yank Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 Hey Redskins fans - where have you been? How did Monk become annointed as the "next" Redskin to get in the Hall of Fame? While a Redskin hero for sure, I'm stumped at the "outrage" for him vs. other Redskins who I think deserve it much, much more. Art never had more than 8 TDs in a season (did it twice). Here's the list of players this year with more than 8 just this season: Moss ...................... 17 Holt ........................ 12 Chambers .............. 11 Harrison.................. 10 S. Moss .................. 10 C. Johnson ............. 10 H. Ward .................. 10 Gonzalez ................ 10 Horn ....................... 10 D. Jackson .............. 9 J. Walker ................ 9 Owens ................... 9 Anyone ever heard of Chris Hanburger? Nine Pro Bowls - 9. Art Monk went to 3 Pro Bowls. That's right - 3. Here's the list of Redskisn with more than 3 Pro Bowls. Hanburger ............ 9 Hauss ................... 6 Clark ..................... 4 Grimm ................... 4 Jacoby .................. 4 Mann .................... 4 Monk .................... 3 Hanburger and Hauss should get the piss and vinegar from this board - not Monk. They both had very long careers, just didnt win anything. Of the Super Bowls we won, Art Monk only played in the LAST one - 1991 season. Art had a long career, had 3 or 4 great years, but never got the props he needed to make the HOF while he was playing. Why expect anything different now? Of his own teammates Grimm, Jacoby, Mann and Clark all make the Pro Bowl more times than Monk. But JC, guys 9 Pro Bowls for Hanburger and no HOF - where's the outrage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 Um, I agree that Hanburger should be in, but I won't put too much stock in pro bowls. Just won't. But Jacoby, Grimm and Mann and Manley and Dave Butz and Hanburger should all get some love too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brandies Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 Oh, the Humanity!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matty dread Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 Monk did play in SB XXII for the record Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Montilar Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 Okay, then why should Largent be in? or Stallworth? or Swann? Or the idiot reciever last year? Here's some stats: 1) set a NFL record 183 straight games with a catch 2) first reciever to go 100 catches in a season. Set NFl record at the time of 106 catches in one season. 3) First player to catch 900 receptions (ergo held the all time reception record) And is the only holder of the record NOT in the hall of fame other tha jerry Rice who is still playing. 4) Three time super bowl winner (four time appearance) 5) One of the few groups of recievers that had THREE recievers go over 1000 yards in the SAME season (hint: perhaps if there was not a Gary clark, or a Ricky sanders, or a riggins or an Ernest Byner he may have gaudier stats..... hmmmmm) 6) 940 catches for 12,721 yards and 68 touchdowns Also, compare him and his numbers to the WR's of his era. NOT to the WR's in this passy happy time. Who says he wouldn't be putting up 100 plus catch season if he was playing now? The hall of fame should be based on a CAREER. Otherwise, Timmy Smith would be an instant inductee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hogwash Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 He's 6th all time in career recieving yard. He's 4th all time in career receptions. Everyone on the list is a Hall of Famer or future first ballot hall of famer. He played in an era that was dominated by great running backs, and on a team that was a smashmouth running team. So the question is... Where have you been? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 Name one receiver currently enshrined in the Hall of Fame with more receptions than Art Monk. Know why you can't? Because there AREN'T ANY. Case closed. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hogwash Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 Today all players care about is stats... How many yards do i have, how many TD's did i get, how many catches did I make? Art was a team player, a tptal class act and he get no respect. Meanwhile you people would gladly get on your knees for a guy like TO. It's really sad.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hogwash Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 Another thing, that the Pro Bowl is a popularity contest anyway. When you're not dazzling and you don't draw attention to yourself you're never gonna catch the eye of the people who vote fro a pro bowl... Yank, i don't understand yout logic, or lack there of for that matter..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hauss Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 I can't remember any other HOF nominee then Monk who has been the negative target of a few national writers. I can't think of another who has been singled out by these writers stating that they won't vote for him. It's almost like they feel guilty that they aren't voting for him and then try to justify their actions. Just last week, Peter King was talking about Cris Carter eventually getting into the HOF based on numbers then he states that he will never vote for Monk. It was a line that he threw in right in the middle of the interview. Why? Why do Zimmerman and King continually put down Monk? I can't think of others they they single out that way. I agree that Hanburger, Hauss and Jacoby should be in the HOF--along with Monk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hogwash Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 Peter King is a peice of garbage, I hate the mother f-er Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Master Jay Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 The game has changed a lot since the 80's they throw the ball more. They have changed the game so the receivers can get off the line of scrimmage after 5 yards. In Monks heyday he had to beat off the DB and there was more holding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hogwash Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 Good Point J... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jurgy Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 Originally posted by Montilar Okay, then why should Largent be in? or Stallworth? or Swann? Or the idiot reciever last year? Here's some stats: 1) set a NFL record 183 straight games with a catch 2) first reciever to go 100 catches in a season. Set NFl record at the time of 106 catches in one season. 3) First player to catch 900 receptions (ergo held the all time reception record) And is the only holder of the record NOT in the hall of fame other tha jerry Rice who is still playing. 4) Three time super bowl winner (four time appearance) 5) One of the few groups of recievers that had THREE recievers go over 1000 yards in the SAME season (hint: perhaps if there was not a Gary clark, or a Ricky sanders, or a riggins or an Ernest Byner he may have gaudier stats..... hmmmmm) 6) 940 catches for 12,721 yards and 68 touchdowns Also, compare him and his numbers to the WR's of his era. NOT to the WR's in this passy happy time. Who says he wouldn't be putting up 100 plus catch season if he was playing now? The hall of fame should be based on a CAREER. Otherwise, Timmy Smith would be an instant inductee. Well said!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waldo da Magnificent Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 *reply deleted* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief skin Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 Monk got screwed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmythehair Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 The sad thing is seems since Monk played the game without all the show boating and trash talking it shows he played with honor. A lot of players play and disrespect the game but a lot of those players might make it because they were in the media all the time. The other thing to the original post in this thread I sure most of us care about other great Skins that have not made it but Monk is being talked about due to the fact this is the 4th time in a row he has been nominated and lost. The longer it takes to get in is seems the chances of getting in drops by a huge margin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 3 probowls and if you want to compare him to the WR's of his era then: only a 13.5 ypc average, which is not good for a WR 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: 28t Yards from scrimmage: 26 as you can see he didn't dominate, he will get it in but it will take time it took Swann and Stallworth almost 15 years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 for the post about Largent :doh: 7 probowls 100 tds Seasons among the league's top 10 Receptions: 1976-6t, 1978-3, 1979-7, 1980-9, 1981-6, 1983-10, 1984-9, 1985-6, 1987-7t Receiving yards: 1978-2, 1979-1, 1980-6, 1981-5, 1984-8, 1985-1, 1986-10, 1987-9 Receiving TDs: 1977-2, 1978-8t, 1979-5t, 1981-4t, 1983-4t, 1984-2t, 1986-8t, 1987-3t Rush/Receive TDs: 1977-5, 1984-7t, 1987-8t Among the league's all-time top 50 Receptions: 8 Receiving yards: 7 Receiving TDs: 3 Yards from scrimmage: 23 Rush/Receive TDs: 12 now do you see why he is in, he dominated when he played the game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCS Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 Uh oh. Beware The Swarm And this is smart one at that. Hey, not the first time that C.H.'s name has been brought up here and all due respect to the man, but it appears as though where Monk is concerned, a deliberate snub by some HOF voters had drawn alot more attention to his plight. Which is a good thing. Guys like Peter King and Len P. I think are out of line. Making up their minds before any vote. This means that even compelling arguments can go the way sid and that, IMHO, goes against the spirit of objectivity that should come with the responsibility of being a voter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ax Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 Originally posted by jbooma 3 probowls and if you want to compare him to the WR's of his era then: only a 13.5 ypc average, which is not good for a WR 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: 28t Yards from scrimmage: 26 as you can see he didn't dominate, he will get it in but it will take time it took Swann and Stallworth almost 15 years Are you really Peter King? Why do you think the current group of HOF voting idiots will EVER change their vote. Or by saying "it will take time" do you mean that as some of these a$$holes die or quit, they will be replaced by people without a personal hatred of everything and everyone that has anything to do with the Redskins. There are three kinds of lies, Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics. Most of which are totally worthless. But I understand that a lot of people swear by them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 Yank, what board have you been reading? Handburger gets brought up all the time around here. The difference is that there is no active campaign against him like there is against Monk. If Monk just didn't get in that would be one thing, but hearing certain writers to continually bad-mouth him like they do ... well, it's just unbelieveable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toddlerdurden Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 Urge to kill: Rising. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 yank :doh: Heck those other skins should be in also. The Midgets Carson was fed up on mike and mike about being snubbed 5 yrs in a row wondering out loud why they didnt go for enshrining 6 candidates and requested that his name be dropped for consideration in the future because is sick of the politics of what he calls anti giants behaviour Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dallasfan Posted February 3, 2004 Share Posted February 3, 2004 Originally posted by Jay Master Jay The game has changed a lot since the 80's they throw the ball more. They have changed the game so the receivers can get off the line of scrimmage after 5 yards. In Monks heyday he had to beat off the DB and there was more holding. That same argument is used against him, b/c the NFL made some rules that freed wrs up alot, about the time he came into the leauge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.