Wednesday, November 16, 2005

Michael Irvin - No Hall of Fame

First, to the important topics, like sports. The Eagles season - Done! I meant to write that in week 3, when it would have been a somewhat novel observation, but I've been very busy. 2 of their 4 wins - the comeback against the Chiefs and the absurd win against San Diego - show that even when they win it is a minor miracle. You could argue the Dallas game was kind of the opposite, so what goes around comes around, but either way, Eagles fans must now look forward to 2007.

On a different note, a reader asked me the following question: Should Michael Irvin, ex-Cowboy receiver, be inducted into the Hall of Fame. My answer is unequivocally no for the following very obvious reasons: 1) I hate that guy; 2) his post-game press conference garb in his playing days was eggregious, what with the high buttoned suits and the bowlers; 3) in his liesure time he sat around snorting coke and ordering hits on his enemies, which by itself is not a disqualifying set of facts, except that 1 above, combined with the logic that the enemy of my enemy is ny friend, implies he was trying to knock off my friends; and 4) I hate that guy. All good and sufficient reasons, but for those skeptics out there who will argue that none of these have anything to do with his play on the field, I offer the following observations:

1) The baseball Hall of Fame should be the model for all such halls - you should be truly extraordinary to make it in;

2) Given that as the model, and football I don't think follows that model (it has weaker standards), football should be the hardest sport to make it into the Hall due to the difficulty in judging the individual ability of the player. Clemens, for example, didn't have a great record this year (13 wins), but his ERA was something close to 0.0001. Clearly a Hall of Fame like season. If Michael Irvin was getting passes thrown to him by Sean Salisbury, who was handing off on other plays to some crappy running back, with a lousy offensive line and a defense that was so lame it made the opposing defenses well rested whenever they took to the field, he probably would have sucked. A guy like Barry Sanders - clear Hall material, because he to dodge three tackles just to avoid a 2 yard loss, and he still ran like the wind;

3) Well, maybe he would have still been good, but nevertheless the standard should be that he would have been great. He said it himself in assessing Randy Moss's chances for success under Norv Turner (Cowboys offensive coordinator during Irvin's playing years): if Norv Turner could make Alvin Harper an All Star, look for Randy Moss to break every record in the book (he said it on ESPN). So there we see him take a gratuitous swipe at a former teammate while being too stupid to realize that the same argument must apply to some extent to himself;

4) A real Hall of Famer doesn't become an ESPN analyst. (And don't give me Steve Young - I said real Hall of Famer). What is ESPN thinking? Between Michael Irvin and Steven A. Smith, I think it's time someone started a competing network. And don't call me racist, because I like Stuart Scott.

*********************************************************************************

Now, to less important things, like politics. Finally Bush has started to call on the carpet the many irresponsible liberals who want to endlessly claim he lied or deceived us into war. In a couple of speeches he's accused them of undermining troop morale and fortifying the enemy. Such conspiratorial fantasies of the "Bush lied, people dies" variety are fine for nutjob bloggers like myself (but of the opposite political stripe) to entertain, but they shouldn't be indulged, encouraged, or propogated by U.S. Senators and Reps. Your crazy lefty needs to believe it's a matter of good and evil (Saddam - good; Bush - evil); it's the only way to assuage his delicate psyche and enable him to sleep at night while Bush is in charge. I'll permit him his psychological venting, but more should be expected from our so called leaders. All halfway intelligent people in the US may know that Ted Kennedy is a boorish windbag, but when he says something that gets echoed on Al Jazeera, the Arab world probably doesn't view him as the drunken ass he is. (MaryJo Kopechne could not be reached for comment). Bush said it right - criticize the decision if you disagree with it, or the planning and execution if you think it went badly - but don't offer up a conspiracy theory with zero proof to back it. And for those of you who think there is anything to the conspiracy theory, please read this link: http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110007540

The problem is that most of the Democratic Senators cannot criticize the decision, since they were fully on board with it. And while there may have been execution problems, does anybody really think any of our windbag Senators, who manage nothing but a staff of sycophantic lemmings attracted to their power, could have done it better? Whether Democrat or Republican, any government run endeavor (maybe even any human endeavor) is going to be hopelessly inefficient - the only difference between the two is the type of policies they typically choose. But if all agreed initially to go to war, as they did, it's hopelessly naive to believe that Democrats would have run it better. Not saying they would have run it worse, just not better.

