Metalhead Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 James Lofton 764 14,004 75 Steve Largent 819 13,089 100 Charlie Joiner 750 12,146 65 Paul Warfield 427 8,565 85 Lance Alworth 542 10,266 85 HOW MANY CHAMPIONSHIP RINGS DO THESE HALL OF FAMERS HAVE??? ZERO Art Monk 940 12,026 68 CHAMPIONSHIP RINGS? 3 Vote Peter King into the ***hole Hall of Fame Bada bing. What else is there to say? Geez, Art's numbers alone are just as good/better than those, and that's without the rings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SRBFan Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 Peter King is the living embodiment of why out-of-shape, ignorant, never-played-the-game Sportswriters should NEVER be allowed to decide who is enshrined into ANY Hall of Fame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoeRedskins Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 Does anybody know why Peter King hates Art Monk so much. Did Monk kick King's puppy or something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKINZ33 Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 It is well noted that Peter Kings stance is this "It is the HOF not the Hall of Very Good". How can you be a receiver and hold the record for most all time catches and not be great? At one point in his career Art Monk did his job (catching passes) better than anyone had ever done it before. He has 3 superbowl rings and was a GREAT TEAM PLAYER, it is beyond a joke now that he is not in. It is one persons petty stance that is keeping a great human being from getting the recognition he deserves. What I fear is that one day Peter King himself could enter the Pro Football HOF as a journalist. This would be the second biggest travesty next to keeping Art Monk out. Amen brotha. Someone should take Peter King, Stand him at the 50 yrd line at fedex, and let Sean Tayor get a free shot at him, followed by sellers, arrington,washington...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Gotti Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 Peter King is a Pecker-Head Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4Ever51 Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 As a Redskin fan living in Texas, I read an article today about this very subject, btu the player was Michal Irvin. They asked this writer of the Dallas Morning News, what it takes to really push the voters to choose certain people. I guess one of the writers in our sports page is one of the voters and an ardent cowboys fan. I am curious if a writer in the DC/MD/VA area is on that election board. If so, then I would start pushing there. Send your emails, letters, phone calls to that person or persons. But dont go in without knowledge. You go in with an argument of, well, cause he was great, just wont fly. I am certain, the voters know all they need to know, but maybe some local support and pride would push the point a little more. Goodluck to Art, he does deserve it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Animal Trainer Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 I heard the entire segment between Dan Patrick and Joe T. - Joe was right on the money the entire way. He was telling Dan that he was simply curious about what type of formula those with votes used to induct players into the Hall. They were debating Jerome Bettis and Curtis Martin, saying that while Curtis has much better numbers (4th on the all time rushing list and over 1000 yards every season except this past one) many writers believe Jerome is a sure fire HOFer because everyone likes him and he's a great story. On the other hand, Curtis is a much more low key athlete that doesn't seek out all the attention for himself, which may hurt his HOF chances. Everyone be sure to listen to Dan Patrick on Monday because Dan is having Peter King on and he invited Joe T to come on and confront him, as Dan put it, or ask him as Joe T put it, about why some players with much better numbers are not admited to the Hall. Joe T said he would be there unless he was in the air on his way to Detriot. He simply stated what he had heard from other writers about how King weilded a lot of power with other voters and how there might be a "good ole' boy network" going with the writers as in "you vote for my guy and I'll vote for your guy". I don't remember if Joe T or Dan Patrick said it, but there was definately talk about how Joe Gibbs had spoken to Peter King about openly campaigning against Monk, and that King said he would vote for him this year. Another point they made was that Swann had about 400 catches and was in the hall. Monk should definately get in this year, if he doesn't its a conspiracey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beastman Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 The main argument I've heard against Monk that he record number of catches were a product of his longevity, and that while he was always a very, very good player, many believe he just wasn't the dominant force that makes it into the Hall of Fame. One thing about the list of players that was mentioned before, they all have career averages of 16 yds/catch at least. Monk didn't average 13 yds/catch. Also, save for Charlie Joiner, Monk has significantly less TDs even though he has far more receptions, and Joiner caught two less TDs than Monk, but on 190 less receptions. I think Art Monk should be in the Hall, but I can understand why some would believe he wasn't the dominant force a HOF receiever should be, and I also don't think his situation is much different from several ex-NFL players who should concievably be in the HOF. Also, I have a feeling that if the people on this board were voting, that Emmitt Smith, Troy Aikman, Reggie White, and Lawrence Taylor either wouldn't be in the HOF or wouldn't have a shot at the HOF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Edds Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 I heard the entire segment between Dan Patrick and Joe T. - Joe was right on the money the entire way. He was telling Dan that he was simply curious about what type of formula those with votes used to induct players into the Hall. They were debating Jerome Bettis and Curtis Martin, saying that while Curtis has much better numbers (4th on the all time rushing list and over 1000 yards every season except this past one) many writers believe Jerome is a sure fire HOFer because everyone likes him and he's a great story. On the other hand, Curtis is a much more low key athlete that doesn't seek out all the attention for himself, which may hurt his HOF chances. Everyone be sure to listen to Dan Patrick on Monday because Dan is having Peter King on and he invited Joe T to come on and confront him, as Dan put it, or ask him as Joe T put it, about why some players with much better numbers are not admited to the Hall. Joe T said he would be there unless he was in the air on his way to Detriot. He simply stated what he had heard from other writers about how King weilded a lot of power with other voters and how there might be a "good ole' boy network" going with the writers as in "you vote for my guy and I'll vote for your guy". I don't remember if Joe T or Dan Patrick said it, but there was definately talk about how Joe Gibbs had spoken to Peter King about openly campaigning against Monk, and that King said he would vote for him this year. Another point they made was that Swann had about 400 catches and was in the hall. Monk should definately get in this year, if he doesn't its a conspiracey. I love that JOe T. and Joe Gibb's have confronted Peter Kingabout it . . . two winners and legends n their own right taking it to the enemy (media) . . . his numbers are sick compared to alot of people already in 3 SUPER BOWL RINGS people . . . how can you possibly deny that Monkn had anythign to do with these. His mere presence on the filed had to be accounted for. It is so mind-boggling to me why he has not made it in yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 Imagine the love Peter King would get from this board if he voted for Monk and Art finally made the HOF. Heck, I'll be first in line singing his praises and even write him a huge thank you e-mail. C'mon Petey....YOU CAN DO IT!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldTownFan Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 **** Peter King Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chachie Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 Well I hope the fact that King has been called onto the carpet by Joe Theisman will give this matter more attention and will force King into some type of explanation to the fans and the rest of the media. Even if Joey T is wrong, it will at least bring Peter King out into the daylight on this issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ_Skins Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 I am curious if a writer in the DC/MD/VA area is on that election board. If so, then I would start pushing there. Send your emails, letters, phone calls to that person or persons. But dont go in without knowledge. You go in with an argument of, well, cause he was great, just wont fly. I am certain, the voters know all they need to know, but maybe some local support and pride would push the point a little more. Goodluck to Art, he does deserve it. I think Wilbon is a voter, and has been trying to no avail, but don't hold me to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ax Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 Well I hope the fact that King has been called onto the carpet by Joe Theisman will give this matter more attention and will force King into some type of explanation to the fans and the rest of the media. Even if Joey T is wrong, it will at least bring Peter King out into the daylight on this issue. Unfortunately, King thrives on the fact that HE is the reason Monk is not in the hall. It keeps him on sports shows talking about it. Dan Snyder should bet him 5 million dollars that even you, the great Peter King, could not get Monk in the hall. He'd be in for sure. Then Danny could just say, "Go **** yourself, Fatso! You ain't gettin' ****!