Michael Irvin still bitter about 94

Originally posted by tmpluff:
He's just upset that he couldn't push off of Deon and get away with it like he did everyone else. Refs let them play that game, only difference is Deon had the speed to catch back up after being shoved out of the way! If Rice wasn't HOSED on the Deep td in the 92 nfccg never know how momentum may have worked in our favor! (I Still wonder what would have happened had Montana played in that game rather than Young too- Sorry got off topic forgive me everyone!)

we still would have lost, our defense was getting old and slow, we could beat most teams, but not dallas, plus young made key mistakes

The Cowboys didn't really "close the gap" at all in that game. We went up by 21 early, and maintained a 17 point lead for the majority of the game. They scored a late TD in the 4th to make seem closer than it was. That game was out of reach for them by the 3rd quarter. They didn't spot us any points either. We came out super aggresive, with Eric Davis jumping that route for a pick 6, and two other forced fumbles.

shut up crackhead

As Boast would say, Irvin can E.A.D.

Originally posted by cciowa:

Originally posted by tmpluff:
He's just upset that he couldn't push off of Deon and get away with it like he did everyone else. Refs let them play that game, only difference is Deon had the speed to catch back up after being shoved out of the way! If Rice wasn't HOSED on the Deep td in the 92 nfccg never know how momentum may have worked in our favor! (I Still wonder what would have happened had Montana played in that game rather than Young too- Sorry got off topic forgive me everyone!)

we still would have lost, our defense was getting old and slow, we could beat most teams, but not dallas, plus young made key mistakes

Didn't we only lose by 10? you add that TD it's a 3 point game and we had the ball late. Plus "IF" we played Montana rather than Young? I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that we would have lost. (altho you could very easily be right) Sorry off subject again

really don't like to wish bad things on people, but ........

Ummm....the very next time we met up with them, in '95 (the year they won their 3rd Superbowl), we played in Dallas without Young (Grbac was the QB) we CRUSHED them AGAIN 38-20. So, no. Nice theory, but the evidence does not support his argument. In fact the evidence would suggest that if we don't "spot" Green Bay a ton of first half points in the '95 playoff game, then we kick Dallas' ass AGAIN in the NFC Championship and we never have to heard the word Dyanasty associated with that sleep-with-their-sister franchise again!

Oh shut the f**k up, Irvin, you guys went on to win another one the following year; don't even talk about how the refs & Young handed you the '92 game on a silver platter.

its good to see the old still has some fire to him. hes been butt hurt about if for sometime, let it continue.

Yeah well Im still bitter about 1992 & 1993 so f**k him.

The balance of power changed when Charles Haley went to the Cowboys.

Originally posted by dwy621:
The balance of power changed when Charles Haley went to the Cowboys.

of all the teams they had to trade him to just think damn it what it could have meant for our defense if haley would have been able to get along with and play with tim harris,, what a f**king pass rush we would have had for years..then he had to go take a pee and it all fell apart

Originally posted by tmpluff:
Didn't we only lose by 10? you add that TD it's a 3 point game and we had the ball late. Plus "IF" we played Montana rather than Young? I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that we would have lost. (altho you could very easily be right) Sorry off subject again

i just was trying to say, in my opinion, we were getting slow esp at the linebacker spot. we had a nice defense but our lack of speed showed against one team and that was dallas. you are right about montana to, had we traded young for derick thomas, that would have solved our pass rush woes and lack of speed at linebacker, aikman would have been laying on the turf all game long and montana would have won the game and probably two more super bowls,,, again in my opinion

Originally posted by HoneyBadger49er:

Micheal Irvin will be giving hand jobs for cocaine within 10 years

Do you think it will really take that long?

He can put glasses on to make him look all intellectual but he is and will always be a crackhead.