what was better?
Moderator: Moderators
-
- All Pro Elite Player
- Posts: 1056
- Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 2:34 am
what was better?
watching favre in purple beating green bay twice, or watching them lose tonight the way they did? i'm in favor of the former.
-
- Starting Wide Receiver
- Posts: 19150
- Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 5:48 pm
- Location: Crystal, MN
- x 114
- Contact:
Re: what was better?
Not even close... The former for sure.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
The Devil whispered in the Viking's ear, "There's a storm coming." The Viking replied, "I am the storm." #SKOL2018
- Raptorman
- Hall of Fame Candidate
- Posts: 3403
- Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 10:23 pm
- Location: Sebastian, FL
- x 67
Re: what was better?
Well it's simple. For the past few years all I have been hearing from Packer fans is about Favre interception in New Orleans and how it cost the Vikings a trip to the Super Bowl. I can tell you I won't be hearing that one anymore. At least the Vikings didn't blow a 16 point lead in the game.
Vikings fan since Nov. 6, 1966. Annoying Packer fans since Nov. 7, 1966
-
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 9774
- Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:57 pm
- x 1859
Re: what was better?
The former.
I actually wanted them to beat Seattle, then lose the Super Bowl.
I actually wanted them to beat Seattle, then lose the Super Bowl.
Go ahead. I dare you.
Underestimate this man.
Re: what was better?
I'll go against the grain here and say the Seattle win over GB is better. What a finish!
But then, it's difficult for me to be fond of the Chili years, regardless who was playing QB.
But then, it's difficult for me to be fond of the Chili years, regardless who was playing QB.
Re: what was better?
Ditto, Craig. Yesterday's finish was one of the most memorable ends to a championship game that I can remember and for once, watching an NFC North/Central team blow their chance to reach the Super Bowl was actually a positive experience for me.losperros wrote:I'll go against the grain here and say the Seattle win over GB is better. What a finish!
But then, it's difficult for me to be fond of the Chili years, regardless who was playing QB.
-
- Hall of Fame Inductee
- Posts: 4016
- Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 8:14 pm
- Location: So. Utah
Re: what was better?
I woulda been more happy with the former if Favre hadn't come back and got thumped by GB the next season. I was really tickled by that stat that GB was the only team to never have beaten Brent Favre....until that second season.
That defeat yesterday was demoralizing. The onside kick...TJack at the coin toss....blowing a 16pt lead. That's even harder to take than 41-0 IMO.
I'll laugh quietly to myself for years over this one.
That defeat yesterday was demoralizing. The onside kick...TJack at the coin toss....blowing a 16pt lead. That's even harder to take than 41-0 IMO.
I'll laugh quietly to myself for years over this one.
Re: what was better?
The scenario that involves the Vikings winning, no brainer.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Re: what was better?
This one was more satisfying for me. The fact that we had to beat them with their QB kinda taints those victories, and they're only regular season games.
Seeing them collapse on all fronts yesterday was so unbelievably satisfying. My packer fan brother has yet to respond to my text messages, it's beautiful
Seeing them collapse on all fronts yesterday was so unbelievably satisfying. My packer fan brother has yet to respond to my text messages, it's beautiful
- CbusVikesFan
- All Pro Elite Player
- Posts: 1395
- Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2012 8:07 pm
- Location: Columbus, Ohio
Re: what was better?
I cannot distinguish which is better. Any Packer misery, no matter how it manifests itself, is wonderful. I found it great this year that the Bears sucked worse than the Vikings, the Pack choked like a fat man on a piece of steak, the Cowgirls got punched in the throat, the Steelers went down, 49ers suck again, and the Lions fell short again.
To me, all of those scenarios are just peachy keen on a yearly basis.
To me, all of those scenarios are just peachy keen on a yearly basis.
Don't hate on my Buckeyes. Some of the best Vikings went to Ohio State.
Including now, HOF WR #80 Cris Carter
- Wild Bill
- Transition Player
- Posts: 364
- Joined: Mon May 26, 2003 6:13 pm
- Location: Orlando FL
- Contact:
Re: what was better?
Raptorman wrote:Well it's simple. For the past few years all I have been hearing from Packer fans is about Favre interception in New Orleans and how it cost the Vikings a trip to the Super Bowl. I can tell you I won't be hearing that one anymore. At least the Vikings didn't blow a 16 point lead in the game.
I agree!!! That collapse and amazing plays by Seattle were just =insert superlative=. No that word is not big enough to describe what happened. No words can really capture that sequence of events. I have a friend who has been a Seahawk fan since at least 10 yrs old. He posted a congrats to Packers message on facebook. THEN !!!!!!!!! If either team had been the Vikings I would have been in the ER. Give him all we got ####CLEAR#### Zap still nothing hit him again######CLEAR##### Zap we lost this one nurse. Tell the family....OH they are still watching the game.
Wild Bill
"Sometimes We Live No Particular Way But Our Own"...Hunter,Garcia
"Sometimes We Live No Particular Way But Our Own"...Hunter,Garcia
- PurpleKoolaid
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 8641
- Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:52 pm
- x 28
Re: what was better?
Seattle beating GB in the final seconds. Couldn't script it any better. Plus, I like Seattle (not even close to how I love the Vikings of course). Favre, in my book, will always be 99.9% Packer.
Re: what was better?
I'll always be find of the 09 season, even if Favre will always be a Packer. That game yesterday was fun in a vindictive way, but when WE win, it's better.
-
- Career Elite Player
- Posts: 2936
- Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 1:10 am
- Location: Seattle, Wa
- x 150
Re: what was better?
DKSweets wrote:I'll always be find of the 09 season, even if Favre will always be a Packer. That game yesterday was fun in a vindictive way, but when WE win, it's better.
All of this.
-
- Hall of Fame Candidate
- Posts: 3836
- Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
- Location: Coon Rapids, MN
- x 117
Re: what was better?
I loved the 1999 season, the finish against SF with that rope to Greg Lewis remains the single best football moment I've ever experienced. That being said, I felt a great deal of evil pleasure watching all the rantings and ravings of the Packer fans after Sunday's defeat. It was bittersweet since I recall so much of their snark both times that it has happened to us.
My three least favorite teams right now are the Seahawks, Cowboys, and Packers. I knew Carolina wasn't going to get the job done, so I've been an anti-fan during all of the playoffs. That being said, as much as I disliked seeing the Seahawks go back to the big game, there is still no team I despise more than the Packers.
I would still rather watch us win than them lose, but when you don't have the former, the latter will do just fine.
My three least favorite teams right now are the Seahawks, Cowboys, and Packers. I knew Carolina wasn't going to get the job done, so I've been an anti-fan during all of the playoffs. That being said, as much as I disliked seeing the Seahawks go back to the big game, there is still no team I despise more than the Packers.
I would still rather watch us win than them lose, but when you don't have the former, the latter will do just fine.
Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi