Peter King Quote that I hope will get Monk in HOF

[SkinsFTW]

And to top it all off, Monk owned the most important records as a receiver while Carson never held any as a linebacker. Not that he doesn't belong in the HOF. He does but so does Monk. It's pretty rediculous having to defend the former NFL Career Receptions leader.

[MaddogCT]

It's pretty rediculous having to defend the former NFL Career Receptions leader.

Don't forget the single season reception record. Monk is the only reciever to hold the single season,career reception and the consecutive game with a reception records.(as far as I can tell, anyway.) And for a short time in 1992 he held all three at the same time.

Pro Bowl Year Stats:

Reed and Lofton are sometimes referred to as better receivers who should make it into Canton before Art Monk. Many point to the number of Pro Bowls Reed and Lofton went to compared to Monk. But when you look at the stats, Monk’s Pro Bowl seasons are better than most of the seasons when Reed or Lofton made it.

I also included two seasons where Monk should have gone to the pro bowl and the stats of the NFC recievers that year.

Monk

Rec Yards Y/R TD

1984 106 1372 12.9 7

1985 91 1226 13.5 2

1986 73 1068 14.6 4

Reed:

Rec Yards Y/R TD

1988 71 968 13.6 6

1989 88 1312 14.9 9 |

1990 71 945 13.3 8 |

1991 81 1113 13.7 10 |

1992 65 913 14.0 3 |

1993 52 854 16.4 6 |

1994 90 1303 14.5 8 |

Lofton:

Rec Yards Y/R TD

1978 46 818 17.8 6 |

1979 54 968 17.9 4 |

1980 71 1226 17.3 4 |

1981 71 1294 18.2 8 |

1982 35 696 19.9 4 |

1983 58 1300 22.4 8 |

1984 62 1361 22.0 7 |

1985 69 1153 16.7 4 |

1991 57 1072 18.8 8

Two Pro Bowls which should have included Art Monk:

1989 NFC Pro Bowl:

Taylor:

60 1077 17.9 10

Sharpe:

90 1423 15.8 12

Rice

82 1483 18.1 17

Ellard:

70 1382 19.7 8

Carrier:

86 1422 16.5 9

Monk:

86 1186 13.8 8 |

1991 NFC Pro Bowl:

Clark:

70 1340 19.1 10

Irvin:

93 1523 16.4 8

Rice:

80 1206 15.1 14

Rison:

81 976 12.0 12

Monk:

71 1049 14.8 8

:logo:

[Stonoman]

Why do sports writers get to vote on football players.What the hell do they know? They should let the Defensive players vote on Offensive players and then reverse it.After 5 years tally the votes and see who is on top of the list.Pick a panel of players and then let them vote for the best. :2cents:

[WilberMarshall]

I have been saying it and will continue to say it... Peter King, is a disgrace to other HOF voters... he can make all kinds of excuses for the guys he likes but when it comes to Monk he just wouldn't go beyond a 2nd grader excuse level...

Pity!

[Sknsnation]

Great job Bubba, good stuff,enjoyed it

[FedExFielder]

=

I think all skins fans can agree on this

[Henry]

Yup. King has some pretty huge blinders on when discussing Monk. And now he's got his heels dug in to the point where I think even pointing out his inconsistant logic will do little good.

HOF voting needs to be re-vamped. Pure and simple. There's a reason college football took the rankings out of the hands of the media. They have a terrible track record when it comes to making objective decisions about things like this.

[zoony]

Osi Umenyiora. Not only a great story -- he's lived equal thirds of his life in London, Africa and America -- but a smart kid, good talker and one heck of a pass-rusher

Funny how he had to point out that Osi was a 'good talker'.

Chris Rock does an entire bit on this, I highly recommend it. :2cents:

[MoeRedskins]

Why continue beating a dead horse here, I think everybody in Redskins Land knows Peter King is a tool job, why bring up more points.

[fight_on_til_you_have_won]

Funny how he had to point out that Osi was a 'good talker'.

Chris Rock does an entire bit on this, I highly recommend it. :2cents:

He speaks so well! He's so well spoken! He speaks so well!

Speaks so well is not a complement, okay? Speaks so well is some **** you say about retarded people that can talk. What do you mean he speaks well, what did he have a stroke the other day? :laugh:

Back to the subject at hand, I think this is a great post. I just wish other high-ranking sports journalists had the nuts to call Peter King on this nonsense.

[raperry2]

Peter King can die in a fire. Slowly.

[NOVA2Tampa]

F Peter King...

[JPM285181]

Don't forget the single season reception record. Monk is the only reciever to hold the single season,career reception and the consecutive game with a reception records.(as far as I can tell, anyway.) And for a short time in 1992 he held all three at the same time.

Pro Bowl Year Stats:

Reed and Lofton are sometimes referred to as better receivers who should make it into Canton before Art Monk. Many point to the number of Pro Bowls Reed and Lofton went to compared to Monk. But when you look at the stats, Monk’s Pro Bowl seasons are better than most of the seasons when Reed or Lofton made it.

I also included two seasons where Monk should have gone to the pro bowl and the stats of the NFC recievers that year.

Monk

Rec Yards Y/R TD

1984 106 1372 12.9 7

1985 91 1226 13.5 2

1986 73 1068 14.6 4

Reed:

Rec Yards Y/R TD

1988 71 968 13.6 6

1989 88 1312 14.9 9 |

1990 71 945 13.3 8 |

1991 81 1113 13.7 10 |

1992 65 913 14.0 3 |

1993 52 854 16.4 6 |

1994 90 1303 14.5 8 |

Lofton:

Rec Yards Y/R TD

1978 46 818 17.8 6 |

1979 54 968 17.9 4 |

1980 71 1226 17.3 4 |

1981 71 1294 18.2 8 |

1982 35 696 19.9 4 |

1983 58 1300 22.4 8 |

1984 62 1361 22.0 7 |

1985 69 1153 16.7 4 |

1991 57 1072 18.8 8

Two Pro Bowls which should have included Art Monk:

1989 NFC Pro Bowl:

Taylor:

60 1077 17.9 10

Sharpe:

90 1423 15.8 12

Rice

82 1483 18.1 17

Ellard:

70 1382 19.7 8

Carrier:

86 1422 16.5 9

Monk:

86 1186 13.8 8 |

1991 NFC Pro Bowl:

Clark:

70 1340 19.1 10

Irvin:

93 1523 16.4 8

Rice:

80 1206 15.1 14

Rison:

81 976 12.0 12

Monk:

71 1049 14.8 8

:logo:

Hey nice work, now you got me po'd on Valentines day. I remember these years where whatever argument fit was used to keep Monk out. A lot of catches but lower ypc than blah blah, a lot of yards but lower catches than blah blah, a good amount of cathes and yards but low on TD's,................. it was always some angle to screw Monk I guess kissing reporters asses has its advantages.

[JPM285181]

Why continue beating a dead horse here, I think everybody in Redskins Land knows Peter King is a tool job, why bring up more points.

Its what are therapist recommended to help us cope.

[skins fan1010]

Carson did the one thing no defensive player ever gets enough credit for, even though it's the first thing every defensive coach talks about with his team every week: He defended the run. ...That was Carson's job.

Holy crap. All these years I thought the Giants had eleven guys on the other side of the line of scrimmage and now I learn that they only had one--Carson.

We should start a petition to remove Gibbs from the Hall. If a coach can't put up a hundred against a team with one player on defense, that coach shouldn't be in the Hall.

[BlueTiki21]

It's also interesting how he dismisses the idea of Monk being in the HoF b/c of his contention that he had a scarier WR next to him in Gary Clark that drew attention away from Monk, allowing him to pad his stats.

Yet when he talks up how Carson deserves to be in the HoF, he ignores the fact that he had what's considered the greatest LB of all time playing next to him in Lawerence Taylor drawing attention away from him.

Just another example of King talking out of two sides of his mouth.

I agree with others, Bubba. You should mail this into him and point out his hypocrisy.

Carson made 2 pro bowls before taylor even arrived...

However, I think it is a travesty that art monk hasn't been placed into the hall of fame yet. He definately deserves to get in, hopefully next year. It's a shame players such as monk and carson get snubbed like this year after year.

[Jumbo]

Why continue beating a dead horse here...

We are the endlessely cloned Imperial Storm Toopers of dead-horse-beaters. :point2sky

[bubba9497]

Pete is funny, I like he answers a question by not answering the question with anything relevant to the actual question.

like a bad politician :laugh:

[MattGeorge85]

King is such a hypocrite. He makes a case for teams, players, and so forth but when it comes down to backing them he tends to go with whatever fad is sweeping the NFL. He is one of the last people I would want on the HOF voting board. I would additinally like him to leave sportswriting and leave it to some new blood with some fresh ideas. I'm certain that more senior members of this message board are more qualified in their knowlege than him

[MaddogCT]

Another couple of Pro Bowls for Monk:

1988 Pro Bowl:

John Taylor:

14 325 23.2 2

JT Smith:

83 986 11.9 5

Eric Martin:

85 1083 12.7 7

Anthony Carter

72 1225 17.0 6

Henry Ellard:

86 1414 16.4 10

Jerry Rice:

64 1306 20.4 9

Monk:

72 946 13.1 5

Yet another season Monk should have gone to the Pro Bowl. Ellard is the only other reciever to have better numbers in every stat. Monk either ties or beats everyone else in at least one catagory.

So now that makes at least three more Monk should have gone to. For a total of six.

Six Pro Bowls Mr. King......kind of kills ANOTHER of your arguments against Monk.....what's it going to be next year?

Edit:

Total Snub Batman!

Another year Monk should have been in the Pro Bowl:

1983 Pro Bowl:

Billy Johnson

64 709 11.1 4 (16 games)

Monk:

47 746 15.9 5 (12 Games)

Now, Monk gets beat by everyone else, but man in four less games he beats Johnson in everything except for receptions.

And Monk made the Pro Bowl before Clark arrived btw.

Edit # 2

Ok...I'm not making this up:

1980 Pro Bowl:

Pat Tilly

68 966 14.2 6

Harold Carmichael

48 815 17.0 9

Monk:

58 797 13.7 3

Close one, but another one Monk could have made.

1981 Pro Bowl:

Ahmad Rashad

58 884 15.2 7

Monk:

56 894 16.0 6

Monk, again, just as good as a Pro Bowler......

1982 Pro Bowl:

(Strike Year. Only nine games played.)

James Lofton:

35 696 19.9 4

Dwight Clark:

60 913 15.2 5

Charlie Brown:

32 690 21.6 8

John Jefferson

27 452 16.7 0 (!)

Monk:

35 447 12.8 1

Thats Ten.

:logo:

[Brianbien83]

Don't forget the single season reception record. Monk is the only reciever to hold the single season,career reception and the consecutive game with a reception records.(as far as I can tell, anyway.) And for a short time in 1992 he held all three at the same time.

I don't disagree with your post, and you make an effective counterarugrment to those who use Monk's Pro-Bowl years to keep him out of the hall. However, in this point above, I do believe you are mistaken. I think Rice carried these same three records at one point. Though, that should go to even futher the argument. The only other receiver who has held all three of these records is a sure-fire, first ballot HOFer...just Monk's bad luck that Rice played at the same time he did.

[DjTj]

I don't disagree with your post, and you make an effective counterarugrment to those who use Monk's Pro-Bowl years to keep him out of the hall. However, in this point above, I do believe you are mistaken. I think Rice carried these same three records at one point. Though, that should go to even futher the argument. The only other receiver who has held all three of these records is a sure-fire, first ballot HOFer...just Monk's bad luck that Rice played at the same time he did.

Jerry Rice never had the single-season receptions record.

The record was held by Charley Hennigan, who caught 101 passes in 1964.

Art Monk broke the record in 1984 with 104.

Sterling Sharpe broke that record in 1992 with 108. He broke his own record in 1993 with 112.

Jerry Rice tied that in 1994, but Cris Carter broke the record again with 122 in the same year.

Herman Moore broke that record in 1995 with 123 catches.

Marvin Harrison shattered the record in 2002 with 143.

[LD0506]

I'm still surprised to see how some people think you can CONVINCE King of anything, like there's a logical, reasonable argument that simply hasn't been made. The guy is a sack, an outright liar with a personal agenda that makes up excuses as he goes along because he doesn't have the cojones to admit the truth- he blocks Monk because he was a Skin, plain and simple. You will never debate or persuade a zealot into changing their views, it won't happen. Now if I, ooops I mean someone accidentally ran over King 8 or 47 times it might alter the next round of voting but words aint gonna do it.