Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

Just an update...as of 10:24am....Monk 68% Irvin 32%!!!!

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

Peter King is a former Giants beatwriter who would love nothing better than to keep as many Skins out of the Hall as he can. Now I understand that he is only one guy with one vote but I'm sure alot of those guys side with hime because he is such a respected figure in journalism. I have been trying to understand his reasons for feeling that Art Monk is not "deserving" of a HOF nod and I don't think I ever will. He said that Monk not being THE guy in the WR unit and just a guy who played his role therefore helping the group succeed was correct. Why do I bring that up you may ask. Well a linebacker by the name of Carl Banks was described in the exact same way with Lawrence Taylor's name substituted for Gary Clarks yet Banks is "deserving" of a HOF vote ? What team did Mr.Banks play for ? The New York Giants of course. This writer cites FORMER GIANTS COACH Bill Parcells as saying the the Giants NEVER gameplanned for Monk yet were more worried about Clark and Sanders. So I guess that the teams that planned for Taylor instead of Banks didn't matter. He compares Monks numbers to Jerry Rice's when Monks prime wasn't during the same as Rice's was. The man epitomizes everything that people say is wrong with sports. Congradulate the guy who wins and is a dick about it, forget about the guy who wins the "right way" as long as he is a Redskin. Monk probably shafted him on an interview a long time ago and he is still salty about it. I have not been shy about my resentment towards Peter King and I won't do the be today. I'm sure he's a good guy at home, if he has children I'm sure he may be a good father. As a sportswriter/correspondent he stinks IMO. He lays at the feet of Parcells and Bill OverratedChieck. What they say is golden and that's it. He has Parcells in his top ten of guys who haven't made the hall yet, how long was he retired before he came back ? Let the fat bastard retire first. Irvin before Monk ? Come on now. I respect what Irvin did and he was definitely a baller, a pushoff artist, but still a baller. If it was such a travesty that he didn't get in then the same should be for a guy who had a great work ethic and did it "the right way". Fork Peter King, he knows alot he just denies the truth. He's a Redskin hater, I would probably be a Peter King fan if he came out and was honest saying, " Hell no I would never vote for Art Monk, he's a friggin Redskin for Christ's Sake !". If he did that I'd respect him, but giving bitchy response after bitchy response only helps my hatred grow for him. He's shitty on Inside the NFL, they should get rid of him and that fag Bob Costas. Keep Chris Carters sleepy hairy eyebrowed ass on there so he can give me my dose of Redskin hate every week. It's great when he gives reason after reason without any substanance for why the Redskins will lose every game.

Screw Peter King for helping keep Art Monk out of the Hall !




"This ain't WCW, this ain't Monday Night Raw, this ain't Smackdown ! Hell this ain't even the WWE, this my friends is E,C FUCKIN W !!!!

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

just voted 69-31 monk up

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

They both deserve to be in the HOF Monk stat wise accomplishments during his career now I've said this manny times yes the stats for Irvin 750 vs 940 of monk theres a huge difference but the thing is Irvin did that in 11 seasons (I'm not counting his last season when he got injured in the 4th game never to return) and specially since he rack the mayority of his stats in 8 years (662) he was a 5 time pro bowler and all this was done in a run oriented team that often lead the oposition before halftime and they just gave it to emmitt to run the hole second half that's why the stats of Aikman aren't so high It just was a verry talented team as a hole.

During those 11 years Irving had an average of 67 catches per year (during his top 8 83 avrg).

Monk played 15 complete good season (taking away his last season also) was a 3 time pro bowler during those 15 season he average 62.4 catches per year) if we take his 8 best years that started in 1984 and lasted to 1991 he had during that time 605 catches an avrg of 76 catches per year.

He (monk) had 68 TDs in 15 seasons Irvin had 62 in 11 (65 total) monk never had more than 8 tds in a season Irvin had1 season of 9 and one of 10 (without counting the others). Again all this in a run oriented team, we are not talking of the Rams, Colts, Vikings wich all put huge numbers on offense specially on the air.

Irvin passed the 1000 yard mark 7 times, monk only did it 5 times in my book that's why people are saying Irving theserves to get in first..... don't get me wrong I believe Monk is a HOF also and should had be in there long ago.

