NFL 2011 Season Week 14 Picks

Create an Account or Login to make your own picks!

These are not our most current picks!
Our freshest batch of picks are the NFL 2017 Season Week 12 Picks.

Jeremy's PicksMatt's PicksJon's PicksSarah's Picks
Browns 3 @ Steelers 14
Final
Thu, 12/8/11 7:20pm
0 Picks - 0% 18 Picks - 100%
Steelers
Steelers
Steelers
Steelers
Steelers
Steelers
Steelers
Steelers
Patriots 34 @ Redskins 27
Final
Sun, 12/11/11 12:00pm
22 Picks - 100% 0 Picks - 0%
Patriots
Patriots
Patriots
Patriots
Patriots
Patriots
Patriots
Patriots
Eagles 26 @ Dolphins 10
Final
Sun, 12/11/11 12:00pm
5 Picks - 23% 17 Picks - 77%
Eagles
Eagles
Dolphins
Dolphins
Dolphins
Dolphins
Dolphins
Dolphins
Saints 22 @ Titans 17
Final
Sun, 12/11/11 12:00pm
20 Picks - 91% 2 Picks - 9%
Saints
Saints
Saints
Saints
Saints
Saints
Saints
Saints
Vikings 28 @ Lions 34
Final
Sun, 12/11/11 12:00pm
2 Picks - 9% 20 Picks - 91%
Lions
Lions
Vikings
Vikings
Vikings
Vikings
Lions
Lions
Buccaneers 14 @ Jaguars 41
Final
Sun, 12/11/11 12:00pm
16 Picks - 73% 6 Picks - 27%
Buccaneers
Buccaneers
Jaguars
Jaguars
Jaguars
Jaguars
Buccaneers
Buccaneers
Falcons 31 @ Panthers 23
Final
Sun, 12/11/11 12:00pm
19 Picks - 86% 3 Picks - 14%
Falcons
Falcons
Falcons
Falcons
Falcons
Falcons
Panthers
Panthers
Texans 20 @ Bengals 19
Final
Sun, 12/11/11 12:00pm
15 Picks - 68% 7 Picks - 32%
Bengals
Bengals
Bengals
Bengals
Texans
Texans
Texans
Texans
Chiefs 10 @ Jets 37
Final
Sun, 12/11/11 12:00pm
2 Picks - 9% 20 Picks - 91%
Jets
Jets
Jets
Jets
Jets
Jets
Jets
Jets
Colts 10 @ Ravens 24
Final
Sun, 12/11/11 12:00pm
1 Pick - 5% 21 Picks - 95%
Ravens
Ravens
Ravens
Ravens
Ravens
Ravens
Ravens
Ravens
Raiders 16 @ Packers 46
Final
Sun, 12/11/11 12:00pm
2 Picks - 9% 20 Picks - 91%
Packers
Packers
Raiders
Raiders
Packers
Packers
Packers
Packers
49ers 19 @ Cardinals 21
Final
Sun, 12/11/11 3:05pm
22 Picks - 100% 0 Picks - 0%
49ers
49ers
49ers
49ers
49ers
49ers
49ers
49ers
Bears 10 @ Broncos 13
final overtime
Sun, 12/11/11 3:05pm
3 Picks - 14% 19 Picks - 86%
Broncos
Broncos
Broncos
Broncos
Broncos
Broncos
Broncos
Broncos
Bills 10 @ Chargers 37
Final
Sun, 12/11/11 3:15pm
4 Picks - 18% 18 Picks - 82%
Chargers
Chargers
Chargers
Chargers
Chargers
Chargers
Chargers
Chargers
Giants 37 @ Cowboys 34
Final
Sun, 12/11/11 7:20pm
13 Picks - 59% 9 Picks - 41%
Cowboys
Cowboys
Giants
Giants
Giants
Giants
Giants
Giants
Rams 13 @ Seahawks 30
Final
Mon, 12/12/11 7:30pm
1 Pick - 5% 21 Picks - 95%
Seahawks
Seahawks
Seahawks
Seahawks
Seahawks
Seahawks
Seahawks
Seahawks
Week Record12 - 4
0.750
11 - 5
0.688
13 - 3
0.812
12 - 4
0.750
Season Record132 - 76
0.635
116 - 92
0.558
128 - 80
0.615
144 - 64
0.692
Scotttime Record961 - 581
0.623
923 - 619
0.599
955 - 587
0.619
978 - 564
0.634
No-Pack-Vike Record2313 - 1350
0.631
2248 - 1415
0.614
2321 - 1342
0.634
2300 - 1363
0.628
Lifetime Record1638 - 971
0.628
1534 - 1075
0.588
1625 - 984
0.623
1637 - 972
0.627
click me!
Other Nut Canner Picks
scott.jpg
Steelers
Patriots
Dolphins
Saints
Lions
Buccaneers
Falcons
Texans
Jets
Ravens
Packers
49ers
Broncos
Chargers
Cowboys
Seahawks

Week:12 - 4
0.750
Season:134 - 74
0.644
Lifetime:974 - 563
0.634
2887.gif
Steelers
Patriots
Dolphins
Saints
Lions
Jaguars
Falcons
Texans
Jets
Ravens
Packers
49ers
Broncos
Chargers
Cowboys
Seahawks

Week:13 - 3
0.812
Season:136 - 72
0.654
Lifetime:956 - 584
0.621
goodlooking.jpg
Steelers
Patriots
Dolphins
Titans
Lions
Buccaneers
Falcons
Bengals
Jets
Ravens
Packers
49ers
Bears
Bills
Giants
Seahawks

Week:9 - 7
0.562
Season:128 - 79
0.618
Lifetime:852 - 556
0.605
face.bmp
CLE @ PIT - No Pick
Patriots
Dolphins
Saints
Lions
Jaguars
Falcons
Texans
Chiefs
Ravens
Packers
49ers
Broncos
Chargers
Cowboys
Seahawks

Week:11 - 4
0.733
Season:104 - 73
0.588
Lifetime:553 - 348
0.614
l_ad719f619e5ad7f4b593814445bf63ec.jpg
Steelers
Patriots
Dolphins
Saints
Lions
Buccaneers
Falcons
Bengals
Jets
Ravens
Packers
49ers
Broncos
Chargers
Cowboys
Seahawks

Week:11 - 5
0.688
Season:141 - 67
0.678
Lifetime:746 - 457
0.620
pyzamOmgWtf.jpg
CLE @ PIT - No Pick
Patriots
Dolphins
Saints
Lions
Buccaneers
Panthers
Bengals
Jets
Ravens
Packers
49ers
Broncos
Chargers
Giants
Seahawks

Week:10 - 5
0.667
Season:132 - 72
0.647
Lifetime:553 - 316
0.636
me.png
Steelers
Patriots
Dolphins
Saints
Lions
Buccaneers
Panthers
Bengals
Jets
Ravens
Packers
49ers
Bears
Bills
Giants
Seahawks

Week:9 - 7
0.562
Season:136 - 72
0.654
Lifetime:519 - 334
0.608
picture07.bmp
CLE @ PIT - No Pick
Patriots
Eagles
Saints
Lions
Buccaneers
Falcons
Texans
Jets
Ravens
Raiders
49ers
Broncos
Chargers
Giants
Rams

Week:11 - 4
0.733
Season:133 - 73
0.646
Lifetime:625 - 344
0.645
FB_IMG_1499398490950.jpg
Steelers
Patriots
Eagles
Saints
Lions
Buccaneers
Falcons
Texans
Jets
Ravens
Packers
49ers
Bears
Chargers
Giants
Seahawks

Week:13 - 3
0.812
Season:130 - 78
0.625
Lifetime:458 - 283
0.618
question_mark.gif
Steelers
Patriots
Dolphins
Saints
Lions
Jaguars
Falcons
Texans
Jets
Ravens
Packers
49ers
Broncos
Bills
Giants
Seahawks

Week:13 - 3
0.812
Season:100 - 60
0.625
Lifetime:385 - 231
0.625
question_mark.gif
Steelers
Patriots
Eagles
Saints
Lions
Buccaneers
Falcons
Texans
Jets
Ravens
Packers
49ers
Broncos
Chargers
Giants
Seahawks

Week:14 - 2
0.875
Season:130 - 65
0.667
Lifetime:443 - 234
0.654
Me at work.JPG
Steelers
Patriots
Dolphins
Titans
Lions
Jaguars
Falcons
Texans
Jets
Ravens
Packers
49ers
Broncos
Chargers
Cowboys
Seahawks

