape of that season, and the next few. Think about it, Favre could have gone out on top, stayed retired, then he never would have come back to embarrass Super’s hero Ted. There would have been no 16-0, GB more than likely wins the SB in ’07, and now Rodgers would have Moss, Jennings, and Driver, and maybe he wouldn’t have fumble-punted away his only playoff appearance.
    badfish69 says:
    September 7, 2010 7:06 PM
    Yeah Majik how far did the Patriots make it that year? Oh yeah they were actually in the Super Bowl with a team that was head and shoulders above everyone else in the league in talent, and yet still didn’t win. But keep acting like you know for sure that Moss would have put the Packers over the top that year. Maybe he would have. Then again maybe he would have been the same douche bag whiner he was in Oakland.
    Why do you care anyway? Your a Viking fan now. You should be happy it never happened.
    Brewdogg says:
    September 7, 2010 8:05 PM
    Thank you. I was hoping for something along the lines of both franchises have things to be proud of, and you certainly should be proud, but I feel no shame cheering for the Vikings. So I will leave you good people to your threads and go back to the Viking’s threads. To those who don’t come over to post on ours, good luck to you and yours. Cheers.
    Majik Bullet says:
    September 7, 2010 10:23 PM
    bigdouche69
    Never said I knew for sure, just said it was very likely. I care because it directly affected the team I was rooting for. And if you truly believe GB is better off with Jordy Nelson instead of Randy Moss, which is what you Packer fans are saying when you say you’re happy it never happened, then you truly are complete morons.
    Beer Cheese Soup says:
    September 8, 2010 12:15 AM
    Brewdogg says:
    Beer Cheese Soup says:
    Of course it does, why wouldn’t it?
    What a stupid question!!
    ——————– ——————– ——–
    Now answer the rest of it….
    ____________
    Okay.
    –
    Brewdogg says:
    Now, we all know that since then the Packers have won a SB and the Vikings have not. But does that really make the Packers the better franchise? After all, the Vikings have more wins, more playoff appearances, more playoff victories, more PBers, more HOFers….. Is claiming the Packers are the better franchise not the same as saying that Christian Okoye was a better RB than Eddie George because Okoye won a rushing title and George never did?
    ____________
    I’ve heard a lot of arguments on here and elsewhere from a lot of Viking fans over the years, all attempting to denounce our many championships rather than holding their own team responsible for failing to get one themselves, but this has got to be the dumbest one ever to NOT have Pervy’s name attached to it.
    At the end of each season, one team wins. Every single other team loses. Obviously, the most recent winner is the Saints. Good on them, they earned that well-deserved win, and no one can ever take that from them (though you have certainly spared no effort in trying).
    We as Packer fans have been blessed. We’re lucky to have been that one winning team more often than any other. No one can take that from us either.
    The Vikings, as you well know, have never been that one team. They have essentially been tied for last each of the past 50 years.
    You’re right about plenty to be proud of. They may have the most 2009 Pro Bowlers, they have certainly had some extremely talent players over the years, and they have had a plethora of dominating regular season wins. However, no one cares who won the Monday Night game in Week 13 back in 1994. They only care who won it all, and THAT is why the Packers are far and away the superior team of the two, and will more than likely always be.
    VikesBlowHorn says:
    September 8, 2010 8:45 AM
    Couldn’t be happier we got rid of this guy…Happened about 48 weeks late though…
    RC IV says:
    September 8, 2010 10:08 AM
    THAT is why the Packers are far and away the superior team of the two, and will more than likely always be.
    ==================== ========
    No Beer. That doesn’t make them the superior team, it means they have a superior winning tradition.
    What the problem is, is that you guys cannot accept the fact that the Viking had a better team when that happens.
    If the regular season does not matter, why keep track of the records? Why not just have a free for all tournament? I’m going a bit overboard, but you see what I mean.
