Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

I Cannot Believe Mortenson Answered My Question About Peter King And Art Monk

Hooper

By Hooper
in 2005 Archives Forum

Recommended Posts

Hooper

Hooper

Posted
Posted

Kyle (Los Angeles, CA): Hey, Chris. Can you please slap Peter King upside the head for leading the crusade to keep Art Monk out of the hall of the fame? I know King loves the giants and hates the skins, but that shouldn't effect his vote at all. I mean, Art Monk was Steve Largeant with better stats. Or is it a skin color thing?

 Chris Mortensen: (11:17 AM ET ) Regardless of what anybody says, Peter is not alone ion his thoughts on Monk. I don't think he is on a crusade, either. When he's asked about Monk, he simply states his reasons for not being a Monk supporter. I disagree with him, but there are plenty of independent votes on that committee. I think Monk is a Hall of Famer. I always think it is ill-advised to measure by stats. All I do is check my memory bank - was Monk a star on a great team. Yes, he was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ntotoro

ntotoro

Posted
Posted

I think we realize Peter King isn't alone in this. That's why Art Monk isn't in the HOF yet. It's just that Queen has gone out of her way to explain why she thinks Monk doesn't deserve in. It's just a shame and a travesty he's not in. Why even ask about skin color, though? Last time I checked, Monk wouldn't exactly be the first black player in the HOF.

It would be fine to chastise Peter King, but don't bait with something as stupid as the race card.

Nick

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hooper

Hooper

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I was just stirring the pot with the skin color thing -- I never thought my question would get posted -- but the fact is Largeant and Monk were very similar players (clutch, possession receivers who caught EVERYTHING). Largeant was a first ballot hall of famer and Monk may never get in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
redman

redman

Posted
Posted
Originally posted by bubba9497

Bob (San Diego, CA): Mr. Mortensen - Any truth to the rumor of a Sean Taylor for Philip Rivers? Thanks!

Chris Mortensen: (11:50 AM ET ) No, I think you just started that rumor. Absoutlely no. !

LOL! No wait, wait! Any truth to the rumor of a Rod Gardner for Antonio Gates trade? :rolleyes:
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TXREDSKINS44

TXREDSKINS44

Posted
Posted
Originally posted by bubba9497

Bob (San Diego, CA): Mr. Mortensen - Any truth to the rumor of a Sean Taylor for Philip Rivers? Thanks!

Chris Mortensen: (11:50 AM ET ) No, I think you just started that rumor. Absoutlely no. !

:laugh:

:laugh: :laugh:

That is the worst rumor I have ever heard!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bubba9497

bubba9497

Posted
Posted

Talk NFL with Chris Mortensen!

http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/chatESPN?event_id=7090

Chris Mortensen: (10:59 AM ET ) Good morning! I'm pretty excited about the Super Bowl, for a lot of reasons. One being that we get the measure the Patriots in historical perspective and the other being that the Eagles are a little better than most people are giving them credit for....anyway, let's see what's on your minds.

Donny Brass, Detroit: Chris, rumor is the Lions have settled on Ted Tollner as the new Offensive Coordinator, and Lion fans are not happy. Are we all wrong about Mooch dipping into the friends and family plan here ??

Chris Mortensen: (11:02 AM ET ) I actually like the move. Tollner is very well respected and he brings a different perspective to the passing game. He will bring a vertical, explosive element to the Lions' offense that will take full advantage of those great, young receivers: Roy Williams and Charles Rogers.

charles (dc): i heard on the radio joe gibbs said if they don't win next year his stay will be short, could you shed some light on how long gibbs will be coaching the redskins?

Chris Mortensen: (11:03 AM ET ) That's pretty plain: If Joe doesn't win next year and feel that he has the team on track for the Super Bowl, he'll get out. It's also interesting to me that somne executives in the league forecast the redskins for serious salary cap woes in 2006, but I have no idea if that plays into Gibbs' thinking.

