uffda udfa
8 years ago

No shit... unless we're using sarcasm, we all post what we truly believe. You always repeat this stupid line, like you're the only one... which is just arrogant .


People were certain that the Packers were going to have a winning record you verbally attacked them, suggesting they'll never wake up to reality, that they're just dreamers who can't take off their rose color glasses and dismissed them. That has been your line year after year... so yes you have clearly been proven wrong year after year... as you're the one that's not in reality.

I get it, you're a perfectionist and always have try to improve things... but it fucking sucks that you're happy when the Packers lose and pissy&bitchy when the Packers win.... and feels like crap when you dump all over the team, and having your shout box hit and runs...


Threatened? WTF are you taking about... no one feels threatened... this is on the internet... no one feels threatened about going on their computers. I'm not threatened about questions I can't answer... if fact the only people I know would be threaten about that is 1) People that are about to take a test 2) Perfectionist which feel the need and desire to know the correct answers.

And I'm not even close perfectionist. But you are... so you're probably just projecting your own feelings out on that one.

Also, that would completely explain why you feel the need to ask answers like "Why did Aaron Rodgers make no Guarantees for the Playoffs?" and why you feel the need to come up with a theory for everything... and why you response to each and and every post in the past.

So thanks for the insight on yourself, and maybe you need to work on not feeling threatened by others. Also feeling threatened and being a perfectionist combo would explain a lot of your behavior on here... Sorry, I never thought about that before.

Originally Posted by: beast 



I post what I truly believe is to mitigate the accusation that I'm a troll. Trolls type anything to sow discord. Plus, I don't believe everyone posts what they believe. I do. Arrogant? You get personally attacked and questioned like I do? No. You don't.

I'm not threatened by anyone. I would say that's a textbook case of projection.

It's much more interesting creating topics that don't exist than to plagiarize every day typical old and boring ones. I have theories because I have thoughts of my own. It isn't arrogance but could you carry a forum solely on fresh and new topics you created?

Z doesn't want any poster over doing it here or I would be posting more topics for you to rip. The Rodgers question was a good one. He had an opportunity to double down an didn't. There is a reason why and that's where the topic comes into play.

UserPostedImage
Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."


Zero2Cool
8 years ago

Z doesn't want any poster over doing it here or I would be posting more topics for you to rip

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



What we do not like at PACKERSHOME is one person overtaking an entire thread (or multiple) threads by replying to each person. This is a discussion board. You have a lot of good thoughts, even if I think most are whacky (hey so are mine at times). The problem I've seen with you is someone will bring up 7 points saturating your argument and you'll completely ignore them (while quoting them) and jumping all over one thing that doesn't even have much quality in the context of the matter. Reminds me of the OJ trial where the defense says "hey, hey that evidence PSSSH, don't look over there, look over here --- the glove don't fit, you must acquit"

I'm not sure why you need this re-told to you. I must not be saying clearly enough.
UserPostedImage
uffda udfa
8 years ago

What we do not like at PACKERSHOME is one person overtaking an entire thread (or multiple) threads by replying to each person. This is a discussion board. You have a lot of good thoughts, even if I think most are whacky (hey so are mine at times). The problem I've seen with you is someone will bring up 7 points saturating your argument and you'll completely ignore them (while quoting them) and jumping all over one thing that doesn't even have much quality in the context of the matter. Reminds me of the OJ trial where the defense says "hey, hey that evidence PSSSH, don't look over there, look over here --- the glove don't fit, you must acquit"

I'm not sure why you need this re-told to you. I must not be saying clearly enough.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



Sorry, I just pick out the one thing I have the most issue with. I'll do better at acknowledging all the criticism I get in reply. Some points don't merit a reply and some do. IE: Who do you want if MM gets fired? If you don't tell someone who else you want then they think that completely negates your desire for regime change. It doesn't. I may not know who I want at CB next season but I know I don't want the ones we have now. The ones next year may be worse (unlikely) or better buy you at least have to try to be better.

Just like is alleged toward me...I think most feel like their points are salient and worthy of discourse. I may not respond at all but that's better than making some big production out of it when a point isn't responded to. Maybe, it's not deemed worthy of response? That shouldn't be offensive. Everyone has to determine what they feel they should or shouldn't respond to. IE: Almost every single question/point I've raised since being back with the exception of Porforis.

