What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Mike McCarthy (1 Viewer)

Regardless of what this guy may have said to him, MM just comes across as a major doosh bag, IMO.
What if...and its a big if...but what if McCarthy really had nothing to do with the guy being fired?Yet some of you are so convinced it was him?Look, he is a bad head coach...no doubt about it...does not mean he is responsible for the guy being fired.
I think both of these guys are lying through their teeth.There is no doubt in my mind the guy made some comment along the lines of dont lay an egg.There is no doubt in my mind that MM got him fired.
 
Ookie Pringle said:
Hilarious that people blame the front office for a part time maintenance guy getting fired.Pretty much sure they would blame McCarthy or Thompson if a light bulb on the scoreboard went out too.
Hilarious that people don't have the common sense to realize what took place here. Employee makes a comment that McCarthy doesn't like...McCarthy responds with a comment to the employee and then finds out the name of that employee.
Yes...found out the name of the employee does not equal had him fired.Its possible. I have said that...but its funny how many assume that McCarthy fired him/had him fired. Without really knowing anything factual other than he inquired of the guy's name.
 
BeaverCleaver said:
Once again sho is showing his blind faith and love of Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy. Classic.
Once again Beaver comments about me and not the topic.Its not blind faith...I hope McCarthy is gone and he is a terrible head coach.There are some putting blind faith that he did do it.Others are claiming its possible he had nothing to do with the guy actually getting fired.Nice try...but a failure as usual.any comment on the topic? Any insight as to what happened?
 
Ookie Pringle said:
Hilarious that people blame the front office for a part time maintenance guy getting fired.Pretty much sure they would blame McCarthy or Thompson if a light bulb on the scoreboard went out too.
Hilarious that people don't have the common sense to realize what took place here. Employee makes a comment that McCarthy doesn't like...McCarthy responds with a comment to the employee and then finds out the name of that employee.
Yes...found out the name of the employee does not equal had him fired.Its possible. I have said that...but its funny how many assume that McCarthy fired him/had him fired. Without really knowing anything factual other than he inquired of the guy's name.
So you admit it is possible that McCarthy was involved with the firing yet you think it is funny to assume McCarthy had him fired. Typical sho nuff logic. :thumbup:
 
BeaverCleaver said:
Once again sho is showing his blind faith and love of Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy. Classic.
Once again Beaver comments about me and not the topic.Its not blind faith...I hope McCarthy is gone and he is a terrible head coach.There are some putting blind faith that he did do it.Others are claiming its possible he had nothing to do with the guy actually getting fired.Nice try...but a failure as usual.any comment on the topic? Any insight as to what happened?
Your lack of logic is mind boggling.
 
BeaverCleaver said:
Once again sho is showing his blind faith and love of Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy. Classic.
Once again Beaver comments about me and not the topic.Its not blind faith...I hope McCarthy is gone and he is a terrible head coach.There are some putting blind faith that he did do it.Others are claiming its possible he had nothing to do with the guy actually getting fired.Nice try...but a failure as usual.any comment on the topic? Any insight as to what happened?
Your lack of logic is mind boggling.
Damn :banned:
 
Ookie Pringle said:
Hilarious that people blame the front office for a part time maintenance guy getting fired.Pretty much sure they would blame McCarthy or Thompson if a light bulb on the scoreboard went out too.
Hilarious that people don't have the common sense to realize what took place here. Employee makes a comment that McCarthy doesn't like...McCarthy responds with a comment to the employee and then finds out the name of that employee.
Yes...found out the name of the employee does not equal had him fired.Its possible. I have said that...but its funny how many assume that McCarthy fired him/had him fired. Without really knowing anything factual other than he inquired of the guy's name.
So you admit it is possible that McCarthy was involved with the firing yet you think it is funny to assume McCarthy had him fired. Typical sho nuff logic. :banned:
Typical Stinger logic.Realizing its possible...and saying its automatic that he is involved are two very different things. You know this right?
 
