Packer Fan or no?

[jrpack]

Great article Longtime. And no, I wouldn't hope for my team to lose for a draft pick even though it would be the smart thing to do. And yes Angry, I do understand your dilema and everyone's gotta do what they gotta do including Brett. I guess I feel in this case when he returns, it's better to do neither cheer, nor boo, just do nothing. Silence is golden and Brett made his choice (remember, he retired). He had wanted to play for Minnesota the whole time and IMO the whole thing was staged so GB mgmt would look like the bad guys when he went to the Vikes. He didn't expect that they would take him back that first time in April, starting job and all. And he did it didn't he, divided the fan base, and tried to make GB look like idiots to an adoring world. But it ain't over til it's over. Go Pack!

 

[PackersRS]

I have no idea with that rendition of troll, troll, troll the boat. As witty, charming and sophisticated song as it is I was saying why would anybody bring that up as the packers could almost tied for first if they win on sunday. If that is being a troll you baffle me. Lets not fight anymore oK now can I have a hug?

You and me both have no idea. Somehow, doesn't matter how the Packers play, or how far we go, some poeple simply won't like whatever the Packers do with TT at the management. You'll find them a lot at the JSOnline and GPPG, as well as in Brett Favre's official message board. Some got over here.

You won't find them, however, at the head of packer blogs. Cheeseheadtv, Packers Lounge, Green Bay Bums, Acme Packing Company, TundraVision, Donald's Designated Driver's blog, Packer Chatters... You name them. Those people won't root for no rival, or no man. Like me, and a lot of others here, they'll root for the team, TO WIN, don't matter the hypotetical, don't matter the state of the team, because if you're a true fan, you won't simply leave your team...

Unfortunately, TT since his arival, has pledged to rebuild, and that has directly opposed Favre's intention to go all out and win now. Favre petitioned for his coach (Mariucci), TT got McCarthy. Favre pledged for Randy Moss, and TT didn't trade for him (though he called the Raiders for it)...

Favre was such a big deal that a lot of people became fans of the Green Bay Packers because of him. So, when he left, those who were more of a fan of him than a fan of the Franchise went with him.

It's not that Packer Nation is divided, really. It's just that those fans that Favre brought in left with him. And when Favre retires, and they have nothing more to root for, they'll go with the familiar franchise, the Green bay Packers. That's the definition of fair weather to me, like them or not.

 

[Quientus]

You and me both have no idea. Somehow, doesn't matter how the Packers play, or how far we go, some poeple simply won't like whatever the Packers do with TT at the management. You'll find them a lot at the JSOnline and GPPG, as well as in Brett Favre's official message board. Some got over here.

You won't find them, however, at the head of packer blogs. Cheeseheadtv, Packers Lounge, Green Bay Bums, Acme Packing Company, TundraVision, Donald's Designated Driver's blog, Packer Chatters... You name them. Those people won't root for no rival, or no man. Like me, and a lot of others here, they'll root for the team, TO WIN, don't matter the hypotetical, don't matter the state of the team, because if you're a true fan, you won't simply leave your team...

Unfortunately, TT since his arival, has pledged to rebuild, and that has directly opposed Favre's intention to go all out and win now. Favre petitioned for his coach (Mariucci), TT got McCarthy. Favre pledged for Randy Moss, and TT didn't trade for him (though he called the Raiders for it)...(...)

As "Captain" and one of the leaders of the team, it was upon him to be a "spokesperson" for the team ... If you think Favre was the only player who wanted those changes, you are (probably) mistaken ... I don't believe for one moment that he was alone with wanting those coaches and players (I know for a fact that even some in the board agreed on that) ... However being the leader, he probably had to voice it to the management/coaching staff ...

(...)
Favre was such a big deal that a lot of people became fans of the Green Bay Packers because of him. So, when he left, those who were more of a fan of him than a fan of the Franchise went with him.
(...)

