Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Impeach Peter King!


southeast jerome

Recommended Posts

DC is a town where a lot of people make a living trying to find ways to dig up dirt on other people in an effort to ruin their career. As far as I know, the only reason Art Monk is not in the Hall of Fame (not like he used to hold the all time receiving yards record or anything) is because of Peter King. Any ideas?

Peter King probably game plans with Pasquerelli about how to keep Art Monk out of the HOF for his entire lifetime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another thing that gets me is this.

If Pittsburgh was such a great defensive team, and 4 of their defensive players from the 70s are in the HOF, then why are every one of their offensive skill position players in the HOF too when their offense was pretty average?

They have 9 players from that team in the HOF and Greenwood will get in eventually making it 10.

Bradshaw

Blount

Ham

Green

Harris

Lambert

Stallworth

Swann

Webster

1 DLmen, 2 LB, 1 DB, 1QB, 1RB, 2WR, 1OL

The Redskins offense for several years in the 80's and early 90's was one of the best ever but we don't get any representation other than Riggins who played for less than 1/2 of the Gibbs years.

If we were the Steelers we would eventually have:

Monk

Clark

Grimm

Jacoby

Bostic or May

Mann

Green

But in the end only Monk and Green will get in and maybe Grimm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can James Lofton rank above Monk ?

That's the one that floors me.

I remember Lofton as an average, but not spectacular receiver.

Maybe I was on hiatus when he was "tearing up" the league.

Lofton was very good and should be in the HOF even though his teams never won championships.

The ones that get me are Swann and Stallworth. Stallworth averaged 38 catches a year for 14 years and Swann's best year his stats were this 61 880 14.4 11, and thats the only season he had more than 50 catches. The rest of his years were about what we would hope to get from David Patten or James thrash, 30-40 catches.

Swann is probably about the same quality player as Alvin Harper when he was in Dallas. He retired with 336 receptions but is in the HOF, but somehow Monk and his 940 aren't good enough. :doh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OMG! Swann only had 336 catches!! Now sometimes even a player without

hefty numbers should get in because they change the game -- the innovators,

the revolutionaries (Gale Sayers) -- but I'm not sure Swann was necessarily one. Back to Monk: you should only be judged against the era that you played and 940 (?) was the leader in the clubhouse for quite some time. Moreover, Peter King's whole career and regard in the industry are a complete mystery to me. He is quick to offer such gems as "the Steelers want to run the football" and this passes for expertise. His columns in SI and online and his reporting on Inside the NFL are garbage -- this message board is full of people with better NFL insight.

Where are our conspiracy theorists on the real reason King is keeping Monk out?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would argue that the Redskins from the 80's & 90's who belong in the Hall are:

Monk

Grimm

Jacoby

Clark

I wanna say Doug Williams, because the 2nd quarter of Super Bowl XXII is something that will never again be duplicated or seen. He was a good (probably not great) QB whose prime years were spent toiling away on futile teams (the Buc's, for example)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peter King isn't the only one, but he's the most vocal. Pretty much the pack leader against Monk. Every reason I've heard him give has been very weak.

His big one is that so many people today are poised to overtake 1000 catches, the number alone can't be the only thing getting him into the hall. Mr. King fails to realize that nearly all of Monk's catches came from a time when the NFL was very much run-heavy. To have over 950 catches from that time period is outstanding, and that was represented by the fact that he retired as the active leader in catches. So what if Rice passed him later? By applying Mr. King's false logic, no statistics should ever count, because eventually, somebody will surpass them.

Peter King is a ridiculous ass who has no business deciding the future of a great player and great man like Art Monk.

I read an article King wrote explaining his reasons why Monk shouldn't get in. The above reason was #1 (flawed for the reason stated above - he compares Monk to recieves in TODAYS game). Then goes on to state 2nd that he was about the fourth-most dangerous player on the Redskins...... I think that would be a reason he SHOULD get in. He acomplished the feat of making that many catches in a run-heavy league as the 2nd or 3rd reciever. He also claims Monk was not considered to be the very best reciever in his era by peers or the media.......then goes on to say he made the AP's all pro team (top 2 recievers) twice and the pro bowl 3 times??????

Here is the link if anyone wantt to read it

!WARNING!-make sure all breakables & kids are out of arms reach-!WARNING!

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/writers/peter_king/01/17/mmqb.divisional/index.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peter King isn't the only one, but he's the most vocal. Pretty much the pack leader against Monk. Every reason I've heard him give has been very weak.

His big one is that so many people today are poised to overtake 1000 catches, the number alone can't be the only thing getting him into the hall. Mr. King fails to realize that nearly all of Monk's catches came from a time when the NFL was very much run-heavy. To have over 950 catches from that time period is outstanding, and that was represented by the fact that he retired as the active leader in catches. So what if Rice passed him later? By applying Mr. King's false logic, no statistics should ever count, because eventually, somebody will surpass them.

Peter King is a ridiculous ass who has no business deciding the future of a great player and great man like Art Monk.

It was defineately a different game then. And Monk made every catch count.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Largent and Lofton went to lots and lots of pro-bowls and scored lots of TDs.

Swann and Stallworth both had amazing SB performances.

Monk did not. This is what King would tell you.

The name you need to throw out there then is Charlie Joiner.

Joiner played 18 seasons. He caught fewer passes for fewer yards and the fewer TDs than Monk. He was an All-Pro just once and only went to three pro-bowls. He was a top 10 WR just 3 times in his 18 years, and never higher than 3rd. He never won a ring. We was the top WR on his team only five seasons.

His claim to fame is that he was once the all-time career leader in receptions with 750. Ahem.

Joiner has nothing, and I mean NOTHING on Monk. He got into the Hall of Fame in 1995, ten years after his retirement.

I'm not saying Joiner doesn't deserve to be a HOFer, especially considering that only 17 WRs are in the Hall right now. But I'd love for someone to explain why Joiner's deserving where Monk isn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't stand the fact that writers get to vote on who should or shouldn't get into the HOF anyway.Most of them don't know what the Hell they're talking about anyway. You'll have writers on the east coast not voting for players on the west coast because they don't see that player play, and vice versa. Only people in the NFL (GMs, coaches and players), members of the HOF, and the HOF committee should be allowed to vote. Writers have nothing to do with football except digging up dirt. :rant:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are only 39 voters. Peter King presents his "evidence" during the discussion. He and Dr Z have publically stated that they did not vot for him in the past. You need 80% to get voted in, so they only need to get 7 votes to prevent Monk from getting in. Their lobby has become very stubborn, despite the evidence to the contrary. And Peter King and Dr. Z are voters for life. :rolleyes:

they also got lenny pasta in their court too...take any of your typical redskin haters who have a vote, and their bias becomes clear as a brook bubbling in the snowy wilderness...they will keep the core of the 80s redskins championship teams out of the HOF at all costs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peter King is a fat, bloated slob who probably never played a down of football in his life. Anyone who was a football fan in the 1980's and 1990's knows that Art Monk was a consistent top-tier WR on a playoff contending team. He BROKE THE RECORD for career catches AND catches in a season for god's sake!!!

How can anyone lobby against him??? I am going to auto-send him emails every day from now on pertaining to his stance against AM. I urge you all to do the same....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...