Bryan (Rockville): Do you see Tom Coughlin being retained as the Giants head coach? Although the players nearly revolted against him, supposedly management there really likes him. I can't really understand this because it seems like the Giants won't even play for him. Any chance he gets the boot? Do you see any other head coaching changes happening? Is Gregg Williams definitely staying in Washington, or is there a chance he might take a high college job? Insight please! Thanks

Chris Mortensen: (11:06 AM ET ) Any notion of Coughlin being ousted is a joke. This is the cancerous culture that the Giants knew they had when they hired Coughlin and they need to remove it by getting rid of players, not the coach. Bill belichick wasn't real popular in new England his first season. Dick vermeil almost had a few plauer mutinies in his first two years in St,. Louis before winning the Super Bowl. As for Gregg Williams, he's staying with the redskins and he'll probably get an opportunity as a head coach again.

Mark (Philly): Mort, thanks for giving the Eagles a little credit, but I believe that all this dynasty talk with the Pats leaves the Eagles short. Most wins since 2001, no years outside the playoffs since 1999, and now the best team of that run. I think the Eagles shock the world, but not themselves, because they not only believe they can win, they believe they WILL.

Chris Mortensen: (11:08 AM ET ) Well, ultimately a team's greatness is measured by its Super Bowl rings. I do think the eagles have a good formula - the most underrated defense led by a great coordinator (Jim Johnson) and a terrific quarterback in Donovan McNabb. What I also like about the Eagles is they are built for more success in the next few years. I do like the Patriots in this game but I am always prepared for a surprise.

Pat (atl): Mort, what do you think is the best deal the Vikings can get for Moss? Do you think its just a defensive player and a top pck or could they do better than that?

Chris Mortensen: (11:10 AM ET ) I feel like they can get two draft picks (one being a first rounder) and possibly a defensive starter. The more teams bidding for Moss, the better the package they can get. However, it will not be a giveaway and Red McCombs could always nix it.

Doyle (Philly): Little tidbit some people are forgetting: While the core of the New England Patriots Super Bowl teams are still on the team, that is the same core team that did not make the playoffs in that middle year.

Chris Mortensen: (11:11 AM ET ) Yeah, but they still went 9-7 and missed the playoffs ona tiebreaker in a very, very tough division.

Mike (Toronto): Do you think Jim Bates will be able to turn around a Packers defense that took a huge step back this season. With the Packers most likely using the draft to upgrade their defense, do you see Bates improving this D or are the players just not good enough?

Chris Mortensen: (11:12 AM ET ) I think bates will have a huge impact. The players are better than their performance showed. They will continue to upgrade the talent over there, but the offense might take a hite by losing two free-agent guards in Mike Wahle and Marcoa Rivera.

Ross (Rosemount, MN): Please update us on the status of the Vikings sale! Does Fowler really have the cash to make it happen? If so, does he have enough cash reserves to spend on the team, as opposed to operating on the cheap like Red McCombs does?

Chris Mortensen: (11:13 AM ET ) I have some info in my latest column. I am told Fowler is not a real player.

Brendan (NJ): Mort, what can the Eagles do when the Pats spread 4 wides? They have no proven Dime Back

Chris Mortensen: (11:14 AM ET ) That is a dilemma for Philly and part of the great chess match for this game. But the eagles do have talent back there... I expect the Pats will attack with some 4-and-5 wides with a no huddle at times. But they also have to get Corey Dillon 25 carries.

Kyle (Los Angeles, CA): Hey, Chris. Can you please slap Peter King upside the head for leading the crusade to keep Art Monk out of the hall of the fame? I know King loves the giants and hates the skins, but that shouldn't effect his vote at all. I mean, Art Monk was Steve Largeant with better stats. Or is it a skin color thing?

Chris Mortensen: (11:17 AM ET ) Regardless of what anybody says, Peter is not alone ion his thoughts on Monk. I don't think he is on a crusade, either. When he's asked about Monk, he simply states his reasons for not being a Monk supporter. I disagree with him, but there are plenty of independent votes on that committee. I think Monk is a Hall of Famer. I always think it is ill-advised to measure by stats. All I do is check my memory bank - was Monk a star on a great team. Yes, he was.

nat da g-man (wythe va): mort, The g-men need speed, is FA's mohammed and or burress the anwser ? or is a trade back into the first round of the draft the anwser?

Chris Mortensen: (11:19 AM ET ) I love Muhammad but neither he nor Buress are 'speed" guys. They do need a great vertical threat becauise the deep ball is one of Eli Manning's stengths and Tom Coughlin believes in the vertical game.

