ESPN on TO and the speech

[Paniolo22]

He also puts it in past tense, so it seems like how he felt then, which we all knew he felt someone betrayed him by leaking the inside info. I may be grasping for straws with this guy, but I'm quickly running out of sring to hold on to. Let's hope he shuts up for the rest of the season.

 

[Stash]

If its a matter of opinion and not right and wrong then why do you use the word "blindly" to those with a different opinion? Hipocrite!

The term blindly wasn't in reference to the poster's opinion. He has the right to that.

Try to get the context right before you start with the name-calling, OK? (and try to at least spell it right)

What would you call it when someone cheers on a person without question based on the uniform they wear?

 

[SultanOfSix]

"Joke" or not, it was a stupid and disresepctful thing to say.

Nothing good can come from a quote like that other than to get Owens' name back in the media spotlight again.

He either:

1) Truly didn't listen to his Hall-of-Fame coach's speech about doing what it takes to win a Super Bowl

or

2) Lied about not listening in an effort to draw attention from the media.

Either way looks like a boneheaded move to me.

How about Irvin and the rest of the media start asking about leading the league in dropped passes?

Actually, there are a lot more than just two options that could be possible.

It's sad what sports media has become from its major outlet. Instead of sticking with discussing sports, they've added another item to their reportoire that reeks of the smell of shady journalism that imbues the air from the likes of "National Enquirer" or "The Star": stirring up controversy to subtley enforce their own hidden agenda.

And people fall for it every time.

"It's obvious that he's trying to get under Bill Parcell's skin."

Really? Obvious to whom? Wasn't obvious to me.

"You gotta get rid of the guy."

Why? Because you say so. Because you know we aren't going to win a championship without him. You don't want that, so you'll use your own twisted notion of "bad behavior" to justify your opinion as the primary reason for his removal, but it's really not the primary reason is it?

"Bill Parcells didn't even want the guy."

And yet he said he did.

"Bill Parcells is 64 going on 93."

Really? He looks better this year than in all years he's been coaching the team, even better than in his first season when we went to the playoffs. He knows we can do something special here, and Owens is a key component to that.

People who are constantly negative have their negative opinions constantly reinforced. Why? Because it's what they want to see. It works the same way for those who are positive. Except the latter function not only better in life, they're always happier than the former.

Is Owens really that bad for craving attention in an outlet that repeatedly tries to grab your attention? Isn't Owens just a pawn of the system?

 

[sacowboysfan513]

Actually, there are a lot more than just two options that could be possible.

It's sad what sports media has become from its major outlet. Instead of sticking with discussing sports, they've added another item to their reportoire that reeks of the smell of shady journalism that imbues the air from the likes of "National Enquirer" or "The Star": stirring up controversy to subtley enforce their own hidden agenda.

And people fall for it every time.

"It's obvious that he's trying to get under Bill Parcell's skin."

Really? Obvious to whom? Wasn't obvious to me.

"You gotta get rid of the guy."

Why? Because you say so. Because you know we aren't going to win a championship without him. You don't want that, so you'll use your own twisted notion of "bad behavior" to justify your opinion as the primary reason for his removal, but it's really not the primary reason is it?

"Bill Parcells didn't even want the guy."

And yet he said he did.

"Bill Parcells is 64 going on 93."

Really? He looks better this year than in all years he's been coaching the team, even better than in his first season when we went to the playoffs. He knows we can do something special here, and Owens is a key component to that.

People who are constantly negative have their negative opinions constantly reinforced. Why? Because it's what they want to see. It works the same way for those who are positive. Except the latter function not only better in life, they're always happier than the former.

Is Owens really that bad for craving attention in an outlet that repeatedly tries to grab your attention? Isn't Owens just a pawn of the system?

I agree 100 %

After the game this sunday, especially if we win, no one will be talking about this story, because it isn't one.

 

[Stash]

Actually, there are a lot more than just two options that could be possible.

I'd be interested to see what other motives there could be.

I don't see any positives that could come from this in any way.

It's sad what sports media has become from its major outlet. Instead of sticking with discussing sports, they've added another item to their reportoire that reeks of the smell of shady journalism that imbues the air from the likes of "National Enquirer" or "The Star": stirring up controversy to subtley enforce their own hidden agenda.

And people fall for it every time.

I agree with the claim, but I also fault Owens for being stupid - which I feel he claerly was. What was his motivation to do something like this?

"It's obvious that he's trying to get under Bill Parcell's skin."

Really? Obvious to whom? Wasn't obvious to me.

"You gotta get rid of the guy."

Why? Because you say so. Because you know we aren't going to win a championship without him. You don't want that, so you'll use your own twisted notion of "bad behavior" to justify your opinion as the primary reason for his removal, but it's really not the primary reason is it?

"Bill Parcells didn't even want the guy."

And yet he said he did.

"Bill Parcells is 64 going on 93."

Really? He looks better this year than in all years he's been coaching the team, even better than in his first season when we went to the playoffs. He knows we can do something special here, and Owens is a key component to that.

People who are constantly negative have their negative opinions constantly reinforced. Why? Because it's what they want to see. It works the same way for those who are positive. Except the latter function not only better in life, they're always happier than the former.

Is Owens really that bad for craving attention in an outlet that repeatedly tries to grab your attention? Isn't Owens just a pawn of the system?

He's no "victim" when he brings it upon himself - and his head coach.

If someone can illustrate a reason for Owens doing what he did, I'd be glad to hear it.

I blame this one on him, not the media. Not this time anyway.

 

[EPL0c0]

It's a clip from the full interview which is supposed to be shown during NFL Countdown on Sunday morning. It does appear he's being more serious in this conversation...

That said, Cowlishaw said something on ATH this afternoon that justified it a bit. Apparently the speech was for the guys who have no experience in the playoffs or what it takes to get to a Super Bowl. TO has been there, he knows what it takes.

Shockey rips his coaches and ESPN says he's just trying to fire the team up. Terrell says he missed one speech and ESPN says he should be cut. Hmm

Owens can handle the media. Look what that one lockerroom interview did. It took the focus off of Tony Romo. I see that as a good thing heading into a big conference game. Romo being named November Player of the Month got little attention b/c of this Owens thing...and I'm willing to bet that Parcells doesn't mind. It takes the media microscope off of Tony Romo. Despite being in his 4th year, it still is only his 7th start and a HUGE game. IMO, this helps him.

Though I'm sure ESPN will say something about Owens stealing Romo's thunder soon too...we'll see.

PS
How many of the other players in the room paid 100% attention to the speech?


Go Cowboys!

 

[Doomsday101]

Shockey rips his coaches and ESPN says he's just trying to fire the team up. Terrell says he missed one speech and ESPN says he should be cut. Hmm

Owens can handle the media. Look what that one lockerroom interview did. It took the focus off of Tony Romo. I see that as a good thing heading into a big conference game. Romo being named November Player of the Month got little attention b/c of this Owens thing...and I'm willing to bet that Parcells doesn't mind.

Though I'm sure ESPN will say something about Owens stealing Romo's thunder soon too...we'll see.

PS
How many of the other players in the room paid 100% attention to the speech?


Go Cowboys!

This taking no attention away from Romo he is still a hot story. Owens can't stand not being front and center in grabbing attention and does so by coming out and saying stupid things. As for ESPN's Irvin is the one doing the interview and the words are TO not something they are spinning or making up. As far as some saying he should be cut they were saying that long before this because they see him for the idiot he has been and still is. The man has great talent but he is a fricken moron who does not know how to shut his stupid mouth.

 

[Sportsbabe]

People who are constantly negative have their negative opinions constantly reinforced. Why? Because it's what they want to see. It works the same way for those who are positive. Except the latter function not only better in life, they're always happier than the former.

Dag that's good. Do you mind if I frame that? :starspin

 

[conner01]

i guess when they showed a clip from yesterdays p.c. where bill said something to the efrect he was'nt going into a state of the union and nfl live uses that clip to make it look like bill was talking about t.o. when he was'nt even talking about t.o. thats t.o.'s fault too. t.o. is an attention hound, but espn is trying to make something out of nothing. they went out of there way to make it look like bill was upset about the stroy when bill was talking about the oline, not t.o.