TO Rushed to the ER.....

DESkins · Post by **DESkins** » Thu Sep 28, 2006 8:32 am

Thing is, if I played football for that team, I'd be looking to off myself too. But TO, in typical fashion, couldn't finish the job.

NikiH · Post by **NikiH** » Thu Sep 28, 2006 8:52 am

DESkins wrote:Thing is, if I played football for that team, I'd be looking to off myself too. But TO, in typical fashion, couldn't finish the job.

He had absolutely no intention of killing himself. He did this to put his name back in the headlines because things had calmed down and not every sports reporter under the sun was uttering his name. He's succeeded and his narcissism was feed sufficiently.

Primetime42 · Post by **Primetime42** » Thu Sep 28, 2006 10:07 am

Niki, I'm sorry but anybody that views this as a publicity stunt just doesn't know what they're talking about.

Even TO wouldn't mess himself up that badly to create attention (like he needed it, anyway)

If it's a publicity stunt, Drew Rosenhaus oughta be banned from ever being an NFL agent ever again.

Which is why I don't believe it is; Rosenhaus isn't dumb enough to let him do that.

forskins · Post by **forskins** » Thu Sep 28, 2006 11:12 am

cleg wrote:

I hope he never gets in the Hall. If he gets in and Monk does not there is no legitamicy in football.

Before I get busted again and get accused of being a flame war starter, I'll just say this about the Irvin-Monk comparison. How many Pro Bowls for Irvin-5 Monk-3 Superbowl rings HE ACTUALLY EARNED Irvin-3 Monk-0.

They both have thier share of great stats, there is no arguement.

Does Monk deserve to get in? Yes, but not before Irvin. If you want to ban stripper loving, cocaine addicts, you should have banned Lawrence Taylor. Oops, he made it in already.

I actually think both will get in this year, and they both deserve it.

Now, this is supposed to be about Owens. If you want to Flame about this some more, we can take it elsewhere...

NikiH wrote:He had absolutely no intention of killing himself. He did this to put his name back in the headlines because things had calmed down and not every sports reporter under the sun was uttering his name. He's succeeded and his narcissism was feed sufficiently.

And a fake suicide attempt would bring boost your ego how?? Come on, you gotta be smarter then that. :roll:

If I were him, I'd be canning that publicist of his, since ALL of this mess was her doing.

Now the real story he wanted to portray and will portray is his recovery for this weeks game.

NikiH · Post by **NikiH** » Thu Sep 28, 2006 11:56 am

forskins wrote:And a fake suicide attempt would bring boost your ego how?? Come on, you gotta be smarter then that.

If I were him, I'd be canning that publicist of his, since ALL of this mess was her doing.

Now the real story he wanted to portray and will portray is his recovery for this weeks game.

A little background on his disorder!

Wikipedia wrote:However, narcissism can also manifest, in an extreme pathological form, in some personality disorders such as the Narcissistic Personality Disorder wherein the patient overestimates his abilities and has an excessive need for admiration and affirmation. This is present to such a degree that it severely damages the person's ability to live a productive or happy life because the traits manifest as severe selfishness and disregard for the needs and feelings of others.

Fios · Post by **Fios** » Thu Sep 28, 2006 11:57 am

forskins wrote:
cleg wrote:

I hope he never gets in the Hall. If he gets in and Monk does not there is no legitamicy in football.

Before I get busted again and get accused of being a flame war starter, I'll just say this about the Irvin-Monk comparison. How many Pro Bowls for Irvin-5 Monk-3 Superbowl rings HE ACTUALLY EARNED Irvin-3 Monk-0.

They both have thier share of great stats, there is no arguement.

Does Monk deserve to get in? Yes, but not before Irvin. If you want to ban stripper loving, cocaine addicts, you should have banned Lawrence Taylor. Oops, he made it in already.

I actually think both will get in this year, and they both deserve it.

Now, this is supposed to be about Owens. If you want to Flame about this some more, we can take it elsewhere...

1) You can't hide behind "I'm not starting a flame war" and then post inflamatory things, can't have it both ways
2) Please explain the stat we use to measure "Super Bowls HE ACTUALLY EARNED" ... that idea is inherently flawed
3)
Monk: 940 receptions; 12, 721 yards; 13.5 YPC; 68 TDs
Irvin: 750 receptions; 11,904 yards; 15.9 YPC; 65 TDs
Explain how the person with fewer catches goes in first

forskins · Post by **forskins** » Thu Sep 28, 2006 12:26 pm

Since a Staff Member asked....

Did Art Monk ever play in a Super Bowl where the skins won??

