Wow, it's good to be talking football again.
After a few weeks of NBA Free Agency frenzy, and quite a dud time in the NFL I must say, it's exciting to be back in the thick of Broncos country (though some of me is still watching how the Chicago Bulls fill out their dynamite new roster).
Still, thanks to NBA free agency I am still in the hypothetical state of mind, and one of my favorite things as an avid mock drafter is thinking of new possibilities. Back before free agency started, I made a list of players that could potentially fit with the Broncos. One of those players was wide receiver Terrell Owens, and his name has resurfaced recently as a player who is looking for a team to sign with.
***UPDATE*** Perhaps there is a better low risk, high reward option out there for the Broncos. One that is young, apparently really fast, huge, and one who caught a ton of passes in college.
I just have a couple questions for all those who believe T.O. is a team "cancer":
Have any of us here ever followed closely (and I’m talking as closely as we do the Broncos) which T.O. has been part of? How do you know he’s a team cancer? Because the only way he’s been painted as a team cancer is by ESPN or NFL Network, and it’s mainly because he’s a fun persona to hate (see Sharpie incident).
Spoken from the man himself:
"The teams I’ve been on, if you ask in that locker room how I’ve been as a teammate and as a person, it’s contradictory to what’s been displayed out there."
The main thing is, the only way we have any notion of this guy being a team "cancer" is because he’s been portrayed that way on ESPN. Now, when we hear ESPN talk about how bad the Broncos are, we are all so quick on here to judge them for that. So why should we believe the way they portray TO?
Of course he’s gotten in some faces, and of course he’s gotten mad about not catching balls. Find me a receiver who has yet to do that in the NFL, and you’ll find a guy who doesn’t have that great of a competitive drive.
Is he more diva-ish than most receivers? Alright, I’ll grant that. But please don’t compare him to Tony Scheffler or Jay Cutler. Those were two guys who didn’t give a hoot about anything but putting up inflated stats and getting chicks at the bars after games. They didn’t put the team and winning first.
TO, aside from last year with crappy Buffalo and regardless of what you may think, has always been part of teams that, for the most part—WIN. I could give a list of reasons not to sign the guy, but his history of drops would come WAY before his history with fellow players.
Besides, it’s not like you’re committing a ton of money to this guy for five or six years. You can sign him to a modest one or two year deal at this point so he can finish out his career, and what do you have to lose?
Some don’t seem to get the concept of "Low risk, high reward", which is understandable because it’s not my own opinion piece. It’s the same way I felt about Brady Quinn. Why not bring the guy on? He came cheap, and there’s a high reward factor by bringing him in with little risk involved.
Same is true of TO. You don’t have to commit ton of finances toward this guy, but he will still put up better numbers than more than half of the receivers currently on the roster. Right now, bringing on TO and replacing him with Brandon Stokley is not outside the realm of possibility. Stokley has had concussion problems the last couple of years, and though he was effective last year, I don’t know how effective he will be for the future with his injuries.
Why not bring on Terrell Owens? Here’s more of what he had to say:
"I’ve never been in any trouble. I know right from wrong. I try to make the right choices and judgments when I’m out in the public."
"It’s not like I can’t play," Owens said. "There is some type of influence that they’re making in the minds of teams and owners and GMs."
"I feel like I have enough talent to be a starter on any team," he said. "That’s what’s so frustrating."
T.O. with a chip on his shoulder? Low risk, high reward potential? You can count me in. Not to mention, his name alone forces opponents to game plan differently for our offense. Regardless of how old he is, he’s still TO and he still poses a more than average threat when he’s on the field. He will make everyone that much better, in my opinion.
You can think I’m wrong, but please don’t paint T.O. with ESPN’s brush. We are always quick to hate on them when it’s bad press for the Broncos, so why should we believe the TO hype they’ve created?
"People have listened to a lot of the commentaries throughout a lot of the media outlets, mainly ESPN, that has my character in question as far as things that have happened in the past," Owens said to the Nashville station.
"I may do 99 good things right and if I do one thing wrong, ESPN and the people on there … make it out to be the worst thing ever," he added.
"I think with the years that I’ve had, the last three to four years, I feel like I’ve tried to turn over a new leaf," Owens said. "But still they won’t let go of what I did in the past."
If a team does give him a chance, it will be a chance for Owens to show that he has some good football left in him and that he has made the necessary changes in his attitude. Any team lacking depth at wide receiver should probably take a chance on him for the 2010 season. It may have not worked out in Buffalo, but who has really helped Buffalo in recent memory? Owens may be a missing component for a team to improve.
In just over a year’s time, the Broncos have traded Jay Cutler, Brandon Marshall, Tony Scheffler, and Peyton Hillis. They managed to squander away Brian Dawkins from Philadelphia, which in and of itself should be considered unbelievable. They managed to completely dominate the draft board and manipulate their way to getting Tim Tebow, the most polarizing player in the entire draft. They have managed to somehow have four first round picks in the last two years.
If any of you think the idea of Terrell Owens to the Broncos is out of the realm of possibility and Josh McDaniels hasn’t shot it down, you might find that you’re sorely mistaken.