Alot of the "Packer-Nation" welcomed Favre, fans who had been "Packer Fans" for years prior, just as alot of (newer) fans came "aboard" ... - Those fans are still there ... and by all accounts are still "Packer Fans", regardless of what your definition of a "true" Packer Fan is, however, just because they don't "blindly" follow and agree doesn't make those people less fans ...

(...)
It's not that Packer Nation is divided, really. It's just that those fans that Favre brought in left with him. And when Favre retires, and they have nothing more to root for, they'll go with the familiar franchise, the Green bay Packers. That's the definition of fair weather to me, like them or not.

Right ... that's why you see so many arguements and posts by these fans across the boards (not just this one ...) - You actually see them many places ... Even from "old-time" fans to new fans ...


So those Packer fans who have been following and supporting the Packers for some odd 30+ years or more but doesn't like the current management and happen to like Favre are "fair weather" / "band-wagon" fans ? ...

I'm sorry ... but across the board ... even if you look at what other (Packer) fans are writing ... that is a "bold" statement to make ...

That (in my opinion) is the proto-typical response a "disgruntled" fan would make when he/she doesn't agree with what other of his/hers (fellow) fans are saying and arguing ...

 

[PackersRS]

As "Captain" and one of the leaders of the team, it was upon him to be a "spokesperson" for the team ... If you think Favre was the only player who wanted those changes, you are (probably) mistaken ... I don't believe for one moment that he was alone with wanting those coaches and players (I know for a fact that even some in the board agreed on that) ... However being the leader, he probably had to voice it to the management/coaching staff ...

Players are paid to play, not to GM a team. It's one thing to voice an opinion about something, but actually call for a coach? Where have this happened before?

Alot of the "Packer-Nation" welcomed Favre, fans who had been "Packer Fans" for years prior, just as alot of (newer) fans came "aboard" ... - Those fans are still there ... and by all accounts are still "Packer Fans", regardless of what your definition of a "true" Packer Fan is, however, just because they don't "blindly" follow and agree doesn't make those people less fans ...

That's not my definition. That's the common definition. If you cheer for a team, you're a fan of that team. If you cheer against a team, you're not a fan of that team. I'm sorry, but it is that simple. If you cheer for a team sometimes, but sometimes cheer for them to lose, well, that's what is a fair wheater fan. You don't want me to go all smartass and past some dicionary definitions of fan, right?

Right ... that's why you see so many arguements and posts by these fans across the boards (not just this one ...) - You actually see them many places ... Even from "old-time" fans to new fans ...

Many places... But yet they're never ahead of any packer blog (except Firetedthompson.com...)

So those Packer fans who have been following and supporting the Packers for some odd 30+ years or more but doesn't like the current management and happen to like Favre are "fair weather" / "band-wagon" fans ? ...

No, only the fans who cheer for the packers to lose when they face Favre. Those are fair weather fans. Those who cheer against the packers all the time aren't fair weather fans. Those aren't fans.

That (in my opinion) is the proto-typical response a "disgruntled" fan would make when he/she doesn't agree with what other of his/hers (fellow) fans are saying and arguing ...

Yes, I'm disagreeing the same way I disagree with a Vikings fan. They'll cheer for my team to lose next week. So will you. What's the difference?

 

[Hauschild]

I hvae a hypothetical question for any GB fan.

Say the Packers are eliminated from playoff contention. And say its a good draft, but the elite prospects are in the first couple of picks. The rest of the draft class is average to say the least.
If the packers win the last few games of the season it puts them out of the running for the cream of the crop picks. If they lose they are in and can pick a guy that will help the franchise become better down the road.

Do you root for them to win even if it screws their draft chances and ultimatly hurts the team by not getting a soild player that could contribute to the team winning?

Or do you root for them to lose even though it would be hard, you understand that its for the best?

This is a situation that many teams in all sports face at times.

I never root for Green Bay to lose in this situation because over the years I have learned the HARD WAY that the hyped players on the covers of magazines and headlining talk radio and cable tv are not usually the players everybody is talking about in the same vein 3 years after the draft. Hype blinds and makes so many fans far too upset.

Look at the hype over the past few years - Derrick Johnson, Reggie Bush, Crabtree, Hawk...the list is endless of overvalued collegiate prospects that never live up to their initial billing from college.

And, I think this is the MOST overlooked fact in the history of drafting. Most consistently sound franchises that perennially make the playoffs draft around 25 every year. As a result, they never have to play the hype game and they are never forced into awkward positions of drafting players that'll never live up to their hype (not to mention they can save that guaranteed 30 million on a Hawk-type and use it for a player that's proven their mettle like a Jennings/Driver/Kampman/harris/Woodson). Look at New England and Indy and Green Bay from the entire 1990's thru mid 2000's - as a GM, you are never forced to take an AJ Hawk at #5 because you can acquire AJ Hawk-type of talent at 25 (DeMeco Ryans). Let's face it - all you guys would have lynched TT had he NOT selected Hawk at #5.

I firmly believe it is a curse to draft in the top 10 because teams that do it, end up doing it repeatedly. Green Bay is the only exception because that 4-12 year was mainly due to the entire offensive line being on IR and half the receiving corps and Ahman Green.

 

[ColtsSeahawks]

for me you always want your team to win

Agreed.... I mean if your team is say 2-10 and there is only 4 weeks left then yes I would rather have my team maybe only win one or 2 more to get a good draft pick then win out..... That actually was the story of the Seahawks last year.

But you just never know how the season will end.... If your team is say 5-8 but you think there is a good chance that they could still win the division with an 8-8 record, or possibly even get into the wild card spot then I want them to win out....

A team like the Titans obviously there is no chance they will get a wild card so I think its safe to say most want them to win 3 or 4 games just to have some wins up there but not much more then that so they could get a good draft pick.

With the Seahawks even if they were to lose to the Dallas I still believe even at 2-5 they have a chance at winning the division... A very very small chance and can only lose maybe 2 out of their next 9 games but none the less a 9-7 can still win the division.... However if they lose the next 3 after Dallas and are 2-8 or something then yes the season is over and just go for a hot draft pick.

So all in all I dont think you really know until about week 9 or week 10.... I think I would rather have my team hit an average 8-8 record and NOT get into the playoffs then 2-14 and get a good draft pick.

There im done wow.... sorry for that in depth answer lol.

 

[angryguy77]

I never root for Green Bay to lose in this situation because over the years I have learned the HARD WAY that the hyped players on the covers of magazines and headlining talk radio and cable tv are not usually the players everybody is talking about in the same vein 3 years after the draft. Hype blinds and makes so many fans far too upset.

Look at the hype over the past few years - Derrick Johnson, Reggie Bush, Crabtree, Hawk...the list is endless of overvalued collegiate prospects that never live up to their initial billing from college.

And, I think this is the MOST overlooked fact in the history of drafting. Most consistently sound franchises that perennially make the playoffs draft around 25 every year. As a result, they never have to play the hype game and they are never forced into awkward positions of drafting players that'll never live up to their hype (not to mention they can save that guaranteed 30 million on a Hawk-type and use it for a player that's proven their mettle like a Jennings/Driver/Kampman/harris/Woodson). Look at New England and Indy and Green Bay from the entire 1990's thru mid 2000's - as a GM, you are never forced to take an AJ Hawk at #5 because you can acquire AJ Hawk-type of talent at 25 (DeMeco Ryans). Let's face it - all you guys would have lynched TT had he NOT selected Hawk at #5.

I firmly believe it is a curse to draft in the top 10 because teams that do it, end up doing it repeatedly. Green Bay is the only exception because that 4-12 year was mainly due to the entire offensive line being on IR and half the receiving corps and Ahman Green.

So even if there might not be a sure guy in the top part of the draft, you could always trade your pick for more later picks or for a proven player.
To not want your team to have the best shot at improving doesnt sound like a true fan to me. Im not calling you that, but rather trying to make the point that this is not as black and white as some are making it.


Before we trhow labels around, I think we should all just step back and realize that some have a different idea about whats best for the team