UserPostedImage
Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."


Zero2Cool
8 years ago

Sorry, I just pick out the one thing I have the most issue with. I'll do better at acknowledging all the criticism I get in reply. Some points don't merit a reply and some do. IE: Who do you want if Mike McCarthy gets fired? If you don't tell someone who else you want then they think that completely negates your desire for regime change. It doesn't. I may not know who I want at CB next season but I know I don't want the ones we have now. The ones next year may be worse (unlikely) or better buy you at least have to try to be better.

Just like is alleged toward me...I think most feel like their points are salient and worthy of discourse. I may not respond at all but that's better than making some big production out of it when a point isn't responded to. Maybe, it's not deemed worthy of response? That shouldn't be offensive. Everyone has to determine what they feel they should or shouldn't respond to. IE: Almost every single question/point I've raised since being back with the exception of Porforis.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



No, you pick out what is easiest for you to attack in hopes of discrediting the premise of the author. I think it's cool how many reply to you, but I don't think you need to reply to every single person. That'd drive you crazy-go-nuts man! lol.

True, some points are not worth a response. But when someone takes the time to debate a point with you with item after item and you gloss over it pointing out one word and focusing on one word, you're kind of being rude, don't you think? I dunno, could just be me.

I've countered most if not all of your negativity with factual information that negates it. You refuse to acknowledge I have a valid point. Instead, you focused on a word, or some innocuous technicality to side step it. That I find frustrating because I feel I see your point, but you just jam your thumbs into your ears saying "I no hear you, i no hear you" and then begin to reply with something else.

In short, I think I farted out more football knowledge than you possess. 😂 [giddity]
UserPostedImage
Barfarn
8 years ago

I post what I truly believe is to mitigate the accusation that I'm a troll. Trolls type anything to sow discord. Plus, I don't believe everyone posts what they believe. I do.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



Z2C is right, wacky thinking like yours [like Z2C’s, like mine] can be good; but you undermine your ability to contribute.

Step 1: admit you’re an alcoholic. You are a Troll [a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of disrupting normal, on-topic discussion, often to satiating the troll's lack of esteem and need for attention].

1. Look at everything you post; then look at the topic! You sabotage topics with most, if not every post you make. 3 or 4 People will be contributing on the topic, EG “CB Waters.” Then comes UFFDA, chiming in about how Waters wouldn’t be here if Ted signed FAs, or didn’t draft so poorly or kept Hayward.

Note: Packer fans lurk the net lusting for topics like this. These people will return over and over to, EG, PH to read similar stuff. Eventually, they’ll have a morsel of info or a perspective not discussed, they’ll, throw caution to the wind and post; they’ll be thanked, embraced and begin to post more regularly. This is the lifeblood of a good forum.


2. You don’t believe what you write. If you believe your schtick, there is no need to cherry-pick, exaggerate or misrepresent. People that truly believe their position know it will stand up to the ultimate truth, there simply is no need to exaggerate, cherry-pick and/or misrepresent anything.

Example 1: You state that Ted should not sign Hayward, so Ted not signing Hayward should be counted as a good decision. But opportunistically, a year later, when it’d be damn nice to have Casey materialize on the roster, you use Ted’s good decision on not signing Hayward to excoriate Ted for not singing him.

Example 2: Someone writes “loved Tripp as a 6th rounder.” But, when your personal agendas call for it or you’re seeking discord and a little extra attention, you misrepresent the statement as “you said you loved Tripp.”

You falsely quote what others say routinely. If you were sincere you wouldn't feel the need to do this. The Troll does this because he believes he’ll get a response.

3. In disagreement, the non-troll desperately seeks areas of common ground by recognizing the uncontroverted facts and issues. This provides fertile ground for minds to be changed or at least impetus for movement toward middle ground. The troll is hysterical and accentuates the points of disagreement.

4. The Troll has to get in the last word. His battered self-esteem can then say, “yep, I won that argument too.”

Try this: Dont respond to this post; you cant defend yourself against what was said here because it is ultimate truth and you know it...just stop being a troll because I like ya!
uffda udfa
8 years ago
Z... I addressed your point about the D and turnovers. The D is still bad, regardless. Not sure why you feel the need to put lipstick on a pig? It isn't going to kill any Packers fan no matter how positive to say our D is substandard and very well may be a quick end to our post season. Say it with me... Our D is terrible and it very well could cost us. Not so hard. It's just truth. Not negativity.