BeaverCleaver said:
Once again sho is showing his blind faith and love of Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy. Classic.
Once again Beaver comments about me and not the topic.Its not blind faith...I hope McCarthy is gone and he is a terrible head coach.There are some putting blind faith that he did do it.Others are claiming its possible he had nothing to do with the guy actually getting fired.Nice try...but a failure as usual.any comment on the topic? Any insight as to what happened?
Your lack of logic is mind boggling.
As is your lack of substance, and the "good posting" that followed.Please clarify where I have lacked logic on this?
 
Ookie Pringle said:
Hilarious that people blame the front office for a part time maintenance guy getting fired.Pretty much sure they would blame McCarthy or Thompson if a light bulb on the scoreboard went out too.
Hilarious that people don't have the common sense to realize what took place here. Employee makes a comment that McCarthy doesn't like...McCarthy responds with a comment to the employee and then finds out the name of that employee.
Yes...found out the name of the employee does not equal had him fired.Its possible. I have said that...but its funny how many assume that McCarthy fired him/had him fired. Without really knowing anything factual other than he inquired of the guy's name.
So you admit it is possible that McCarthy was involved with the firing yet you think it is funny to assume McCarthy had him fired. Typical sho nuff logic. :banned:
Typical Stinger logic.Realizing its possible...and saying its automatic that he is involved are two very different things. You know this right?
If McCarthy doesn't go to the supervisor to whine like a baby then Wood doesn't get fired. I'd say that shows he was involved.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
BeaverCleaver said:
Once again sho is showing his blind faith and love of Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy. Classic.
Once again Beaver comments about me and not the topic.Its not blind faith...I hope McCarthy is gone and he is a terrible head coach.There are some putting blind faith that he did do it.Others are claiming its possible he had nothing to do with the guy actually getting fired.Nice try...but a failure as usual.any comment on the topic? Any insight as to what happened?
Your lack of logic is mind boggling.
As is your lack of substance, and the "good posting" that followed.Please clarify where I have lacked logic on this?
Easy...the simple fact you don't have the common sense to see that McCarthy had a lot to do with the firing.
 
If McCarthy doesn't go to the supervisor to whine like a baby then Wood doesn't get fired. I'd say that shows he was involved.
First...all we know is McCarthy asked for his name. Your bias against him show when you claim he whined like a baby.Second...you have no clue if McCarthy's comment to any supervisor led to the firing...that is pure assumption.You have no clue what was said from the people McCarthy was talking to when the comments were made. You just don't know.But you assume it was all McCarthy.The only involvement we know of is McCarthy going to ask the guy's name.
 
BeaverCleaver said:
Once again sho is showing his blind faith and love of Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy. Classic.
Once again Beaver comments about me and not the topic.Its not blind faith...I hope McCarthy is gone and he is a terrible head coach.There are some putting blind faith that he did do it.Others are claiming its possible he had nothing to do with the guy actually getting fired.Nice try...but a failure as usual.any comment on the topic? Any insight as to what happened?
Your lack of logic is mind boggling.
As is your lack of substance, and the "good posting" that followed.Please clarify where I have lacked logic on this?
Easy...the simple fact you don't have the common sense to see that McCarthy had a lot to do with the firing.
I see that its possible he did...its not a fact that he had "a lot to do with the firing".That is your assumption.HTH.
 
If McCarthy doesn't go to the supervisor to whine like a baby then Wood doesn't get fired. I'd say that shows he was involved.
First...all we know is McCarthy asked for his name. Your bias against him show when you claim he whined like a baby.Second...you have no clue if McCarthy's comment to any supervisor led to the firing...that is pure assumption.You have no clue what was said from the people McCarthy was talking to when the comments were made. You just don't know.But you assume it was all McCarthy.The only involvement we know of is McCarthy going to ask the guy's name.
22 year employees do not get fired because somebody asked what their name was. Plain and simple. If that was all McCarthy said, then how does the person he asked know something "fire worthy" was said?McCarthy may not have gone out of his way to insist the guy get fired, although he might have, but if he didn't say anything, the guy would still have his job.
 
