My Letter to Dr. Z

[sparkosaurus]

its stacking his stats against other QBs in the HOF.

Moose Johnston has 3 rings, was a major part of the offensive success of the cowboys and was the best lead blocker of his time. he doesn't deserve the HOF. John Taylor played in multiple superbowls for SF was a major part of the equation and had a couple of very good years he doesn't desrve to be in the HOF.

again, I think that's why this debate goes on a lot. Art Monk is real borderline for HOF. each side can make arguments for their case and each side would be right.

perhaps someday he will be. like I said, I have no problems with that. and I don't have a problem with him not getting in.

Can't you give a complete comparison? How many ALL TIME RECORDS did Johnston or Taylor break during their career??? MONK WAS PROLIFIC DURING HIS CAREER... you keep choosing one or two things to try and make yourself sound reasonable...of course Redskin fans are passionate on this subject but please, be thorough...you really undermine your own credibility...

[Ghost of]

Henry, is it wrong that when I imagine strangling Dr. Z, I derive a certain sexual satisfaction from the image?

[Henry]

Henry, is it wrong that when I imagine strangling Dr. Z, I derive a certain sexual satisfaction from the image?

:laugh:

Why did you have to ask ME that question? :laugh:

[Rogers22]

Ricky Sanders

1. Two 1,000 yard seasons. Lynn Swann 0

2. 5 seasons with over 55 catches. Lynn Swann 1

3. More total Rec. and total yards then Swann.

Sanders

481 catches for 6453

Swann

336 catches for 5462

I don't believe Swann was the caliber WR of Art Monk, so that's why I compared him with some more his speed, and he still wasn't better.

:dallasuck :gaintsuck :eaglesuck

Pretty suprising stats. Monk should be in the HOF. Maybe even Sanders?

[dgreen]

I can't understand how James Lofton, who mostly played on losing teams, gets inducted before Art Monk. It makes no sense at all, most of Art Monks catches that I remember he was always behind the secondary.

YPC and TDs. The main knock on Monk is YPC and TDs. Lofton blows Monk away in YPC and has the edge in TDs.

[dgreen]

If that's the case why is Steve Largent in?

Largent was NOT a possession receiver.

Largent retired the all time leader in receptions, yards, and TDs.

[skins4eva]

FYI--Lofton's career stats:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/LoftJa00.htm

+--------------------------+-------------------------+

| Rushing | Receiving |

+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

| Year TM | G | Att Yards Y/A TD | Rec Yards Y/R TD |

+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

| 1978 gnb | 16 | 3 13 4.3 0 | 46 818 17.8 6 |

| 1979 gnb | 16 | 1 -1 -1.0 0 | 54 968 17.9 4 |

| 1980 gnb | 16 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 71 1226 17.3 4 |

| 1981 gnb | 16 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 71 1294 18.2 8 |

| 1982 gnb | 9 | 4 101 25.2 1 | 35 696 19.9 4 |

| 1983 gnb | 16 | 9 36 4.0 0 | 58 1300 22.4 8 |

| 1984 gnb | 16 | 10 82 8.2 0 | 62 1361 22.0 7 |

| 1985 gnb | 16 | 4 14 3.5 0 | 69 1153 16.7 4 |

| 1986 gnb | 15 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 64 840 13.1 4 |

| 1987 rai | 12 | 1 1 1.0 0 | 41 880 21.5 5 |

| 1988 rai | 16 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 28 549 19.6 0 |

| 1989 buf | 12 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 8 166 20.8 3 |

| 1990 buf | 16 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 35 712 20.3 4 |

| 1991 buf | 15 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 57 1072 18.8 8 |

| 1992 buf | 16 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 51 786 15.4 6 |

| 1993 phi | 9 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 13 167 12.8 0 |

| 1993 ram | 1 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 1 16 16.0 0 |

+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

| TOTAL | 233 | 32 246 7.7 1 | 764 14004 18.3 75 |

+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

Seasons among the league's top 10

Receptions: 1980-5t, 1981-7t

Receiving yards: 1980-3, 1981-2, 1982-5, 1983-3, 1984-5, 1985-6, 1987-10, 1991-9

Receiving TDs: 1981-8t, 1982-10t, 1983-7t, 1991-9t

Yards from scrimmage: 1984-10

Among the league's all-time top 50

Receptions: 17

Receiving yards: 3

Receiving TDs: 23

Yards from scrimmage: 16

Rush/Receive TDs: 49t

Postseason data

Please read this fine print before using this data or sending questions or corrections.