Receptions, Smeptions, So Art Monk hung around longer. 15 years is a lot longer then 11 years ya know. So if Irvin didn't break his neck his yards and TD number would have been significantly higher then Monk's now wouldn't it. Even for one more season, he could have easily attained 780 yards and three TDs.

I don't disagree that Monk is overdue. Most recievers don't get the respect they should. When you've got 23 quarterbacks, 24 running backs, and only 17 wide recievers in the HOF, something is a little lopsided.

With the weak class this year, both Irvin and Monk should be no-brainers. Should be...

Now lets keep this thing on Owens, since that is what is was started it for.

NikiH, you have a PHD to diagnose this guy's condition?

You can't base your entire diagnosis on the bloated reports of the media. I would hope you are smarter then that. You aren't an Eagles fan, so you must be.

Hoss · Post by **Hoss** » Thu Sep 28, 2006 1:13 pm

I believe Monk played in SBXXII and SBXXVI.

Fios · Post by **Fios** » Thu Sep 28, 2006 1:13 pm

Since a User asked: Yes, 1987 and 1991 ... he was such a jerk for being hurt during one of the SB wins ... and, yeah, why should catches even count, it's not as if the job title has "receiver" in it ... also, thanks for the lesson in math, I had spent my entire life under the impression that 11 was the highest number possible

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Thu Sep 28, 2006 1:37 pm

Receptions, Smeptions, So Art Monk hung around longer. 15 years is a lot longer then 11 years ya know. So if Irvin didn't break his neck his yards and TD number would have been significantly higher then Monk's now wouldn't it. Even for one more season, he could have easily attained 780 yards and three TDs.

So you're argument is "Big deal, so what if Monk has better stats. If Irvin had played more years than he actually did then he would have had better stats!"

Are you serious?

Dangerfield · Post by **Dangerfield** » Thu Sep 28, 2006 1:51 pm

Let's all pause and try to understand that both sides on this argument believe that Art should get in the Hall of Fame.

What are we arguing about here?

If style points, and who technically goes in first matter, then carry on, but this appears to be a collosal waste of time.

Primetime42 · Post by **Primetime42** » Thu Sep 28, 2006 2:04 pm

forskins wrote:Since a Staff Member asked....

Did Art Monk ever play in a Super Bowl where the skins won??

Receptions, Smeptions, So Art Monk hung around longer. 15 years is a lot longer then 11 years ya know. So if Irvin didn't break his neck his yards and TD number would have been significantly higher then Monk's now wouldn't it. Even for one more season, he could have easily attained 780 yards and three TDs.

I don't disagree that Monk is overdue. Most recievers don't get the respect they should. When you've got 23 quarterbacks, 24 running backs, and only 17 wide recievers in the HOF, something is a little lopsided.

With the weak class this year, both Irvin and Monk should be no-brainers. Should be...

Now lets keep this thing on Owens, since that is what is was started it for.

NikiH, you have a PHD to diagnose this guy's condition?

You can't base your entire diagnosis on the bloated reports of the media. I would hope you are smarter then that. You aren't an Eagles fan, so you must be.

The argument makes sense, but unfortunately doesn't work.

Lynn Swann IMO is not a Hall of Famer. If he's in, Drew Pearson should be too.

And if Drew Pearson is in, Art Monk and Michael Irvin DAMN well should be in.

But none of them is.

JansenFan · Post by **JansenFan** » Thu Sep 28, 2006 2:35 pm

except Lynn Swann. :roll:

Post by **admin** » Thu Sep 28, 2006 3:24 pm

Can you all take your conversation about Monk and Irvin to another thread please?

Thanks.

This thread is about T.O.D.

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Thu Sep 28, 2006 3:29 pm

How much of a factor was Monk in getting the 'Skins to the SB he did not play in due to injury? And no, PT42 the argument does not make sense. I'm with Irn-Bru, how can you get credit for years you might have played? As for Pro-Bowls played in, that is a reflection of how much grandstanding and self-adulation a player exhibits. Monk was a soldier, Irvin was a showman. No contest. I'm not sure Irvin belongs, but I know Monk does.

Dangerfield · Post by **Dangerfield** » Thu Sep 28, 2006 3:31 pm

Uh-Oh...I smell trouble...you directly usurped BH's request jspb!

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Thu Sep 28, 2006 3:34 pm

Dangerfield wrote:Uh-Oh...I smell trouble...you directly usurped BH's request jspb!

Sorry Boss, I was responding when you posted. I never even saw that until I read Dangerfield's post.

Post by **admin** » Thu Sep 28, 2006 3:37 pm

Start a new thread.

Or heck, find one of the umpteen million other times we have had this exact same conversation with the exact same data and points re-gurgitated.