Dan, Boston: Mort, is it me or does this Patriots team just seem to be a little angrier than in the past. Seems to me that this team is out to prove once and for all, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that they deserve to be recognized as one of the greatest teams of all time.

Chris Mortensen: (11:21 AM ET ) It's not just you. I sense it, too. It will be interesting because the Patriots, first and foremost, have to find a way to simply win the game. But if there is an opportunity to make a statement for historical points, I think there is a hidden desire there. They also know that the ol' gang is breaking up with the loss of both coordinators - Weis and Crennel, who is very much the lock for the Browns job.

Matthew (Gainesville, FL): Chris, don't you believe Jim Johnson's defensive scheme has a chance to confuse Tom Brady. I'm not saying it WILL happen, but everyone acts like it CAN'T happen. I mean the other SB's with the Rams (weak defense) and the Panthers (smashmouth defense) Brady wasn't given alot of different looks.

Chris Mortensen: (11:23 AM ET ) Well, he got plenty of looks from the panthers - John Fox is one of the best at that. I do think this presents a challenge for Brady but, look, he has faced Jim Johnson's scheme before and handled it quite well. I do think this may be the best eagles' defense yet, though.

Paul (Rochester, NY): What is wrong with Terrel Owens? Take all his other "incidents" and throw them out the window, because this one tops them all. He sits there and lets his teammates do all the hard work in the playoffs, and now they make it to the "big game" and he feels it necessary to go out and play? Why? Things aren't any different. He still isn't cleared to play, so really he is just trying to steal the spotlight. I know if I was his teammate, I wouldn't be too happy about that. Mort, what are your thoughts on this whole "mess"?

Chris Mortensen: (11:26 AM ET ) That's a valid point of view. I believe that there is no value to playing a charade with the patriots - they're too smart, too versatile and it's a two-week break. I think it's clear the eagles' wideouts don't want to hear it anymore and if Andy Reid let's it linger into next week, it might build some resentment. Then again, somebody may argue that T.O. getting the attention will allow for the other Eagles to focus more on the game. I'm more with you.

Gordon (San Francisco): Is Mike McCarthy going to end of with Nolan in SF as the Offensive Coordinator? What about Defensive Coordinator? Is Dave McGinnis in play at all??

Chris Mortensen: (11:27 AM ET ) Unfortunately, Gordon, I haven't had a lot of time to spend ion the 49ers. McCarthy could end up in tennessee, NO or SF, I guess. I have not heard McGinnis but he's one of my faves.

Barry (Ft Laud, FL): Hey Mort, What do you think of the coaches that Saban has brought to the Fins? How many years before we make the playoffs...3?

Chris Mortensen: (11:29 AM ET ) On the offensive side, it's about as good as it gets. Scott Linehan with Hudson Houck as line coach is a big, big deal. Playoffs? I would think 2-to-3 years. That division isn't getting weaker, though. The Patriots may slip a little just because of the coordinator change, but not much. The Jets have a young defense. The Bills are playoff-ready.

Dan, Work: Why would any team risk millions of dollars and put randy Moss on their team. Is there really any chance whatsoever that he will someday decide to play football and fullfill his potential?

Chris Mortensen: (11:31 AM ET ) Well, the big money in signing bonus has already been paid by the Vikings. I think he's a problem, but if you thought youb were one great receiver away from the Super Bowl, you might take a shot, figuring you would get a honeymoon for two years or so. The other thing is, just look at his numbers - not many are more productive.

Ethan (Syracuse): Why does Owens want to play? It is a no win situation for him. His team is vastly inferior to the opponent with our without him. If he plays he could do some real damage that screws up the rest of his career. If he does play and the Eagles lose (which they will) he will take away the only excuse Eagle fans will have for losing the game.

Chris Mortensen: (11:33 AM ET ) I do understand why he wants to play. It's the Super Bowl. The greatest game in football. Nobody is promised next year. That's why he went to the Eagles. So I understand the emotional side of it. Everything else you say has some truth.

Jeff (Cincinnati): Hey Mort, what do you think the likelihood of Rudi Johnson sitting out a season if he gets franchised. Seems like a bluff to me. Who would pass up 6 Mill for one year. Do you think it is just a tactic to scare the bengals into signing him long term?

Chris Mortensen: (11:34 AM ET ) Well, players just don't sit out seasons. Where else are you going to make $5 million-plus? And runing backs have short shelf lives, which is why his agent is trying to create some leverage. I understand the tactic, but he'll be playing for someone - I think the Bengals - in 2005.

Jeff (Charlotte, NC): Mort: Any skinny on why offensive line coach Bill Muir did not leave the Bucs staff and join Bill Parcells in Dallas? Parcells seems to be facing bigger and harder decisions than he had in 2003, e.g., who is your QB and what kind of defense to run? Any special insight on which direction he may go?

Chris Mortensen: (11:37 AM ET ) Muir is under contract for one more year and the Bucs did not give him permission. But he has a much bigger problem - he is undergoing (may have already) serious back surgery. He has been nearly incapcitated with this back/spinal problem. He plans to retire very shortly. As for Parcells, I think henson ahs a chance. I am now interested to see if Brees will interest him. I expect the defense will be more 3-4.

John (Portland, ME): Why do some think the Pats will take a step back after this season? I know Weis and Crennel are very valuable, but I'm sure Belichick is going to replace them with coaches that are just as bright. Belichick and all the important players will be back, so why can't they keep this run going?

Chris Mortensen: (11:39 AM ET ) Well, I don't think the pats are going to fall apart. Belichick is involved in evey aspect of the team and that includes offense. I think Weis' ability to adapt during a game may be missed, but now that Tom Brady is a veteran it may not be as negative. I expect them to slip a little for a lot of reasons but I don't see why we would dismiss them after this year.

Henry (Boston): Speaking of Parcells... do you think he has been exposed as kind of a fraud?? it looks like Belichick's defenses with the Giants won Parcells his SBs....

Chris Mortensen: (11:42 AM ET ) Stop. It was Parcells who hired a young Belichick and who oversaw the defense and who helped groom belichick into what he is today, although Belchick has had many other influences, too. I know people like to use that stat about Parcells having never won a Super Bowl and being six games under .500 w/o belichick. Well - and I used this before - Belichick is about 20 games under .500 and never won a Super Bowl without Crennel. It's all very stupid. Parcells and Belichick are both great coaches.

John (Transplant): Do you expect more than 50 percent of teams switching or experimenting with the 3-4?

Chris Mortensen: (11:43 AM ET ) I do. And we're back to that old adage that it's easier to find linebackers than it is stud defensive ends.

Dave (Philly Pa): Mort how can you agree that the Eagles are vastly inferior to the Pats? The numbers just simply don't back that up. Going into week 16 when the Eagles went into hybernation the Eagles were ranked higher in offense and defense. The Eagles WILL win this game and then maybe people will be carefull which bandwagon they jump on.

Chris Mortensen: (11:47 AM ET ) Bandwagon. Very, very few media guys have bandwagons. I understand you're a fan but there's nothing unusual with neutral media observers favoring a two-time Super Bowl champion in this game. that's not disprespect. And, please, forget statistical rankings. They are always deceptive. They deal with yards. The Pats are a tremendous red-zone team. Every game is designed to win, not to see who gets the most yards. That being said, the Eagles have everyone's respect - everyone's.

Steven (Monroe, LA): Rumor has it that the Bills are going with Losman next year and that Bledsoe may resurface with Cowboys. My opinion is that Bledsoe is not an upgrade over Testaverde.

Chris Mortensen: (11:49 AM ET ) I reported - that's fact, not rumor - that the Bills have asked Bledsoe to take another pay cut. If he doesn't, he could be released and Losman would get his shot. I'm not sure Parcells would jump on Bledsoe, although Drew still has a big-time arm and he's a leader. I think Parcells prefers some mobility in his QBs during this era.

Bob (San Diego, CA): Mr. Mortensen - Any truth to the rumor of a Sean Taylor for Philip Rivers? Thanks!

Chris Mortensen: (11:50 AM ET ) No, I think you just started that rumor. Absoutlely no.

Eddie (Dallas): Since Roy W is such a liability in coverage, what do you think of moving him to a WILL position and drafting another safety?