Week:12 - 4
0.750
Season:96 - 54
0.640
Lifetime:290 - 205
0.586
question_mark.gif
CLE @ PIT - No Pick
Patriots
Dolphins
Saints
Lions
Buccaneers
Falcons
Bengals
Jets
Ravens
Packers
49ers
Broncos
Chargers
Cowboys
Seahawks

Week:10 - 5
0.667
Season:96 - 57
0.627
Lifetime:192 - 130
0.596
hambone.jpg
Steelers
Patriots
Dolphins
Saints
Lions
Buccaneers
Falcons
Texans
Jets
Ravens
Packers
49ers
Broncos
Chargers
Giants
Seahawks

Week:13 - 3
0.812
Season:141 - 67
0.678
Lifetime:308 - 167
0.648
077.JPG
Steelers
Patriots
Dolphins
Saints
Lions
Buccaneers
Falcons
Texans
Chiefs
Colts
Packers
49ers
Broncos
Chargers
Giants
Seahawks

Week:11 - 5
0.688
Season:135 - 73
0.649
Lifetime:230 - 142
0.618
IMG003.jpg
Steelers
Patriots
Dolphins
Saints
Lions
Buccaneers
Falcons
Texans
Jets
Ravens
Packers
49ers
Broncos
Chargers
Cowboys
Seahawks

Week:12 - 4
0.750
Season:138 - 70
0.663
Lifetime:217 - 113
0.658
ColorTouch.jpg
Steelers
Patriots
Eagles
Saints
Lions
Buccaneers
Falcons
Texans
Jets
Ravens
Packers
49ers
Broncos
Bills
Giants
Seahawks

Week:13 - 3
0.812
Season:112 - 66
0.629
Lifetime:112 - 66
0.629
question_mark.gif
Steelers
Patriots
Dolphins
Saints
Lions
Buccaneers
Falcons
Texans
Jets
Ravens
Packers
49ers
Broncos
Chargers
Cowboys
Seahawks

Week:12 - 4
0.750
Season:118 - 59
0.667
Lifetime:118 - 59
0.667
Create an Account or Login to make your own picks!

Browns 3 @ Steelers 14

sarah.jpg
Sarah
Maybe the Browns will surprise?
jon.jpg
Jon
The Steelers just seem to always be good. They do it with defense and running, then later they do it with the passing game. They win games when their starting quarterback is out. Coaching change, more winning. They just keep doing it.

Vikings 28 @ Lions 34

sarah.jpg
Sarah
Suh is not coo'.
jon.jpg
Jon
Jared Allen, Christian Ponder, Percy Harvin, Adrian Peterson, Kyle Rudolph, Kevin Williams, EJ Henderson, and others are still fun to watch.

Raiders 16 @ Packers 46

sarah.jpg
Sarah
The Raiders have been hit and miss this year and to be honest, I just haven't watched them. Packers' injuries are starting to stack up. Woodson and Stark have to be a concern, plus everyone else we've lost over the weeks. Defense has been weak, can't expect Pick 6's every week. (Although I think we've come to expect it)
jon.jpg
Jon
Could be a good game.

Giants 37 @ Cowboys 34

sarah.jpg
Sarah
The Giants are going to the playoffs, mark it down everyone. Once they get there they're Super Bowl bound. (Let's hope history doesn't repeat itself....) BTW, I said 2 weeks ago that Romo had one more good game in him. He did, but then last week I didn't take my own advice and picked them again. Boo.
jon.jpg
Jon
The Giants have had a rough stretch of games. I think they are the better team.

Rams 13 @ Seahawks 30

sarah.jpg
Sarah
TEBOW!!!!!!!!!!! Oops.
jon.jpg
Jon
The Seahawks are interesting.
scott.jpgScott - 6216 Posts
12/06/2011 @ 12:40:42 PM
 Quote this comment
Is anyone here becoming an owner of the Green Bay Packers anytime soon?
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
thumbnailCAW1I0O3.gifMatt - Ombudsman
12/07/2011 @ 12:29:31 AM
 Quote this comment
Well, by owner, you really mean "owner", and by "owner", I really mean sucker. emoticon
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Matt edited this at 12/07/2011 2:01:28 am
thumbnailCAW1I0O3.gifMatt - 3222 Posts
12/07/2011 @ 01:17:09 AM
 Quote this comment
Seriously though, it's not really stock in the common understanding of the term (something that they hammer home in the offering document). You get no dividend or other monetary benefit. You can't sell the stock, only transfer it, and then only to an immediate family member as a gift, or upon your death. You are able to buy exclusive "owner" memorabilia, which I assume is overpriced and just another moneymaker for the team. You do get to go to the annual shareholders meeting and have a vote, but that vote is essentially meaningless as you are capped at 200 shares (counting this sale, the 1997 sale, and, possibly, future sales) out of around 5 million that will be outstanding.*

So, really, it's a $250 (plus $25 shipping) donation (a non-deductible one at that) to the Packers so they can add on to Lambeau Field. There is nothing wrong with that, teams do it all the time and you get your name on a brick or plaque or something. In this case, you get a fancy certificate that you can put on your wall. Again, that's fine, if someone wants to support their team by giving them money, good for them, I just think people should be clear on what they are actually doing.


*If you originally bought stock in 1950, that stock was split 1,000-to-1, so those people are capped at 200,000 shares. There are 2 people that have the full 200,000 shares.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Matt edited this 2 times, last at 12/07/2011 2:03:51 am
thumbnailCAW1I0O3.gifMatt - 3222 Posts
12/07/2011 @ 01:51:54 AM
 Quote this comment
Another interesting thing I learned reading the offering document. Apparently, if you are a shareholder, NFL rules prohibit you from engaging in conduct detrimental to the league, including publicly criticizing any NFL club, management, employees, or officials (not sure if players count as employees or not). As for the punishment, well... from the offering document, "[T]he Commissioner has the authority to fine such shareholder in an amount not in excess of $500,000 and/or require such shareholder to sell his or her stock."

Also, "In addition, if the Commissioner determines that a shareholder has bet on the outcome or score of any game played in the NFL, among other things, then the Commissioner may fine such shareholder in an amount not in excess of $5,000 and/or require such shareholder to sell his or her stock."

Since you're not allowed to sell your Packer shares to anyone else, if the Commissioner forces you to get rid of your stock, the Packers will buy it back for 2.5 cents per share.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - Get Up! Get outta here! Gone!
12/07/2011 @ 08:00:29 AM
 Quote this comment
Matt Wrote - Today @ 01:51:54 AM
Another interesting thing I learned reading the offering document. Apparently, if you are a shareholder, NFL rules prohibit you from engaging in conduct detrimental to the league, including publicly criticizing any NFL club, management, employees, or officials (not sure if players count as employees or not). As for the punishment, well... from the offering document, "[T]he Commissioner has the authority to fine such shareholder in an amount not in excess of $500,000 and/or require such shareholder to sell his or her stock."

Also, "In addition, if the Commissioner determines that a shareholder has bet on the outcome or score of any game played in the NFL, among other things, then the Commissioner may fine such shareholder in an amount not in excess of $5,000 and/or require such shareholder to sell his or her stock."

Since you're not allowed to sell your Packer shares to anyone else, if the Commissioner forces you to get rid of your stock, the Packers will buy it back for 2.5 cents per share.


Does public criticism inclue telling a coworker that the Vikings suck? Or would I need to address that subject in a press conference? And, does that mean that Packer shareholders can't put money on games? I highly doubt that is enforceable, but it is probably required under SEC rules. Not that I am or will be an owner of the Packers. $250 is a lot of money for something that holds only symbolic or sentimental value. (although it should be noted that while it holds no monetary value, it holds lots of value in other forms that lots of people find important enough to pay for).
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott messed with this at 12/07/2011 8:02:33 am
matt.jpgMatt - Washington Bureau Chief
12/07/2011 @ 09:15:44 AM
 Quote this comment
From the offering document: "Because the Corporation believes Common Stock is not considered “stock” for securities laws purposes, it believes offerees and purchasers of Common Stock will not receive the protection of federal, state or international securities laws with respect to the offering or sale of Common Stock. In particular, Common Stock will not be registered under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or any state or international securities laws. The Common Stock will not be approved by the Securities and Exchange Commission or any state or international regulatory authority nor will the Securities and Exchange Commission or any state or international regulatory authority approve the Offering or the terms of the Offering."

I take from this that, since its not "real" stock, none of the regulations dealing with stocks apply.