But when you analyse both carriers you see the diference (taking away off the field issues).

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

[quote=D'BOYZ][B]They both deserve to be in the HOF Monk stat wise accomplishments during his career now I've said this manny times yes the stats for Irvin 750 vs 940 vs monk theres a huge difference but the thing is Irvin did that in 11 seasons (I'm not counting his last season when he got injured in the 4th game never to return) and specially he raked the mayority of his stats in 8 years (662) he was a 5 time pro bowler and all this was done in a run oriented team in a power team that often lead the oposition before halftime and they just gave it to emmith tu run the hole second half that why the stats of Aikman aren't so high It just was a verry talented team as a hole.[/B]

During those 11 years Irving had an average of 67 catches per year (during his top 8 83 avrg).

Monk played 15 complete good season (taking away his last season also) was a 3 time pro bowler during those 15 season he average 62.4 catches per year) if we take his 8 best years that started in 1984 and lasted to 1991 he had during that time 605 catches an avrg of 76 catches per year.

He (monk) had 68 TDs in 15 seasons Irvin had 62 in 11 (65 total) monk never had more than 8 tds in a season Irvin 1 season of 9 and reached double digits once. Again all thsi in a run oriented team, we are not talking of the Rams, Colts, Vikings wich all put huge numbers on offense specially on the air.

Irvin passed the 1000 yard mark 7 times, monk only did it 5 times in my book that's why people are saying Irving theserves to get in first..... don't get me wrong I believe Monk is a HOF also and should had be in there long ago.

But when you analyse both carriers you see the diference (taking away off the field issues).[/quote]

For the love of God, please use punctuation marks!!! If I have to read another run-on sentence like that I might shoot myself.

Regarding your point though, the Redskins and Cowboys were both run oriented teams during the times when Monk and Irvin were playing. It's not like the Redskins were running the run and shoot.

And Irvin did post his numbers over fewer seasons, which is impressive (expecially on a TD per Season basis). But you can't totally discount Monk's longevity as a non-factor. Monk has to get credit for playing 36% longer than Irvin did (15 seasons compared to 11).

A strong case can be made for both for the hall. I think they're both top 15 type WRs of all-time. I'd put both in the hall of fame. And if I were ranking them, I'd probably put Monk 12th and Irvin 13th or so. They're very close in my mind - ignoring all biases associated with the Skins/Boys rivalry.

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

dboyz, dont forget that irvin was the man when he played at dallas. can you even name another reciever other than harper that played along side with irvin? monk played with clark, sanders,and clint didier, who in his time was probably the best recieving tight end of his era( pardons to jay novacek)

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

yeah Dmek25 monk played with other greta players that took catches from him that's why the point that PK has is tha the wasn't "the man" in was as irvin was in Dallas....

Irvin demanded double coverage all the time and still got the job done, monk didn't (always) and the other's took some attention away from him.... again I believe that Monk should be in the HOF and a long time ago I'm just trying to post why PK has been so addament of not giving credit to Monk where credit is do.

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

[quote=dmek25]dboyz, dont forget that irvin was the man when he played at dallas. can you even name another reciever other than harper that played along side with irvin? monk played with clark, sanders,and clint didier, who in his time was probably the best recieving tight end of his era( pardons to jay novacek)[/quote]very good point! monk caught 900+ balls while he had some real good wr's opposite him that were taking away from his production. peter king says that monk wasnt even the best reciever on his team. how could that be?? did any other wr have 900 rec for the skins ??he also gives the argument that the giants never game planned for monk. that is because they couldnt. if they did we would just run it down their throat, which we did anyway on our way to 3 rings.

hey peter king, the last time i checked 3 rings is more that 2, you jealous f*ck.

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

and this is my point to king. playing along side other good recievers and still setting the record for most catches ever. monk was the nfl's very first "big' possesion receiver. i guess king is still pissed the giants havent had a good wr since frank gifford left

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

i have no problem with irvin getting in, as long as the writers dont have an issue with his off the field problems. irvin was exactly what he said he was, a playmaker that got the benefit of a very good ground game. but no way he goes before monk. that would be a flat out joke

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

Peter King is a fucking moron.

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

i propose a 'Peter King is a fucking moron' man-law

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

MAN LAW !!!

