Damaramu Posted February 2, 2004 Report Posted February 2, 2004 Anybody see Michael Irvin arguing on ESPN that the NFL is full of bad players and his team would've beaten any of them?
Guest Mosaicv2 Posted February 2, 2004 Report Posted February 2, 2004 How many of you MASSholes will be at Government Center tomorrow afternoon?!?!? I'll be there like a pasty on Janet Jackson's NIPPLE!!! could u be even more insultin asshole!!
Guest Choken One Posted February 2, 2004 Report Posted February 2, 2004 Anybody see Michael Irvin arguing on ESPN that the NFL is full of bad players and his team would've beaten any of them? he might be a retarded Crackhead but he's kinda right.
Damaramu Posted February 2, 2004 Report Posted February 2, 2004 Anybody see Michael Irvin arguing on ESPN that the NFL is full of bad players and his team would've beaten any of them? he might be a retarded Crackhead but he's kinda right. Yeah well you should've seen the way he presented himself. He came off as a raving delusional jackass and anyone that hadn't seen the Cowboys of that era play(very likely a lot of people) would think he's an idiot..........then again the raving delusional jackass thing isn't different from his normal composure........
HarleyQuinn Posted February 2, 2004 Report Posted February 2, 2004 Honestly, I could probably buy that argument as their defense was pretty good-great in the early 90's and their offense was also extremely solid
sfaJack Posted February 2, 2004 Report Posted February 2, 2004 Yeah well you should've seen the way he presented himself. He came off as a raving delusional jackass and anyone that hadn't seen the Cowboys of that era play(very likely a lot of people) would think he's an idiot..........then again the raving delusional jackass thing isn't different from his normal composure........ Oh, so you just hate Irvin, then? Bah. If you'd listen to what he's actually saying, you'd know that he's quite often right, just as he is now. The Cowboys of that era WOULD beat any of the teams in the NFL today. Ignore Irvin's antics, and you'll get some good football thoughts. I don't remember which week it was, but on one of the ESPN countdown shows in the midpoint of the season, he said Carolina was going to go to the Super Bowl, and they hadn't even vanquished the Bucs yet.
Red Baron Posted February 2, 2004 Report Posted February 2, 2004 But I'll say this. This season was probably one of the best seasons the NFL had in the last few years
Your Paragon of Virtue Posted February 2, 2004 Report Posted February 2, 2004 Anybody see Michael Irvin arguing on ESPN that the NFL is full of bad players and his team would've beaten any of them? he might be a retarded Crackhead but he's kinda right. anyone that hadn't seen the Cowboys of that era play(very likely a lot of people) would think he's an idiot Translation: Anyone that's ignorant. Believe me, football isn't some new sport making it into the mainstream. "Super Bowl Fans" still use the Cowboys as their first guess as to who is going to be playing. Still, about 90% of the people that watch the NFL today would have seen them play, and would probably have agreed with him.
Damaramu Posted February 2, 2004 Report Posted February 2, 2004 Anybody see Michael Irvin arguing on ESPN that the NFL is full of bad players and his team would've beaten any of them? he might be a retarded Crackhead but he's kinda right. anyone that hadn't seen the Cowboys of that era play(very likely a lot of people) would think he's an idiot Translation: Anyone that's ignorant. Believe me, football isn't some new sport making it into the mainstream. "Super Bowl Fans" still use the Cowboys as their first guess as to who is going to be playing. Still, about 90% of the people that watch the NFL today would have seen them play, and would probably have agreed with him. You'd be suprised. And I wouldn't say I hate Irvin. But as a hardcore Cowboy hater and 49ers fan during that era there is still resentment.
Guest Choken One Posted February 3, 2004 Report Posted February 3, 2004 My only beef with Irvan is that he tries to outdress Deion too much
Your Paragon of Virtue Posted February 3, 2004 Report Posted February 3, 2004 My only beef with Irvan is that he tries to outdress Deion too much Deion could say the most intelligent thing in the world, and he'd STILL sound like an idiot. He's just so obnoxious.
Damaramu Posted February 3, 2004 Report Posted February 3, 2004 My only beef with Irvan is that he tries to outdress Deion too much Deion could say the most intelligent thing in the world, and he'd STILL sound like an idiot. He's just so obnoxious. Deions got a pretty big ego himself. Was he one of the guys involved with all the Cowboy crack stuff? I think it's even funnier when I see him on the evangelist shows.
Slayer Posted February 3, 2004 Author Report Posted February 3, 2004 All I remember about Titans-Rams was the longest yard and how BORING the game was up until that final drive. That game is barely in my top five. The ending is one of the tops but that game was incredibly slow. Nine times out of ten I would agree with the notion that "one play does not make a game" This is that tenth exception
Tony149 Posted February 3, 2004 Report Posted February 3, 2004 I don't think Deion was involved in the drug problems of some of the '90s Cowboys. Although he does tell the story when he thought about driving off a cliff due to personal demons before deciding against it. As for Irvin's Cowboys against either of the two Super Bowl teams, if it's Jimmy Johnson's 'Boys, then he's right. If it's Switzer's team, then I'd say a toss up against the Pats but a win over Carolina.
Vern Gagne Posted February 3, 2004 Report Posted February 3, 2004 New England showed that their "Homeland Defense" had a ton of flaws. I think even the Switzer coached Cowboys beat New England, by 6 or 7 points. How about the Bills teams that lost 4 straight Super Bowls? Where do they stalk up with New England, and Carolina?
Slayer Posted February 3, 2004 Author Report Posted February 3, 2004 Sometimes I don't get why the mid 90's Cowboys get so much love They were a Thurman Thomas fumble and a couple of Neil O'Donnell interceptions away from possibly only winning one SB in the 90's
sfaJack Posted February 3, 2004 Report Posted February 3, 2004 Sometimes I don't get why the mid 90's Cowboys get so much love They were a Thurman Thomas fumble and a couple of Neil O'Donnell interceptions away from possibly only winning one SB in the 90's Are you serious? I might give you the O'Donnell thing, because without those picks the game would have been much more interesting. The second win over the Bills was inevitable. All Thomas' fumble did was give the Cowboys the win sooner rather than later.
Slayer Posted February 3, 2004 Author Report Posted February 3, 2004 Sometimes I don't get why the mid 90's Cowboys get so much love They were a Thurman Thomas fumble and a couple of Neil O'Donnell interceptions away from possibly only winning one SB in the 90's Are you serious? I might give you the O'Donnell thing, because without those picks the game would have been much more interesting. The second win over the Bills was inevitable. All Thomas' fumble did was give the Cowboys the win sooner rather than later. That's why I said sometimes No doubt they were a great team with a great coach (in Johnson at least), but they had their flirtations with disaster too My main point is how people are ragging on these Patriots because they don't believe they're the same kind of teams as the dynasties of old, and I was pointing out that even those dynasties had the potential for disaster
Vern Gagne Posted February 3, 2004 Report Posted February 3, 2004 Of course they did. The 49ers had to drive like 85 yards in 2 minutes to beat the Bengals. The Steelers had a couple of close games with the Cowboys.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now