Michael Irvin vs Terrell Owens.
- Thread starter the next guy
- Start date
49ers fan, did you like when TO spiked the ball on the star in 2000
fukk him
at him being better than Moss
TO aint even a better receiver than Julio Jones
Negged. I'd give you Moss. But he's better than any receiver currently playing the game by a decent margin too. Reason why I got T.O. over Moss is because he was overall the better player. T.O. had locker room issues, but you couldn't say he wasn't out there putting 100% effort every single time he touched the field.
Right after having a broken leg this nikka just about won the Super Bowl his damn self. Probably would have too if McNabb ain't bytch up.
have a 100 post thread about another man's hands brehs 
Nah but, this is a tough subject. Mike was great, but he benefited no doubt from all that great talent. TO did more with less talent around him.
If I was building a team, I'd take Mike because he was clutch, but TO has a higher production ceiling.
Nah but, this is a tough subject. Mike was great, but he benefited no doubt from all that great talent. TO did more with less talent around him.
If I was building a team, I'd take Mike because he was clutch, but TO has a higher production ceiling.
Irwin not in the same league as TO, borderline disrespectful to compare the two
They're already running out of shyt to say to have a discussion about this
They're already running out of shyt to say to have a discussion about this
Rout3r2035
Superstar
Irvin is the best receiver in the flats probably ever in his prime. I'd go with him but it is very close. T.O. had way better longevity but lags in the rings department.
filial_piety
Banned
filial_piety
Banned
I grew up watching Irvin since day one...and TO since he came into the league...it aint even close, TO is clearly more dominant and a threat.
And i'd go so far as to say that I'd take Andre Reed over Irvin too and probably Herman Moore in his peak.
Irvin is more comparable to people like Sterling Sharpe (Sterling was better than Irvin BTW), Mark Clayton, Henry Ellard and Art Monk, they were all very good pro bowl level receivers...but nothing of the once in a life time variety like TO was
it's just a different level altogether.
Last edited:
stepbackj34spud
Top 75 All-Time
Why do people keep talking about TO's drops like he was dropping every other pass? He has 153 TD catches, and he could've had a lot more if he wasnt black balled out of the league. Miss me with the drop balls non sense.
This is a disrespectful comparison. TO easily.
This is a disrespectful comparison. TO easily.
Irvin wasn't physically gifted. He had to push off most of the time to create separation.
TO was bigger, more physical and had way more speed than Irvin.
The stats speak for themselves as well.
This is a silly comparison. T.O. has over 300 more catches, 4000 more yards and 91 more touchdowns than Irvin. And this is coming from someone who idolized Irvin as a youth.
TO was bigger, more physical and had way more speed than Irvin.
The stats speak for themselves as well.
This is a silly comparison. T.O. has over 300 more catches, 4000 more yards and 91 more touchdowns than Irvin. And this is coming from someone who idolized Irvin as a youth.
Eldorado
And less we forget Jerry Rice admitted to using stickum
A lost a lot of respect for Rice after that. He was definitely a stat whore. Unfortunately because of free agency player contracts and the physicality of this era, I don't see any WR's breaking his records.
