On his ESPN radio show yesterday, former Dallas Cowboy Michael Irvin said he’d trade in his three Super Bowl rings and his Hall of Fame jacket to go 19-0 one season.
I’d give them all back for perfection. Being the best for a season (Super Bowl champ) is great but being one of the greatest of all-time is something else.
For the most part, I agree with him. While I do think the luster of “undefeated” faded a bit after 2007 when the Patriots went 18-1, it would still be incredible to have the only 19-0 record out there. And you’d get a Super Bowl ring with that 19-0 season; So I guess the question is: Is 19-0 worth two Super Bowl titles?
Still, if I had to pick between three Super Bowls or one 19-0 season, I’d go for the latter. Greatest-of-all-time or not, to do something that no one else has been able to do would be an amazing accomplishment.
Plus, we’d never have to hear from Mercury Morris again.
Which would you rather have? Three rings or one 19-0 season?
on Dec 16th, 2009 at 3:08 PM
I love Michael but he’s full of it on this. No way he’d trade 3 rings AND his HOF jacket. I heard him say this on NFL Network and thought he was doing it clearly to be a contrarian. Plus, since this can never possibly happen, it’s an easy thing for him to say since he’ll never have to put up.
The real question is whether he’d trade his rings and a jacket for a “Dancing With the Stars” title.
on Dec 16th, 2009 at 3:49 PM
I’d take the 3 Super Bowl wins and the HOF, thanks. What did that 1 undefeated season ever get Dan Marino? 0 Super Bowl rings.
on Dec 16th, 2009 at 4:38 PM
I’ll take the one ring from the 19-0 season over the 3 from the other random seasons.
We get a new SB champion each season, and although the opportunity to simply earn a ring is still slight, that 19-0 rarity is even more special.
on Dec 16th, 2009 at 6:22 PM
John, what undefeated season for Dan Marino are you talking about?
on Dec 17th, 2009 at 8:26 AM
The Dolphins went unbeaten but that team is never mentioned when they talk about the greatest teams of all time while Irvin’s Cowboys teams are. Going unbeaten would be a nice thing to have on your resume but it doesn’t compare to 3 Super Bowl rings and a Hall of Fame bust, IMO.
on Dec 17th, 2009 at 10:04 AM
I’d take the three rings. Getting three exhilarating championship experiences is better than one. I can’t imagine getting that one in perfect fashion would be so much better than a “non-perfect” championship that it could make up for the two you’d miss out on.
on Dec 18th, 2009 at 1:29 AM
can anyone even name the player with the most rings? does anyone care about him? now does everyone know who Mercury Morris is? yeah ok, there you go.
P.S.- it’s Charles Haley