wildbill1952 Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 In my humble opinion, the HOF voters get away with this because the ballot is secret. They can then blame their vote on Skin fans, Dan Snyder, or Monk not talking to the media or anything that justifies their previous decision. It helps them to justify a decision they made prior to ever hearing from either the Skin fans or Dan Snyder. Gibbs and Riggo. The only HOF'ers from 3 RedSkin Super Bowl teams. Not a single member of the Hogs, Not Art Monk, not Gary Clark, not a single player on defense. Yeah, definitely it's we Skin Fans, or Monk not talking himself up like most loud-mouth athletes, or asking for the ball or writing a book or ranting to the media. Or maybe it's Dan Snyder's tie or the phase of the moon when the vote's taken. It couldn't be the honorable sports writers bias, could it? I've never written to a sports writer in my life, but even if I flamed every one of them daily, it would not be justification for anyone with integrity to keep Monk out of the Hall of Fame. Ooops. Pardon me. I know I shouldn't use the integrity word in a paragraph that mentions sportswriters or HOF voters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UK Skins Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 Is that right, we haven't had a player elected since 1992? That is unbelievable. I know there are eligibility rules, which I am not familiar with, but does that mean there are players other than Monk who have been snubbed? I am really curious. For those young enough not to have seen him, Art Monk was a real star. We were lucky enough to get live NFL coverage back in the 80s and 90s and I saw a lot of him, of course culminating in the amazing Superbowl win in 91 when instant replay cost me a good bet on first TD scorer!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
number twenty-eight Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 There's Grimm and Jacoby. Two stalwarts on arguably the best offensive line ever. They keep getting passed by, to various degrees of displeasure. It seems like the threads are unraveling around this HOF voting process. There has been such a hue and cry that I'd be surprised if something didn't change, and rightfully so. Goodell seems to be looking out for the fans' best interests, with the conduct crackdown, and just kind of in general. Notice at the draft how he was announcing the picks as "Okay Raiders fans, with the first pick..." etc.? Seems like he wants to come across as the peoples' commissioner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussieskin Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 If what Snyder says is true, then doesnt that make him right....and if he is true then all those people who vote against Art Monk should be ashamed of themselves, because they are NOT performing the duty assigned to them. And if Dan is right then the NFL is obligated to either change the rules of voting or the people voting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squatch66 Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 so let me get this straight. kornheiser says that he wouldnt vote for monk becuase of an off the field issue like not talking to reporters, but michael irvin gets busted with blow and hookers in a hotel room and gets into the hall because we cant count off the field issues when looking at a players career? it deeply saddens me that we live in such a world of double standards that one of the great MEN who ever played the game of football is being punished for wanting to do his job while criminals get into the hall. shame on them. shame on them all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
number twenty-eight Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 The Sarbanes-Oxley act was the governmental response to Enron, and it basically demands transparency in business practices, for the benefit of the people it affects. Its what I think of when I imagine all the fat sportswriters hunkering down and slapping each other on the backs to decide which world-class athlete was more deserving of recognition than another. They need to re-induct Coach about three more times, since he apparently cobbled our dynasty together out of all those spare parts. The Hall of Fame sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ax Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 Peter King's 180 turn is the exception, not the rule. Was there anyone here who wasn't shocked by his change of heart? And what proof is there that he actually changed his vote? Because he said he did? It's a secret ballot. I don't believe him. He now gets to spend the next few years saying, "See, it wasn't me keeping him out." All the while continuing to vote against him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever21 Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 Well if this is true...that the voters are that petty that they would not vote in a guy who should have been a first ballot hall of famer because of the guy who owns the team now...he didn't own it for one day when Art was a 'Skin...then doesn't that right there absolutely demolish the integrity of the system??? Not to mention...they blab about 'secret ballot'...but that's bull...how many of the voters are writers who write about who they will or won't be voting for? Secret ballot my ass. Integrity my ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsFTW Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 The HOF is a joke. Why do sportswriters, people who really have no clue, get to vote? I think it should be a group of former players, or former coaches, GM's, or even Refs before Sportswriters. They are really the only group other than fans that have a reason to show bias for or against certain players. All you have to do is compare Monk's stats to guys like Joiner or Largent to figure out that he should have been a first ballot HOFer. They both were even though neither of them ever won anything, but still Monk's limited SB stats seem to be important somehow. I could understand if Monk had 650 catches but he held the record. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever21 Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 I think it should be a group of former players, or former coaches, GM's, or even Refs before Sportswriters. They are really the only group other than fans that have a reason to show bias for or against certain players. I think sportswriters have a place on the committee but it should be composed mostly of former coaches/front office personel and former players. Who knows more about football than those who were there on the field and in the trenches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsGuy Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 Riggins in '92 Actually it was Joe Gibbs in 1996. Actually, HJ85 was right in that I asked for players, not coaches (thanks, HJ85 ). It stuns me that the Redskins, who won 3 SBs in the 80s and early 90s (and went to 4), haven't had ANY players inducted into the Hall in FIFTEEN YEARS despite the fact that all the players from those great teams are retired now. Does anyone know how many Dallas Cowboy players have been put into the Hall in that span? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeKnowsBest Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 In slapping Snyder down for impugning the integrity of selectors, Shapiro suggests something Snyder says could cause voters to go against Monk. Obviously, this would suggest Shapiro is either correct, or, HE is making a profoundly offensive comment that impugns the integrity of the selectors by suggesting they would ignore the merits of Monk's career in a vendetta against Snyder. In all honesty, can anyone actually figure out a more clear reason that Monk is not in the Hall of Fame beyond the media's dislike of Snyder? I'm surprised Shapiro would let us in on the little secret that Snyder's influence can change votes for a player who was gone before Snyder came into the league. For the Monk crowd, this has to be a rallying point. Or, am I reading too much into it? I think you are right on the money. It was already pointed out by Adam Sheftler when talking to Jamie Dukes on NFL Network how petty these guys are. They don't care about the players accomplishments or the integrity of the Hall of Fame, all they care about is that their power hunger is fed and they're ego pat. All they care about is that they get their own way. I doubt any of them really care anything a bit about the Hall of Fame and the process. If they did, we would not see some mediocre's in the Hall already, and players like Monk would have already been in there. When you have every hall of famer say Art Monk should be in when they are interviewed and asked about this topic, then you know there is something wrong. And all the excuses they give are senseless hogwash. I was more a Gary Clark fan myself but I know where the offense's bread and butter was. Let's also remind every one that during that era when we went to the playoffs/NFC championship game nearly every consistant year for those 11-12 years, the was only 2 players who were constants through out that whole time period and that was (center) Jeff Bostic, and Art Monk. Every where else there was turn over. But Art Monk was the glue that held it together and got us championships. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeKnowsBest Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 How many great recievers can you say went through a multitude of countless quarterbacks and still produced numbers like Art Monk did? I mean come on. The more I think about it, the more rediculous it gets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted May 3, 2007 Author Share Posted May 3, 2007 It is very clear to me Snyder's roll on the HOF committee is to begin work to reform how selections are made. The media, seen here by Shapiro, calls for complete openness and access granted them from the subjects they wish to speak to. Yet, none of them have ever pushed to have a secret ballot system, or secret meeting, open to, well, reporters. What better story than to unwrap the secrecy of the meeting, write about comments made, who made them, their arguments, and reveal the list of voters for the actual media to not only want, but demand of themselves here, when THEY are the news makers. I hope Snyder not only changes the secrecy, making these men accountable, but, puts other reporters in the room to cover it so the world will know what's going on. At least the media should love the concept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshiePoo85 Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 And what proof is there that he actually changed his vote? Because he said he did? It's a secret ballot. I don't believe him. He now gets to spend the next few years saying, "See, it wasn't me keeping him out." All the while continuing to vote against him. I don't know, I believed it because he addressed it pretty thoroughly by relating all the info he got from talking to Joe Gibbs which ended up changing his mind. And then in a later edition of MMQB he said he ran into a soldier in a hospital who asked when they are gonna get Monk into the HOF and he said "we're trying" or something like that. I feel like he wouldn't have bothered bringing that up if it was all fake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeKnowsBest Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 I nominate Art for position the Selection Commity! He's a very good reporter! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.