gchwood Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 As I was looking over Art Monk's career stats (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/MonkAr00.htm) I noticed that his 3 best postseason games we lost. WE were 1-3 when he went over 100 yds or 5 catches. Santana had 2 for 18 yds last week and we won. Maybe we just need to keep it away from him and we win too? Ah Forget it, through the screen and the deep ball we can light them up!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiefPowhatan17 Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 I don't think there is any correlation at all. But, it is an interesting little bit of data.:logo::logo::logo: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpfan Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Maybe that means because those games we won we were pounding the ball on the ground? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpass Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Monk was a real great receiver. I hope Moss can have just as many good years as Monk did for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjcdaman Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Maybe that means because those games we won we were pounding the ball on the ground? I agree. It means we were controlling the clock just like we will try to do this Saturday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diesel22 Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Teams went into those playoff games trying to shut Monk down. He was our most dependable WR and they knew it. They would devote their attention to him and someone else would hurt them. Then, we got up on them and started ramming it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gchwood Posted January 12, 2006 Author Share Posted January 12, 2006 Teams went into those playoff games trying to shut Monk down. He was our most dependable WR and they knew it. They would devote their attention to him and someone else would hurt them. Then, we got up on them and started ramming it. You mean like how everyone pays attention to Moss, and then we kick it to Cooley cuz Moss is quadrupal covered? and then we ram it down their throats with Portis, Betts and the Rock? Good lets keep it from moss then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinking Skins Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 See, I'm all for Moss being a great Redskins reciever, but when you start putting him in Monk's shoes (or Coles in Clark's shoes), thats when I've got to raise my hand and just say NO! One good year, even if its the best in the history of the team, but ONE GOOD YEAR does not make you similar to a HOF WR. Instead of Moss being just like Monk, why not just say what he is? He's Just like MOSS. JUST LIKE SANTANA MOSS. And thats all we want him to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PotomacSkinsFan Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 also, both of their names start with "M" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.