Favre - Deadspin Story· Page 3

doddpower
Veteran Member

14 years ago

I wouldn't hold that against any man, especially since getting married is basically just making a commitment to make it rain -- with your entire paycheck -- for life.

"Zero2Cool" wrote:

I really feel for you and yours if this is your true outlook of what marriage is all about.. not sure if it is in tongue and cheek or not.

"pack93z" wrote:

He and his wife have multiple sexual partners. I don't feel sorry for the bastid at all.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:

Monogamy is HIGHLY dated and over rated. +1 for that sir!!

Nonstopdrivel
Preferred Member

14 years ago

#22

not sure if it is in tongue and cheek or not.

"pack93z" wrote:

Of course it's tongue in cheek. Almost everything I say on this site is tongue in cheek. :P

And Kevin, I'm actually off the market at the moment. I met an amazing young woman a couple months ago and haven't really been interested in looking since.

RedSoxExcel
Registered

14 years ago

#23

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, if this is true, that is one of the funniest things I've ever read, CROCS?!

Of course all of this is a little TMZ and who knwos what to believe but even if its fake, I love the creativity.

Overall, my view with these kind of things is, does it affect his performance on the field? If no, who really cares other than for jokes. Tiger's stuff matters because it is clearly affecting his game. Maybe Croc-gate will throw off Favre and we'll take the North!

blank

Nonstopdrivel
Preferred Member

14 years ago

#24

Monogamy is HIGHLY dated and over rated. +1 for that sir!!

"doddpower" wrote:

I've discovered that if you're up front and honest from the beginning about the fact you're not a monogamist, many women don't have much a problem with it. Most women I've talked to seem to have a pretty realistic appraisal of male nature and not only understand but also accept that not all men are hardwired for monogamy. (That doesn't mean, of course, they're necessarily willing to have a relationship with such men, though a surprising number are.)

It's the guys who hide the truth and sneak around they hate so much. That makes sense to me: gaining sexual favors under false pretenses is essentially a form of fraud.

Pack93z
Select Member

14 years ago

#25

The basis of a healthy marriage depends on much more than the physical.. albeit important.. a truly solid and lasting relationship/marriage is deeper than that.

"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"

doddpower
Veteran Member

14 years ago

#26

Monogamy is HIGHLY dated and over rated. +1 for that sir!!

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:

"doddpower" wrote:

This is true. I've been in relationships where I wasn't completely honest in the beginning and then it makes things MUCH MUCH more difficult to own up to later in the relationship. At least if you get everything out in the very beginning, and they still decide to date you, you don't have anything to hide.

I know a few woman that aren't all about monogamy. A few couples actually. I'm all about having a deep, loving, beyond physical type of relationship, but that still doesn't change the monogamy aspect of this conversation.

=)

all_about_da_packers
Senior Member

14 years ago

#27

Getting back onto the topic (and away from this quasi-philosphical discussion on the subject of what marriage is and is not), this story is pretty funny.

However, soon after I finished reading the article today I had Leroy Butler's ambiguous words from last year play in my head, something about how "you haven't heard anything yet" in reference to Brett Favre stories.

Hmmmm.......

The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.

djcubez
Senior Member

14 years ago

#28

"RedSoxExcel" wrote:

Funny you bring up Tiger Woods...

And there's no real evidence that Favre's been horndoggin' it throughout the latter part of his NFL career. Maybe he was just lonely while he spent time in New York and sought some companionship with Sterger who, if you hadn't noticed, does resemble his wife, Deanna. One thing that is notable is this: it turns out that Brett watched last year's Super Bowl at home in Mississippi. He didn't watch it alone, however. According to one source, he watched the Saints miraculously defeat the Colts in the company of one special guest: Tiger Woods. I wonder what those guys talked about?

DeadSpin Link

Dexter_Sinister
Registered

14 years ago

#29

Brings new meaning to "Crocks rock".

I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.
Not screaming in terror like his passengers.

Since69
Registered

14 years ago

#30

Completely uncorroborated claims from a professional attention whore. I'd rate the chances of this being true as next to nil.

But I really, really hope it is!

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

packerfanoutwest (2h) : both games Watson missed, Packers won

Martha Careful (4h) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!

Mucky Tundra (14h) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol

buckeyepackfan (14h) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier

buckeyepackfan (14h) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol

Mucky Tundra (14h) : Jacobs gonna be OK???

Zero2Cool (14h) : Watson gonna be OK???

packerfanoutwest (18h) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath

packerfanoutwest (18h) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.

packerfanoutwest (18h) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed

Zero2Cool (20h) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them

Zero2Cool (20h) : I just checked. What tie breaker?

bboystyle (20h) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner

Zero2Cool (20h) : Ahh, ok.

bboystyle (20h) : yes due to tie breaker

Zero2Cool (20h) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.

Zero2Cool (20h) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?

bboystyle (20h) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference

Mucky Tundra (21h) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network

beast (22h) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th

beast (22h) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly

Zero2Cool (22h) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.

bboystyle (22h) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed

Mucky Tundra (22h) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv

Zero2Cool (23h) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (23h) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?

packerfanoutwest (23h) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (23-Dec) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (23-Dec) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (23-Dec) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (23-Dec) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (23-Dec) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (23-Dec) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I literally just said it.

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS