One week after making comments on Dan Patrick's radio show that Tony Romo's athleticism must be the result of some black ancestry, Michael Irvin returned to the show today and addressed those comments."I do want to apologize for those comments," Irvin said today. "They were inappropriate and insensitive.... What I always try to do is give people first-hand knowledge of what it's like in the locker room and how we as players joke around with one another. This is how I joke around with Romo."
Patrick said some have suggested that there was a double standard that Irvin, as a black man, got away with his comments while a white broadcaster might not have. Patrick added, "I'm as guilty because I was laughing."
Irvin also said he thought some people might have thought his comments were worse than they were because, "When it's written it comes off in a different tone." (You can listen for yourself here.) Before going on to talk about yesterday's NFL action, Irvin reiterated, "I certainly have to know where to draw the line, and I needed to draw the line last week and I did not, so I apologize.... The last thing I want to do is offend anybody. I want to have fun, I enjoy what I do, but by no means do I want to offend anybody."
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
12-04-2006 @ 9:05AM
steven caruso said...
it is a shame that Jimmy the greek and howard cossell both got fired for a lot less,and they were both a lot more intelligent and professional than this bigotted bozo. Lets see if the black community really wants equality or not. Fire his butt NOW.
Reply
11-29-2006 @ 10:23PM
J. Trecker said...
I fail to see the difference between the comments of
Rush Limbaugh and Michael Irvin. Both speak of
ignorance and intollerance, and yet Mr. Irvin is still
employed by ESPN, while Mr. Limbaugh, rightly so, is
not. I find myself changing the channel every time Mr.
Irvin begins to speak during the Sunday broadcasts, because
he comes across as an unintelligent, uninformed,
unentertaining commentator. He brings little if any
insight to the conversation, while being boisterous,
bombastic, and beligerent to any dissenting person.
Give me Terry Bradshaw, Howie Long, or Shannon Sharp,
for interesting analysis and insight without the
attitude.
Reply
12-03-2006 @ 10:02AM
Chris Stevens said...
I personally was not offended by Michael Irvin's comments. While I think he is an idot, I do get a chuckle by the stupid statements he makes and the "hood" tone of his voice.
That said, given the multiple firings of many commentators over the past few years for inappropriate comments, there is no way that Irvin should be allowed to continue.
While it is debatable whether or not these commentators should have been fired, the stadard has been set and Irvin needs to be fired.
It has been stated many other times, but if Irvin was white talking about a black man, he would have been fired the same day.
I am white and I don't think he should be fired because of this comment (although I think he should be fired because he is terrible), but based on the stadards that have been set (ESPN set it with Rush), MI needs to be terminated.
Reply