MMQB TE: Peter King will reevaluate his position on Monk

[NoCalMike]

The funny thing is, during Monk's final few seasons, everyone in the NFL business was so sure he was a first ballot HOFer, you couldn't see Monk's image on TV without a sportscaster calling him a future hall of famer.

I think Monk retired right when the NFL was changing to a pass-heavy league, and what it did was skew his stats. People forget that he accomplished what he did, during a running era in the NFL, plus he did it with Clark and Ricky Sanders as teammates.

[panel]

King will re-evaluate, but come to the same conclusion, thats just how he rolls. Get some attention for making a statment, but then not changing anything.

[DjTj]

King will re-evaluate, but come to the same conclusion, thats just how he rolls. Get some attention for making a statment, but then not changing anything.

This is my gut feeling as well, but maybe King is hedging his bets because he feels Art may actualy have a chance this year ... I think what could happen is that the other voters carry Art to the final round, and King is willing to give him the thumbs up for induction.

He talked to Theismann last year, and had similar comments, but it didn't help Art make it:

For all of you who follow such things, I heard a "Hey, Peter'' Friday night at the hotel. I looked over and there was Joe Theismann. We've had a tad of a disagreement over Monk, and Theismann told Dan Patrick that I had too much control over the room. Totally silly, of course; I'm one of 39. Out of respect for Theismann's stature, I brought his main points about Monk into the room on Saturday morning. It did no good. Monk didn't make the cut from 15 to 10.

http://artmonk.wordpress.com/hall-of-fame-voters/peter-king/

[TheLongshot]

King will re-evaluate, but come to the same conclusion, thats just how he rolls. Get some attention for making a statment, but then not changing anything.

That's basically how I think it is going to end up. Another excuse for writing a column that bashes Monk again.

Jason

[BleedBNG]

King will re-evaluate, but come to the same conclusion, thats just how he rolls. Get some attention for making a statment, but then not changing anything.

Your right. Even if Joe Gibbs orders plenty of Dunkin Donuts at the discussion, it won't change anything. He's stuck on:

A few years ago, when Monk was in his last season, I started doing a little bit of research on him and I was shocked to see that, despite his high number of catches, Monk had led his own team in receiving in just six of 16 years as an NFL player, and that he was voted All-Pro in only two of 16 years. To me, membership (of course he meant voting) in the Hall of Fame is a tremendous privilege and honor.

Well what about HOF'er John Stallworth? 14 yrs. = All-Pro 1 time and led his own team in receiving 5 times. SHOCKING!!!!!

Come on Pita, got any MORE LAME excuses? :redpunch:

dumb***

[TheSource]

Dear Lord! Will someone PLEASE punch this guy in the face?

I'd do it, but I'm afraid that I wouldn't make it past the imaginary bodyguards he has.

[whatmeworry]

I personally think it's a smokescreen. King's not going to admit he's wrong.

As an aside, on the Monk vs Irvin comparison, Monk was known as one of the best blocking receivers ever while the only time Irvin blocked was when he was trying to catch the ball.

[33]

I actually wrote to him this week based on something he wrote recently about Derek Jeter. He said numbers aren't everything and thay Jeter was the heart and soul of that team.

I told him that those words directly contradicted his thoughts on Monk. I don't believe what I wrote had any affect on this decision, but I'm glad to see a possible change of heart.

When you think about Monk's players only meeting back in the day, it is exactly why King loves Jeter. The guy was the beat of our teams back in the day.

[tenken627]

This isn't a major disagreement, but think about what you're saying for a moment. 600,000 e-mails? In one day? I mean, first of all, even the most generous e-mail server would be clogged by the time you got to 100,000 or so e-mails.

600,000 was just a number I brought up as a hyperbole, just like 16 million. I don't know what the actual amount was, you don't know the actual amount was, but I was saying that it doesn't matter the exact quantity.

He got a very large amount of emails regarding the subject, and was actually shocked from it. For the past few years, he has been getting a lot of Art Monk emails from Skins fans and he wouldn't even blink.

This time around though, he actually had enough all at once to make him blink twice, and even admit it in his internet column. If it was the normal amount of Redskins hatemail he receives daily, most likely he would make his usual snide comments about Redskins fans and that would be it.

[TheREALJBird]

I'll believe it when I see it...until then i'm hardly impressed or moved by these actions

[SkinsFTW]

Did this guy not watch football from 1980-1993 or something?

How else did he miss Monks 940 catches?

[GSF]

It's offensive that Joe Gibbs will have to take time out of his schedule to talk to this piece of crap, about the possibility that Art Monk might belong in the HOF in the first place. Who does this Peter King think he is?

I thought the same exact thing. Gibbs would probably do it though for Monk.

[DjTj]

Did this guy not watch football from 1980-1993 or something?

How else did he miss Monks 940 catches?

He actually saw a lot of them.

If you pick up the December 3, 1990 issue of Sports Illustrated, Peter King wrote this:

Art Monk eschews interviews, so NFL fans know little about him — except his numbers, which certainly speak well of his 11-year career as a Redskins wide receiver. Monk is third on the list of alltime pass receivers, with 707 career catches, which put him 43 behind Charlie Joiner and 112 behind Steve Largent's NFL-record 819. If Monk, whose five receptions in a 27-17 loss to the Cowboys on Thanksgiving Day increased his season total to 45, remains healthy and continues to catch passes at the same pace that he has the past two seasons — 4.8 receptions a game — he'll pass Largent in Week 3 of the 1992 season. Monk had the most productive first 10 years of any receiver in NFL history.

...of course, he changed his mind on Monk some time later ... let's hope Coach Gibbs can change his mind back.

http://artmonk.wordpress.com/hall-of-fame-voters/peter-king/

[jbooma]

This is my gut feeling as well, but maybe King is hedging his bets because he feels Art may actualy have a chance this year ... I think what could happen is that the other voters carry Art to the final round, and King is willing to give him the thumbs up for induction.

He talked to Theismann last year, and had similar comments, but it didn't help Art make it:http://artmonk.wordpress.com/hall-of-fame-voters/peter-king/

Many have said that there are a few in the voting that will block Irvin untill Monk is in, maybe King recognizes that and why we will see Monk and Irvin this year.

[Gamebreaker]

I doubt he's going to change his mind. Seems to me like he's just using this "rethink my stance" excuse as a way to make himself seem objective. Everyone knows he's not.

[GlennBrenner]

He actually saw a lot of them.

If you pick up the December 3, 1990 issue of Sports Illustrated, Peter King wrote this:...of course, he changed his mind on Monk some time later ... let's hope Coach Gibbs can change his mind back.

http://artmonk.wordpress.com/hall-of-fame-voters/peter-king/

The quotes about Monk in that link are remarkable! Maybe it's time for a new tactic with Peter King. What we should do is find a bunch of quotes like these from King himself and just keep sending them to him in an email. Let's suffocate him with his own words. What's he going to do, disagree with himself??