FUCK PETER KING !!!!!!

not literally though !

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

If, God forbid, Irvin does somehow manage to get into the HOF before Monk, who else is up for a very loud, very angry protest during the induction ceremony that year? We'll need as many Monk jerseys as possible, I've got mine all ready to go!

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

i would love to go and its about a 5 1/2 hour trip from my house, but i swore i would not visit the hall until monk gets in

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

HOLY COW!!! There's hope!!!!

Look at the response from King in his mailbag!

"Ain't so. I'm a fan of no football team. You may be interested to know that I am going to rethink my position on Monk this year. I don't want to be so stuck in the mud on this issue that I close my mind to the possibility that I'm wrong and that Monk really does belong. So I'm going to sit down with Joe Gibbs when I see the Redskins this summer and try to soak in what the Monk side believes I am missing. A lot of people I respect tell me I'm dead wrong on Monk -- Len Shapiro, Mike Wilbon among them, plus quieter ones with close ties to the Hall. So I'll rethink my position and let you know what I come up with."

[url]http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/peter_king/06/06/mmqbte/1.html[/url]

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

I would just like to note that I was so completely shocked by his response, that I used the lead "Holy Cow" in the above post. I would totally edit it out of extreme and utter embarassment, but who am I to disturb the integrity of Warpath posting history?

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

I thought "holy cow" was referring to Peter King actualyl taking large bites out of a live cow. Obviously, I was mistaken.

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

Dang I'm amazed. If he changes his mind I will hold him in very high regard, actually. It would prove that he's not stubborn, he's willing to reconsider his views, and that he doesn't consider himself infallible. I can't give him that credit yet. He's going to have to vote yes before I heap any praise on him.

Earn it, Peter!

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

Voted for Monk.

Art Monk 71%
Crackhead Racist 29%

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

[quote=Buster]Voted for Monk.

Art Monk 71%
Crackhead Racist 29%[/quote]

What will King's response be to Monk smashing Irvin in this vote? He'll probably jsut say the fans don't understand what makes an HOF'er and that's why they can't vote or some sh*t like that. But isn't the Hall sort of for the fans, shouldn't we have a say?

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

[quote=Schneed10]Dang I'm amazed. If he changes his mind I will hold him in very high regard, actually. It would prove that he's not stubborn, he's willing to reconsider his views, and that he doesn't consider himself infallible. I can't give him that credit yet. He's going to have to vote yes before I heap any praise on him.

Earn it, Peter![/quote]
Well why didn't he change his mind 5 years ago. He's still a moron and always will be. He's only thinking about changing his mind because going for Irvin instead of Monk is no longer the popular decision. The poll is 71-29 in favor of Monk. He obviously just decided that he might change his mind, or else he would have put Monk on his top 10. Peter King is still, and always will be a fat douchebag.

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

I agree that both Monk and Irvin should be in the HOF. I didn't know Michael Irvin was a racist though. I read King's response, he can suck my balls because he's saving face. He realizes that there are a lot of Skins fans in the world that feel Monk should be in. He gets alot of emails from us that he actually posts online so just think of how many he get's that we never get to see. I sent him one after his Harry Carson explanation that never made the story. He's not a fan of one team maybe we should say he's a fan of one or two coaches. He constantly used Bill Parcells' comment about the Midgets (sorry if I offended anyone) never gameplanning for #81 as proof that Monk shouldn't be in. Fuck him and his face saving post ! If Irvin makes it I wouldn't protest because I think he should get in, the ONLY time I will make the trip to Canton is when Art Monk gets his bust put in the Hall of Fame. While we're on shafted Skins, why aren't ANY of the Hogs in ? One of the most dominant offensive lines to ever grace the football field and none of them have made it ? Harry Friggin Carson is in !

I APOLOGIZE FELLAS I MADE A MISTAKE IT'S CARSON NOT BANKS !!!!! SORRY FOR THAT !!!!!!!!!!

The Monk should be in, hopefully he'll make it next year !!

HAIL

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

[quote=steveo395]Well why didn't he change his mind 5 years ago. He's still a moron and always will be. He's only thinking about changing his mind because going for Irvin instead of Monk is no longer the popular decision. The poll is 71-29 in favor of Monk. He obviously just decided that he might change his mind, or else he would have put Monk on his top 10. Peter King is still, and always will be a fat douchebag.[/quote]

When was taking Irvin over Monk ever the popular decision? Monk was a near miss over and over in Hall voting. The popular move has always been to put Monk in, but he hasn't.

