Michael Irvin and ESPN (spinoff) (1 Viewer)

[pinequick]

Was just reading the thread about the argument between Michael Irvin and Sean Salisbury on the Dan Patrick Show. Now don't get me wrong, both of these guys are goofballs. But Irvin just gets under my skin, especially when he is on the set of the football television programs on ESPN. It's always louder and "more street" with him.

I know that part of the formula of sports broadcasting is having former athletes/coaches on to give that P.O.V. But in my opinion, if ESPN needed to have a former player--*even one from the Cowboys championship teams*--I would much rather listen to a well-reasoned personality like Darren Woodson than the off-the-wall, 150-decibel block party that is Michael Irvin.

So while Darren Woodson may seem a strange choice here, think of this poll as:

a. the flamboyant athlete who is loud and says things/argues to get attention for himself and ESPN

vs.

b. a laid-back, well-reasoned athlete who offers his opinions and *also* listens to the opinions of others on the program.

What say you--what would you rather watch/listen to? (And feel free to offer other athletes that you would rather see in Irvin's position, if need be).

EDIT TO ADD: If you to vote for Irvin, please post why below. I may be in the minority here--would like to hear from those that don't think like I do about him (i.e. what do you like about him as a commentator?)

 

[Vikes Fan]

Simply put...I hate Irvin as a comentator.

 

[pinequick]

9 votes thus far for Irvin, but no posts--can no one put into words what they actually prefer about him as a commentator?

 

[jacklejack]

Live and let live. If anyone really HATES him, just don't watch him.

 

[kook178]

Irvin = doosh

kook

 

[josh]

I voted for Irvin. Can't really give you a good explaination. I just enjoy watching him. Sometimes you watch a show for information (which I could see you hating him), other times for entertainment, which I think he brings.

I can't see really listening to Salisbury vs. Irvin if you aren't looking for entertainment. I do not think these guys possess too much inside info you couldn't find elsewhere, so you have to know what your expecting when you tune in.

 

[Raskell5]

Irvin is a clown. I would rather listen to Joe Theismann, and I can't stand him either.

 

[Sinrman]

Irvin is a clown. I would rather listen to Joe Theismann, and I can't stand him either.

LOL That's harsh.. saying Theismann is better than Irvin.......Funny thing is..... I agree with this. And Joe is HORRRRRRRRRRIBLE!

Irvin needs to just go away. Sick of seeing/hearing him...

 

[gman8343]

I'd almost rather listen to one of Osama's insane Arabic rants than Irvin. Almost.

 

[Despyzer]

Live and let live. If anyone really HATES him, just don't watch him.

That makes for some pretty psychotic television viweing if you want to watch the program that he is a part of but can't stand him.:watchlookawaywatchlookawayflipthechannelflipback:

 

[BeTheMatch]

I voted for Irvin. No contest in my opinion. I'm not sure what to make of your "street" comments, but I'll leave that alone.

I like Irivin because he's well-connected, gets lots of info from players that others don't and isn't afraid to speak the truth. He was the ONLY one on mainstream TV that ripped Favre THE DAY he got involved in Javon Walker's contract impasse.

 

[Despyzer]

I voted Irvin... because you never know when he might stab someone in the neck with a pair of scissors.

 

[nygiants56]

I like Irvin more..he doesn't speak English, so i don't understand him..

 

[GregR_2]

...I know that part of the formula of sports broadcasting is having former athletes/coaches on to give that P.O.V. ...

I've long felt that the formula at ESPN is to have one guy who is annoying and that viewers generally dislike.It's hard to find people with synergy who when you put together can really reach a level of excellence. And so I think they go for the Howard Stern or car wreck mentality. They put someone out there that you dislike enough that you stay tuned in just to see what happens next.There's just a long list of guys that I can't see the justification for them having gotten jobs at ESPN in the first place, let alone having stayed on as long as they did. Trey Wingo, Sean Salisbury, Michael Irvin, Stephen A Scott, and the poster child of this formula, Rush Limbaugh.What I wouldn't give to see someone smart, insightful, AND non-abrasive, like Eric Allen, get put in Irvin's spot. But he won't, because Allen combined with the rest of the crew would make for too dry of a show for ESPN, despite the quality of the content.

 

[BlueOnion]

Irvin is a clown. I would rather listen to Joe Theismann, and I can't stand him either.

Terribly sad, but terribly true. Listening to Thiesmann is like nails on a chalkboard. But he is a significant upgrade over Irvin.

 

[blkgolf23]

I voted for the playmaker becasue of the following reasons:

1. He was the heart of the Cowboys during the great days.

2. He had a better jab than most boxers

3. He helped the Cowboys win 3 Super Bowls

and....

4. I love seeing him feel up Steve Young...

 

[pinequick]

...

I know that part of the formula of sports broadcasting is having former athletes/coaches on to give that P.O.V.  ...

I've long felt that the formula at ESPN is to have one guy who is annoying and that viewers generally dislike.It's hard to find people with synergy who when you put together can really reach a level of excellence. And so I think they go for the Howard Stern or car wreck mentality. They put someone out there that you dislike enough that you stay tuned in just to see what happens next.

There's just a long list of guys that I can't see the justification for them having gotten jobs at ESPN in the first place, let alone having stayed on as long as they did. Trey Wingo, Sean Salisbury, Michael Irvin, Stephen A Scott, and the poster child of this formula, Rush Limbaugh.

What I wouldn't give to see someone smart, insightful, AND non-abrasive, like Eric Allen, get put in Irvin's spot. But he won't, because Allen combined with the rest of the crew would make for too dry of a show for ESPN, despite the quality of the content.

I totally agree with you here--they're going for "shock" factor ("what will they say next?"). The thing is, it just doesn't work on me. On the Sunday morning shows, I'll watch ESPN, but when Irvin gets going, I'll just change the channel. It's that simple. I was wondering if I was alone in this regard. . .