Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkeydad
Yes, the numbers don't lie.
We've had some questionable characters get into the HOF, so that's not the issue. On the field, he was a beast. Teams (including us) game-planned around him and the only man I ever saw stop him in his prime was Sean Taylor. Owens actually looked intimidated against him, cutting routes short, not stretching to make catches...for good reason.
Even at age 37, he's still a physical specimen and I think he'll be back sooner or later. He's not the player he once was, but he had matured and can still help a team. I actually would not mind seeing him here IF we needed a vet WR but we don't, our WR depth chart looks promising.
He always played for teams I hated and at times, I could not stand him as a person, but I have grown to respect him as time has gone on, as a player and in recent years as a person. He never got into real trouble (legally), he was just a nuisance and joker.
If Michael Irvin got in, Owens should.
|
Again, I don't think the comparison is valid. Let's distinguish between
off the field or what I would call personal issues, versus behavior that is related to job performance. I'm not even considering personal behavior in this debate, I think the hall has in recent past not considered that too much. Just in terms of performance related to your teams goals, Irvin was so much greater than TO.
Michael Irvin was a winner. Although he could be a pain for his qb & OC, it was never to the point that dallas wanted to get rid of him. In the end, teams couldn't count on TO. Skip Bayless called it best - TO = "TEam obliterator."