I mean it's been at least a month we had a good old Irvin vs Monk thread... when did CNNSI post the poll?

THIS THREAD IS ABUT TERRELL OWENS.

Thanks.

Primetime42 · Post by **Primetime42** » Thu Sep 28, 2006 3:52 pm

JansenFan wrote:except Lynn Swann.

Well, I meant other than Lynn Swann, hence why I used his example.

I guess I should be clearer :lol:

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Thu Sep 28, 2006 3:54 pm

forskins wrote:NikiH, you have a PHD to diagnose this guy's condition?

No, but she did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

REDEEMEDSKIN · Post by **REDEEMEDSKIN** » Thu Sep 28, 2006 4:04 pm

The good thing about T.O. being back at practice today with the Pukes and his stating his desire to play on Sunday, is that he has significantly increased the likelihood of his reenacting the opening scene to the football classic "The Last Boy Scout", starring Damon Wayans and Bruce Willis. My 2 cents

Fios · Post by **Fios** » Thu Sep 28, 2006 4:07 pm

I can now honestly say that, with this incident in mind, I wish TO as much success on the field as he has had off it

REDEEMEDSKIN · Post by **REDEEMEDSKIN** » Thu Sep 28, 2006 4:10 pm

This could be the equivalent of The Rock's going from "The Corporate Champion" to "The People's Champion" in WWE.

We could be witnessing the transformation of T.O. from mega heel to mega face.

Stay tuned...

JansenFan · Post by **JansenFan** » Thu Sep 28, 2006 4:12 pm

Many will say he seems more human, and all the media outlets were talking about how he met his father for the first time, and he will become more likeable in some people's eyes.

JPFair · Post by **JPFair** » Thu Sep 28, 2006 5:01 pm

Here's my take on the whole T.O. thing, and whether or not he 'attempted' to commit suicide or not.

First of all, I think too many people are focusing too much attention on T.O. flamboyance, than to focus on what needs to be focused on in order to make a logical decision as to what may have happened. Here's why I say this:

Personally, I don't think Terrel Owens definitely tried to commit suicide though it is possible. What about when Owens broke his foot and came back earlier than expected to play in the Super Bowl? Did he not take pain medication then? I'm sure he did, and that being the case, he should already be aware of the possibility of any "adverse" reaction associated with taking them with supplements. I don't buy the whole "it was just a reaction cuz of the supplements and pain meds" crap. It simply doesn't hold water, as he was undoubtedly on similar, if not the same medication the last time he broke his foot, and I say this because he obviously has "personal" physicians that he employs and they would know what to give him. So, maybe he didn't intend to cause harm to himself, first of all because I think the Hospital is obligated to do certain protocols if they believed he wanted to cause himself harm, but I guarantee you he deliberately took excessive pain meds for one reason or another, and he knew what he was doing, whatever the reason. Maybe he liked the high he was getting, maybe he was just frustrated, maye he WAS in pain, or maybe he WAS depressed, but he knew what he was doing. Though, in reality, if he was in pain, then why not go through proper channels within the organization?

T.O. can very easily clear this whole mess up and prove all his critics, the Dallas P.D., the media, and all the naysayers wrong by simply doing one thing. But, as I mentioned above, too many people are focusing on the flamboyance of the whole thing without realizing what T.O. could, can, and probably NEVER will do to prove everyone wrong. The answer is simple: If T.O. did NOT try and kill himself, and he WASN'T depressed, and he DID have extra pills in the drawer, then WHY doesn't he just allow the media to see the results of the pathology tests that were undoubtedly taken, as is required when a "attempted suicide by prescription medication" call is responded to. Let's see what was in his blood at the time, and how much of it was in there!!!

T.O. knows he can clear it up by doing that, but he's got the MOTHER of all caveats in his favor. Such information is protected by Doctor/Patient confidentiality and is privelaged information, information that T.O. would more than likely NEVER give out cuz it might incriminate him as to how much pain medication was in his system at the time. Federal Law is quite strict about releasing anyones personal medical information, and T.O. is using this to his benefit. Until then, it's gonna be a classic case of his word vs everyone elses word, and as long as he's not in any legal trouble, he has nothing to lose by simply lying about it until the next media frenzy over him starts, and this will be long forgotten. If T.O. was to authorize the release of any and all blood/urine tests that were taken that night, and it shows that he had the "amount prescribed" of pain meds in his system, then I'll admit I'm wrong. But, for now, I'm quite confident that, though he may or may not have tried to kill himself, he did take an overdose for some reason, be it enjoyment or intent to cause harm to himself.

So, come on T.O., pony up the results of the lab tests and help us formulate an opinion!!!