As for the conduct detrimental to the league issue, it's an NFL rule. By agreeing to buy the stock, you agree to be bound buy the rules of NFL ownership. Now, I highly doubt that the NFL will come after any Packer stock holder for this. I actually wonder whether this is just the rule for owners of all teams, and that Packers shareholders end up technically being covered. It's probably even possible that a shareholder could argue (and succeed) that they aren't covered by this since it really isn't stock and really isn't ownership.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Matt perfected this 3 times, last at 12/07/2011 9:17:05 am
scott.jpgScott - 6216 Posts
12/07/2011 @ 09:48:42 AM
 Quote this comment
Well, the Packers had to go through some big SEC hoops to be able to make the offering. They had to comply with the exchange laws (at least to a certain extent) of all 50 states. They may not fall under the same protections that trading in Boeing would warrant, but there was still some SEC dealings. But still, since it isn't traditional stock, there's basically nothing to actually protect.

And really, it's as much "ownership" as any other publicly traded company* except that the ownership has strict limitiations regarding, among other things, the transfering of that ownership--strict in that you can't sell it and can only transfer it to family members. It's not "stock" for securities laws purposes. That doesn't mean it isn't stock. Just not the kind of stock people are accustomed to knowing. You own a part of the team, and be it a technicality of sorts, it's something no other franchise fanbase can claim.

*and I suppose that owning stock in Boeing doesn't put me under any of the behavioral conduct requirements that Boeing might have as a company policy, so I suppose your point is still valid.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott perfected this 4 times, last at 12/07/2011 9:55:11 am
reign_of_fire.jpgMicah - I'm on a boat! Everybody look at me cause I'm sailing on a boat!
12/07/2011 @ 10:18:28 AM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Today @ 10:48:42 AM

And really, it's as much "ownership" as any other publicly traded company*


Except you have no actual claim to the business, no voting rights, no share of company profits, no dividends, no movement of stock price, and even if it did have said movement, no ability to ever sell it.

That said, it is a completely genius business plan. Whenever you need money, print a bunch of worthless pieces of paper and people will line up to shell out $250 for them. There aren't many businesses out there that can do that.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - 6216 Posts
12/07/2011 @ 10:32:55 AM
 Quote this comment
Right, it's mainly symbolic, and by mainly I mean it's almost completely symoblic. One thing it does do is gives fans about as close to absolute certainty that the team will never be sold or moved. And you guys are putting to much emphasis on the monetary value of things. It's worthless only in that the piece of paper has no monetary value. But why are people only measuring value based on the monetary value? The GB Packers are making no claims to this bringing with it a monetary value. In fact it is just the opposite. They are marketing it as--and rightfully so--a chance to help thte Packers add to their deep tradition and history and in exchange you get to own a piece of the franchise. The sentimental value, the symbolic value, the deep-connection-Packer-fans-have-to-their-team-that-annoys-the-heck-out-of-rivals-living-in-the-state-value.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - 6216 Posts
12/07/2011 @ 11:23:42 AM
 Quote this comment
Packers Shareholders in their own words. It's worth a read.

excerpt:
No one was thick enough to view it as investing in traditional shares of a normal company. Instead, many saw it as a strengthening of their commitment to the biggest influence on life in the Green Bay area. They're happy to contribute to the renovation of Lambeau Field, nobly exempting local citizens who don't want or can't afford to contribute via tax hikes, and will value the accompanying stock certificate as a souvenir that exemplifies their part in the most unique professional sports team in the country.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott edited this at 12/07/2011 11:24:11 am
scott.jpgScott - On your mark...get set...Terrible!
12/07/2011 @ 11:43:23 AM
 Quote this comment
Even from a monetary-is-king perspective, calling it a worthless investment is a stupid way to look at it too. A pair of tickets to a football game could easily exceed the price of this stock, and the value provided by going to the game compared to the stock is debatable. The tickets lose their value once the game is over too, and they provide even less non-monetary value than the stock does--at least it could be argued that way, anyway.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - 8821 Posts
12/07/2011 @ 03:54:31 PM
 Quote this comment
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/collections/special/columns/polinaut/archive/2011/12/post_1.shtml?refid=0

Tribe would give state roughly $150 mil a year to build a Casino near the Vikings new stadium. Only 2 things was stopping a "gambling" solution.

1) Tribe exclusivity (even though that's not technically a thing, and is basically just implied by reservations being the only place it's allowed.)
2) Gambling is "bad"

So, this solves problem 1. In fact, it more than solves it, because the state is out nothing but the $400 million they should be essentially obligated to give the Vikings if this private casino fails. It nearly doubles the construction project. (150 table casino is massive).

Problem 2 is stupid anyway. People can already gamble, or pick one of a million other ways to "ruin their lives."

Plus, a massive casino near where we often go would be awesome anyway.

This could not be more win-win in every sense, so I fully expect it to get scuttled by someone thinking of the children.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy screwed with this at 12/07/2011 3:54:50 pm
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - 8821 Posts
12/07/2011 @ 04:21:00 PM
 Quote this comment
Re The Fake worthless stock: I think people just get annoyed by the "entitlement" aspect of it. It's a donation, same as many others. Except instead of donating $250 to help a few starving families, you're doing it so the Packers can buy a case of Suite Polish for Lambeau Field hidden behind layers of double speak and sleaze. They're "owners" only in the most technical of paying-lip-service ways, and they're the only ones who do, because they're the only ones that can, because the NFL for some reason allows just one team to have the competitive advantage of almost literally being able to print money, so long as it doesn't go toward payroll, wink wink.

If Target sold pieces of paper for $250, commonly just referred to it as stock and anyone who bought it as "owners", and the only thing it entitled you to was the right to sell it back at .01% of the asking price, and being invited to a meeting where you got a token vote on something trivial, and could buy a $30 "I own Target" [I gave Target $280 and all I got was this lousy] t-shirt, and the only justification for the scam was "a deep connection with their favorite company" they would be shut down and fined.

I think it's safe to say that if Matt, Micah, and I are "jealous" or anything, it's not that Packer fans' are allowed to "own" their team, it's that the Packer organization has a such a cult following that it can grift their fans any time it wants, and be thanked and lauded for the "privilege." We don't envy the "owners", we pity them. They're being conned, and then wearing it as some kind of badge of honor.

A ticket isn't just a piece of paper. It imbues the right to that/a seat at the event in question, generally sold in plain terms that don't imply much more.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy messed with this 5 times, last at 12/07/2011 4:58:19 pm
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - 8821 Posts
12/07/2011 @ 04:28:54 PM
 Quote this comment
And, to add to what Matt and I implied, on SOME level this isn't all that different from brick sales, and such, that let you "be a part of Target Field." Except, it kind of is, because if you buy a brick that will be placed in Target Plaza a) You actually ARE a part of it b) You got a brick at Target Field, just like it said, no claim you're now a partial owner of Target Field with 12 pages of lawyer talk explaining how you're not a partial owner of Target Field, really buying nothing, and indemnifying the Twins from your doing anything about its inherent worthlessness.*

*I imagine there's SOME lawyer speak involved, because there has to be in today's day and age, saying things like "You can't actually find your brick, dislodge it, and take it home, because you don't actually own the brick either"
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy edited this 5 times, last at 12/07/2011 5:11:10 pm
scott.jpgScott - 6216 Posts
12/07/2011 @ 05:06:30 PM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 04:21:00 PM
We don't envy the "owners", we pity them. They're being conned, and then wearing it as some kind of badge of honor.


I found myself growing increasingly angry Tuesday at the condescension and elitist commentary connected with the opening of the Green Bay Packers' latest stock offering.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - No one's gay for Moleman
12/07/2011 @ 05:10:06 PM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Today @ 05:06:30 PM
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 04:21:00 PM
We don't envy the "owners", we pity them. They're being conned, and then wearing it as some kind of badge of honor.


I found myself growing increasingly angry Tuesday at the condescension and elitist commentary connected with the opening of the Green Bay Packers' latest stock offering.


Is that a quote from something? Condescension and elitist commentary in what direction? Did you mean the posts above?

Have you and nutcan now grown so intertwined it automatically posts your inner-monologue life narration a la John "JD" Dorian? Cause that would be awesome.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy screwed with this at 12/07/2011 5:12:47 pm
scott.jpgScott - 6216 Posts
12/07/2011 @ 05:14:45 PM
 Quote this comment
It's from the Kevin Seifert article I posted earlier. I pointed this out earlier as well, but Kevin Seifert used to cover the Vikings, so he is certainly not a Packer homer.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jeremy.jpgJeremy - Robots don't say 'ye'
12/07/2011 @ 05:29:29 PM
 Quote this comment
Ah. Well, I'm sure lots of people are honored to give their life savings to Scientology too. The fact that the person forking over the dough rationalized it, or are ok/happy/ecstatic about the "opportunity", doesn't really make the practice more or less ok. It's a scam or not on it's own merits. They're selling snake oil, or not, either way. Much like millions of people swearing by those bracelets that give you super balance by harnessing a magical energy force in a hologram harmonizing with the energy field around your body doesn't make them ACTUALLY work or not. They actually work, or they don't, and if they don't, then they're not selling you what they claim to be selling you. I'd have a problem with that even if 99% of Placebo Band customers claimed to be satisfied.

