Michael Irvin awaits his fate
By Grizz
Posted on Sat Feb 03, 2007 at 12:05:43 AM EST
By sometime tomorrow morning, I better see Michael Irvin crying at some podium. And I'm not talking about crying because he got snubbed again. I'm talking about tears of joy because he got voted into the Hall of Fame. You know Mike, he's an emotional guy, and if he gets voted in, ESPN could have one wacky morning on its hands.
I've written previously about this subject so my views are well-known. There's no other reason Irvin isn't in the HoF except for a group of writers punishing him for a life off-the-field that was as explosive as his play on-the-field. I'm not one to sit in judgment of Irvin's life, although it's obvious he could have done a lot better in some areas. Some of the stuff he did, and some of the stuff he says - until this day - make me cringe, make me wonder - "Why, Mike, why?" But the HoF is about one thing, your play between the lines; it's about how you performed for three hours every Sunday. It says so right in the by-laws of the HoF voting - you can look it up.
If you want to have a discussion about the modern-day athlete, their role in society and their obligations to be role models, or any of many other moral and ethical issues, that's fine - and it's a worthy discussion to have. And you can throw Michael Irvin right into the middle of it. But if you want to discuss Irvin deserving the HoF - where his play on the field is the only criteria - then there is no discussion.
And if Michael Irivn doesn't make the HoF again, I hope some of the writers will have the guts to admit that they are sitting in judgment of Michael Irvin, the man - not the player.
Posted on Sat Feb 03, 2007 at 12:05:43 AM EST
By sometime tomorrow morning, I better see Michael Irvin crying at some podium. And I'm not talking about crying because he got snubbed again. I'm talking about tears of joy because he got voted into the Hall of Fame. You know Mike, he's an emotional guy, and if he gets voted in, ESPN could have one wacky morning on its hands.
I've written previously about this subject so my views are well-known. There's no other reason Irvin isn't in the HoF except for a group of writers punishing him for a life off-the-field that was as explosive as his play on-the-field. I'm not one to sit in judgment of Irvin's life, although it's obvious he could have done a lot better in some areas. Some of the stuff he did, and some of the stuff he says - until this day - make me cringe, make me wonder - "Why, Mike, why?" But the HoF is about one thing, your play between the lines; it's about how you performed for three hours every Sunday. It says so right in the by-laws of the HoF voting - you can look it up.
If you want to have a discussion about the modern-day athlete, their role in society and their obligations to be role models, or any of many other moral and ethical issues, that's fine - and it's a worthy discussion to have. And you can throw Michael Irvin right into the middle of it. But if you want to discuss Irvin deserving the HoF - where his play on the field is the only criteria - then there is no discussion.
And if Michael Irivn doesn't make the HoF again, I hope some of the writers will have the guts to admit that they are sitting in judgment of Michael Irvin, the man - not the player.
posted by The Gryphon at 8:42 AM
<< Home