iceberg
rock music matters
- Messages
- 34,403
- Reaction score
- 7,932
theogt;1526138 said:But you realize that the only reason Glenn has been better for the Cowboys is because of his longevity with the team, correct? It has nothing to do with him being a better WR.
In that case, how is it at all worthwhile to compare 1 year to 4 years of production?
What we can say that is worthwhile is that 2006 was close to being Terry's best year as a Cowboy and it still wasn't as good as Terrell's, who arguably had a down year because of the hand injury.
ok - this is talk that now defines the question and helps people understand vs. just "wah" around. thanks for bringing this cranky dude back into the mix. : )
i went glenn cause it's a "cowboys" receiver. is it fair to compare 1 year to 4 years?
no. never said it was. but i did say it was the reason i went for glenn because he's helped us longer and has had zero baggage coming along with him.
i'm not going to get into hand injuries, and the side discussions because as i said, i took this to be a cowboys poll not an overall who's a better wr.
who's had the better career?
owens.
who's done more good for dallas?
glenn.
if TO can keep on his mended ways and have another good year or two i'd likely put him past glenn because he went out and did it *for us* and it is in fact a *cowboys* poll.
as i understood it.
but i still say the saddest part of all this is that since irvin we've not done jack squat to find another #1 WR in our own system and our drafts picks and even FA's have bombed out.
who'd have thought when irvin was carried off the field it would take 10+ years to even bring someone in who'd compare to him, much less who that WR would be.
that's the sad part.