In the end, it's not a huge deal, but it's a little shady, and at the very least people on the outside looking in can find the whole "I'm such a big fan I've flushed ____ down the toilet" pissing contest you all have with each other humorous, and/or roll our eyes when someone said they "own the Packers." emoticon
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy edited this 2 times, last at 12/07/2011 5:32:43 pm
scott.jpgScott - Get Up! Get outta here! Gone!
12/07/2011 @ 05:37:47 PM
 Quote this comment
well, like you said earlier, what's the difference between selling stock and selling a brick?

Packer fans know full well that it is essentially worthless. No one is having the wool pulled over their eyes. All the examples you just gave are the exact opposite.

I would say most people don't brag about the cost they put into it. They view it the same that someone else might view another expensive piece of sports memorabilia. It's just that he stock, according to pretty much everyone who owns it, has vastly more meaning than other articles associated with the team. I've heard people say that the stock means more to them than their season tickets, so it's what you put value in. And season tickets cost a ton more than this stock. Someone could argue that season tickets is flushing money down the drain. What if someone really likes the team but doesn't like going to games--tickets would be of absolutely no value to them (well, unless you sell them I guess). But the monetary value isn't the point. It's what you put value in. And if I had disposable income (and a wife who was capable of putting aside rational thought for just one second) I would be all over it and would have it up on my wall like the rest of them.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jeremy.jpgJeremy - I believe virtually everything I read.
12/07/2011 @ 05:53:53 PM
 Quote this comment
Because it isn't just "memorabilia." It's not some limited edition poster. It is being sold as, and maintains its lofty cost as, something it's mostly not, and you're never allowed to recoup any cost/value.

There's a stark difference between:

Become a part of Target Field by putting your name on a part of it
and
Become a part owner of the Minnesota Twins! (Where you get a piece of paper, and 25 pages of text describing how that isn't true.)

Put it this way. Lets say someone was a Kiss fan. There's nothing those guys won't slap their names on, and their fans get pretty die hard. There are lots of people with massive memorabilia collections, and having a the biggest collection is probably a badge of honor.

If Kiss took advantage of their fans by selling 50,000 pieces of paper for $250, where buying one "Made you a member of the band and part owner of the Kiss franchise," except of course when it comes to spitting money, being on stage, etc. And, unlike everything else they own, this can't be sold. That would bother me. I wouldn't care how much "closer" to the band people felt, or how happy they were to show their loyalty. A) Their taking advantage of fanatics by selling nonsense would bother me, it doesn't matter if everyone "gets" what's going on. People are buying it because "they can say they're in Kiss", which, even with a wink, isn't true. B) Either way I can be baffled-by/snicker-at bragging about the "opportunity" to hand over money for something painstakingly defined to have no value.

I can print off a piece of paper that says I'm partial owner of the Vikings too (though I'd have to go to FedEx/Kinkos to do it) and it would only be marginally less true on the most technical of technicalities. We do have 6 season tickets after all.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy perfected this 9 times, last at 12/07/2011 6:20:43 pm
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - 8821 Posts
12/07/2011 @ 06:14:50 PM
 Quote this comment
And as for the person for has Tickets but hates the games:

This isn't really about people justifying what's worth it to them. If you want to donate, fine. If you want to buy a season ticket, and then stay home, fine. That ticket still gave you the RIGHT to go. That ticket still was what it said, and selling that person who had no intention of ever using them, or selling them, counterfeit tickets would still be wrong.

It's not what it claims to be, and it only has such high cost because of what it claims to be. If this was just paper people were buying for just memorabilia, then why don't they sell "replica" stock every year for $250, or some limited edition etching of Aaron Rodgers? Or nothing. Even we have a donate button.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy messed with this at 12/07/2011 6:16:14 pm
scott.jpgScott - On your mark...get set...Terrible!
12/07/2011 @ 06:49:17 PM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 05:53:53 PM
Because it isn't just "memorabilia." It's not some limited edition poster. It is being sold as, and maintains its lofty value as, something it's mostly not.


I don't agree. I just mulled the idea of some super bowl game ball signed by Rodgers, or Favre, or Starr going for $300 or something like that. I would never really see myself buying something like that. I can't explain it, it's just not me. I am seriously considering buying stock because you're right it isn't just memorabilia. To me, it truly is much more than that. That leads me to my next point.

It's not like the Packers suddenly decided this in 2011 and are duping people into a once in a lifetime never before seen opportunity. "Ownership" in the Packers is so intertwined in the Packers that fans today are excited to be apart of something that started 60 years ago (since the first stock was released). It is engrained in who we are as Packer fans. Not in a "we're all idiots" way, but in the same kind of way that a Grampa passes memories down to his grandchildren. I can already anticipate the "it's still meaningless" argument of sorts here, but to us it's not.

If the Vikings were allowed this year to do the same thing it would be stupid like you are saying. But if the Vikings were founded the way the Packers were and it was part of the history, it would be different.

And really, it is exactly what it claims to be and nothing more. You the one trying to make it something it's not and then tell us that we are being duped into thinking that.

The value does come from the fact that is has a rare quality to it. If they sold it at Wal Mart no one would buy it. If they sold it continuously, no one would want it. 100% of the revenue brought in by the stock goes directly to the team. If it was memorabilia and if it was sold every year, the NFL would never allow it and even if they did the revenue would go to the NFL and be subject to NFL revenue sharing. And the NFL allows it in the same way that they allow other fund raising efforts that teams do for facility enhancements so there's nothing controversial about it.

Basically it comes down to this. Packer fans know exactly what they are buying. They are not being conned, hoodwinked, duped, tricked, conived, schemed, scammed, bedazzled, or bazinged. The players come and go. Favre, Starr, Rodgers, whomever. They come and go. But the team has been around since before the NFL, and this sort of helps ensure that it will be around for a long time to come. I don't expect others to understand it.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
hoochpage.JPGSarah - 3932 Posts
12/07/2011 @ 07:04:41 PM
 Quote this comment
Not reading all of this. BTW, I've secretly purchased some Packer stock for myself. Yea, right, can you imagine the crap I'd get for that?
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jeremy.jpgJeremy - 8821 Posts
12/07/2011 @ 07:10:44 PM
 Quote this comment
Thank you sir. May I have another?
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jon.jpgJon - 2720 Posts
12/08/2011 @ 04:53:17 AM
 Quote this comment
I dunno. The more arguments posted against the Packers stock, the more I'm fine with it. Or at least apathetic toward it. Maybe it's just too late at night, I'm not sure. I didn't read all posts either.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
pyzamOmgWtf.jpgJfk10intex - My computer is better than yours!!!!
12/10/2011 @ 06:22:19 PM
 Quote this comment
I've bought a share for my dad for christmas. When he passes (hopefully won't be anytime soon, he is in his late 50s) it will go down to me! yay! Idk if there is any left, I couldn't reall afford to buy two, being that I'm a full time college student, and I just had to pay 1200 in repairs for my car-.-
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - 6216 Posts
12/11/2011 @ 05:24:11 PM
 Quote this comment
Jfk10intex Wrote - Yesterday @ 06:22:19 PM
I've bought a share for my dad for christmas. When he passes (hopefully won't be anytime soon, he is in his late 50s) it will go down to me! yay! Idk if there is any left, I couldn't reall afford to buy two, being that I'm a full time college student, and I just had to pay 1200 in repairs for my car-.-


That car only lasts a few years, though.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - 6216 Posts
12/11/2011 @ 05:30:33 PM
 Quote this comment
I'm assuming Jeremy's head exploded after the ref announced that the replay system failed and there would be no review. I guess the Packers do catch some breaks every now and then.

