Búfalo Blanco Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 Back in July, Mark Kriegel (Fox Sports) wrote an article claiming that T.O. was washed up... This article was posted on The Stadium Wall for discussion before the season... Since I cannot reply to that thread directly, I have posted the link to it in the archives: Thread: http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/115763-one-writer-thinks-to-is-washed-up/page__p__1904689__fromsearch__1#entry1904689 Fox Sports Article: http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/terrell-owens-washed-up-and-looking-for-work-071510 Here's an exerpt from the article which I thought was particularly premature: As this is the NFL, the issue has little to do with character. After all, Roethlisberger and Vick (at least for now) still have jobs. It has to do with Owens’ decline as a football player. It was all he could do to catch 55 balls for 829 yards last season with the Bills. Those numbers, combined with his age, translate into new cost-benefit analysis. He’s not worth the trouble anymore. Well, after leading the Bengals with 72 rec. 983 yds. a 13.7 yd avg. and 9 TDs (Over twice as many TDs as Ochocinco), I'd say Kriegel's got some explaining to do... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 Well, to be fair, Gailey also thought he was washed-up, hence the reason he let him walk. And while he had an excellent season for a 37-year old WR playing in 14 games, his career might be over with the injury he suffered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Well, to be fair, Gailey also thought he was washed-up, hence the reason he let him walk. And while he had an excellent season for a 37-year old WR playing in 14 games, his career might be over with the injury he suffered. And he once again proved he can't keep his mouth shut. He's one of the most physically dominant receivers ever. But he is a terrible teammate and you'd be crazy to bring him a young team with playoff hopes. In his head, TO > team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Búfalo Blanco Posted January 4, 2011 Author Share Posted January 4, 2011 Well, to be fair, Gailey also thought he was washed-up, hence the reason he let him walk. And while he had an excellent season for a 37-year old WR playing in 14 games, his career might be over with the injury he suffered. Actually Doc, I don't believe you're being fair to my point... There was a season in between July 2010 and Jan. 2011.... My point is that Kriegel deemed T.O. washed up before he was signed by the Bengals or the 2010 season actually occurred.. He proved his critics wrong yet again... and the numbers more than prove it... In fact, he actually increased his production... Now, I understand he was with a very bad and injury-riddled Bills roster in 2009, but he still led that Buffalo offense... He went on to lead the Bengals this season too... Kriegel was just plain wrong... If Gailey actually made the decision himself in the offseason that T.O. was washed up, then he was wrong too... That does not mean that the Bills should have re-signed him.. Based on Stevie Johnson's development, it was probably the right decision for Buffalo.. Besides, in my opinion, the only reason the Bills front office signed Owens to begin with in 2009 was to help lagging ticket sales.. and it worked. This offseason is THIS offseason.. but don't fall into the same trap Kriegel did.. Perhaps T.O. does not come back from a torn meniscus.. He is 37 years old.. But thus far in his career, he has proven his critics wrong.. I know people love to hate him, but no one (particularly Kriegel and his article) can deny his talent... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malazan Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 When did Gailey say TO was washed up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Búfalo Blanco Posted January 4, 2011 Author Share Posted January 4, 2011 When did Gailey say TO was washed up? Read what I actually said... What I said was IF that was the reason he decided not to re-sign him... Personally I don't think that was the reason... I believe he wanted to see what he had in Stevie Johnson, among others... Besides, I'm sure the GM Buddy Nix had just as much to do with those decisions, if not more... I never stated that Gailey said T.O. was washed up... My entire point in this thread is about Kriegel's article.. Doc brought up Gailey in this thread, not me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malazan Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 (edited) Read what I actually said... As you stated, Doc wasn't using an 'IF'. I would have quoted your statement if directly speaking to you. I apologize for the confusion. Edited January 4, 2011 by jeremy2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Búfalo Blanco Posted January 4, 2011 Author Share Posted January 4, 2011 As you stated, Doc wasn't using an 'IF'. I would have quoted your statement if directly speaking to you. I apologize for the confusion. I'm kind of curious where Doc got that myself.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 And he once again proved he can't keep his mouth shut. He's one of the most physically dominant receivers ever. But he is a terrible teammate and you'd be crazy to bring him a young team with playoff hopes. In his head, TO > team He said nothing until the team was long out of the playoff hunt. And nothing he said was wrong. The interesting thing is him going-off on the Bungles from top to bottom, whereas he didn't say a bad word about the Bills, despite numerous chances and reasons to do so. Actually Doc, I don't believe you're being fair to my point... There was a season in between July 2010 and Jan. 2011.... My point is that Kriegel deemed T.O. washed up before he was signed by the Bengals or the 2010 season actually occurred.. He proved his critics wrong yet again... and the numbers more than prove it... In fact, he actually increased his production... Now, I understand he was with a very bad and injury-riddled Bills roster in 2009, but he still led that Buffalo offense... He went on to lead the Bengals this season too... Kriegel was just plain wrong... If Gailey actually made the decision himself in the offseason that T.O. was washed up, then he was wrong too... That does not mean that the Bills should have re-signed him.. Based on Stevie Johnson's development, it was probably the right decision for Buffalo.. Besides, in my opinion, the only reason the Bills front office signed Owens to begin with in 2009 was to help lagging ticket sales.. and it worked. This offseason is THIS offseason.. but don't fall into the same trap Kriegel did.. Perhaps T.O. does not come back from a torn meniscus.. He is 37 years old.. But thus far in his career, he has proven his critics wrong.. I know people love to hate him, but no one (particularly Kriegel and his article) can deny his talent... My point was that Kriegel thought he was washed-up before the season started. So too did Gailey (TO said it in an interview prior to the Bills-Bungles game, and that he respected Gailey's decision even though he didn't agree with it). They were proven wrong, as were many others. And Steve Johnson developing (well, until that Steelers game) was a nice surprise. But with no proven receiver outside of Evans going into the season, it would have made sense to re-sign TO. In retrospect though, things worked-out all right at WR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malazan Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 He said nothing until the team was long out of the playoff hunt. And nothing he said was wrong. The interesting thing is him going-off on the Bungles from top to bottom, whereas he didn't say a bad word about the Bills, despite numerous chances and reasons to do so. My point was that Kriegel thought he was washed-up before the season started. So too did Gailey (TO said it in an interview prior to the Bills-Bungles game, and that he respected Gailey's decision even though he didn't agree with it). They were proven wrong, as were many others. And Steve Johnson developing (well, until that Steelers game) was a nice surprise. But with no proven receiver outside of Evans going into the season, it would have made sense to re-sign TO. In retrospect though, things worked-out all right at WR. Which interview? I don't remember him saying anything close to 'washed up' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts