SharkHawk wrote:You brought up the player and explained him away in the same post. Harper was one of many who was Irvin's #2. He made a big statement about being a #1 receiver after his production in Dallas, and went where? Tampa or something? Wherever he went he fell off the map and wasn't half the player he was as a Cowboy. He was one of many that looked good because he played opposite Irvin. Then left and disappeared. He was just never the same. He should have given half that contract to Irvin for getting it for him. I think each one of those guys they ran out there just proved what a player Irvin really was.
Not sure what you are trying to say, other than Irvin was really really good. Harper wasn't a Number 1, he proved that in Tampa. But those Cowboy teams had one great WR and really good WR as a #2. Just shows how strong that team was. I was just saying when people talk about how many offensive weapons that team had, they tend to forget Harper. Harper killed the Niners in the playoffs. Most likely because Irvin was double teamed, but still doesn't take away from his accomplishments.
I don't see what you're missing. I think I was pretty clear. Harper wasn't that good. You say he was because he faced single coverage against the niners and beat up on them. Why did he? Because nobody could cover Irvin. And none of the receivers that played opposite Irvin were really that good. Their play without Irvin shows you that they weren't as good as they seemed on Dallas. I understand that #2 receivers frequently have improved stats and performances because of who is on the opposite side, but to me, the Cowboys receivers all really sucked, and that is a testament to how good Irvin was, because he made the guys who played with him look good every week. They weren't that good.
It is like saying Steve Kerr is a great shooting guard. Kerr was a good shooter. That's about the extent of it. He benefited from the fact that nobody ever bothered to guard the guy because everybody was guarding Jordan and Pippen. This of course led to a lot of open looks for Kerr. This isn't meant to devalue what he did, because he hit those wide open shots, just like Alvin Harper caught those balls that were thrown on a dime by Aikman when he was being covered by the worst defensive back on the team, because everybody else was trying to cover Irvin or tackle Smith.
So Harper had a great game or games against the Niners... I think that further proves the point I was trying to make. Irvin was a great receiver and he wasn't a guy that could make his own plays and he wasn't a star. He happened to play opposite one of the best receivers ever on a team that had a great receiving TE, a great running back, a great OL, and a pinpoint accurate QB. If you think that team wouldn't have done the things they did without Alvin Harper on the field then I have news for you.... you're wrong. He left and I didn't see a significant dropoff in that team or in Irvin's performance. Harper was a #2 guy playing opposite one of the best #1's ever. That's about all I have to say. You think differently. I disagree. To each their own.