I guess it could malfunction anywhere, but this seems like more evidence for putting the replay reviews in the hands of an off-field official; like the guy who sits up in the booth and decides to review plays inside of 2 minutes. What does that guy do anyway, other than say "hey, maybe you should review that one."
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott edited this at 12/11/2011 5:32:04 pm
sarah.jpgSarah - So's your face
12/11/2011 @ 06:03:28 PM
 Quote this comment
A 59 YARD FG TO TIE THE GAME????? TEBOW!!!!
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
sarah.jpgSarah - So's your face
12/11/2011 @ 06:21:59 PM
 Quote this comment
TEBOW
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
pyzamOmgWtf.jpgJfk10intex - My computer is better than yours!!!!
12/11/2011 @ 06:25:41 PM
 Quote this comment
omfg. your lord and savior Jesus Christ? UGH! I FUCKING HATE TIM TEBOW SO BAD. I was rooting for the bears. Thats how bad I hate Tim Tebow. He didn't do shit the entire game. I can't wait until they play the patriots. I can't fucking wait.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 2 times.
scott.jpgScott - 6216 Posts
12/11/2011 @ 06:31:16 PM
 Quote this comment
I don't dislike Tebow for his faith. I dislike the Tebow that does nothing for 55 minutes, starts playing with 5 minutes left, and then gets credit when his kicker hits 59 yarder to tie and 51 to win.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
sarah.jpgSarah - So's your face
12/11/2011 @ 06:32:32 PM
 Quote this comment
Maybe you guys should chill and just enjoy it.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - 6216 Posts
12/11/2011 @ 08:38:34 PM
 Quote this comment
Meh, it's not really that enjoyable. The only thing that I could see as enjoyable is the fact that finally a team has found ways to win by utilizing a really good defense. But that has almost nothing to do with Tebow.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
hoochpage.JPGSarah - 3932 Posts
12/11/2011 @ 09:17:07 PM
 Quote this comment
Well to each their own, I'm personally getting a kick out of it.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - 6216 Posts
12/12/2011 @ 09:47:05 AM
 Quote this comment
To his credit, Tebow is handling this with humility befitting the situation. Even the media is starting to admit that the "hype" is because of them. Tebow is a hard guy to hate.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - 8821 Posts
12/12/2011 @ 10:45:18 AM
 Quote this comment
I think other players have said they don't like him and/or the "show" he puts on.

In a lot of ways "Tebowing" is as much a "look at me" show as Ochocinco orchestrating something, except Ochocinco isn't constantly implying, whether or not it's fair, "I'm a better Christian than you." Not to mention the Bible doesn't contain any language instructing you that when you put on your fake "HOF 20??" gold jacket you should do so in private.

We get it, you like you some Jesus, you and 99% of the league.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
matt.jpgMatt - Ombudsman
12/12/2011 @ 10:54:55 AM
 Quote this comment
Thank you Mr. Maher. emoticon
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Matt messed with this at 12/12/2011 10:55:19 am
scott.jpgScott - No, I did not change your screen saver settings
12/12/2011 @ 11:02:02 AM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 10:45:18 AM
I think other players have said they don't like him and/or the "show" he puts on.

In a lot of ways "Tebowing" is as much a "look at me" show as Ochocinco orchestrating something, except Ochocinco isn't constantly implying, whether or not it's fair, "I'm a better Christian than you." Not to mention the Bible doesn't contain any language instructing you that when you put on your fake "HOF 20??" gold jacket you should do so in private.

We get it, you like you some Jesus, you and 99% of the league.


I do agree with this. As a Christian myself, I've thought about the "pray in the closet" idea before regarding Tebow's display, and I am a little bothered by it*. Greg Jennings is himself a Christian. He holds bible studies with a number of players on the team on a weekly basis. But except for a 2 second little kneel down after touchdowns, he doesn't make a hug display of it for all the world to see. I think your point is well made, if not slightly more sarcastic than I would have stated it.

*for what it's worth**, the Bible doesn't necessarily condem public displays or righteousness, but that those that do them have already received their reward in full. I'm not saying anything about Tebow in this situation one way or another, because I believe it is a matter of motivation. If Tebow is doing it to be a "look at me" moment, than this would apply. If he is just that compelled to do it, then it would be different. At the very least, he should at least be conscious of the fact that people are A)mocking him for it B)faking their own acts of righteousness C)disrespecting the pupose of the act. Anything one of these, to me, should be a flag that the public act isn't edifying anymore.

**apparently "for what it's worth" has become my new thing, for what it's worth
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott edited this at 12/12/2011 11:05:19 am
scott.jpgScott - 6216 Posts
12/12/2011 @ 11:09:21 AM
 Quote this comment
Bucking last year's trend, teams are firing their coaches before they have a chance to be destroyed by the Packers, instead of after the fact.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - Always thinking of, but never about, the children.
12/12/2011 @ 11:41:43 AM
 Quote this comment


As in Bill Maher?

And without quoting Scott's post above:

In a way his intentions almost don't matter. Even if he isn't doing it to draw attention to himself, he's drawing attention to himself. And not just for ridicule. (Though I think the meme is wayyyyyyy more about people's love for memes than it is about "ridiculing" Tebow, or prayer in general.)

I read a few storys back in the early days of Tebow that his constant prayer hit a nerve with other players because it made them feel like he was making "showing your faith" some kind of competition. "My first instinct isn't to drop to a knee and pray instead of watching a pivotal moment in a game, so what does that say about me?*"

*Which again, might not be fair to hang on Tebow, but it is what it is. People felt/feel that way either way. Let me feel my feelings, Turk!
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy screwed with this 3 times, last at 12/12/2011 11:48:24 am
scott.jpgScott - Ma'am, can you make sure your computer is turned on?
12/12/2011 @ 12:06:12 PM
 Quote this comment
Of course, both sides are a bit crazy, as featured here by the always credible Christian authority. The writer takes exception with the fact that Stephen Tullock "mocked" Tebow after a sack by essentially performing what people around the league are essentially equating as Tebow's touchdown dance. Should Rodgers be outraged when players do the belt celebration after sacking him?

And I don't know anything about the author, but I get the feeling that he more concerned with being a "Conservative" than he is with being "Christian", considering the fact that he is also attackign Christians who pose legimate concerns about the way Tebow conducts himself on the field.

A particular disappointment has been the criticism levied against Tebow by his fellow Christians.
“It seems Tebow might help himself and the kingdom by getting off his knees, taking the verses off of his face, and being faithful to Christ without the public acts like all the other Christians in the NFL have done for decades,” wrote Anthony Bradley, an associate professor of theology and ethics at The Kings College in New York City, in World Magazine.


The writer even trashes Kurt Warner. Apparently no one who so much as utters a disagreement with the way Tebow acts is safe. Kurt Warner, the very face of anti-Christian bigotry.

Then there's his closing:
At the end of the day, though, which NFL star would you want your little boy idolizing? A dog killer? A guy who beats up his girlfriend? Someone who is communicable? Or a man who loves Jesus, helps orphans and builds hospitals for the needy?

Again, especially from the perspective of Christians, no one has a problem with his faith. What people have a problem with is the fact that he is sending out this message "I'm a Christian because I pray, see, I get down on a knee in front of everyone and pray." Lots of football players build hospitals for the needy. Lots of football players love Jesus. The difference is, most of them don't display their acts of righteousness 14 times a game for 35 minutes of a 3 hour broadcast. Again, from a Christian perspective, "They will know we are Christians by our love", not by how awesome we look while we are praying.

I'm not going to judge the writer of the article, except to say that I do not recognize Christian fruit from the context of this article.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott edited this 4 times, last at 12/12/2011 12:07:59 pm
jeremy.jpgJeremy - Pie Racist
12/12/2011 @ 12:32:46 PM
 Quote this comment
I didn't make it past his bitching about the fact that some people actually care about enforcing the law in regards to public places and religion* and his complete straw man that anyone anywhere thinks "jesus has no place on the football field".

Edit: I lied, I went back and read down to There was no outrage – no editorials of condemnation. There were no calls for religious tolerance – nothing but silence from the chattering class. and I'm out. Yes, there were none at all. Unless you count the one you're doing, and the other 29 complete overreactions I saw regarding the event.

*Except for the sidewalk thing, which I'd say even if true, and not way overblown, was one officer just being wrong in regards to the law.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy edited this 5 times, last at 12/12/2011 1:06:02 pm
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - 8821 Posts
12/12/2011 @ 12:43:06 PM
 Quote this comment
Also, yes, Rodgers could be mad about someone doing his belt thing. (Even in a commercial that makes absolutely no sense on any level)

The difference is no one would claim that player was mocking anyone that has ever worn a belt. Or bemoan the fact that everyone can make fun of belt owners, but never watch owners, because watch owners kill anyone who mocks watches, as if that somehow is a point in the watch wearer's pro column.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy perfected this 2 times, last at 12/12/2011 12:45:55 pm
scott.jpgScott - If you aren't enough without it, you'll never be enough with it.
12/12/2011 @ 12:47:03 PM
 Quote this comment
It has been long practiced tradition of mocking opposing players' celebrations. The thing with Tebow is that his act has been interpreted as his celebration and is being treated accordingly by players.

