I still don't believe for a second that Favre isn't playing this year.
His obnoxious silent act wasn't getting the same attention this year that it has gotten for the past four years, so now he's leaking a retirement rumor to get back in the news cycle.
I'll believe Favre is retired after week 2 of the regular season is over, and not a second sooner.
There are 432 users in the forums
Are we better than Favre-less Vikings?
Aug 3, 2010 at 6:49 PM
- PopeyeJonesing
- Veteran
- Posts: 3,243
The above videos are auto-populated by an affiliate.
Aug 3, 2010 at 7:00 PM
- pelos21
- Veteran
- Posts: 7,748
Yes!
Aug 3, 2010 at 7:23 PM
- hondakillerzx
- Veteran
- Posts: 19,274
were better than the favre-fied vikings and the favre-less vikings. shaun hill and glenn coffee were starters and we shouldve won. with smith and gore it wouldve been a beat down.
Aug 3, 2010 at 7:28 PM
- DonnieDarko
- Veteran
- Posts: 65,822
YES
you just might not think so because ESPN is all over their nuts
you just might not think so because ESPN is all over their nuts
Aug 3, 2010 at 7:33 PM
- NorCaL9er
- Veteran
- Posts: 8,329
Originally posted by hondakillerzx:
were better than the favre-fied vikings and the favre-less vikings. shaun hill and glenn coffee were starters and we shouldve won. with smith and gore it wouldve been a beat down.
fact.
oh and not to mention we didn't even have Crabtree.
[ Edited by NorCaL9er on Aug 3, 2010 at 19:34:25 ]
Aug 3, 2010 at 7:45 PM
- tjd808185
- Veteran
- Posts: 26,075
Originally posted by hondakillerzx:
were better than the favre-fied vikings and the favre-less vikings. shaun hill and glenn coffee were starters and we shouldve won. with smith and gore it wouldve been a beat down.
Minnesota was just finding themselves offensively during that game. They started the year against 2 door mats and we were their first true test. I wouldn't assume we could beat a Favre led team just because we played them close last season. We make a big deal about chemistry well Minnesota had none of that last year when we played them.
Aug 3, 2010 at 7:52 PM
- kemp_j
- Veteran
- Posts: 1,733
Yes! Niners were better last year.........
Aug 3, 2010 at 7:54 PM
- SBinMT
- Veteran
- Posts: 83
No way. There are only a very few teams in the NFC that are NOT better than the 49ers.
Sad but true.
Sad but true.
Aug 3, 2010 at 7:56 PM
- kemp_j
- Veteran
- Posts: 1,733
Originally posted by WestCoast:
YES
you just might not think so because ESPN is all over their nuts
True!!!
Aug 3, 2010 at 8:16 PM
- A-R-S
- Veteran
- Posts: 8,216
lol. With or without Favre, Vikings are way better.
Aug 3, 2010 at 8:18 PM
- TheXFactor
- Veteran
- Posts: 25,990
we almost beat them with Shaun Hill and Roman sooo yes
Aug 3, 2010 at 8:41 PM
- cwilson830
- Staff
- Posts: 5,501
We are better than the Favre-full Vikings. As long as Roman is off the field.
Aug 3, 2010 at 10:03 PM
- elguapo
- Veteran
- Posts: 26,280
we were better last year WITHOUT GORE AND STALEY AND CRABTREE!
Now we are a lot better. Done
Now we are a lot better. Done
Aug 3, 2010 at 10:07 PM
- MRNINESEVEN
- Veteran
- Posts: 10,730
Originally posted by Mex49:
f**k that b***h! We were better last year but our coaching staff dropped the ball
Don't forget Roman!! Couldn't find the ball lol
Aug 3, 2010 at 10:53 PM
- elguapo
- Veteran
- Posts: 26,280
Originally posted by tjd808185:Originally posted by hondakillerzx:
were better than the favre-fied vikings and the favre-less vikings. shaun hill and glenn coffee were starters and we shouldve won. with smith and gore it wouldve been a beat down.
Minnesota was just finding themselves offensively during that game. They started the year against 2 door mats and we were their first true test. I wouldn't assume we could beat a Favre led team just because we played them close last season. We make a big deal about chemistry well Minnesota had none of that last year when we played them.
And we wouldn't assume that the Vikes could even be in the game with GORE CRAB and SMITH at their Home. and what about our team chemistry on offense???? What about the niners finding themselves???
Done