Year Opp Result | RSH YD TD | REC YD TD

---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

1982 stl W,41-16 | 1 -13 0 | 3 52 1

1982 dal L,26-37 | 1 71 1 | 5 109 1

1989 cle L,30-34 | 0 0 0 | 3 56 1

1990 mia W,44-34 | 0 0 0 | 7 149 1

1990 rai W,51-3 | 0 0 0 | 5 113 2

*1990 nyg L,19-20 | 0 0 0 | 1 61 0

1991 kan W,37-14 | 0 0 0 | 3 34 1

1991 den W,10-7 | 0 0 0 | 1 11 0

*1991 was L,24-37 | 1 -3 0 | 7 92 0

1992 hou W,41-38 | 0 0 0 | 2 24 0

1992 pit W,24-3 | 0 0 0 | 2 29 1

1992 mia W,29-10 | 0 0 0 | 2 19 0

---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

TOTAL | 3 55 1 | 41 749 8

[skins4eva]

Monk's career stats, for comparison:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/MonkAr00.htm

+--------------------------+-------------------------+

| Rushing | Receiving |

+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

| Year TM | G | Att Yards Y/A TD | Rec Yards Y/R TD |

+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

| 1980 was | 16 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 58 797 13.7 3 |

| 1981 was | 16 | 1 -5 -5.0 0 | 56 894 16.0 6 |

| 1982 was | 9 | 7 21 3.0 0 | 35 447 12.8 1 |

| 1983 was | 12 | 3 -19 -6.3 0 | 47 746 15.9 5 |

| 1984 was | 16 | 2 18 9.0 0 | 106 1372 12.9 7 |

| 1985 was | 15 | 7 51 7.3 0 | 91 1226 13.5 2 |

| 1986 was | 16 | 4 27 6.8 0 | 73 1068 14.6 4 |

| 1987 was | 9 | 6 63 10.5 0 | 38 483 12.7 6 |

| 1988 was | 16 | 7 46 6.6 0 | 72 946 13.1 5 |

| 1989 was | 16 | 3 8 2.7 0 | 86 1186 13.8 8 |

| 1990 was | 16 | 7 59 8.4 0 | 68 770 11.3 5 |

| 1991 was | 16 | 9 19 2.1 0 | 71 1049 14.8 8 |

| 1992 was | 16 | 6 45 7.5 0 | 46 644 14.0 3 |

| 1993 was | 16 | 1 -1 -1.0 0 | 41 398 9.7 2 |

| 1994 nyj | 16 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 46 581 12.6 3 |

| 1995 phi | 3 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 6 114 19.0 0 |

+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

| TOTAL | 224 | 63 332 5.3 0 | 940 12721 13.5 68 |

+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

Seasons among the league's top 10

Receptions: 1984-1, 1985-2, 1988-9t, 1989-3t

Receiving yards: 1984-4, 1985-3, 1989-10

Receiving TDs: 1991-9t

Among the league's all-time top 50

Receptions: 5

Receiving yards: 9

Receiving TDs: 29t

Yards from scrimmage: 27

Postseason data

Please read this fine print before using this data or sending questions or corrections.

Year Opp Result | RSH YD TD | REC YD TD

---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

1983 ram W,51-7 | 0 0 0 | 4 60 2

1983 sfo W,24-21 | 0 0 0 | 3 35 0

*1983 rai L,9-38 | 0 0 0 | 1 26 0

1984 chi L,19-23 | 0 0 0 | 10 122 0

1986 ram W,19-7 | 0 0 0 | 5 34 0

1986 chi W,27-13 | 0 0 0 | 5 81 2

1986 nyg L,0-17 | 0 0 0 | 8 126 0

*1987 den W,42-10 | 0 0 0 | 1 40 0

1990 phi W,20-6 | 0 0 0 | 2 44 1

1990 sfo L,10-28 | 1 9 0 | 10 163 1

1991 atl W,24-7 | 1 -2 0 | 3 45 0

1991 det W,41-10 | 0 0 0 | 5 94 1

*1991 buf W,37-24 | 0 0 0 | 7 113 0

1992 min W,24-7 | 3 7 0 | 3 35 0

1992 sfo L,13-20 | 1 3 0 | 2 44 0

---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

TOTAL | 6 17 0 | 69 1062 7

[skins4eva]

Irvin's numbers:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/IrviMi00.htm

| Rushing | Receiving |

+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

| Year TM | G | Att Yards Y/A TD | Rec Yards Y/R TD |

+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

| 1988 dal | 14 | 1 2 2.0 0 | 32 654 20.4 5 |

| 1989 dal | 6 | 1 6 6.0 0 | 26 378 14.5 2 |

| 1990 dal | 12 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 20 413 20.6 5 |

| 1991 dal | 16 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 93 1523 16.4 8 |

| 1992 dal | 16 | 1 -9 -9.0 0 | 78 1396 17.9 7 |

| 1993 dal | 16 | 2 6 3.0 0 | 88 1330 15.1 7 |

| 1994 dal | 16 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 79 1241 15.7 6 |

| 1995 dal | 16 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 111 1603 14.4 10 |

| 1996 dal | 11 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 64 962 15.0 2 |

| 1997 dal | 16 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 75 1180 15.7 9 |

| 1998 dal | 16 | 1 1 1.0 0 | 74 1057 14.3 1 |

| 1999 dal | 4 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 10 167 16.7 3 |

+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

| TOTAL | 159 | 6 6 1.0 0 | 750 11904 15.9 65 |

+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

Seasons among the league's top 10

Receptions: 1991-2, 1992-7, 1993-3, 1995-5

Receiving yards: 1991-1, 1992-2, 1993-2, 1994-8, 1995-4, 1997-8t

Receiving TDs: 1991-9t, 1992-8t, 1993-9t, 1995-10t, 1997-6t

Yards from scrimmage: 1991-4, 1992-10, 1993-8, 1995-9

Among the league's all-time top 50

Receptions: 18t

Receiving yards: 14

Receiving TDs: 35t

Yards from scrimmage: 38

Postseason data

Please read this fine print before using this data or sending questions or corrections.

Year Opp Result | RSH YD TD | REC YD TD

---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

1991 chi W,17-13 | 0 0 0 | 4 83 0

1991 det L,6-38 | 0 0 0 | 5 84 0

1992 phi W,34-10 | 0 0 0 | 6 88 0

1992 sfo W,30-20 | 0 0 0 | 6 86 0

*1992 buf W,52-17 | 0 0 0 | 6 114 2

1993 gnb W,27-17 | 0 0 0 | 9 126 1

1993 sfo W,38-21 | 0 0 0 | 2 23 0

*1993 buf W,30-13 | 0 0 0 | 5 66 0

1994 gnb W,35-9 | 0 0 0 | 6 111 0

1994 sfo L,28-38 | 0 0 0 | 12 192 2

1995 phi W,30-11 | 0 0 0 | 1 9 1

1995 gnb W,38-27 | 0 0 0 | 7 100 2

*1995 pit W,27-17 | 0 0 0 | 5 75 0

1996 min W,40-15 | 0 0 0 | 8 103 0

1996 car L,17-26 | 0 0 0 | 1 22 0

1998 ari L,7-20 | 0 0 0 | 4 32 0

---------------------+-----------------+-----------------

TOTAL | 0 0 0 | 87 1314 8

[shawn]

Just answer the question or don't make statements like this. If he wasn't one of the top 5 WR's of his time, who was? I'll give up Jerry Rice, but really...