Franky, when these guys go off as they do on the lies and deception rants, I honestly believe 3 things: 1) they know they are spouting nonsense; 2) they know it may be detrimental to our efforts; and 3) they know it nevertheless serves their political interest, and so they carry on. For a notable exception to this rule of asininity among Democratic Senators, see these comments by Lieberman: http://corner.nationalreview.com/05_11_13_corner-archive.asp#082672.

7 Comments:

Blogger Incredible Dirigible said...

Hatch, what's your take on Pete Rose being banned for life from MLB, & thus being ineligible for the Hall of Fame?

I think he should be allowed in. I think the punishment was overkill. He's lived a cleaner life than a lot of other athletes, who've done drugs & choked their coaches. He was a phenomenal baseball player, and, come on, GAMBLING?? How big a deal is That?? (Sorry, that's my opinion.)

Nice links about WMDs, too.

8:03 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Don't hate the player baby. I could not say this on ESPN but since no one but me monitoring my press reads this Blog, I can say it here. Norv Turner and Alvin Harper were made riding my back and my success (plus Emmitt and Troy and a great line, my homies). You forget that I was a player under Landry; I played on the one-win Cowboys. I attacked the middle and made the catch, without complaint or fear. We were a running team under Johnson and I was a team player, never complaining about my catches, or creating a "Playmaker" ratio. When the Cowboys needed more than 3 yards, whose number got called? Mine. What happened to Troy and Emmitt after I had to retire? The line was still the same but a bit older, were they Pro-Bowlers? Compare my numbers to Swann or Stallworth.

You obviously have never played football. I skimmed your other posts while I was busting my ass over the middle you were running in shorts that would have gotten you pounded into the dirt in my neighborhood. Lastly you can't apply the baseball standard to football because people get hurt a lot more often in football. Careers are shorter.

I looked at photos of your kids, they look like soccer players not football players, maybe you should focus your attention on soccer. You know nothing about football.

8:32 AM  
Anonymous Jim O said...

Well, you have to admit that you can't argue with logic like that shown above.

Not that you would want to...

11:28 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think everyone forgets that, just prior to the invasion, political will for containment and inspection of Saddam was failing. Although he may not have WMD at the time of the invasion, does anyone doubt if we had not invaded, the inspections would have ended, and Saddam would be making all the WMD he could?

Hatcher, a football Hall of Fame is a joke. Why don't you write a story about the Cross Country Hall of Fame, and how Snake has been unfairly excluded. That guy is like the Pete Rose of college running.

5:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

spell check, man. Use the spell check. and by the way , Do you collect George's poo? Because obviously you think he squats gold.

10:15 AM  
Blogger Hatcher said...

Snake,

I think you were denied Hall status unfairly for consorting with the Slumpbuster. Interestingly enough, one of my HS running buddies who was quite the runner in his day is probably the only person on earth who was on the brink of breaking his own slump and someone blew it. He's still eligible for the Hall.

9:05 AM  
Anonymous Greg Hindsley said...

What's up with liking Stuart Scott? That guy has to GO! He is still riding his 'invention' of the word 'bling', and it's just getting old. Here is Stuart's call on Hatcher's blog: "The Hatch's blog was stupid, droppin' down points like the '67 Sixers. Y'all know that his philosophy is phat, and that's with a 'ph' baby. Don't even THINK of readin' anyone else's blog, fool".

8:54 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Sign up for my Notify List and get email when I update!

email:
powered by
NotifyList.com