Another thing that this guy should be equally mad about: Tebowing has gone from something a guy has done as a moment alone with God (which is probably his intention) to an act that people do in response to anything good they are doing. The real outrage should be towards the website Tebowing.com where people are actually making a mockery of it even though it is essentially a supportive message towards Tebow.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott messed with this 3 times, last at 12/12/2011 1:22:59 pm
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - Super Chocolate Bear
12/12/2011 @ 01:08:53 PM
 Quote this comment
But even that site (link is busted) I'd say a vast majority of those people were the same type of people that were planking a few months ago. At some point, and I'd argue very quickly as the viral nature is kind of the point/the fun, the meme is just its own thing.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy messed with this 2 times, last at 12/12/2011 1:24:12 pm
scott.jpgScott - 6216 Posts
12/12/2011 @ 01:24:31 PM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 01:08:53 PM
But even that site (link is busted) I'd say a vast majority of those people were the same type of people that were planking a few months ago. At some point, and I'd argue very quickly, the meme is just its own thing.


Well, that's kind of my point. A football player announces that he's going to Tebow after he sacks Tebow and this guy calls him a bigot, when he's basically doing the same thing that 6 million other people are doing and posting pictures of it on the internet.

edit: link fixed
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott screwed with this at 12/12/2011 1:24:57 pm
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - The pig says "My wife is a slut?"
12/12/2011 @ 01:31:24 PM
 Quote this comment
Yeah, but I'm sure those people also count the people on the Tebowing site as another example of the constant persecution of the massive super-majority that is Christianity.

It is a bit different when you're doing it 5 feet from Tebow after doing something bad to him, but I wasn't even saying that it's silly to pick out one guy as an asshole when everyone is doing it, though I think that's an ok thing to point out.

My point was, more or less, that these memes hit so hard and fast, that people just want to get in on the craze. That the meme is self perpetuating, and in a way, really has little/nothing to do with Tebow. (Again, hard to claim when you're doing it 3 feet from him*, but in general I'd say it barely has anything to do with him at this point.)

*But even then, you're just doing his "move", and not making some grand commentary on his belief system.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy screwed with this 3 times, last at 12/12/2011 1:36:04 pm
jeremy.jpgJeremy - Pie Racist
12/12/2011 @ 01:33:23 PM
 Quote this comment
Also, I'm really struggling to fight the urge to post the picture of Sarah Tebowing. She did post it as her twitter icon for a day or two.....but I'm going to assume it would upset her, cause that's a safe bet.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
thumbnailCAW1I0O3.gifMatt - 3222 Posts
12/12/2011 @ 01:34:28 PM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 11:41:43 AM
I read a few storys back in the early days of Tebow that his constant prayer hit a nerve with other players because it made them feel like he was making "showing your faith" some kind of competition. "My first instinct isn't to drop to a knee and pray instead of watching a pivotal moment in a game, so what does that say about me?*"

*Which again, might not be fair to hang on Tebow, but it is what it is. People felt/feel that way either way. Let me feel my feelings, Turk!


You know what hits a nerve with me? Joggers... It's like they are rubbing in the fact that they have more willpower than I do. Also, the Amish. Their conspicuous refusal of modern technology and their conservative dress make me feel inadequate in my convictions. Both these groups should change so as not to cause me mental anguish.

Seriously though, I understand the argument, and if the evidence was that he was purposely doing these things with the main purpose being to show up, or make other players feel bad, then I would say that Tebow was a bad person. I don't think that is the case though, and just because something he has done for a while has taken off as a meme, and thus, people are more aware of what he does, doesn't necessarily mean he should stop.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Matt edited this at 12/12/2011 1:37:29 pm
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - 8821 Posts
12/12/2011 @ 01:42:06 PM
 Quote this comment
I don't care if he stops or not, I was just saying what I read about other player's less-than-stellar reactions to it. I never said they were rational and fair reactions.

Many of them took umbrage to the whole "hard working Christian finally gets a break" aura he cultivates, or largely just gets credit for, because that describes about 90% of the league.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy messed with this at 12/12/2011 1:45:20 pm
scott.jpgScott - You're going to have to call your hardware guy. It's not a software issue.
12/12/2011 @ 01:45:27 PM
 Quote this comment
I guess my motives are different. If I felt compelled to pray on the street corner or get down on a knee and make it obvious about what I was doing that would be fine. However, if I got the impression that my act (which was for me to communicate with the man upstairs) was being perceived as snobbish, arrogant, (all the things people are saying about Tebow), it would behoove me to change my actions, not just for my sake but for the sake of the kingdom for which I (and Tebow) would be trying to further. If the motives behind my actions are truly Christian motives, it would be in the interest of everyone, including mine, not to do something unecessary that so easily pisses people off, when you can still be just as Christian without such an overt display. If I felt that my actions were actually causing the thing I was trying to please to be perceived in a negative way, then my actions, whatever my motives, would become of vanity. I (and Tebow) am an ambassador of that which we pray to. Personally, I feel like Tebow takes it too far and actually hurts the cause of Christians more than helps it.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - You're going to have to call your hardware guy. It's not a software issue.
12/12/2011 @ 01:47:35 PM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 01:42:06 PM
Many of them took umbrage to the whole "hard working Christian finally gets a break" aura he cultivates, or largely just gets credit for, because that describes about 90% of the league.


Right, the only reason he gets scrutinized is because he is so over the top about it. The writer of that column seems to think that Tebow is the first Christian ever to play football and that's the cause of the scrutiny. That really couldn't be further from the truth.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott messed with this at 12/12/2011 1:47:56 pm
matt.jpgMatt - Washington Bureau Chief
12/12/2011 @ 01:47:39 PM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 01:42:06 PM
I don't care if he stops or not, I was just saying what I read about other player's less-than-stellar reactions to it. I never said they were rational and fair reactions.

Many of them took umbrage to the whole "hard working Christian finally gets a break" aura he cultivates, or largely just gets credit for, because that describes about 90% of the league.


The post was more of a response to the players who felt that way, then to your views specifically.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - No one's gay for Moleman
12/12/2011 @ 01:47:57 PM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Today @ 01:45:27 PM
I guess my motives are different. If I felt compelled to pray on the street corner or get down on a knee and make it obvious about what I was doing that would be fine. However, if I got the impression that my act (which was for me to communicate with the man upstairs) was being perceived as snobbish, arrogant, (all the things people are saying about Tebow), it would behoove me to change my actions, not just for my sake but for the sake of the kingdom for which I (and Tebow) would be trying to further. If the motives behind my actions are truly Christian motives, it would be in the interest of everyone, including mine, not to do something unecessary that so easily pisses people off, when you can still be just as Christian without such an overt display. If I felt that my actions were actually causing the thing I was trying to please to be perceived in a negative way, then my actions, whatever my motives, would become of vanity. I (and Tebow) am an ambassador of that which we pray to. Personally, I feel like Tebow takes it too far and actually hurts the cause of Christians more than helps it.


Agreed, and on the flip side to call every criticism of Tebow's actions, or even poking fun at him, "hating Christianity" is just silly.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy messed with this at 12/12/2011 1:48:52 pm
scott.jpgScott - 6216 Posts
12/12/2011 @ 01:48:33 PM
 Quote this comment
After all that, we all agree?
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
face.bmpCarlos44ec - Since 1980!
12/12/2011 @ 03:06:05 PM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 10:45:18 AM
you like you some Jesus, you and 99% of the league.


There are definitely more than 1% Mohammadeans, Jews, and 'others' out there. I'd wager there was even a fringe Scientologist or Jew for Jesus in the mix somewhere.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jon.jpgJon - 2720 Posts
12/13/2011 @ 03:38:43 AM
 Quote this comment
Carlos44ec Wrote - Yesterday @ 03:06:05 PM
Jeremy Wrote - Yesterday @ 10:45:18 AM
you like you some Jesus, you and 99% of the league.


There are definitely more than 1% Mohammadeans, Jews, and 'others' out there. I'd wager there was even a fringe Scientologist or Jew for Jesus in the mix somewhere.


Great use of "Mohammadeans." I'm not sure I've come across anyone using that term outside of a book authored sometime around the 1940s. ("Mere Christianity" if you're wondering.) Also, I chuckle a bit that your spelling of the word doesn't match any of the 5 common spellings of the word according to wikipedia. But I suppose we can change that.

However, I would disagree with part of your statement. I think "Jews for Jesus" would fall into the "liking Jesus" category. It's actually right in the name. They're FOR Jesus.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jon edited this 2 times, last at 12/13/2011 3:41:08 am
reign_of_fire.jpgMicah - I'm flippin' burgers / you at Kinko's straight flippin' copies
12/13/2011 @ 07:59:01 AM
 Quote this comment
Carlos44ec Wrote - Yesterday @ 04:06:05 PM
Jeremy Wrote - Yesterday @ 11:45:18 AM
you like you some Jesus, you and 99% of the league.


There are definitely more than 1% Mohammadeans, Jews, and 'others' out there. I'd wager there was even a fringe Scientologist or Jew for Jesus in the mix somewhere.


Carl, you're never going to be an Operating Thetan if you don't accept that we are not a fringe group. I am coming to Minneapolis to audit you and remove some of those pesky engrams, then maybe you can reach the next level.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
jon.jpgJon - Nutcan.com's kitten expert
12/13/2011 @ 08:00:50 AM
 Quote this comment
As for the other stuff addressed on this thread, where to start?

Well, I come at it from primarily two perspectives, that I know of. I am a Christian, and I take my faith seriously. I'm also a sports fan who's spent the last 3 or so years marveling at how badly we sports fans (of any faith or creed or lack thereof) love to tell the athletes we watch how to act. On the field, off the field, during interviews, making career choices, making personal choices, and everywhere doing anything in between. And it's probably not an all-bad thing. It probably has its place somewhere. But largely, I just feel like we all need to take a step back and chill out. I mean, while we're referencing Jesus' teachings, we all (fans and people everywhere) might do well to take the plank out of our own eye before we get too obsessed with the speck that might be in someone else's. (See, planking goes way back.) Anyway, I say that all, not regarding this situation specifically, but to illustrate my perspective coming into it.

My general thoughts on Tebow are always developing I suppose. I like things he's said and done, but am far from a Tebow fanatic.

I actually feel weird speaking too much of Tebow's praying specifically, because I haven't really seen him doing that a whole lot. The only habit I knew he had was that he puts his arms out and clenches his fists right after he scores. I know he prays, but really am more familiar with it as a meme than in reality. (I do however, have a ton of thoughts on expressions of faith and sports but I'll save some of those for the article I'll never write.) More than that, I don't know Tebow much better than I know any of the other 52 Broncos, so I won't pretend I know his motivations. I think our common faith might give me some insight but I feel like he and I probably have fairly dissimilar lives in many ways too.

Jeremy Wrote - Yesterday @ 10:45:18 AM
...Not to mention the Bible doesn't contain any language instructing you that when you put on your fake "HOF 20??" gold jacket you should do so in private.


I understand your point. Though, it really only makes sense if you mean that it literally doesn't talk about a HOF jacket. If you're looking for verses speaking against pride or arrogance or the like, you can probably choose almost any page at random and find the concept. But I understand that it's Tebow's actions that are the real subject of the analogy, I just think you might have over-reached.

Scott Wrote - Yesterday @ 11:02:02 AM
...I'm not saying anything about Tebow in this situation one way or another, because I believe it is a matter of motivation. If Tebow is doing it to be a "look at me" moment, than this would apply. If he is just that compelled to do it, then it would be different....

Jeremy Wrote - Yesterday @ 11:41:43 AM
...In a way his intentions almost don't matter. Even if he isn't doing it to draw attention to himself, he's drawing attention to himself. And not just for ridicule. (Though I think the meme is wayyyyyyy more about people's love for memes than it is about "ridiculing" Tebow, or prayer in general.)...


If I can speak for Scott (I would say a lot of stuff about the Brewers and Packers...), I think Scott's point about motivation isn't so much about people's feelings of it as it is about God's feelings of it. Or if you prefer, how much he's living up to the standard of the verse you alluded to.

Matthew 6:5-6: “And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.

I dare say Jesus' teaching here is almost entirely about the motivation of the pray-er. I want to say it's "all" about the motivation, but I tend to think such teachings generally teach multiple things, but I digress.

As I read it, that passage about prayer is actually the 2nd of 3 practical applications Jesus gives for living out the teaching he introduced just moments prior. Namely, "Be careful not to practice your righteousness in front of others to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven." (Matthew 6:1) The other two applications are regarding giving to the needy and fasting.

The thrust of the message against doing those acts in public seems to not be that others are seeing it, but that the doers so easily make public recognition, and all the "rewards" that go with it, their motivation. In fact, if Jesus was concerned about people strictly only doing "acts of righteousness" in secret, he probably would not have compared his followers, just a few moments prior, to a city on a hill and a lamp on a stand, telling them:

"In the same way, let your light shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven." (Matthew 5:16)

A contradiction? Not really. Jesus specifies the ultimate goal of each action. The good acts done in front of others are to serve a purpose -- glorifying God. And this glorification happens because other people see how Christ's followers are living. Jesus was inviting his followers to live a different kind of life, and to live it in a way that others will notice. He wants them to stand out. But he wants them to stand out in a way that points others toward God. And I think praying in public can be one of those ways that happens. Though, in general it seems to be something much more suited for the private times between the person praying (or people praying) and God. Because God is not looking for fake worship. He's not looking to be a means to someone trying to glorify themselves. Jesus pointed out that selfish motivation in the people of that day and it's easy to see that humanity hasn't changed all that much. His words, then and now, serve as a mirror to look at ourselves to find what our real motivation is.

All that to say that, yes, I think motivation makes a big difference, if not all the difference and no, I don't know what Tebow's motivation is.

But I have a guess about something. I would guess that Tim Tebow is very familiar with all the teachings we've discussed on this thread. They're all right there in Jesus' most famous sermon. It doesn't mean he lives them out perfectly. In fact, I can guarantee you he doesn't. But I do feel like he has spent some time contemplating them and trying to apply them to his life on the field and off.

As for the stuff here...

Scott Wrote - Yesterday @ 01:45:27 PM
I guess my motives are different. If I felt compelled to pray on the street corner or get down on a knee and make it obvious about what I was doing that would be fine. However, if I got the impression that my act (which was for me to communicate with the man upstairs) was being perceived as snobbish, arrogant, (all the things people are saying about Tebow), it would behoove me to change my actions, not just for my sake but for the sake of the kingdom for which I (and Tebow) would be trying to further. If the motives behind my actions are truly Christian motives, it would be in the interest of everyone, including mine, not to do something unecessary that so easily pisses people off, when you can still be just as Christian without such an overt display. If I felt that my actions were actually causing the thing I was trying to please to be perceived in a negative way, then my actions, whatever my motives, would become of vanity. I (and Tebow) am an ambassador of that which we pray to. Personally, I feel like Tebow takes it too far and actually hurts the cause of Christians more than helps it.


I'm honestly not sure I'd agree. I mean, I think I might agree to a degree, but I'm not so sure. Certainly, when our actions truly become a hindrance to what we profess to desire, it's a bad thing. And surely "good intentions" don't give you a free pass to do whatever. Also, the Bible does address the topic of how our behaviors can affect others due to perceptions and various circumstances. But I'm not sure Tebow's actions are really at that point where they've become a "negative."

I don't like applying standard PR rules to matters of faith. I think it's wise to have an idea of how you are perceived, but the weight you give that perception is a much trickier matter. Sure, if not doing a truly unnecessary thing saves you from alienating people, that might be a fairly strong argument to stop the thing. But I don't want to be the one to determine what's in that category and what isn't. And let's face it, to the general unbelieving public, it's pretty much all unnecessary. Could Tim Tebow be a Christian and show no outward expressions on the field? Sure. But as a believer, I'm not sure that's the person God made Tim Tebow to be. Does he need to mention Jesus Christ all the times he does in his interviews? No, I don't think so. But it seems that's the way he praises God. Others do it differently. To put it in some perspective, some musicians sing about their faith in bold terms, some less so. They've certainly all got their critics, but I tend to think they've all got their place to do what they do.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - No, I did not change your screen saver settings
12/13/2011 @ 08:55:37 AM
 Quote this comment
I'm probably guilty of the "well, I wouldn't do that, so no one should do that" mentality regarding tebow. And seriously, what do I know about it to assume that people perceive it as negative. The thing that bothers me is the news coverage that hates Tebow for doing his thing and the news coverage that hates those that question Tebow for doing his thing. Maybe that's what I'm most offended about. So my response is to tell the man at the center to knock it off, but why is that a good answer.

Well put response, btw.

Also, for what it's worth, I have no problem with on field group prayers organized by players. Reggie White used to do that with member of the Packers and even with members of the opposite team.


