T.O. in dallas?

[sufunk]

Killed me that Irvin's not getting into the Hall with Troy this year. Biggest shaft EVER. Irvin retired as the 2nd most dominant receiver ever arguably. Unstoppable, destroyed deion and rod woodson in their primes. Really wanted to take my 2 kids to canton to see them get in together. I almost hope they keep him out 4 more years so him and Emmitt can go together!

 

[nflnutswif]

Originally Posted by sufunk
Killed me that Irvin's not getting into the Hall with Troy this year. Biggest shaft EVER. Irvin retired as the 2nd most dominant receiver ever arguably. Unstoppable, destroyed deion and rod woodson in their primes. Really wanted to take my 2 kids to canton to see them get in together. I almost hope they keep him out 4 more years so him and Emmitt can go together!
I think that's exactly what's going to happen. He had a bad rap at the wrong time for this years induction. I really beleive it was the drug charge that shot his chances.

 

[sufunk]

True but how come that didnt hurt Lawrence Taylor?. Irvin not getting in last year was ridiculous. If he isnt a 1st ballot hall of famer i dont know who is. Like i said, even though his overall numbers arent insane, he was hurt early in his career and retired early but he destroyed the 2 best CB's in the Nfl (woodson and deion, both members of the all time NFL team) in their prime. Check his numbers against deion with atl and sf or woodson with Pittsburgh, they are insane. He averaged like 8- 125-1 against them. He was the only player who ever dominated deion in his prime. The only CB to ever even contain him was Bobby Taylor and that was after Irvin turned 30 and taylor was like 24. Not to mention, ummmm, 3 RINGS!!!!

 

[ruaround]

you cant compare michael irvin and Lawrence Taylor... LT changed the game!!! His numbers are far superior to irvins... Besides where would Michael Irvin been without Alvin Harper... Look at MI's #'s after Harper went to the Bucs...

 

[sufunk]

That must be a joke?? Irvins numbers were still good and he was getting old. How bout you look at Harpers numbers after he left us. He lived off Irvin being double teamed. Real easy when you NEVER have to be double teamed. Michael Irvin was the 2nd most dominant receiver of all time. And he also changed the game, he was the first really big receiver that was great and he forced teams to start getting CB's that were over 6'. He ended the days of 5'9" cb's and started the "big" receiver trend. I would guess your not a cowboy fan since ive NEVER heard a cowboy say Harper made Irvins numbers, other way around. Irvin was unstoppable before Harper was even a player.
More importantly, he was a main contributor to 3 titles.

 

[ruaround]

I really dont care for Dallas to be honest... My favorite team is the Bucs and my second favorite is anyone playing Dallas...
Irvin was a great receiver... a great possesion receiver, Harper spread the feild with his speed... I never said that Harper was or should have been a #1 WR... the Bucs gave him a shot and he failed misserably because he is not a possesion receiver... as far as being the "big wide receiver" I think that was John Stallworth... 6'2" and speed to go along with it...
much like any other position there is going to be a need to get "bigger" players... In the early 80's it was a rarity that a QB could see over his lineman now short QB's dont have a real place in the game... so to say that Irvin single handedly change the defensive secondary is obsurd...
Along with Coach Parcels, his staff and the raw talent of LT offensive coaches needed to plan a game around him... where as if a Defensive coach planned his game around Irivin he would get burned by moose, novahick or the all time rushing leader... Michael Irvin was a part of a great team TEAM... he did contribute, but he was not the sole reason for the 3 rings...

 

[sufunk]

no, but he was a main reason. Are you saying LT was the sole reason for the giants success???? That D had plenty of stars also.
As for the stallworth argument thats ridiculous. Stallworth wasnt a physical receiver at all especially compared to irvin. Irvin powered over cb's not just using his hgeight. He was the 1st of this kind to be so successful being physical with cb's. Proof stallworth did nothing to change it is that well after his prime and into his retirement the lkeague was full of 5'7-5'9 cb's that weighed 170-180lbs. Irvin made that impossible. If you werent big and physical he dominated you! Like i8 said check his numbers against the 2 best cb's of his era. He didnt bother padding stats against weak opponents. The bigger the game , the better irvin was. The tuitle game we lost bc emmitt was hurt in sf, irvin torched deion for like 11-183. Thats more than receivers gained in a month of games against deion at that time!
Harper was our 4th option at best, by the time teams tried to stop emmitt by moving up a safety, rolled the other safety to double irvin, and used a lb and nickel back to shade novacek, How could Harper not be open??? As any cowboy fan who watched the games will tell you, harper routinely dropped easy cathes and fumbled more than irvin on less than half the touches.

 

[sufunk]

P.S.- check irvin's numbers after harper left, especially 95 which was one of the 5 best years a receiver had had to that point in nfl history!

 

[darth tang]

Vanderjagt signed a 3 year 5.4 million dollar contract with 2.5 of that being bonus. Equals out to less than 1 million a year against the cap. Much better deal than what Vinateri would have cost us.....remember we would have had to offer vinateri more than what Indy did.....costing us more money than what Indy offerred.

 

[sufunk]

were only saving 700k a year, thats nothing. Whats 1 million more a year to know your kicker isnt gonna wet his pants if he has to make a game winner?
Vandy has awesome numbers but hes had very few pressure kicks. Hes piled up a lot of FG's in games indy won big. Plus he kicks indoors as opposed to bad weather for vinarieri. What would their numbers be if vandy was outside in NE his whole career and vinatieri was indoors?

 

[oceanists]

I cant agree with you fubnk , i was 12 when emmitt started playing , and football was my life , i have watched and understood since 5 , emmitt was my freaking IDOL , so i do appreciate him , yet you have to admit he had one heck of a line to run through , something Barry sanders didnt need ...... and once that line started to slack he wasnt doing much ....... and as far as saving a few dollars it was more like 15 million that they were saving............ Parcels has talked to TO on several occasions and they both like what they hear from one another ....... I really really really really doubt Parcells was boycotting the TO signing by not showing up. Jerry Jones wasnt at the Bledsoe conference last year when he was signed ....... yet he was damn happy with his decision and backed it up with a 3 year contract. Parcells isnt the type that would not speak to the media because he doesnt like a player , if parcells didnt like TO he seems like the type of guy that would say I dont like TO and i wont coach him ........Parcells doesnt hold his tongue .................................another thing about emmitt ........ yes he was great ..... but we also had a threat of Irvin Alvin Harper Kevin Williams and Jay Novecek downfield , with The moose leading Emmitts way ............. take that away like it happened around 1997 and Emmitt is struggling to get 1000 yards

 

[oceanists]

all Im saying is you have to look at the big picture in the 90s there were KEY elements to Emmitts success. Emmitt didnt break alot of tackles , once he was caught he was down , so if there wasnt a hole for him to run through he wasnt doing much

 

[sufunk]

How were you 12???? Your profile says you were born in april of 82. Do you know when emmitt was drafted?? Not 1994 in was 1990, emmits fisrt sb you were only 10.
And it shows by these ridiculous statements. Once emmitt was caught he was down??!?!?!?!?! Are you crazy????? did you ever even see him play??? Imstarting to think not. Emmitt broke a ton of tackles and made even more people miss. No matter how many weapons we had, EVERY and i mean EVERY defense we played from 1991-1998 was 100% committed to stopping emmitt 1st and foremost. EVERY defense we pl;ayed stacked the line against hin. Irvin, harper and novacek benifitted from emmitt not the other way around. Name 1 game in that timespan, just 1, where the defensive gameplan was well let emmitt get his yards but well drop back in a nickel and keep the receivers in check. There wasnt 1, it never happened. Every team we played committed to stopping emmitt after his rookie year and he still got 18k+ yards.
As for sanders, he had some nice numbers but he could never win titles on any team. He didnt move the chains, emmitt did. Barry was all or nothing, no matter what line he played behind. He would gain 0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,then 80yard td. Guess what thats 12-80, looks great but they had to punt 5 times and are losing 21-7 now. Emmitt was 5x the receiver Barry was as well.
P.S.- by 97, emmitt was like 28 and had taken quite a beating with a hell of a lot of carries so obviously he was slowing down but check his 98 numbers and youll see even at that age without most of those guys he was great!

 

[oceanists]

94-95 Cowboys - 49ers ......... the one where the 49ers were up 21-0 5 minutes into the first quarter .......why you ask? Deion Sanders Merton hanks and others shutting down the pass which didnt leave much room for Emmitt ................. I am doubting your football knowledge .... i watched emmitt from his rookie season in 90 (which i was 8) all the way up to his last game with the cardinals (where he was embarrased) ........... you are blowing this out of proportion ..... im not saying emmitt wasnt great , but he did have a lot of help
i can say this and he is my favorite player of all time
Im done on this subject because unlike you I want to keep my screen name ..... and this thread is about TO not emmitt .... and it is being Hijacked
Case closed

 

[sufunk]

I agree, you are done on this subject. You CLEARLY said you were 12 when Emmitt started playing. What , did you forget you had a profile with your birthday on here????

Obviously you did.
I wont waste my time talking to someone who claims to be a Cowboy fan but thought Emmitt started playing in 1994. I usually can tell within 4 years when my "idol" was drafted! At least check your stats before you try to start trouble kiddo

 

[sufunk]

By the way, it doesnt say this in stat books and since you werent watching games then, actual Cowboys fans can tell you why we lost the 94 chanpionship. Emmitt had a severely strained hamstring most of the year in 94, thats why his average per carry was so low in 94. He missed numerous second halves and fourth quarters that year due to what real Cowboys fans knew as "damn hammie". With a healthy Emmitt we would have moved the ball at will on that team and beaten them just as easily as the 2 previous years despite them being salary cap cheats.

 

[oceanists]

Originally Posted by sufunk
I agree, you are done on this subject. You CLEARLY said you were 12 when Emmitt started playing. What , did you forget you had a profile with your birthday on here????

Obviously you did.
I wont waste my time talking to someone who claims to be a Cowboy fan but thought Emmitt started playing in 1994. I usually can tell within 4 years when my "idol" was drafted! At least check your stats before you try to start trouble kiddo

yeah ok ..............

so i didnt do the math
The Terell Owens signing is the greatest thing to happen to the cowboys for a long time
I am all for it unlike other newbies on this board
^^^ this guy is ridiculous
if he was a REAL cowboy fan he would accept the change of the team and the move of the OWNER..... were you you a fan of Bum Bright selling the cowboys to jones who immediatly fired Tom Landry hired Jimmie and then went 1-15 on the season ..........didnt think so but it worked ! because of this the cowboys got aikman moose stepnoski and tony tolbert
maybe you werent a fan of trading Herschel walker for draft picks which allowed us to get EMMITT in the first place
I was 9 when that happened yet i still remember it ....

 

[oceanists]

by the way that damn hammy happened in 96

 

[sufunk]

Didnt do the math? thats a joke right?

You lied to bolster your argument and got caught, dont try to lamely explain it away now.
Whats really funny is your doing it again :hilarious
You remember when we traded Hershel, you were 9 at the time you say

I guess im not a real cowboy fan like you say, i didnt know we traded Hershel in 1991(Emmitts 2nd year) when you were 9. :hilarious
Wow!!! can you get anything right?????? you obviously werent a Cowboy fan then since you have no idea when we traded Hershel or drafted Emmitt

 

[sufunk]

No, 96 he hurt his neck in the opener against chicago. 94 was the hamstring as any Cowboy fan knows.
Like i said, can you get anything right??????