    The falling back on “there is only 1 winner” is your way of justifying that the Packers didn’t do as well as the Vikings, couple that with the fact that if the Vikings perform better, most Packer fans have to fall back on the championship argument.
    It’s the same FRANCHISE, not the same TEAM.
    As I have stated before, I’m sure Rodgers and the boys are comforted by the fact that the franchise has 12 titles. I’m sure that takes the sting out of the WC loss. No. They want one of their own. I’m sure those titles mean nothing to them, why would they? They had nothing to do with them.
    It’s the inaneness of the posts that bother me, you guys just can’t give the Vikes credit for having the better team in any said year. We don’t envy the titles you have. We just get sick of the fact that you guys just can’t ever admit defeat, no matter how hard it kicks you in the balls.
    You Packer want to have it both ways. Just admit the the Vikes were better last year with out any qualifiers or yeah buts.
    To a man, you guys just can’t do it. That is why there will always be conflict between Packer and Vikings fans.
    I’m as big of trash talker as anyone, I will continue to do so. I don’t mind that from the other side.
    But, i have yet to meet a Packer fan that has not been able to admit a good Vikings season of say 12-4, when the Packers go, say 6-10, it’s obvious who the better team is, 1 makes the playoffs, the other does not, yet we will hear, “how many trophies you have”?
    It’s dumb. 1920-1996 has nothing to do with a recent team.
    I congratulate you on all those trophies, but it has nothing to do with the current team, how you Packer fans do not get that is beyond me.
    I guess it is willfull ignorance?
    I’m not trying to start a fight. But the Packers fanbase has to be the most obtuse around.
    Don’t ever give an inch though, i love to hate you guys.
    Supersuckers says:
    September 8, 2010 10:25 AM
    “Moss wouldn’t have been enough to push GB over the hump in ’07? ”
    —————–
    Absolutely not. He is a locker room cancer everywhere he has been. Even now in New England the true Randy is making his appearance. Green Bay would have been a worse “team” with Moss on it.
    ACS2 says:
    September 8, 2010 12:34 PM
    cusoman says: September 6, 2010 10:44 PM
    I love it when packer fans include their NFL championships in their team’s winnings but forget to include the fact that the Vikings have 1 win from that era as well. But we don’t like to split hairs… We live in the now, not the past.
    ————–
    Sure, but even when the Vikings win they lose. The Vikings went on to lose the Super Bowl in 1970 after winning the NFL championship.
    So even when they won their championship they still ended their season with a loss. Can’t say that about the Packers. Face it: the 1970 NFL championship was basically an NFC championship game, nothing more. The Chiefs were the Super Bowl winners that year. The Vikings, although heavily favored in that game, choked and failed again.
    Thanks for the stroll down memory lane, though. It’s been fun.
    RC IV says:
    September 8, 2010 12:38 PM
    Supersuckers says:
    September 8, 2010 10:25 AM
    “Moss wouldn’t have been enough to push GB over the hump in ’07? ”
    —————–
    Absolutely not. He is a locker room cancer everywhere he has been. Even now in New England the true Randy is making his appearance. Green Bay would have been a worse “team” with Moss on it.
    ==================== ====
    And if teddy teabag would have traded for him, you’d be singing his praises……
    How transparent can you be?
    Majik Bullet says:
    September 8, 2010 1:23 PM
    Supersuckers says:
    September 8, 2010 10:25 AM
    “Moss wouldn’t have been enough to push GB over the hump in ’07? ”
    —————–
    Absolutely not. He is a locker room cancer everywhere he has been. Even now in New England the true Randy is making his appearance. Green Bay would have been a worse “team” with Moss on it.
    __________________
    Wasn’t Andre Rison considered a “cancer” when he signed on with GB and won his ring? What about Jeremy Shockey? He’s got 2 rings the last 3 years, and he is also considered a “cancer.” Ben Roethlisberger anyone? He’s had multiple teammates, team captains even, question his work ethic and toughness.
    I wonder if having known drug dealers, prostitute beaters, and drunk drivers would have any effect on team chemistry. Ted has no problems having those guys around, though.
    You can try those weak arguments in defense of your mancrush all you want, they don’t fly here. We were talking about Moss’ effect on the team in ’07, not what’s going on right now. Moss caught 21 TD’s, and there was no drama at all. He would have made the team better, and he sure as heck would have had more impact than Barbre, the guy they just cut.
    Supersuckers says:
    September 8, 2010 1:40 PM
    “And if teddy teabag would have traded for him, you’d be singing his praises……”
    ————-
    No I would not. I said it was bad news back when the rumors were going around that they were talking and was relieved when he went elsewhere. Ask Rags.
    Supersuckers says:
    September 8, 2010 1:42 PM
    “He would have made the team better”
    ———
    Absolutely not in the long run
    Majik Bullet says:
    September 8, 2010 3:34 PM
    Supersuckers says:
    September 8, 2010 1:42 PM
    “He would have made the team better”
    ———
    Absolutely not in the long run
    ____________________
    Again, I said 2007. He would have improved the 2007 Packers. In my opinion, and in many others’, he would have been enough to push them over the hump, and win it all. And just think, then you would actually have a recent Super Bowl win to point to when feeling the need to live in the past.
    ——————
    Nobody was expecting that 2007 team to be 13-3 and get that close to the Super Bowl. Not Thompson, McCarthy, most intelligent packer fans……The reality is the 2007 team was one that got alot of breaks. They were more of a 10-6 type team. Whose reps would Moss take? Jennings? They are much better off today without ever making that deal. If Moss couldnt take the undefeated Patriots over the hump he sure as hell was not going to be the right guy in Green Bay.

  55. Super
    Way to copy and paste the entire comment section in there, masterful computer work. Did you get a little too much Arby-Q on your fingers, and make the keyboard stick?
    And while Moss didn’t push a 16-0 NE over the hump, he was a huge part of the formula that got them there. Your comparison is absolute idiocy. Moss was a part of 16-0, he would have been an addition to 13-3. Do you realize the difference?
    And how, exactly, are they better off without Moss? Are you seriously trying to tell me that Jordy Nelson, James Jones, or even Driver or Jennings are better than Moss? It’s not even close. Moss is better than anyone of those guys, hands down.

  56. RC IV says:
    No Beer. That doesn’t make them the superior team, it means they have a superior winning tradition.
    What the problem is, is that you guys cannot accept the fact that the Viking had a better team when that happens.
    If the regular season does not matter, why keep track of the records? Why not just have a free for all tournament? I’m going a bit overboard, but you see what I mean.
    The falling back on “there is only 1 winner” is your way of justifying that the Packers didn’t do as well as the Vikings, couple that with the fact that if the Vikings perform better, most Packer fans have to fall back on the championship argument.
    It’s the same FRANCHISE, not the same TEAM.
    ____________
    I can’t speak for my fellow Packer fans, but I personally have said the “only one winner” line for years. It has been far too long since we won though.
    I also accepted and gave you credit for being the better team of the two last year. You swept us. You humiliated us on our own turf. I don’t mean to take away from that. You just need to realize that by the end of this week, that won’t mean a thing.

  57. It’s so funny seeing Majik who isn’t even a Packer fan crying over a trade that Randy Moss himself didn’t want.
    Worry about your own team fool. You jumped ship remember?

  58. He couldn’t push a 16-0 team over the hump but he would have with a 13-3 team!!!
    There is a pretty good reason why the worst team in the league was willing to part with him for a 4th and why there were only two teams actually interested in giving up that for him. Maybe just 109 catches for 1700 yds and 11 TD’s in two years had something to do with it maybe?
    I guess since he refused to rework his deal Thompson should have still paid 9 mil in 2007 for that stellar production, right?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!