T.O.

[DemsMyBoys]

I had the same thought, actually. But I slapped myself up 'side the head and it went away. Thank goodness.

 

[Brighteyes]

I think T.O. could really help the Cardinals -- if he went back to the 49'ers.

Just curious - is that you, Terrell ?

 

[kerouac9]

The real reason why T.O. won't be signed is this: Your #3 and #4 WRs have to play special teams.

Terrell Owens doesn't play special teams.

QED.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

You guys are blinded by your cardinal pride IMO TO is a great receiver and a better athlete that would help us.

WAS A GREAT RECEIVER!

Check his stats over the last couple of years. he DROPS too many balls.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

...and you seem like someone that likes to bring up ridiculous suggestions just to stir the pot. Either you are very young, or you don't buy the crap you're spewing, and are just looking for reaction.

Obtuse or deliberately obtuse... that is the question.

 

[cardsfanmd]

The real reason why T.O. won't be signed is this: Your #3 and #4 WRs have to play special teams.

Terrell Owens doesn't play special teams.

QED.

Thank God, I was reading through this thread and wondering why nobody had pointed this out. This, above many other reasons is why TO is still unemployed IMO.

 

[azmike74]

Must....not.....add....sarcastic response......I disagree with the OP.

 

[IAWarnerFan]

My take on this isn't as harsh as the other replies as I still think he could put up some good numbers if a team signs him up, but I seriously doubt he would want to be a clear cut #2(at best) as he would here. There are teams out there that would make sense since he would have a shot at being the top WR.

 

[Captain Matt]

Obtuse or deliberately obtuse... that is the question.

Even if you guys don't agree, please back off with the negative comments about the poster. Calling someone dull or slow because they have a viewpoint you don't agree with is not what we do on this site. Please attack Owens if you must attack someone..... we know there is splenty to attack in T.O. Thanks! [/I]

 

[RugbyMuffin]

Even if you guys don't agree, please back off with the negative comments about the poster. Calling someone dull or slow because they have a viewpoint you don't agree with is not what we do on this site. Please attack Owens if you must attack someone..... we know there is splenty to attack in T.O. Thanks! [/I]

Sorry, I was blinded by my Cardinals pride.

Because it causes me not to know what I am talking about.

 

[JeffGollin]

This is a continuation of the time-old argument of "Athletic Ability vs. Personal Issues."

i.e. how much do you put up with in "distractions" in exchange for having a guy on your roster who can make plays?

On many (but not all) teams, there's a huge gray area - i.e. how big a distraction? How many plays?

And then you get the extenuating circumstances - i.e. "he's controversial but he's really a good teammate" or "even if he doesn't always show up for practice, he always delivers on the field."

Personally, I'm quite leery of placing too much importance on any one player. Football is a team sport and sacrificing things that have made your team great in order to accomodate one very good (even great player) is highly risky and sets your team up for disappointment.

Regarding TO, the two things I'd pay a lot of attention to are (a) specific incidents (i.e. what he said about McNabb when he played in Philly) and (b) whether or not he turned the teams he played on into Super Bowl contenders (in most if not all cases, he didn't - & therefore, if he's not good enough to make that kind of an impact, why take the risk?)

 

[kerouac9]

This is a continuation of the time-old argument of "Athletic Ability vs. Personal Issues."

i.e. how much do you put up with in "distractions" in exchange for having a guy on your roster who can make plays?

On many (but not all) teams, there's a huge gray area - i.e. how big a distraction? How many plays?

And then you get the extenuating circumstances - i.e. "he's controversial but he's really a good teammate" or "even if he doesn't always show up for practice, he always delivers on the field."

Personally, I'm quite leery of placing too much importance on any one player. Football is a team sport and sacrificing things that have made your team great in order to accomodate one very good (even great player) is highly risky and sets your team up for disappointment.

Regarding TO, the two things I'd pay a lot of attention to are (a) specific incidents (i.e. what he said about McNabb when he played in Philly) and (b) whether or not he turned the teams he played on into Super Bowl contenders (in most if not all cases, he didn't - & therefore, if he's not good enough to make that kind of an impact, why take the risk?)

Not to quibble, but the 49ers, Eagles, and Cowboys were all pretty good teams when he was there. I don't know if a WR can turn an average club into a Super Bowl contender, but he definitely helped the Eagles get to the Super Bowl, and the other two teams consistent playoff contenders.

 

[Treefiddy]

Stats:

               G  R  YD TD
Doucet: 11 31 359  3
Owens:  16 55 829  5

Doucet:
2.8 RPG
32.6 YPG
.27 TDs per Game

Owens:
3.44 RPG
51.8 YPG
.31 TDs per Game

One did it as his team's #1 Receiver, one did it as his team's #4 Receiver.

Looking only at stats, Doucet isn't that far behind, and he did it with a lot less field time.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

Even if you guys don't agree, please back off with the negative comments about the poster. Calling someone dull or slow because they have a viewpoint you don't agree with is not what we do on this site. Please attack Owens if you must attack someone..... we know there is splenty to attack in T.O. Thanks! [/I]

"We" do it when someone is clearly dull or slow, so spare us the lesson in behavior.

 

[chickenhead]

Bringing in TO doesn't address a need. Sure he can still make some big plays, but we have three receivers who are equally capable (more in the case of Fitz) on the roster. Plus, if we want Doucet to develop, why bring in a rental who is going to cost him PT?

 

[SoCal Cardfan]

Way to many vets responding in this thread.

C'mon guys, you should know not to feed trolls.

 

[Buckybird]

Way to many vets responding in this thread.

C'mon guys, you should know not to feed trolls.

obvious in what his intentions were since he has yet to return.

 

[Red Dawn]

I gotta support The Lt. here.

As far as TO, he's a past his prime headcase that has caused discontent on every team he's been on. We need him like we need an August game at Sun Devil stadium.

 

[lobo]

This is a continuation of the time-old argument of "Athletic Ability vs. Personal Issues."

i.e. how much do you put up with in "distractions" in exchange for having a guy on your roster who can make plays?

On many (but not all) teams, there's a huge gray area - i.e. how big a distraction? How many plays?

And then you get the extenuating circumstances - i.e. "he's controversial but he's really a good teammate" or "even if he doesn't always show up for practice, he always delivers on the field."

Personally, I'm quite leery of placing too much importance on any one player. Football is a team sport and sacrificing things that have made your team great in order to accomodate one very good (even great player) is highly risky and sets your team up for disappointment.

Regarding TO, the two things I'd pay a lot of attention to are (a) specific incidents (i.e. what he said about McNabb when he played in Philly) and (b) whether or not he turned the teams he played on into Super Bowl contenders (in most if not all cases, he didn't - & therefore, if he's not good enough to make that kind of an impact, why take the risk?)

i'll add a third point....he has for the past two years a bad case of the "dropseys" sort of a bad problem for a wr.

 

[Buckybird]

i'll add a third point....he has for the past two years a bad case of the "dropseys" sort of a bad problem for a wr.

thats an understatement.

BTW I think its dropsies Lol

 

[blindseyed]

Simple..he's a cancer

 

[JeffGollin]

i'll add a third point....he has for the past two years a bad case of the "dropseys" sort of a bad problem for a wr.

That would do it for me.

Funny thing - I was only speaking about TO in general terms and hadn't even remotely considered him as a Cardinal.

I kind of like Fitz-Breaston-Doucet with guys like Roberts and O Jones right behind them. I'm also really interested in seeing what some of the more unheralded rooks and role players (like Mougey and Williams) can bring to the table (because I'm guessing that having a deep group makes it easier for Rod G and Wiz to roll the dice on a couple of high risk/high reward wideouts).