I see that its possible he did...its not a fact that he had "a lot to do with the firing".That is your assumption.HTH.
If McCarthy doesn't cry like a baby Wood still has his job. That would show that he had a lot to do with the firing. Or how about this....he could have cried to the supevisor but also stated...."I want you to know what happened but I don't want the guy to lose his job over this". HTH
 
If McCarthy doesn't go to the supervisor to whine like a baby then Wood doesn't get fired. I'd say that shows he was involved.
First...all we know is McCarthy asked for his name. Your bias against him show when you claim he whined like a baby.Second...you have no clue if McCarthy's comment to any supervisor led to the firing...that is pure assumption.You have no clue what was said from the people McCarthy was talking to when the comments were made. You just don't know.But you assume it was all McCarthy.The only involvement we know of is McCarthy going to ask the guy's name.
22 year employees do not get fired because somebody asked what their name was. Plain and simple. If that was all McCarthy said, then how does the person he asked know something "fire worthy" was said?McCarthy may not have gone out of his way to insist the guy get fired, although he might have, but if he didn't say anything, the guy would still have his job.
You have to use simpler logic than that to convince him.
 
If McCarthy doesn't go to the supervisor to whine like a baby then Wood doesn't get fired. I'd say that shows he was involved.
First...all we know is McCarthy asked for his name. Your bias against him show when you claim he whined like a baby.Second...you have no clue if McCarthy's comment to any supervisor led to the firing...that is pure assumption.You have no clue what was said from the people McCarthy was talking to when the comments were made. You just don't know.But you assume it was all McCarthy.The only involvement we know of is McCarthy going to ask the guy's name.
22 year employees do not get fired because somebody asked what their name was. Plain and simple. If that was all McCarthy said, then how does the person he asked know something "fire worthy" was said?McCarthy may not have gone out of his way to insist the guy get fired, although he might have, but if he didn't say anything, the guy would still have his job.
This guy gets it! :)
 
If McCarthy doesn't go to the supervisor to whine like a baby then Wood doesn't get fired. I'd say that shows he was involved.
First...all we know is McCarthy asked for his name. Your bias against him show when you claim he whined like a baby.Second...you have no clue if McCarthy's comment to any supervisor led to the firing...that is pure assumption.You have no clue what was said from the people McCarthy was talking to when the comments were made. You just don't know.But you assume it was all McCarthy.The only involvement we know of is McCarthy going to ask the guy's name.
22 year employees do not get fired because somebody asked what their name was. Plain and simple. If that was all McCarthy said, then how does the person he asked know something "fire worthy" was said?McCarthy may not have gone out of his way to insist the guy get fired, although he might have, but if he didn't say anything, the guy would still have his job.
For those claiming he had nothing to do with it I would love to hear why on earth MM would ask for the guys name?You dont go and find out the man's name unless there is a reason. What could it be?
 
If McCarthy doesn't go to the supervisor to whine like a baby then Wood doesn't get fired. I'd say that shows he was involved.
First...all we know is McCarthy asked for his name. Your bias against him show when you claim he whined like a baby.Second...you have no clue if McCarthy's comment to any supervisor led to the firing...that is pure assumption.You have no clue what was said from the people McCarthy was talking to when the comments were made. You just don't know.But you assume it was all McCarthy.The only involvement we know of is McCarthy going to ask the guy's name.
22 year employees do not get fired because somebody asked what their name was. Plain and simple. If that was all McCarthy said, then how does the person he asked know something "fire worthy" was said?McCarthy may not have gone out of his way to insist the guy get fired, although he might have, but if he didn't say anything, the guy would still have his job.
This guy gets it! :)
:lmao:
 