Also, on an unrelated topic: Cameras caught Tom Brady cursing his head off at his offensive coordinator on Sunday. It was obvious what the two were saying (well, when reading their lips, but I suppose they could have been saying "no hip" or "vacuum"). Now, I have a question. AJ Hawk got fined like $10k or something like for flipping the bird (a sidways bird, no less) to his own teammates that just happened to be caught on camera. Why should he get fined but caught-on-camera-curse-words get off me-free (take a minute to digest that last word I used)? Just a thought.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott edited this at 12/13/2011 8:59:29 am
jeremy.jpgJeremy - The pig says "My wife is a slut?"
12/13/2011 @ 11:50:52 AM
 Quote this comment
Jon Wrote - Today @ 08:00:50 AM
But I don't want to be the one to determine what's in that category and what isn't. And let's face it, to the general unbelieving public, it's pretty much all unnecessary.


The what public?
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy messed with this at 12/13/2011 11:54:00 am
jeremy.jpgJeremy - Cube Phenomenoligist
12/13/2011 @ 11:52:24 AM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Today @ 08:55:37 AM
Also, on an unrelated topic: Cameras caught Tom Brady cursing his head off at his offensive coordinator on Sunday. It was obvious what the two were saying (well, when reading their lips, but I suppose they could have been saying "no hip" or "vacuum"). Now, I have a question. AJ Hawk got fined like $10k or something like for flipping the bird (a sidways bird, no less) to his own teammates that just happened to be caught on camera. Why should he get fined but caught-on-camera-curse-words get off me-free (take a minute to digest that last word I used)? Just a thought.


Because Tom Brady wasn't using sign language in the middle of the field.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - 6216 Posts
12/13/2011 @ 11:57:37 AM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 11:50:52 AM
Jon Wrote - Today @ 08:00:50 AM
But I don't want to be the one to determine what's in that category and what isn't. And let's face it, to the general unbelieving public, it's pretty much all unnecessary.


The what public?


Well, belief in God, and the faith that jon, myself, (and tebow I suppose) subscribe to our two different things. It's the general belief in the existance of a higher power vs the acceptance of Jesus as lord and savior. Nuanced to the general public perhaps, but a distinction to those that hold the latter belief.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott screwed with this at 12/13/2011 11:59:32 am
scott.jpgScott - 6216 Posts
12/13/2011 @ 11:59:05 AM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 11:52:24 AM
Scott Wrote - Today @ 08:55:37 AM
Also, on an unrelated topic: Cameras caught Tom Brady cursing his head off at his offensive coordinator on Sunday. It was obvious what the two were saying (well, when reading their lips, but I suppose they could have been saying "no hip" or "vacuum"). Now, I have a question. AJ Hawk got fined like $10k or something like for flipping the bird (a sidways bird, no less) to his own teammates that just happened to be caught on camera. Why should he get fined but caught-on-camera-curse-words get off me-free (take a minute to digest that last word I used)? Just a thought.


Because Tom Brady wasn't using sign language in the middle of the field.


The deaf, mute lipreaders heard him lound and clear.

I wonder if Hawk's act had occured on the sidelines if the league would have looked past it. The "in the middle of the field" part probably played a part in the fine.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott perfected this at 12/13/2011 12:00:37 pm
jeremy.jpgJeremy - 8821 Posts
12/13/2011 @ 11:59:52 AM
 Quote this comment
Eavesdropping on a sideline conversation between 2 people.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - 8821 Posts
12/13/2011 @ 12:06:48 PM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Today @ 11:57:37 AM
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 11:50:52 AM
Jon Wrote - Today @ 08:00:50 AM
But I don't want to be the one to determine what's in that category and what isn't. And let's face it, to the general unbelieving public, it's pretty much all unnecessary.


The what public?


Well, belief in God, and the faith that jon, myself, (and tebow I suppose) subscribe to our two different things. It's the general belief in the existance of a higher power vs the acceptance of Jesus as lord and savior. Nuanced to the general public perhaps, but a distinction to those that hold the latter belief.


Oh, well in that case it drops to a mere 79%. 40% of Americans think Jesus is returning before 2050. I don't know what society many Christians think they're playing severe underdog in, but it isn't this one.

Edit: For some "real number" perspective, only 63% of Americans voted in 2008.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy perfected this 4 times, last at 12/13/2011 12:34:34 pm
thumbnailCAW1I0O3.gifMatt - Washington Bureau Chief
12/13/2011 @ 12:43:49 PM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 11:50:52 AM
Jon Wrote - Today @ 08:00:50 AM
But I don't want to be the one to determine what's in that category and what isn't. And let's face it, to the general unbelieving public, it's pretty much all unnecessary.


The what public?


We'll have to wait for Jon to pop in with what he meant, but there are different ways to interpret "general unbelieving public".

There is the way that it seems Jeremy took it, that the general public as a group is mostly unbelieving. You could also view it that he was speaking about the sub-group of unbelievers in a general fashion.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Matt screwed with this at 12/13/2011 12:45:23 pm
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - 8821 Posts
12/13/2011 @ 12:52:48 PM
 Quote this comment
I suppose so. Actually I think he did mean it that way.* The joys of language ambiguity. Though either way "why can't all the meanies just leave the few of us believers alone" does seem to be a prevent attitude in the Tebow talk. (Or to the general believing public emoticon)

*Putting all the context together it would seem he's saying something along the lines of "Don't worry about Tebow making Christianity look bad to the people who aren't, because no one is going to choose not to believe because Tim Tebow prays a lot." or, more cynically perhaps, "to the general non-beleiver Tebow mentioning Jesus every 8 seconds, and you or I praying ever, are pretty much the same thing"
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy messed with this 3 times, last at 12/13/2011 1:01:13 pm
matt.jpgMatt - Nutcan.com's MBL
12/13/2011 @ 01:38:10 PM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 12:52:48 PM
Though either way "why can't all the meanies just leave the few of us believers alone" does seem to be a prevent attitude in the Tebow talk. (Or to the general believing public emoticon)


Well, I don't think their point is that they are a minority numerically, it's that Christians seem to be one of the only groups where it is socially acceptable among the "enlightened" media/academics/etc. to make fun of them or be downright hostile in ways they never would to any other group or religion.

I think there is some truth to this, even while stipulating that some people may be a little oversensitive to this in many cases.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - 8821 Posts
12/13/2011 @ 03:16:16 PM
 Quote this comment
True, but even then that has a lot to do with the fact that Christianity is the predominant religion here. You can't "make fun of" what isn't there. They're the ones out there doing/saying things, especially in America. Obviously a majority of the "spats" about religion are going to be regarding the one a majority of the people involved adhere to.

Likewise, it's really not the same thing in a lot of cases. On one side you have actual hostility/effects, such as the recent act of Christian groups calling a boycott of anyone who advertised during "All-American Muslim," ironically as far as I can tell from the commercials, a show largely about how un-accepting Americans are of them, leading to Lowes pulling its ads. On the other you have "Jon Stewart implied I'm a simpleton."

If an openly Muslim Governor of Texas (I rest my case?) ever held in 2011 what was tantamount to a rain dance (even if you were a fellow Muslim*) I'm sure people would make fun of that too.

Not to mention on the level it IS true, that people feel it's "okay" to make fun of Christianity, but steer clear of Islam out of fear of its many stone age practices....That's not exactly a feather in Islam's cap. "Damn us and our belief it's not ok to behead someone just for disagreeing with us on which of the many deities we choose to believe in....we really ought to do something about that...fire up the lynch mob."

*Which is to say the issue of whether or not praying to Allah** works in general or not isn't necessarily the issue. Obviously if all you're doing is praying until it rains, it's going to eventually work, even if that's not why, even if someone's listening.

**pbuh***
***Upon further review, that might only be reserved for Muhammed****
****pbuh
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy screwed with this 8 times, last at 12/13/2011 3:38:37 pm
vignette.bmpCarlos44ec - ...and Bob's your Uncle!
12/18/2011 @ 05:15:37 PM
 Quote this comment
Micah Wrote - 12/13/2011 @ 07:59:01 AM
Carlos44ec Wrote - 12/12/2011 @ 03:06:05 PM
Jeremy Wrote - 12/12/2011 @ 10:45:18 AM
you like you some Jesus, you and 99% of the league.


There are definitely more than 1% Mohammadeans, Jews, and 'others' out there. I'd wager there was even a fringe Scientologist or Jew for Jesus in the mix somewhere.


Carl, you're never going to be an Operating Thetan if you don't accept that we are not a fringe group. I am coming to Minneapolis to audit you and remove some of those pesky engrams, then maybe you can reach the next level.


I suppose I have some splaining to do
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Leave a Comment of your very own
Name:
Comment:
Verify this code
Verify the Code in this box, or sign in, to post a comment.
click me!
There's an emoticon for how you feel!
click me!
My Files
Sign up, or login, to be able to upload files for Nutcan.com users to see.