Barfarn... that post is beneath you.

Here we go again... I have to defend myself because I'm personally attacked.

I'll have to do this again. If ANY poster said they thought letting Hayward go was smart comes back and say TED made a mistake by letting him go would be...CORRECT. His former opinion has no bearing on that truth. Now, if you want to rip the person who made that post have at it, but it doesn't change.

Sabotage topics? Yeah, I post in every single thread because I'm a troll and want to sabotage it? I pick threads I like. Yours on Kerridge was a good one. One not seen or talked about elsewhere other than maybe a tweet or two. I was buoying your points that really didn't need it save for all the backlash your post created because it was NOT PACKERS FLATTERING. You and I both know that ANYTHING not Packers flattering is going to be upsetting to the masses here save for nerds boorish and childish self crapping that gets a pass for some odd reason. You KNEW when you posted what you did about MM being STUPID you would get strong negative reaction. Hmmm...that is TROLLISH? Is it? Look hard at your definition? In my view, it's not trollish at all. It's factually based and something you appeared to truly believe. Nothing trollish about that ...you can't control people's reactions to things they don't like. The same goes for me. I will admit to despising a lot of the blind homerism I see in all facets of life. Perhaps, I post with that too much in mind. It's reverse troll behavior to post some Packers flattering topic and get a flock of fleas to get off on it because it gives warm and fuzzies when it's not really factually defensible. IE: Packers are team to beat because they're on a 6 game winning streak. The reverse trolls want to fawn all over it, while the "trolls" point out that the D is toasted cheese and was recently blistered by Chicago's 3rd string QB. How terrible to point that out to slow the hype train that is fueled by hopes and wishes plus the past more than current reality. I don't live in that area that reverse trolls seems to need to live in or they die. See: Buck. Once it's not all Packers flattering he quits. He needs the honey to survive when there is some honey but plenty of maggot rotted meat, too. Don't ignore the honey or the rotted meat but when the focus is only on honey it's needed to hear about the rotted meat, also, for balance sake. Alas, balance isn't the goal...it's honey, honey, honey. Packers are great! Packers are going to win it all because media is saying NOBODY WANTS TO PLAY US. I just see the manipulation of honey lovers and point out another side not being talked about. It's not wrong.
UserPostedImage
Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."


nerdmann
8 years ago

Z2C is right, wacky thinking like yours [like Z2C’s, like mine] can be good; but you undermine your ability to contribute.

Step 1: admit you’re an alcoholic. You are a Troll [a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of disrupting normal, on-topic discussion, often to satiating the troll's lack of esteem and need for attention].

1. Look at everything you post; then look at the topic! You sabotage topics with most, if not every post you make. 3 or 4 People will be contributing on the topic, EG “CB Waters.” Then comes UFFDA, chiming in about how Waters wouldn’t be here if Ted signed FAs, or didn’t draft so poorly or kept Hayward.

Note: Packer fans lurk the net lusting for topics like this. These people will return over and over to, EG, PH to read similar stuff. Eventually, they’ll have a morsel of info or a perspective not discussed, they’ll, throw caution to the wind and post; they’ll be thanked, embraced and begin to post more regularly. This is the lifeblood of a good forum.


2. You don’t believe what you write. If you believe your schtick, there is no need to cherry-pick, exaggerate or misrepresent. People that truly believe their position know it will stand up to the ultimate truth, there simply is no need to exaggerate, cherry-pick and/or misrepresent anything.

Example 1: You state that Ted should not sign Hayward, so Ted not signing Hayward should be counted as a good decision. But opportunistically, a year later, when it’d be damn nice to have Casey materialize on the roster, you use Ted’s good decision on not signing Hayward to excoriate Ted for not singing him.

Example 2: Someone writes “loved Tripp as a 6th rounder.” But, when your personal agendas call for it or you’re seeking discord and a little extra attention, you misrepresent the statement as “you said you loved Tripp.”

You falsely quote what others say routinely. If you were sincere you wouldn't feel the need to do this. The Troll does this because he believes he’ll get a response.

3. In disagreement, the non-troll desperately seeks areas of common ground by recognizing the uncontroverted facts and issues. This provides fertile ground for minds to be changed or at least impetus for movement toward middle ground. The troll is hysterical and accentuates the points of disagreement.