If McCarthy doesn't go to the supervisor to whine like a baby then Wood doesn't get fired. I'd say that shows he was involved.
First...all we know is McCarthy asked for his name. Your bias against him show when you claim he whined like a baby.Second...you have no clue if McCarthy's comment to any supervisor led to the firing...that is pure assumption.You have no clue what was said from the people McCarthy was talking to when the comments were made. You just don't know.But you assume it was all McCarthy.The only involvement we know of is McCarthy going to ask the guy's name.
22 year employees do not get fired because somebody asked what their name was. Plain and simple. If that was all McCarthy said, then how does the person he asked know something "fire worthy" was said?McCarthy may not have gone out of his way to insist the guy get fired, although he might have, but if he didn't say anything, the guy would still have his job.
You have to use simpler logic than that to convince him.
:)
 
If McCarthy doesn't go to the supervisor to whine like a baby then Wood doesn't get fired. I'd say that shows he was involved.
First...all we know is McCarthy asked for his name. Your bias against him show when you claim he whined like a baby.Second...you have no clue if McCarthy's comment to any supervisor led to the firing...that is pure assumption.You have no clue what was said from the people McCarthy was talking to when the comments were made. You just don't know.But you assume it was all McCarthy.The only involvement we know of is McCarthy going to ask the guy's name.
22 year employees do not get fired because somebody asked what their name was. Plain and simple. If that was all McCarthy said, then how does the person he asked know something "fire worthy" was said?McCarthy may not have gone out of his way to insist the guy get fired, although he might have, but if he didn't say anything, the guy would still have his job.
For those claiming he had nothing to do with it I would love to hear why on earth MM would ask for the guys name?You dont go and find out the man's name unless there is a reason. What could it be?
That reasoning won't work either. It has to be the level you would expect to see on Sesame Street.
 
Regardless of what this guy may have said to him, MM just comes across as a major doosh bag, IMO.
What if...and its a big if...but what if McCarthy really had nothing to do with the guy being fired?Yet some of you are so convinced it was him?Look, he is a bad head coach...no doubt about it...does not mean he is responsible for the guy being fired.
I think both of these guys are lying through their teeth.There is no doubt in my mind the guy made some comment along the lines of dont lay an egg.There is no doubt in my mind that MM got him fired.
This is probably right and ... if I were to do the same thing in my company I would imagine they would question my employment.
 
If McCarthy doesn't go to the supervisor to whine like a baby then Wood doesn't get fired. I'd say that shows he was involved.
First...all we know is McCarthy asked for his name. Your bias against him show when you claim he whined like a baby.Second...you have no clue if McCarthy's comment to any supervisor led to the firing...that is pure assumption.You have no clue what was said from the people McCarthy was talking to when the comments were made. You just don't know.But you assume it was all McCarthy.The only involvement we know of is McCarthy going to ask the guy's name.
22 year employees do not get fired because somebody asked what their name was. Plain and simple. If that was all McCarthy said, then how does the person he asked know something "fire worthy" was said?McCarthy may not have gone out of his way to insist the guy get fired, although he might have, but if he didn't say anything, the guy would still have his job.
Exactly...he gets fired by finding out what he did say to McCarthy.You have no idea that he would still have a job if McCarthy did not ask his name.Do you all miss that McCarthy, at the time of the comments, was speaking to members of the grounds crew? Anyone of them could have mentioned it to a supervisor.22 year employee did not get fired because mcCarthy asked his name...he got fired because however it happened, his supervisor found out what he said to the head coach.Some here assume McCarthy told him...I simply say we don't know.But none of you will admit we don't know...you will continue to just say it was all because of McCarthy.
 
I see that its possible he did...its not a fact that he had "a lot to do with the firing".That is your assumption.HTH.
If McCarthy doesn't cry like a baby Wood still has his job. That would show that he had a lot to do with the firing. Or how about this....he could have cried to the supevisor but also stated...."I want you to know what happened but I don't want the guy to lose his job over this". HTH
Again, you say he cries like a baby...pretty much showing your bias.If McCarthy did not believe asking the guy's name would get him fired...why would he go on to explain what happened and say he should not lose his job?Talk about a jump in logic....seriously. Its ok for some of you to admit McCarthy might not be at fault here.Its ok...he still sucks as a coach.
 
I see that its possible he did...its not a fact that he had "a lot to do with the firing".That is your assumption.HTH.
If McCarthy doesn't cry like a baby Wood still has his job. That would show that he had a lot to do with the firing. Or how about this....he could have cried to the supevisor but also stated...."I want you to know what happened but I don't want the guy to lose his job over this". HTH
Again, you say he cries like a baby...pretty much showing your bias.If McCarthy did not believe asking the guy's name would get him fired...why would he go on to explain what happened and say he should not lose his job?Talk about a jump in logic....seriously. Its ok for some of you to admit McCarthy might not be at fault here.Its ok...he still sucks as a coach.
:thumbdown:
 
If McCarthy doesn't go to the supervisor to whine like a baby then Wood doesn't get fired. I'd say that shows he was involved.
First...all we know is McCarthy asked for his name. Your bias against him show when you claim he whined like a baby.Second...you have no clue if McCarthy's comment to any supervisor led to the firing...that is pure assumption.You have no clue what was said from the people McCarthy was talking to when the comments were made. You just don't know.But you assume it was all McCarthy.The only involvement we know of is McCarthy going to ask the guy's name.
22 year employees do not get fired because somebody asked what their name was. Plain and simple. If that was all McCarthy said, then how does the person he asked know something "fire worthy" was said?McCarthy may not have gone out of his way to insist the guy get fired, although he might have, but if he didn't say anything, the guy would still have his job.
For those claiming he had nothing to do with it I would love to hear why on earth MM would ask for the guys name?You dont go and find out the man's name unless there is a reason. What could it be?
Who is saying he absolutely has nothing to do with it?
 
If McCarthy doesn't go to the supervisor to whine like a baby then Wood doesn't get fired. I'd say that shows he was involved.
First...all we know is McCarthy asked for his name. Your bias against him show when you claim he whined like a baby.Second...you have no clue if McCarthy's comment to any supervisor led to the firing...that is pure assumption.You have no clue what was said from the people McCarthy was talking to when the comments were made. You just don't know.But you assume it was all McCarthy.The only involvement we know of is McCarthy going to ask the guy's name.
22 year employees do not get fired because somebody asked what their name was. Plain and simple. If that was all McCarthy said, then how does the person he asked know something "fire worthy" was said?McCarthy may not have gone out of his way to insist the guy get fired, although he might have, but if he didn't say anything, the guy would still have his job.
For those claiming he had nothing to do with it I would love to hear why on earth MM would ask for the guys name?You dont go and find out the man's name unless there is a reason. What could it be?
Who is saying he absolutely has nothing to do with it?
You provide great entertainment to the Shark Pool...especially on Sundays.
 
If McCarthy doesn't go to the supervisor to whine like a baby then Wood doesn't get fired. I'd say that shows he was involved.
First...all we know is McCarthy asked for his name. Your bias against him show when you claim he whined like a baby.Second...you have no clue if McCarthy's comment to any supervisor led to the firing...that is pure assumption.You have no clue what was said from the people McCarthy was talking to when the comments were made. You just don't know.But you assume it was all McCarthy.The only involvement we know of is McCarthy going to ask the guy's name.
22 year employees do not get fired because somebody asked what their name was. Plain and simple. If that was all McCarthy said, then how does the person he asked know something "fire worthy" was said?McCarthy may not have gone out of his way to insist the guy get fired, although he might have, but if he didn't say anything, the guy would still have his job.
For those claiming he had nothing to do with it I would love to hear why on earth MM would ask for the guys name?You dont go and find out the man's name unless there is a reason. What could it be?
Who is saying he absolutely has nothing to do with it?
for those saying all he did was ask for his name or really whatever theory anybody is saying I would love to hear why on earth MM would ask for the guys name?You dont go and find out the man's name unless there is a reason. What could it be?edited to avoid any sidestepping.
 
What I have said is that all we know is that McCarthy asked his name. Anything more is speculation.

Its not side stepping...its the facts of the situation.

 
What I have said is that all we know is that McCarthy asked his name. Anything more is speculation.Its not side stepping...its the facts of the situation.
Wrong...anything more is common sense to realize what happened next. McCarthy set the wheels in motion. Not hard to understand.
 
What I have said is that all we know is that McCarthy asked his name. Anything more is speculation.Its not side stepping...its the facts of the situation.
Wrong...anything more is common sense to realize what happened next. McCarthy set the wheels in motion. Not hard to understand.
:thumbup: Sweet...stating the facts now is wrong. Awesome.You don't know what set anything in motion...the Supervisor may have known what was said before McCarthy ever talks to him.Not hard to understand that some of you jump to some major conclusions.
 
What I have said is that all we know is that McCarthy asked his name. Anything more is speculation.Its not side stepping...its the facts of the situation.
Wrong...anything more is common sense to realize what happened next. McCarthy set the wheels in motion. Not hard to understand.
:thumbup: Sweet...stating the facts now is wrong. Awesome.You don't know what set anything in motion...the Supervisor may have known what was said before McCarthy ever talks to him.Not hard to understand that some of you jump to some major conclusions.
Some people in here are going down the most obvious logic path. It's been spelled out so many times, you should be able to repeat it verbatim at this point.
 
What I have said is that all we know is that McCarthy asked his name. Anything more is speculation.Its not side stepping...its the facts of the situation.
Wrong...anything more is common sense to realize what happened next. McCarthy set the wheels in motion. Not hard to understand.
:goodposting: Not hard to understand that some of you jump to some major conclusions.
you mean like you are doing in this thread. :rolleyes:
 
What I have said is that all we know is that McCarthy asked his name. Anything more is speculation.Its not side stepping...its the facts of the situation.
Wrong...anything more is common sense to realize what happened next. McCarthy set the wheels in motion. Not hard to understand.
:shrug: Sweet...stating the facts now is wrong. Awesome.You don't know what set anything in motion...the Supervisor may have known what was said before McCarthy ever talks to him.Not hard to understand that some of you jump to some major conclusions.
Like you are jumping to the major conclusion that McCarthy had nothing to do with the firing and you are ignoring common sense to realize that all signs are that he did.
 
What I have said is that all we know is that McCarthy asked his name. Anything more is speculation.Its not side stepping...its the facts of the situation.
Wrong...anything more is common sense to realize what happened next. McCarthy set the wheels in motion. Not hard to understand.
:rolleyes: Sweet...stating the facts now is wrong. Awesome.You don't know what set anything in motion...the Supervisor may have known what was said before McCarthy ever talks to him.Not hard to understand that some of you jump to some major conclusions.
Seriously...what is wrong with you? You are ripping people for jumping to conclusions yet that is exactly what you are doing. Pathetic! :rolleyes:
 
Taking a break from this girlfight for a moment:

Since McCarthy took the groundskeeper's advice today, shouldn't he be hired back and given a raise?

OK, back to the girlfight.

 
Guys... Packers are gonna win today. You can take a day off of fighting and just hold each other or something. It's a good win too, against the Cowboys. Firing that guy for childish reasons worked for McCarthy, let's not question it any more.

 
Brilliant move by McCarthy to fire a part-time maintenance work and motivate his team. The guy is pure genius.

 
What I have said is that all we know is that McCarthy asked his name. Anything more is speculation.Its not side stepping...its the facts of the situation.
Wrong...anything more is common sense to realize what happened next. McCarthy set the wheels in motion. Not hard to understand.
:thumbup: Not hard to understand that some of you jump to some major conclusions.
you mean like you are doing in this thread. :rolleyes:
What conclusion have I jumped to?
 
What I have said is that all we know is that McCarthy asked his name. Anything more is speculation.Its not side stepping...its the facts of the situation.
Wrong...anything more is common sense to realize what happened next. McCarthy set the wheels in motion. Not hard to understand.
:thumbup: Not hard to understand that some of you jump to some major conclusions.
you mean like you are doing in this thread. :rolleyes:
What conclusion have I jumped to?
:lmao: :lmao: :lmao:
 
What I have said is that all we know is that McCarthy asked his name. Anything more is speculation.Its not side stepping...its the facts of the situation.
Wrong...anything more is common sense to realize what happened next. McCarthy set the wheels in motion. Not hard to understand.
:thumbup: Sweet...stating the facts now is wrong. Awesome.You don't know what set anything in motion...the Supervisor may have known what was said before McCarthy ever talks to him.Not hard to understand that some of you jump to some major conclusions.
Like you are jumping to the major conclusion that McCarthy had nothing to do with the firing and you are ignoring common sense to realize that all signs are that he did.
I have not jumped to that conclusion...I have said its possible. I have said we don't know exactly what happened.Common sense says the head coach has little to nothing to do with the maintenance department and all we know is he asked the guy's freaking name.I have said over and over its possible McCarthy did more than that...but its not known.
 
What I have said is that all we know is that McCarthy asked his name. Anything more is speculation.Its not side stepping...its the facts of the situation.
Wrong...anything more is common sense to realize what happened next. McCarthy set the wheels in motion. Not hard to understand.
:thumbup: Sweet...stating the facts now is wrong. Awesome.You don't know what set anything in motion...the Supervisor may have known what was said before McCarthy ever talks to him.Not hard to understand that some of you jump to some major conclusions.
Seriously...what is wrong with you? You are ripping people for jumping to conclusions yet that is exactly what you are doing. Pathetic! :rolleyes:
What is wrong with you and your reading comprehension.I have not jumped to a single conclusion.im one of the few saying we just don't know exactly what went on.
 
What I have said is that all we know is that McCarthy asked his name. Anything more is speculation.Its not side stepping...its the facts of the situation.
Wrong...anything more is common sense to realize what happened next. McCarthy set the wheels in motion. Not hard to understand.
:thumbup: Sweet...stating the facts now is wrong. Awesome.You don't know what set anything in motion...the Supervisor may have known what was said before McCarthy ever talks to him.Not hard to understand that some of you jump to some major conclusions.
Like you are jumping to the major conclusion that McCarthy had nothing to do with the firing and you are ignoring common sense to realize that all signs are that he did.
I have not jumped to that conclusion...I have said its possible. I have said we don't know exactly what happened.Common sense says the head coach has little to nothing to do with the maintenance department and all we know is he asked the guy's freaking name.I have said over and over its possible McCarthy did more than that...but its not known.
:rolleyes: :lmao:
 
Guys... Packers are gonna win today. You can take a day off of fighting and just hold each other or something. It's a good win too, against the Cowboys. Firing that guy for childish reasons worked for McCarthy, let's not question it any more.
Except he was fired on Nov. 1st. and he made the comment on Oct 28th, days before the Packer-Viking game. :thumbup:
 
Guys... Packers are gonna win today. You can take a day off of fighting and just hold each other or something. It's a good win too, against the Cowboys. Firing that guy for childish reasons worked for McCarthy, let's not question it any more.
Except he was fired on Nov. 1st. and he made the comment on Oct 28th, days before the Packer-Viking game. :rolleyes:
Of course it didn't work before the Viking game.....Brett Favre and his magic would trump that! :thumbup:
 
What I have said is that all we know is that McCarthy asked his name. Anything more is speculation.Its not side stepping...its the facts of the situation.
I asked what could be a reason for MM to ask for his name.Why cant you answer that question?
I have no idea what his reason was...last time I checked I am not Mike McCarthy...you would have to ask him.
Maybe he wanted to send the guy a Christmas goose?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top