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 Well I hope the fact that King has been called onto the carpet by Joe Theisman will give this matter more attention and will force King into some type of explanation to the fans and the rest of the media. Even if Joey T is wrong, it will at least bring Peter King out into the daylight on this issue. King takes pride in the fact he helps keep Monk out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinking Skins Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 Hey rydemps and beastman, I remember when i started a thread about this very topic last year. I was basically looking at Monks stats in his career and asking how they compared to the other WRs who are up for the Hall. Arguments can be made both ways. I was making the argument that Monk wasn't the gamechanging player that writers just fall in love with. I think my quote was "Monk was a great WR at being a GOOD WR". But that was when I was asking the same question that rydemps asked? "What are their arguments against Monk?" So if writers were to ignore every other aspect of Monk's career, I could probably understand it being debatable as to whether Monk gets in or not; But the fact that Monk was a critical part of 4 Superbowl appearances and 3 Superbowl wins, amongst many other individual honors should outweigh the 13 ypc and the arguments against his stats compared to other WRs. MONK SHOULD BE IN THE HALL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goaldeje Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 Also, I have a feeling that if the people on this board were voting, that Emmitt Smith, Troy Aikman, Reggie White, and Lawrence Taylor either wouldn't be in the HOF or wouldn't have a shot at the HOF. You had me until this. Come on, anyone who doesn't think that those guys don't belong in the Hall is insane. I actually agree with you that it's not an open and shut case, but I do believe firmly that Monk goes in (and btw, Gary Clarke as well). I think both are debateable, but both should go. The problem I think most would agree is that the 2nd best (at least, some would say best overall) team of an entire decade (80's) is hugely under-represented in the HOF. Why? You tell me. I honestly don't have a clue. The only thing I can come up with IS some sort of conspiracy. Yet I feel my gut tighten and try to reject that b/c it seems juvenille and silly. But that is the only reason I can come up with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 Not an open and shut case? How about precedent? EVERY receiver that retired as the all-time leader in catches is in the HOF except Monk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Love_Them_Dirtbags Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 Yeah because that will help Monk get in Duh, that's the whole point. Make Peter King change, and his influence drops. Then Monk can get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tjlax Posted January 28, 2006 Share Posted January 28, 2006 I think Wilbon is a voter, and has been trying to no avail, but don't hold me to it. Wilbon is a voter and I think I've heard on discussions about this that one of Monk's problems is Wilbon doesn't aggressively push him. I bet Grimm beats him in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prufRock Posted January 28, 2006 Share Posted January 28, 2006 JHe did say though that he heard that Joe Gibbs has talked to King about it, and that he would now vote for Art. But he didn't say if he had heard that in the past and it never happened, or if had to do with this years vote. Let's hope it happens this time around. It would not surprise me at all if Joe Gibbs promised King some sort of exclusive view into Redskin training camp, or perhaps into Gibbs' personal life, that would sway King's vote. King is, after all, a journalist, and Gibbs' cachet as the old-school coach experiencing a largely unheralded renaissance might be enough to induce him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinking Skins Posted January 28, 2006 Share Posted January 28, 2006 Hey, goaldeje THe thing that the media uses against the Redskins of the 80's is the thing that we Redskins fans praise Gibbs about, the fact that he did it with 3 different QBs and 3 different RB's. If nothing else that should say that we were playing with a dynamic set of WR's and a dynamic OL and a dynamic DEFENSE, but the media just sees it as us being a bunch of crappy players who got lucky over and over and over again. Plus I've heard the argument that we won in strike years, so it makes our victories less spectacular. But with Thiesman and Riggins having a growing part in the media, and Gibbs coming back and reminding everybody that he did actually exist and form the Best or 2nd Best team of the 80's. Its bringing the attention back our way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WallyG3 Posted January 28, 2006 Share Posted January 28, 2006 I've said every time I've posted for the last year because it's in my sig. This is reason # 1 to: BOYCOTT SPORTS ILLUSTRATED!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhead36 Posted January 28, 2006 Share Posted January 28, 2006 Nothing beats Dr. Z's idiotic reason for not voting for Monk. "Irvin comes up first on the alphabetic list." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AzSkinsFan63 Posted January 28, 2006 Share Posted January 28, 2006 king is an idiot..the truth is the truth.. if you can't get over your bias and judge talent your a piece of ****! Oh by the way I got zero problems with Aikman getting in...I know talent when I see it..King is a *****! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.