James Lofton

Steve Largent

Charlie Joiner

Ahmad Rashad

John Jefferson

Stanley Morgan

Dwight Clark

Chris Collinsworth

Wes Chandler

Roy Green

John Stallworth

Marc Clayton

Mak Duper

Mike Quick

Gary Clark

Al Toon

Anthony Carter

Henry ellard

Andre Reed

Anthony Miller

Andre Rison

Micheal Irvin

Herman Moore

Tim Brown

Chris Carter

Irvin Fryar

Issac Bruce

now, not all of them played as long as Monk, but Monk was in the top 10 only twice and lead the league in receptions once.

again, I am not saying Monk wasn't good, or he doesn't deserve to be considered for HOF. but he is anything but a lock. he is borderline and each side can make a case for or against him.

[shawn]

What 3 NFL records did Moose Johnston retire with? How about John Taylor?

Just another whacked out comparison to a player that doesn't have all the credentials that Monk does. Monk not only was a part of championship teams, he retired with 3 major records at his position.

Rings, Records, Character... it's a sham that he wasn't first ballot.

some one cited what a team player monk was and how he blocked well and was a good person and team leader he was. that's not as important in consideration for HOF. there is a lot of those players. its how you stacked against your peers of the time in the position you played. did other teams plan against you and how WRs of the time or period play and how you stacked against them. for HOF you need to have some what a long career that you have made an impact on the game, but because you played 16 years accumulated numbers shouldn't qualify you.

[Henry]

some one cited what a team player monk was and how he blocked well and was a good person and team leader he was. that's not as important in consideration for HOF. there is a lot of those players. its how you stacked against your peers of the time in the position you played. did other teams plan against you and how WRs of the time or period play and how you stacked against them. for HOF you need to have some what a long career that you have made an impact on the game, but because you played 16 years accumulated numbers shouldn't qualify you.

It took Monk less time to break the receptions record than it did Smith to break the rushing record. Enough with the longevity nonsense. If you can't see that there was more to Monk's gme than that you aren't paying attention.

Go look up Charlie Joiner, who you list as a top five WR and who's in the Hall of Fame, and see how many times he went to the pro-bowl, how many times he was the top WR on his team, how many rings he has, or how many times he was top ten in anything, and tell me Monk doesn't stack up.

[No_Pressure]

That's really incredible--in many ways, having Swann and to some extent Stallworth (although he was much more deserving) delegitimizes the entire hall for me. I mean, these voters put Swann in and then they put up a fuse against a guy like Monk, simply because he didn't make an acrobatic catch in the SB? What nonesense.

He made some aerobatic catches in the 92 superbowl, only he had such sure hands that when he went up for the ball, he came down with the ball. He didnt tip it around, bouncing it off his fingers for 10 minutes. Monk is penalized for having better hands than Swann.

[gangars]

isn't catching 8-10 yard hooks the job of a possession receiver like Monk? Z is an idiot. :doh:

[shawn]

It took Monk less time to break the receptions record than it did Smith to break the rushing record. Enough with the longevity nonsense. If you can't see that there was more to Monk's gme than that you aren't paying attention.

Go look up Charlie Joiner, who you list as a top five WR and who's in the Hall of Fame, and see how many times he went to the pro-bowl, how many times he was the top WR on his team, how many rings he has, or how many times he was top ten in anything, and tell me Monk doesn't stack up.

and it took longer to break the passing record!!! apples and oranges. I am not making a case for or against smith.

again Monk was the second option on his own team. teams planned to take away clark and sanders and let monk beat them if he could but they weren't going to let sanders and clark beat them. Monk had one great year with 106 receptions and top 10 in recieving yards. but comparing year to year to year....he wasn't top 5 in the league for WRs. they were others that were better than him

when you are second option on your own team, then that puts you on the fence.

but again.....arguments on either side are valid. Monk is a borderline HOF WR. if he gets in great. if he doesn't no loss or tragedy.

[Henry]

and it took longer to break the passing record!!! apples and oranges. I am not making a case for or against smith.

again Monk was the second option on his own team. teams planned to take away clark and sanders and let monk beat them if he could but they weren't going to let sanders and clark beat them. Monk had one great year with 106 receptions and top 10 in recieving yards. but comparing year to year to year....he wasn't top 5 in the league for WRs. they were others that were better than him

when you are second option on your own team, then that puts you on the fence.

That's bunk. If top five rankings were all that mattered, Aikman wouldn't have sniffed the Hall (let alone gotten in on the first ballet.) Neither would the aforementioned Charlie Joiner, or Lynn Swann. That's never been a primary critera for HOF consideration.

Same goes for the while 'primary option' song and dance. Those three players above weren't anymore important to their respective teams, either. And that's if you believe Monk wasn't the primary option in the passing game, which is a highly debateable point.

but again.....arguments on either side are valid. Monk is a borderline HOF WR. if he gets in great. if he doesn't no loss or tragedy.

Given the calibre of WRs already in the Hall, and the lack of representation of the position in the modern era, I see no valid reason to keep him out ... especially longer than a player like Joiner, who's only claim fame is that at one time he held the career recepetions record. Ahem.

[BleedBNG]

Monk had one great year with 106 receptions and top 10 in recieving yards. but comparing year to year to year....he wasn't top 5 in the league for WRs.

Where are you getting this drivel? He was in the NFL top 5 in receptions for 3 years ('84,'85 & '89) and top 5 in receiving yards for 2 ('84 & '85).

Top 10: 7 times.

[ouvan59]

Basically you have made our argument for us. For the most part these are all players that had a better year or two than Monk but their careers don't even come close.

James Lofton -- Monk level, no rings (in the HOF)

Steve Largent -- Monk level, no rings (in the HOF)

Charlie Joiner -- Played longer than Monk, fewer catches, yards & TDs, no rings (in the HOF)

Ahmad Rashad -- Was not a peer of Art Monk and no where near as productive

John Jefferson -- 3 good years, not better than Monk

Stanley Morgan -- 1 year with more than 58 catches

Dwight Clark -- Not even close

Chris Collinsworth -- Not even close

Wes Chandler -- Add about 4 or 5 more good years and he is near Monk

Roy Green -- played one less year and his numbers don't even come close

John Stallworth -- Played 8 years during Monk's career only one year did he have better numbers than Monk

Marc Clayton -- Dan Marino

Mark Duper -- see above,

Mike Quick -- Played his entired career when Monk played. One year with more receiving yards or catches,

Gary Clark -- Do you see an uproar around here that he is being left out of the HOF instead of Monk? That's all you need to know about whether he was a better player.

Al Toon -- Please

Anthony Carter -- Please

Henry ellard -- Played longer and numbers don't approach Monk

Andre Reed -- Monk without the rings

The guys below played the majority of their careers in the 90s which is when passing numbers exploded. Sorry not the same era.

Anthony Miller

Andre Rison

Micheal Irvin

Herman Moore

Tim Brown

Chris Carter

Irvin Fryar

Issac Bruce

Shawn Alexander had a better year last than Emmitt Smith ever did. He has had a better three year span than Emmitt Smith ever did. Do you think that Shawn Alexander is a better player than Emmitt Smith?

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

That's kinda' what I was alluding to. Swann is basically in the HoF because of that one catch.

More for that one game. He had four catches, each more spectacular than the last.

I think it's the Hall of "Fame" so there is a place for players like Swann in it. You make four all-time catches in a Super Bowl AND put up a pretty good career on an All-Time great team, you should get in.

Monk should get in too though. Monk's main problem is that lack of a single career-defining play. Riggins will always have his run in the Super Bowl. Darryl Green will have three or four at least to choose from.

Monk's other problem is that every year he fails to get in, his numbers become less and less noteworthy. It needs to happen very soon for him.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

By the way, my only problem with the eternal Monk debate is that it obscures the fact that neither Jacoby or Grimm or in the HOF yet. Like I said, it's Hall of "Fame" not Hall of numbers. So why aren't the two premier lineman on the most celebrated offensive line ever not in?

When I think of the Redskins of the 80s and early 90s, Monk is maybe the ninth player I think of. Grimm might be #2.

To me, this is the far greater travesty than the Monk slight, which is nothing but two sides throwing statistics at each other.

[BleedBNG]

By the way' date=' my only problem with the eternal Monk debate is that it obscures the fact that neither Jacoby or Grimm or in the HOF yet. Like I said, it's Hall of "Fame" not Hall of numbers. So why aren't the two premier lineman on the most celebrated offensive line ever not in?[/quote']

It IS ridiculous, isn't it?:doh: But if only one could be in, which would you choose?

It's really a tough choice, but I'll have to go with Grimm. Beat up like hell, but still plays well. Top of the list for a Redskin Warrior is Russ Grimm.

[shawn]

man are we hungry for some football. I think this is the 10th time this off season the art monk debate has come up. its been beaten to death and each side has their heels dug in. one thing that everyone forgets, I am not saying monk doesn't deserve. I am just saying he is borderline. I also don't think having rings is a criteria for getting into HOF. there is too many other things to consider in getting the rings. a lot depends on your team and your team mates, etc. so I don't consider that a highly valuable measuring stick or stat. so good luck to Monk. he was a good player. on some good teams. surronded by some good players and good coaches. perhaps someday he will get into HOF. don't bug me one way or the other. but it seems its bugging you guys a lot.

before anyone says anything. I think Irvin is also borderline HOFer. he is not a clear cut WR to get in. so don't go asking me about him.

[skins4eva]

Basically you have made our argument for us. For the most part these are all players that had a better year or two than Monk but their careers don't even come close.

James Lofton -- Monk level, no rings (in the HOF)

Steve Largent -- Monk level, no rings (in the HOF)

Charlie Joiner -- Played longer than Monk, fewer catches, yards & TDs, no rings (in the HOF)

Ahmad Rashad -- Was not a peer of Art Monk and no where near as productive

John Jefferson -- 3 good years, not better than Monk

Stanley Morgan -- 1 year with more than 58 catches

Dwight Clark -- Not even close

Chris Collinsworth -- Not even close

Wes Chandler -- Add about 4 or 5 more good years and he is near Monk

Roy Green -- played one less year and his numbers don't even come close

John Stallworth -- Played 8 years during Monk's career only one year did he have better numbers than Monk

Marc Clayton -- Dan Marino

Mark Duper -- see above,

Mike Quick -- Played his entired career when Monk played. One year with more receiving yards or catches,

Gary Clark -- Do you see an uproar around here that he is being left out of the HOF instead of Monk? That's all you need to know about whether he was a better player.

Al Toon -- Please

Anthony Carter -- Please

Henry ellard -- Played longer and numbers don't approach Monk

Andre Reed -- Monk without the rings

The guys below played the majority of their careers in the 90s which is when passing numbers exploded. Sorry not the same era.

Anthony Miller

Andre Rison

Micheal Irvin

Herman Moore

Tim Brown

Chris Carter

Irvin Fryar

Issac Bruce

Shawn Alexander had a better year last than Emmitt Smith ever did. He has had a better three year span than Emmitt Smith ever did. Do you think that Shawn Alexander is a better player than Emmitt Smith?

That's an excellent question/example...and the answer is undoubtledly NO.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

It IS ridiculous, isn't it?:doh: But if only one could be in, which would you choose?

It's really a tough choice, but I'll have to go with Grimm. Beat up like hell, but still plays well. Top of the list for a Redskin Warrior is Russ Grimm.

I would choose Grimm first. I think he was the most important Skin of that era. Jacoby would be second. Then Monk.

That team of the 80s/90s should have more than one representative. It should be Gibbs, Riggins, Grimm, Jacoby, Monk, and D. Green. I don't think anyone else qualifies....though I've always secretly felt that Gary Clark was far more important to the team than Art Monk.

[ouvan59]

before anyone says anything. I think Irvin is also borderline HOFer. he is not a clear cut WR to get in. so don't go asking me about him.

I will have to disagree with you there as well. Irvin is a clear HOF receiver in my mind.