Chris Mortensen: (11:51 AM ET ) Roy Williams is an impact player when he's at strong safety, like an extra linebacker. That's what you have in the Super Bowl with Rodney harrison and Brian Dawkins. So you can be sure the Cowboys will address the secondary to ensure Williams is an impact player.

Brian: (Gurnee, IL): Do you think the Packers will make a run at Drew Brees?

Chris Mortensen: (11:53 AM ET ) They're one of the teams. The problem is, Brett Favre is almost certain to return and Brees is at the stage where he has to step into a starting role with starter's money.

Kevin (Richmond, Va): If Bledsoe is let go, do you think Dennis Green my try to use him in Arizona? We can all remember the various QBs he used in Minnesota successfully in his system.

Chris Mortensen: (11:54 AM ET ) Yeah, that's a possibility, I guess. I do see the Cardinals as one of the potential bidders for Brees, although Green often has preferred taller QBs.

Erik (Cleveland): Mort, do you think the escapability of Donovan McNabb will be a factor against the Pats D, who are not familiar all that much against running quaterbacks because there really are not any in the AFC?

Chris Mortensen: (11:56 AM ET ) I guess it's a factor, although McNabb would strong object to being described as a :"running" QB. Do you realize he ran only 42 times this year. He did run 10 times for 32 yards vs. the Falcons and in a game of this magnitude he will do whatever it takes to win. But the Patriots' strength is their linebackers, plus Rodney Harrison, so I wouldn't expect him to have great success running it.

Rob (Denver, CO): Have any teams showed interese in trading for Droughns? What do you think the Broncos can get for him?

Chris Mortensen: (11:57 AM ET ) Not much.

John Cleveland: I would think the Bears might be interested in Bledsoe as a backup for Grossman. Bledsoe would have to be an upgrade from the backup QB mess the Bears have. Any possibility ?

Chris Mortensen: (12:01 PM ET ) I think Kurt Warner is a possibility there.

Mike (Detroit): Mort, Why does it seem like Marriucci is determined to bring everything he had in San Francisco to Detroit? I know San Fran was in salary cap trouble when he took over but he really never accomplished anything there. Is Marriucci overrated as a head coach? And is he still going to be calling the plays next year?

Chris Mortensen: (12:02 PM ET ) If you're referring to Tollner, he wasn't with Mooch. Let's see what happens next year, OK?

RC (NYC): Mort, if you were in the Jets shoes...who do you franchise tag...Abraham or Jordan?

Chris Mortensen: (12:03 PM ET ) You don;t use it on Jordan. Abraham makes sense, whether youre' trying to keep him or trade him. They say they want to keep him.

Chris Mortensen: (12:04 PM ET ) That's the hour and it's time to run. Thanks for another great chat. I am looking forward to next week in Jacksonville. Take care and God Bless!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mooney

Mooney

Posted
Posted
Originally posted by CrazyZeb

Why did skin color come into play?

Why wouldn't it?

Monks numbers are superior in most every way to Steve Largents. And, as Mort said, he was a star on some great teams. Largent was a star on some bad teams.

If all other factors are equal, what is the difference, aside from Redskin bias, between a first ballot and limbo?

Its a valid question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CrazyZeb

CrazyZeb

Posted
Posted
Originally posted by Mooney

Why wouldn't it?

Monks numbers are superior in most every way to Steve Largents. And, as Mort said, he was a star on some great teams. Largent was a star on some bad teams.

If all other factors are equal, what is the difference, aside from Redskin bias, between a first ballot and limbo?

Its a valid question.

Because there's no basis for it other than you want to see it. We've already established that King, Lenny P and their ilk hate the Redskins. Why do we have to throw in the race factor as well? It's not valid, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
redman

redman

Posted
Posted
Originally posted by CrazyZeb

Because there's no basis for it other than you want to see it. We've already established that King, Lenny P and their ilk hate the Redskins. Why do we have to throw in the race factor as well? It's not valid, IMO.

I agree. There's a term for what you were doing, Hooper: race baiting.

