There was a verbal rumble of sorts at Valley Ranch on Thursday.  Though it wasn’t quite as compelling as Herrera-Kawakami I, things got heated between ESPN’s Ed Werder and Nick Eatman of DallasCowboys.com.

As we understand it, the problem arose from Terrell Owens’ post-game comments from the team’s Week Four loss to the Redskins.  Eatman wrote an item for the Cowboys’ official web site knocking ESPN and other national media outlets for making a big deal out of T.O.’s desire to get his hands on the ball.

In the column, Eatman suggested that the question prompting the T.O. sound bite that then prompted a Monday Night Countdown free-for-all on Owens was aimed at baiting him into saying something controversial.

As we understand it, Eatman didn’t realize that Werder had asked the question.

On Thursday, Werder told Eatman that Werder had asked the question, um, in question.

Per a source with knowledge of the exchange, they debated whether the question was aimed at getting a response from Owens that then could be used as proof of a problem in Dallas.  As they talked, things started to get a little heated.  Eventually, Werder walked away.  While doing so, he made a comment regarding Eatman’s overall credibility, given that he writes for a team-owned publication.

Eatman responded by suggesting that ESPN specifically tries to get its reporters to stir things up.  And there might have been an “F” bomb or two added to the message.

Werder returned, and the two continued to jaw for a bit.  Though it never got physical, others eventually stepped in to ensure that it didn’t.

Eatman’s point is a valid one.  At times, it appears that the ESPN machine tries to create a story, and then to squeeze every last drop of 2 percent out of it.  The fact that Werder apparently got a little defensive about the situation suggests to us that, in his heart, he suspects that there might be some merit to what Eatman said.

Of course, Werder’s point back to Eatman is a valid one as well.  No writer who works for the entity that he covers is truly objective, and any item he crafts needs to be viewed through the prism that the ultimate subject of his story is the source of all or part of his livelihood.  So, apparently, Werder struck a raw nerve.

Thus, we’ll call this one a draw.  Maybe there will be a rematch.