4. The Troll has to get in the last word. His battered self-esteem can then say, “yep, I won that argument too.”

Try this: Dont respond to this post; you cant defend yourself against what was said here because it is ultimate truth and you know it...just stop being a troll because I like ya!

Originally Posted by: Barfarn 



If you prove him wrong he starts to attack you personally and psychoanalyze you. YOU JUST DISAGREE, BECAUSE OF THIS OR THAT RELATIONSHIP WITH YOUR MOTHER or weird shit like that. That's why I blocked him. He kept PMing me telling me I was wrong and fail to disagree with him for psychiatric reasons.

“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
beast
8 years ago

Z2C is right, wacky thinking like yours [like Z2C’s, like mine] can be good; but you undermine your ability to contribute.

Step 1: admit you’re an alcoholic. You are a Troll [a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of disrupting normal, on-topic discussion, often to satiating the troll's lack of esteem and need for attention].

1. Look at everything you post; then look at the topic! You sabotage topics with most, if not every post you make. 3 or 4 People will be contributing on the topic, EG “CB Waters.” Then comes UFFDA, chiming in about how Waters wouldn’t be here if Ted signed FAs, or didn’t draft so poorly or kept Hayward.

Note: Packer fans lurk the net lusting for topics like this. These people will return over and over to, EG, PH to read similar stuff. Eventually, they’ll have a morsel of info or a perspective not discussed, they’ll, throw caution to the wind and post; they’ll be thanked, embraced and begin to post more regularly. This is the lifeblood of a good forum.


2. You don’t believe what you write. If you believe your schtick, there is no need to cherry-pick, exaggerate or misrepresent. People that truly believe their position know it will stand up to the ultimate truth, there simply is no need to exaggerate, cherry-pick and/or misrepresent anything.

Example 1: You state that Ted should not sign Hayward, so Ted not signing Hayward should be counted as a good decision. But opportunistically, a year later, when it’d be damn nice to have Casey materialize on the roster, you use Ted’s good decision on not signing Hayward to excoriate Ted for not singing him.

Example 2: Someone writes “loved Tripp as a 6th rounder.” But, when your personal agendas call for it or you’re seeking discord and a little extra attention, you misrepresent the statement as “you said you loved Tripp.”

You falsely quote what others say routinely. If you were sincere you wouldn't feel the need to do this. The Troll does this because he believes he’ll get a response.

3. In disagreement, the non-troll desperately seeks areas of common ground by recognizing the uncontroverted facts and issues. This provides fertile ground for minds to be changed or at least impetus for movement toward middle ground. The troll is hysterical and accentuates the points of disagreement.

4. The Troll has to get in the last word. His battered self-esteem can then say, “yep, I won that argument too.”

Try this: Dont respond to this post; you cant defend yourself against what was said here because it is ultimate truth and you know it...just stop being a troll because I like ya!

Originally Posted by: Barfarn 

Great post!!: As this post perfectly describes him... if it was about the Packers it would potentially be nominee for post of the year (if there were such things). Thank you for that amazing post.
UserPostedImage
beast
8 years ago

You and I both know that ANYTHING not Packers flattering is going to be upsetting to the masses here save for nerds boorish and childish self crapping that gets a pass for some odd reason.

I will admit to despising a lot of the blind homerism I see in all facets of life.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



You always miss the point... always... and that almost impossible to do unless your doing in on purpose.

There are clearly other fans that are unflattering to the Packers... and they don't get even a tenth of the shit you do, because they're living in reality, where you're just as blind as the blind homerism just in the complete opposite different.

You have taken facts and twisted them into bullshit over and over and over again, until you find the most negative things possible to say... and if you never willing to stay on the same opinion once it's no longer the most negative one. You clearly actively seek the most negative opinion possible.

Perfect example... Thompson did what you wanted... and you attack him for it... why? Because it's the most negative thing possible... you are blind just as much (or more) as the blind homerism.

Example 1: You state that Ted should not sign Hayward, so Ted not signing Hayward should be counted as a good decision. But opportunistically, a year later, when it’d be damn nice to have Casey materialize on the roster, you use Ted’s good decision on not signing Hayward to excoriate Ted for not singing him.