As much as I detest Lenny, King, and Zimmerman for their obvious biases, I don't see even a hint of racism in any of their analyses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mooney

Mooney

Posted
Posted
Originally posted by CrazyZeb

Because there's no basis for it other than you want to see it. We've already established that King, Lenny P and their ilk hate the Redskins. Why do we have to throw in the race factor as well? It's not valid, IMO.

Didn't say there is a basis for it. And no, thats not how I want to see it.

Aside from demonstrated anti-Redskin bias, please list any and all reasons why Monk should not be in the HOF while Largent is.

None? Me neither. So now I have to look at all possible reasons for the exclusion. Which leads to these questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CrazyZeb

CrazyZeb

Posted
Posted
Originally posted by Mooney

Didn't say there is a basis for it. And no, thats not how I want to see it.

Aside from demonstrated anti-Redskin bias, please list any and all reasons why Monk should not be in the HOF while Largent is.

None? Me neither. So now I have to look at all possible reasons for the exclusion. Which leads to these questions.

We use similar arguments for why Monk should be in before Michael Irvin. If they vote in Irvin first, is that because of race?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hooper

Hooper

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Like I said before -- I was just stirring the pot and didn't think CM would post the question. I mean, I told him to slap PK upside the head for godsakes.

That said, if you don't think there's subtle, unintentional racism in the NFL and other leagues... well, I guess we just disagree. It's more of a marketing thing -- there are lots of linebackers better than Urlacher but look how many ads he gets. Maybe it's not racism -- but there's no denying white athletes are often more desireable to companies than black athletes. Ah, I'm going off a tangent here and I'm sure plenty of you disagree with me. Can we at least all agree that Peter King deserves a slap upside the head?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CrazyZeb

CrazyZeb

Posted
Posted
Originally posted by Hooper

Like I said before -- I was just stirring the pot and didn't think CM would post the question. I mean, I told him to slap PK upside the head for godsakes.

That said, if you don't think there's subtle, unintentional racism in the NFL and other leagues... well, I guess we just disagree. It's more of a marketing thing -- there are lots of linebackers better than Urlacher but look how many ads he gets. Maybe it's not racism -- but there's no denying white athletes are often more desireable to companies than black athletes. Ah, I'm going off a tangent here and I'm sure plenty of you disagree with me. Can we at least all agree that Peter King deserves a slap upside the head?

Just next time tell him to slap Lenny P as well. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
redman

redman

Posted
Posted
Originally posted by Mooney

Didn't say there is a basis for it. And no, thats not how I want to see it.

Aside from demonstrated anti-Redskin bias, please list any and all reasons why Monk should not be in the HOF while Largent is.

None? Me neither. So now I have to look at all possible reasons for the exclusion. Which leads to these questions.

Frankly it's more of a statement about you as to what "possible reasons" you look to first, than it is about them. If you see the world through race colored glasses, then I'd expect you to think that others would do the same.

You and Hooper should quit this debate while you're behind. You're looking worse and worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hooper

Hooper

Posted
  • Author
Posted

For the third time, I was joking, Redman. There's nothing worse than crying racism in lieu of wolf.

That said, I do believe that Art Monk would already be in the hall of fame if he was white. It's changing, but a lot of sportswriters and fans just look at white athletes... well, differently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cool Hand Loki

Cool Hand Loki

Posted
Posted

Disgusting hypocrisy from King's Tuesday spew:

2. I think it's going to be very tough to figure out the Patriots Hall of Famers someday if they win a third Super Bowl. You start with Belichick and Tom Brady, and then where do you go? You can't stop at two with three Super Bowl wins, I don't think.

Unquote.

Well, Pete, what about the Redskins who won three SB? And what King's "thought" seems to suggest, at least to me, is that while the Patriots don't have a bunch of guys with incredible numbers, they have so many great, team-oriented players that are deserving, that it will be tough to find a way to get them all in.

What about the great, team-oriented players on championship teams who DID have the numbers?! Jeezus. How can these people, in good conscience, vote against Monk?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
smashmowf

smashmowf

Posted
Posted
Originally posted by CrazyZeb

We use similar arguments for why Monk should be in before Michael Irvin. If they vote in Irvin first, is that because of race?

Monk and Irvin are not similar players...Largent and Monk are similar players.

Irvin played in more super bowls, Irvin has more super bowl rings.:2cents:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...