With a gun to your head, would you choose Michael Irvin or Terrell Owens?
I love TO, and I loved the Playmaker. I mean, how do you choose between the two best receivers in team history? This is truly the hardest choice for me to make as a fan, hence the gun to my head.
Terrell Owens has more raw talent and more break-away capability. He is the sole outside receiving threat in an era of professional football that requires multiple deep threats.
TO routinely destroys double teams, and is only stopped by his own problem of dropping the ball. Owens is also an unbelievable physical specimen and one of the premier showmen in sports today. Other than drops, his biggest criticism will always be his rocky relationships with teammates.
Michael Irvin had great talent, and, by fate, ended up with his college coach Jimmy Johnson on the 1990s team. Irvin was also routinely double-teamed, and while never a real outside threat, became the most unstoppable force over the middle of the field in the game.
The Playmaker made so many physical plays that the NFL had to emphasize offensive pass interference just to control him. He was a big game player, but his "big game" off the field in his hotel room on his birthday in 1996 was the tipping point for the 1990s Cowboys. They never recovered to the point of a Super Bowl contender after his arrest and suspension.
So, would you choose a natural talent with no legal trouble, but teammate trouble and questionable "big game" performance, or would you choose a natural talent with a big game on and off the field?
With a gun to my head, I've got to go with the Playmaker, the heart of one of the most dominant teams of my lifetime.