Owens game = Irvin game

[ravidubey]

Irvin was a better possession receiver and leaper while Owens is the better breakaway threat. Owens has a nose for the endzone and his extra speed really helps him. How many times did Irvin make it to the 1 yard line only to have Emmitt get the score? Owens has over 100 TD's-- that's really incredible.

 

[Cochese]

Comparing the butthole to Irvin= blasphemy. Rot in purgatory.

 

[Stash]

I see some similarities in size and physical play, but that's as far as it goes.

Irvin had better hands, Owens has better speed.

Owens is a me-first guy, Irvin a consummate team guy.

Both love the attention (but you can say that about a lot of today's receivers).

One key point for me. I think Owens has helped good quarterbacks look great. I think Bledsoe is the best passer that he'll have played the game with to date.

It will be very interesting to see how he and Bledsoe perform together. I think Owens is the best receiver that Bledsoe has had to date as well and his addition to the team (along with the other offensive weapons) should help Bledsoe's productivity.

 

[superpunk]

Comparing the butthole to Irvin= blasphemy. Rot in purgatory.

 

[EveryoneElse]

A freakin' NO!!!

TO is a self centered MO-RON with his own agenda.

Irvin was flashy and flamboyant, but he was the consumate team player.

Putting them in the same sentence is a disgrace.

When TO breaks his back for a game turning first down, and then gets up for more ... then I'll have respect for him.

Until then, he's not a real Cowboy.

I'll say this first....I love Michael Irvin. He's one of my favorite Cowboys of all time. That said, Michael had his problems, that hurt the team. When he wasn't doing crack and getting suspended, yeah....he was a team player. Nothing TO has done measures up to get yourself suspended over being a selfish drug addict.

TO is no saint, neither was Michael.

Back to the question.....

I think TOs game is similar to Michael's, both want/wanted the ball in the clutch, both will/would go over the middle. The big difference is Michael was a tad slower, but had better hands than TO. Both were/are relentless, and both want/wanted to win.

 

[baj1dallas]

TO is a YAC guy. Irvin was more of a big physical Marvin Harrison type.

 

[AbeBeta]

Ok, in that point I do agree. TO is more dominant now than Irvin was at the same age.

I think the real test is going to be over the next few years. If TO puts up 80 catches this year and next with his usual TD production then we will have a clear winner.

 

[AbeBeta]

TO is a YAC guy. Irvin was more of a big physical Marvin Harrison type.

But is that about the player or the type of offense?

The West Coast O is all about YAC and that's what TO has played in.

 

[Yeagermeister]

Like playing in the Superbowl with a broken leg? That seemed pretty selfish to me.

I hate to defend TO but some of you have so little objectivity that I feel I have to.

The only reason he played was so he could get a new contract from Philly. He said if he'd known they weren't going to redo his deal he wouldn't have played. That is the definition of selfish.

 

[Screw The Hall]

Would you all say that Terrell Owens game is very similar to Michael Irvin with regards to their size and physical style of play?

Irvin was by far the more physical of the two despite Terrell's build. Irvin just bullied DB's ... they dreaded playing against him because they knew they were going to war. Owens however is certainly the better deep threat because of his speed.

As far as some of the other posts about who was more dominant, the Cowboys win zero Superbowls w/o 88. He had the intangible ability of being the ignition switch for his team giving them a united focus and "swagger" if you will. Whenever 88 showed his flare on a football field the result was a "team" igniter and uniter, he was a team leader in every aspect on the football field. Owen's has been the anti-Irvin in regard to these intangibles to this point, and it directly affects his and his team's dominance on the football field.

 

[RCowboyFan]

Irvin was by far the more physical of the two despite Terrell's build. Irvin just bullied DB's ... they dreaded playing against him because they knew they were going to war. Owens however is certainly the better deep threat because of his speed.

As far as some of the other posts about who was more dominant, the Cowboys win zero Superbowls w/o 88. He had the intangible ability of being the ignition switch for his team giving them a united focus and "swagger" if you will. Whenever 88 showed his flare on a football field the result was a "team" igniter and uniter, he was a team leader in every aspect on the football field. Owen's has been the anti-Irvin in regard to these intangibles to this point, and it directly affects his and his team's dominance on the football field.

 

[EveryoneElse]

The only reason he played was so he could get a new contract from Philly. He said if he'd known they weren't going to redo his deal he wouldn't have played. That is the definition of selfish.

Oh my gosh. Think about it though. Is his attitude so different from the common person? He went out and risked his career becase he thought it may benefit him.

Has anyone went the extra mile at work to get a promotion and then regreted it once they were overlooked? C'mon. It happens everyday, and as much as we all hate to admit football is a business, it's not a game as much anymore.

TO is not the devil, and he's not much worse than a normal person.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Would you all say that Terrell Owens game is very similar to Michael Irvin with regards to their size and physical style of play?

Absolutely, although even Irvin has stated that Owens is a better WR than he ever was. Irvin had far better hands and by 1995 he lost too much speed and wasn't the deep threat that Owens is right now.

I think one of the misconceptions have about Irvin's game is that he wasn't just a possession WR who caught the ball over the middle and fell to the ground.. Like Owens, he was deadly on the short stuff because he was so strong along with having these long strides that he was a tough guy to tackle. But as he got around 1995 or so, he started to lose his speed and was still a very good WR, but just not as much of a scary threat as he once was.

Rich...........

 

[Doomsday101]

Oh my gosh. Think about it though. Is his attitude so different from the common person? He went out and risked his career becase he thought it may benefit him.

Has anyone went the extra mile at work to get a promotion and then regreted it once they were overlooked? C'mon. It happens everyday, and as much as we all hate to admit football is a business, it's not a game as much anymore.

TO is not the devil, and he's not much worse than a normal person.

But you still do not trash teammates to the media. He is not the devil nor do I think he is an evil person I think he does not know how to deal with problems in a professional manner. While football may be a business it is still a team game and you can't have a player ripping his teammates to the press. No matter how bad of a game Troy might have had and yes Troy had some bad games never did Irvin trash Troy he encourged Troy and stood by his side and anyone who saw Irvin in training camp knows he encourged all the players.

 

[Paniolo22]

I also think that the fact Irvin broke a lot of tackles to get his YAC adds to the argument he was a more physical receiver. TO out runs a lot of his opponents, but Irvin was so strong, he would get hit when the ball got to him, keep his balance while the defender lay on the ground, and trot the extra yards for a touchdown.

 

[AbeBeta]

As far as some of the other posts about who was more dominant, the Cowboys win zero Superbowls w/o 88. He had the intangible ability of being the ignition switch for his team giving them a united focus and "swagger" if you will. Whenever 88 showed his flare on a football field the result was a "team" igniter and uniter, he was a team leader in every aspect on the football field. Owen's has been the anti-Irvin in regard to these intangibles to this point, and it directly affects his and his team's dominance on the football field.

But let's not put Irvin on a pedestal here.

Michael's selfish off the field behaviors damaged the team tremendously -- he was the highest profile guy involved. During his suspension in 1996 we went 2-3 -- the rest of the way we went 8-3. We had to go to the wildcard game and then play on the road in Carolina. Having Irvin for those first 5 games would have made a big difference.

That team had serious talent and Irvin had a hand in bringing the whole thing down. Great teams have a short window of opportunity and that was that group's last shot -- Irvin's selfish personal behavior hurt the team badly there.

Fast forward to 1997, we play horribly but end up with the #8 pick in the 1998 draft. We pass on Randy Moss -- why? The negative image the Irvin helped build made it impossible for us to take him without suffering another major PR hit.

Selfish comes in many forms folks.

 

[EveryoneElse]

But you still do not trash teammates to the media. He is not the devil nor do I think he is an evil person I think he does not know how to deal with problems in a professional manner. While football may be a business it is still a team game and you can't have a player ripping his teammates to the press. No matter how bad of a game Troy might have had and yes Troy had some bad games never did Irvin trash Troy he encourged Troy and stood by his side and anyone who saw Irvin in training camp knows he encourged all the players.

TO was wrong for trashing McNabb and Garcia....I agree. I don't agree with the selfish tag people are trying to put on him.

Why isn't Gregg Ellis the most hated Cowboy now? Everytime I turn around he's questioning his role with the team, and expecting to be traded.

 

[CrazyCowboy]

I watched every game M. Irvin played and he was great! Had decent speed for a man his size. Awesome passion for the game surpassed by noone and loved to win like nobody before him. Great hands and ended up with stats that should eventually get him in the hall of fame! Mike Irvin is great bottome line........however comma,

Irvin is in no way, shape, or form, better WR then T.O.--period IMO! And I would be willing to bet $$$$ Mike Irvin himself would agree T.O. is the better WR and athlete! In addition: T.O. would kick Irvin's *** in a scuffle on/off the field to boot! Thought I would throw that in for free.......

 

[Yeagermeister]

Oh my gosh. Think about it though. Is his attitude so different from the common person? He went out and risked his career becase he thought it may benefit him.

Has anyone went the extra mile at work to get a promotion and then regreted it once they were overlooked? C'mon. It happens everyday, and as much as we all hate to admit football is a business, it's not a game as much anymore.

TO is not the devil, and he's not much worse than a normal person.

My point was he didn't do it for the team as was suggested.

 

[Screw The Hall]

But let's not put Irvin on a pedestal here.

Michael's selfish off the field behaviors damaged the team tremendously -- he was the highest profile guy involved. During his suspension in 1996 we went 2-3 -- the rest of the way we went 8-3. We had to go to the wildcard game and then play on the road in Carolina. Having Irvin for those first 5 games would have made a big difference.

That team had serious talent and Irvin had a hand in bringing the whole thing down. Great teams have a short window of opportunity and that was that group's last shot -- Irvin's selfish personal behavior hurt the team badly there.

Fast forward to 1997, we play horribly but end up with the #8 pick in the 1998 draft. We pass on Randy Moss -- why? The negative image the Irvin helped build made it impossible for us to take him without suffering another major PR hit.

Selfish comes in many forms folks.

No pedestal, Irvin had his and a slew of other peoples share of problems when it came to legal troubles off the field. And of course you are right there certainly were ramifications that reverberated throughout the franchise for years as a result of some of those decisions, but let's face it the 90's Cowboys were like a shooting star, meant to burn up rather than fade away, not just Irvin ... the team as a whole. Except for a few notable exceptions(Emmitt,Troy,Woody,Novacek...) they were an ornery, passionate, cocky group of badboys from the word go and it all had a shelflife, it wasn't meant to last. I still think Irvin's a good guy it's just when he's not on the football field his passion get's the better of him ... it's a condition I've fought for years myself ... but I digress.

I have an interesting question that begs pondering. If Owen's wouldn't have trashed his QB's and coaches in SF and Philly how good could those teams and teamates have become. Could he have a superbowl ring as we speak. If he would have been in a Cowboy uniform and not Irvin way back when would we have even 1 ring of which to speak? Could he have catapulted Garcia and Mcnabb to Aikman like status by being a team player like Irvin, and conversely would he have relegated Aikman to being an above average afterthought because of the destuction he may have left in his wake with the 90's Boys.

Important thing to remember is that the 90's dynasty didn't occur by accident my friend, it took alot of "cohesive" parts to get us there. A big part was Michael Irvin and his fire and leadership. I have my serious doubts if those two receivers would have switched places that you would be remembering the 90's the same way.