Originally Posted by: Barfarn 



You're just as blind as the people you claim to be against...
UserPostedImage
uffda udfa
8 years ago

You always miss the point... always... and that almost impossible to do unless your doing in on purpose.

There are clearly other fans that are unflattering to the Packers... and they don't get even a tenth of the shit you do, because they're living in reality, where you're just as blind as the blind homerism just in the complete opposite different.

You have taken facts and twisted them into bullshit over and over and over again, until you find the most negative things possible to say... and if you never willing to stay on the same opinion once it's no longer the most negative one. You clearly actively seek the most negative opinion possible.

Perfect example... Thompson did what you wanted... and you attack him for it... why? Because it's the most negative thing possible... you are blind just as much (or more) as the blind homerism.


You're just as blind as the people you claim to be against...

Originally Posted by: beast 



Yup...Dakota and Barfarn. They get pounced on pretty good, too. He and Barfarn are the two most similar to me. Sorry, Barfarn. Dakota sees that you "hyena" me. You have some kind of code that will allow a little criticism once the media has been on it for a long time like what was wrong with Rodgers and this offense. Then and only then will we see some "negativity" from here. The degree to which you are willing to call something what it is is sugar coated...a hedging if you will...like you feel dirty or naughty for speaking against the org. I don't have those hang ups. A hundred times over I've said here I can view this team like you would the Bears or Vikings or Browns or Niners, etc. Take emotion out of it. I do that as well as anyone here and you hate me for it.

Of course you're going to say this about me...you hate what I represent which is opposite of you. Same goes for me. I hate feel good homerism. I don't hate you, though. There's the difference. You have to hate me because of what I say. You can't separate what I say from being personal with me. I'd cite Galatians 4:16...it's a tried and true tested thing. People are hated for this down through the centuries.

So, beast what is your truth? Have you answered any of the charges I've levied at this team? No. You hide and piggyback on Barfarn's wrong assertion on Hayward. You don't get it. What I said or thought about Hayward means NOTHING in the scope of whether TED THOMPSON made a mistake any more than it would something had I said something positive and what Ted did worked. My positive or negative or right or wrong take on what he did is MEANINGLESS to whether HE HIMSELF made a mistake. My opinion BEFORE OR AFTER the fact doesn't change that in either direction but you don't get that.

If I thought Justin Harrell was going to be a total star and got on my high horse praising Ted Thompson for picking him an saying he was going to be a HOF it would not mean that I couldn't say that Ted Thompson made a major mistake in drafting him. I would also be wrong but that wouldn't impact Ted being wrong. You can cite I was wrong on Hayward all day that's fine...but that doesn't change that Ted was wrong. Further, ol Barfarn cherry picked my thoughts on Hayward. I did love the guy as a rook...great ball skills and had knack for INT's. He had a rep for being injured here and I thought it was fine to let a guy walk who was oft injured. This forum just spoke about not adding a CB because he might have gotten injured ala like Hayward used to do.

For the record, I'm fine with letting Perry walk. I love the guy but he's injured all the time, too. Now, if Ted lets him go because he thinks Fackrell is a great replacement and Fackrell bombs then Ted made a mistake REGARDLESS OF MY OPINION. I liked Rollins a lot coming out...not a huge fan of Randall's selection but did like Rollins and thought he would develop. He didn't. That's TT's job to gauge and he gauged WRONG and my opinion has nothing to do with that FACT.
UserPostedImage
Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."


Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (40m) : lol our email hasn't worked in months. 7 pages of unverified users
Zero2Cool (8h) : MySpace Screaming Lord Byron ... Brett Favre.
Zero2Cool (19-May) : Packers have signed first-round pick Matthew Golden, leaving second-round tackle Anthony Belton as their only unsigned draft pick
beast (19-May) : Supposedly he has to take his image, and name off of it... but otherwise could keep selling wine if he wanted to.
Zero2Cool (19-May) : he giving up his win business?
beast (19-May) : Speaking of Woodson, sounds like he'll be a minority owner (0.1%) of the Browns
Mucky Tundra (15-May) : Zero, regarding Woodson, that'd why I find the timing with Williams peculiar
dfosterf (15-May) : Ryan Hall y'all does a great job of tracking thesr
Zero2Cool (15-May) : Fear not!! I planned to do 33mi bike ride tomorrow morning, so ... yeah
Zero2Cool (15-May) : We got some dark clouds and nasty winds right bout now.
Zero2Cool (15-May) : Madison they had hail 4pm.
dfosterf (15-May) : Sure looks like these tornadoes are headed towards Green Bay
Zero2Cool (15-May) : Woodson of Charles fame was reluctant and then loved it. that didn't really come out until post career
Mucky Tundra (15-May) : IE "We bought into the Bears and they let us down, we have no choice to seek alternatives"
Mucky Tundra (15-May) : Or that Williams and his family are preparing an exit ramp if they don't like how things are going in a few years
Mucky Tundra (15-May) : Either Williams thought it would make him look good (reluctant but then embraces the city and franchise)
Mucky Tundra (15-May) : I can only assume that the Williams camp agreed to cooperate with that article tells me 2 things
dfosterf (15-May) : Ya. They are in a great mood
Zero2Cool (15-May) : I should visit again
dfosterf (15-May) : ChiCity Sports entering freakout mode due to Caleb and his dad not wanting him to go there
Zero2Cool (15-May) : "He's looking really good out there," Derrick Ansley said of Kalen King. Adds that he's been playing inside and out.
Zero2Cool (15-May) : Him saying he doesn't have one to give haha
Zero2Cool (15-May) : True, that was awesome. The whole F thing was great actually.
dfosterf (15-May) : I did like the Mark Murphy part, sorta
Zero2Cool (15-May) : Some comments on it saying it was great, amazing... I came away thinking... awkward.
dfosterf (15-May) : Packers schedule release video is "interesting" I guess.
Zero2Cool (15-May) : SOOO glad that tool still works. Saves from manually entering each game
Zero2Cool (15-May) : NFL Pick'em import was done last night.
Mucky Tundra (15-May) : Atlanta with 5 primetime games lol
Zero2Cool (15-May) : Week Five BYE?? NFL is hell.
wpr (14-May) : Vikings schedule leaked. Week 12 in GB. Week 18 in MN.
wpr (14-May) : CBS has GB @ NYG Week 11 Nov 16 and they will face MN in week 18 but don't say where. I think away
Zero2Cool (14-May) : W15: Packers at Broncos
Zero2Cool (14-May) : Ben Sirmans on MarShawn Lloyd: “Everything’s full go for him.”
Zero2Cool (14-May) : Luke Butkus says training camp will allow plenty of time to implement new center Elgton Jenkins
Zero2Cool (14-May) : wk 2 commanders at packers
Zero2Cool (14-May) : Ugh. Packers thanksgiving detroit ...boring
Zero2Cool (14-May) : Panthers at Green Bay in week 9, Nov 2nd
buckeyepackfan (14-May) : Week 1
buckeyepackfan (14-May) : Packers Host Detroit Week 1! ML finally gets a week home opener.
beast (13-May) : I was kind of hoping Douglas might come back to the Pack
beast (13-May) : My question is how much do we trust Jenkins? In bad weather, he seemed to struggle a bit with ball control snapping, though he started at OG
beast (13-May) : Well Jenkins probably knows he's not getting that 2026 salary number without a new contact... so just trying to get the new contact early
Zero2Cool (13-May) : CB Rasul Douglas is visiting the #Seahawks today, per source.
dfosterf (13-May) : He's a switch and baiter. Its the same as a bait and switcher except he agreed to the switch first lol
dfosterf (13-May) : 6.8 mil raise next year. Those are existing contract numbers
dfosterf (13-May) : 12.8 plus 4.8 pro rata signing bonus is 17.6 mil. Top center in the league at 18
Zero2Cool (13-May) : Elgton Jenkins wants to rework contract ahead of position change to center
Zero2Cool (13-May) : 🏈Monday, Nov. 10: Eagles at Packers
buckeyepackfan (12-May) : Packers @ Bears week 16(Saturday Game)
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2025 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM
COMMANDERS
Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM
Browns
Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM
Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM
Cardinals
Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM
PANTHERS
Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM
EAGLES
Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM
Giants
Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM
Bears
Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM
RAVENS
Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM
Vikings
Recent Topics
6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

23h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

23h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

19-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

19-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

18-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

15-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

15-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / greengold

15-May / Random Babble / Martha Careful

15-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

14-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

13-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / nyrpack

13-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

13-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.