Can Terrell Owens make a big impact with the Bears ?
by Dr. Drunkenstien on Mar 1, 2010 9:10 PM CST
Email
Print
Now that Terrell Owens is destined to be a free agent, how does this effect the Bears ? Maybe none, but can he make a big impact if the Bears sign him ? He's proven that he can behave himself for at least one season. And we know he can be a premier receiver if his head is in the game. With the two Devins, Johnny and Mike Martz, they can be a pack that could be talked about for years to come. Maybe with Owens, the Bears can be the new Saints of last year or better. But, the Bears are the Bears and we might as well wake up now cause the fairytale ends here. But this is what fairy-tales are all about, right ?
44 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I think so
One year contract.
the Bears are the type of team TO would love.
We could get all he attention and not have to be a ball hog.
tis is just my opinion thoug
i’m not like 100% all for YEAH LETS GO GET TO.
but i wouldn’t be pissed if they did get him
Do or do not there is not try-Master Yoda
Reality check
Wherever TO goes he is a ball hog
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Mar 2, 2010 12:17 PM CST up reply actions
Isn't that what you want...
out of a receiver? Jerry Rice was a ball hog and so was Micheal Irvin. Both are in the Hall. I think that you absolutely want you WRs to be ball hogs. The problem is that TO has a habit of getting pissy when the team losses and he hasn’t gotten the ball as much as he thinks he should.
To me that says that the guy wants to win and he wants the ball. I have no problems with that, and I think the media has been worse for the teams that TO has played on than TO has been, not that he hasn’t been bad.
The real problems then lie in how bad he could be in one of the most critical sports media markets on earth, and how bad it would get if the Bears don’t win. Both could get ugly….
But he was right about McNabb ;)
Some days it's not worth chewing through the restraints - T-Train.
Two things are infinite: The universe and human stupidity. And I am not sure about the universe. - Albert Einstein.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 2, 2010 4:02 PM CST up reply actions
No, TO is not what I want
I have no problem with a guy wanting to be the go to guy, especially if he has the skills (debatable whether TO still does), but I do have a problem with guys like TO who scapegoat other players for his own failures. He has a long history of throwing teammates under the bus.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Mar 2, 2010 4:57 PM CST up reply actions
Don't.....
get me wrong. I agree with that summary. VBut that’s not what you called him out for above.
bq.Wherever TO goes he is a ball hog
I just want the debate to be about reality, and in reality, being a ball hog is a good thing. I agree that he has a lot of other problems and the biggest one being throwing his teammates under the bus.
But he was still right about McNabb ;)
Some days it's not worth chewing through the restraints - T-Train.
Two things are infinite: The universe and human stupidity. And I am not sure about the universe. - Albert Einstein.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 2, 2010 6:40 PM CST up reply actions
screw up that blocked quote a lot :D
Some days it's not worth chewing through the restraints - T-Train.
Two things are infinite: The universe and human stupidity. And I am not sure about the universe. - Albert Einstein.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 2, 2010 6:41 PM CST up reply actions
Reality is that TO brings trouble.
But he was OK in Buffalo, and they lost a lot. I think he realizes that he is aging, and teams won’t be as willing to deal with his sh*t so he’s toning it down.
He’s still better than anything else on the market, but I’m not sure that he’s good enough to wasn’t a roster spot and slow the growth of on of the teams younger recievers.
by GentleGoodnight on Mar 3, 2010 4:50 AM CST up reply actions
Read what I posted
a talented ball hog (a guy who wants to be the go to guy) is fine, but TO is no longer that kind of ball hog. He is a over-the-hill ball hog who thinks he still deserves to be the go to guy.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Mar 3, 2010 12:33 PM CST up reply actions
OK....
Here is the entirety of what you posted that I responded to……
Wherever TO goes he is a ball hog
Where exactly did it say the rest of that? Maybe in the next post?
I have no problem with a guy wanting to be the go to guy, especially if he has the skills (debatable whether TO still does), but I do have a problem with guys like TO who scapegoat other players for his own failures. He has a long history of throwing teammates under the bus.
Nope. That doesn’t say “a talented ball hog (a guy who wants to be the go to guy) is fine, but TO is no longer that kind of ball hog. He is a over-the-hill ball hog who thinks he still deserves to be the go to guy.” either. So what exactly was I supposed to read, again?
You confuse me. I agreed with what you followed up with after I questioned the initial comment. Why do you have to be so hostile? It really doesn’t make you look smarter, and posting things like “Read what I posted” when you posted exactly nothing that stated what you claimed to have been saying.
First you complained about him being a ball hog.
I asked if that wasn’t actually a good thing.
You responded by saying that he throws people under the bus.
I responded that this was true, but that that wasn’t the argument I responded to, and that my comment was based of of your initial comment.
You respond with “Read what I posted” and then pretended that you said something you didn’t, offering a completely new argument that TO is declining (true) and that he thinks he’s still the go to guy (also true, but not necessarily an inaccurate thought, but we can debate that later). This statement was no issued previously. So what was I supposed to have read? Your mind? Maybe you should take your own advise…..
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 3, 2010 12:58 PM CST up reply actions
Train, you really do like to nitpick I see
In my second post I think I make it clear (except to you I guess) that I think TO now longer has the requisite skills, a comment that I repeated in the third post.
Now, do you have anything more to say about TO?
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Mar 3, 2010 2:31 PM CST up reply actions
Actually.......
read your own post….you said he was a ball hog in the first post. You said in the second post that your real problem was that TO threw teammates under the bus. and in the third post you questioned his talent level.
Your only mention of his talent prior to the third post was…..
I have no problem with a guy wanting to be the go to guy, especially if he has the skills (debatable whether TO still does)
but that is by no means an indictment of his skills nor does it convey that you are positive he no longer “has the requisite skills” . In fact, the “debatable” qualifier leaves the argument open for discussion. Instead, you made the main focus of your argument TO’s habit of throwing teammates under the bus.
You answer to being called on this was to try to marginalize me twice:
Read what I posted
and…….
Train, you really do like to nitpick I see
neither of which worked. Continue it all you want, but I’ll just keep calling it out. It doesn’t really affect me.
As far as the nitpicking goes. Nitpicking is defined as minute, trivial, unnecessary and unjustified criticism. That doesn’t apply here, as I have justified the initial criticism. Instead of justifying your initial argument you changed it. When I called you on it, you changed it again, even though I agreed with the new argument.
The bottom line? I don’t know. Maybe you can explain how it was actually I who took the conversation from TO is a ball hog to TO is a bad teammate to TO hasn’t enough talent and you were saying the same thhing the whole time. Or how debatable becomes clear…….
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 3, 2010 3:20 PM CST up reply actions
You are better than this Train
plenty of real issues to discuss about the Bears without having to make up false issues.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Mar 3, 2010 5:25 PM CST up reply actions
right....
that’s what happened here.
Not that the typical pattern was followed in that you couldn’t respond to what I said and instead dragged red herrings all over the thread, and tried to marginalize my posts instead. Nope.
Not that you took a post in which I agreed with you, and decided to make it into something it wasn’t. Nope.
I’m just making up false issues. Absolutely.
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 3, 2010 5:40 PM CST up reply actions
Clearing you have no gotten over
our difference of opinion regarding Forte after all. Why do you feel the need to make things so personal here? Get a life.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Mar 4, 2010 11:36 AM CST up reply actions
I think you just made his point, hahaha.
Looks from this screen like you have the problem with letting things go and like you might be the one whos butt-hurt.
His point is spelled out clearly. Yours was not. It was really more like watching you try to dig your way out of a mud puddle. You just got deeper and deeper and dirtier and dirtier.
by GentleGoodnight on Mar 4, 2010 12:06 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
T-Train
We are always on the same page Haha. Idk how we do it.
Do or do not there is not try-Master Yoda
nope
he would hinder the development of our WR talent. do you really want another excuse for lovie to not have DA, Knox, JI, Hester or Bennet in?
Bear down Chicago
At what price ?
Free ? Sure, he’s better than anyone we have. Ten mill a year ? Good luck. But if he comes cheap, he’s got to look better on the roster than Whack-me Glazyarse or Rashied Davis. Earl Bennett is out … Hester, Bennett and Knox will have kittens with this new playbook …
by Irish Bears Fan on Mar 1, 2010 10:56 PM CST reply actions
Earl Bennett is done for 2010, really?
-------
"Newbie, if the next two words out of your mouth aren't 'See ya' then the third word will be 'Oh my god. My crotch. You've punched me in my crotch." - Dr. Percival Ulysses Cox
by David Taylor on Mar 1, 2010 11:30 PM CST up reply actions
According to the all-knowing Irish Bears Fan he is. It MUST be true.
Roll Tide... National Champs!!!
Owens
Chicago needs a go to reciever. A guy like Owens would go a long way and be a good fit for Cutlers arm. Jay could throw the ball anywhere and Owens could do get it. Just my opinion, but I think with the addition of a playmaking wide out, and an O-line overhaul..hello playoffs.
Hmmm....
the addition of a playmaking wide out, and an O-line overhaul..hello playoffs.
Unfortuantely, neither of these were the reason we failed to make the playoffs. The offense was actually decent. It was the D giving up 30+ pts numerous times that kept us from being successful as a team. Grab a good G/RT in the draft or FA and spend the rest of the moneys on defense.
Roll Tide... National Champs!!!
no
he’s an old drop the ball guy
by Lester A. Wiltfong Jr. on Mar 2, 2010 8:54 AM CST up reply actions
To be fair, though...
he’s really good at it.
I'm a firm believer in the philosophy of a ruling class. Especially since I rule. -Randal Graves
Writer at windycitygridiron.com -/-I http://www.twitter.com/kdoggers
True but is he Rasheid category?
Then he would be great at it and not just good, maybe Rasheid could mentor him in the art of stone hands.
Price Check on aisle BOOM.
At least Rahhied can play his ass off on the special teams!
Yeah I said it!
by Lester A. Wiltfong Jr. on Mar 2, 2010 10:25 AM CST up reply actions
Lest we not forget,
that it was Sheed’s holding that negated Hester’s TD Return last season.
Even if it was a BS call and I actually like Davis on ST’s.
-------
"Newbie, if the next two words out of your mouth aren't 'See ya' then the third word will be 'Oh my god. My crotch. You've punched me in my crotch." - Dr. Percival Ulysses Cox
by David Taylor on Mar 2, 2010 11:29 AM CST up reply actions
He's so old
and so washed up. I’m not sure how much talent he has left in the tank plus I think the ego left in his tank is way more than his talent. Cutler and Martz are already kind of known brash guys and throwing a third guy in, I don’t know that that would end well.
by Sam Householder on Mar 2, 2010 10:21 AM CST reply actions
not what he use to be & NO even if he was
he’s a tool and nearly a washed up tool. Why bring in a guy that is now slow for an NFL wr and a jerk to boot. I never liked him since the 50 yarrd line deal in Dallas but admitted he was a darn good wr. Now, he’s a tad better than avg but still an idiot. No thanks
The best wideout on this roster at this point and time is Earl Bennett
Runs the best routes, Sure handed, Has made some of the nicest cathces all year in traffic.
Why i think he is better then the best?
Hester- Love him his made great strides but his routes are not as crisp and isnt as great in traffic but hes defnitly a weapon.
Knox- is still raw his routes will only get better but like hester i dont see him go over the middle as much
D.A.- Made great strides but it was only 4 games….people need to stop with the whole if he played 16 games hed hae 1600yrds, 16tds …yes that what the math comes out to but where was he in the bmore game? Im not knocking the guy at all he has nothing but upside but i need to see him for a whole year.
As for owens, i would love to see him here but i dont see it happening.
I like our recieving talent the way it is with Olsen, Hester, Knox, D.A., Iglesias and Mr. Earl
This team has enough egos on it
The entire organization would implode from all the narcissistic thoughts running through Halas Hall if TO was signed.
"The country is full of good coaches. What it takes to win is a bunch of interested players." -Don Coryell, ex-San Diego Chargers Coach
NOOOO
He drop s too many balls, and isn’t even a superstar anymore. Let him rot in another Buffalo-like hell
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Community Guidelines
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