I agree that PK is a big fat DeeBag on general principle and he should have put Monk in the hall a long time ago. But I'd gain some respect if he ultimately made the right choice. Better late than never. I'd like PK a lot better than Lenny P, who would eat broccoli before he'd ever admit to being wrong about anything.

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

King claims Irvin was the undisputable leader of the Cowboys? BS!! I hate the boys but Aikman and Smith were the leaders and are deserving. The poll results are now 70/30 in Monks favor. Is King the only guy who votes for the HOF? I thought with just stats alone he was a shoo in first ballot.....I really don't get the friction Art gets. Does class, talent and longevity mean nothing any longer?

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

Here is an article from Peter King about why Monk is not in the Hall

[url]http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/peter_king/06/06/mmqbte/1.html[/url]

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

[quote=GTripp0012]He completed more than 64% of his passes. Even in the west coast offense, that's unbelieveable. No one else is even close to that. Not even Montana who played in the same system. For my money, only Elway, Marino, and Montana have achieved more greatness than Young.[/quote]

Montana is extreamly close to Youngs 64% pass completion, with 63.7% just for playing with San Fran and a career of 63.2% pass completion. Strange how Young and Montana have very close completion percentages after playing in the same offense. Also with Montana's 63% passer completion comes [B]4 SB [/B]titles in 13 years that he played for San Fran. Youngs 64% passer completion only brings [B]1 SB [/B]title after playing for San Fran 13 years, only starting for 9 of those 13 years.

[quote=dmek25]elway, favre and montana would be the only three on your list i would consider ahead of young. marino and moon put up monstorous numbers playing in a throw first offense with exactly 0 super bowl wins between them. in my eyes greatness almost always = championships[/quote]

Like that guy had said then where would Brady and Bradshaw be? I am not sold on Brady yet either, by the way. Is he a good QB yes, but lets let him hae a career and not just 6 years, he still has a lot of football ahead of him. As for Bradshaw, he has some pretty bad stats, IMO.

According to pro-football-reference.com [url]http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/BradTe00.htm[/url]

Bradshaw ranks in the top 50:
Pass Attempts: 38th
Completions: 45th
Passing Yards: 36th
Passing TD's: 21t

Also for his carrer Bradshaw has only threw 2 more TD's than he had thrown INT's, 212td's vs. 210int's, yet that is somehow HOF worthy...

I am not saying that Young wasnt good, all I am saying is that he was in a good system for him and had the best WR ever to throw to, and yet he still only managed to only win 1 SB!?!? Also, I just dont think that winning 1 SB with the best WR on your team puts you in the top 5 QB all time, IMO.

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

[quote=#56fanatic]His career was cut way short due to concussions (yeah #56). His numbers are pretty damn good for the years he played, plus winning 3 bowls. the guy deserves to be in the hall no matter what his numbers say against current members. Had he played another 5 years he would probably be in the top 5 in just about all catagories.[/quote]


well put Fanatic.

I don't think Aikman is a Top Five QB, but he is a first ballot HOF'er. Whatever that means....

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

[QUOTE=LBrown43]King claims Irvin was the undisputable leader of the Cowboys? BS!! I hate the boys but Aikman and Smith were the leaders and are deserving. The poll results are now 70/30 in Monks favor. Is King the only guy who votes for the HOF? I thought with just stats alone he was a shoo in first ballot.....I really don't get the friction Art gets. Does class, talent and longevity mean nothing any longer?[/QUOTE]

King only considers Irvin the leader of the team because Irvin was the mouthy, obnoxious one.

Ignorant people like King often confuse obnoxious behavior with leadership. Being a loudmouth doesn't make you a leader, it just makes you noisy.

FYI, just voted in the poll and it's 70-30 for Monk!

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

[quote=mheisig]King only considers Irvin the leader of the team because Irvin was the mouthy, obnoxious one.

Ignorant people like King often confuse obnoxious behavior with leadership. Being a loudmouth doesn't make you a leader, it just makes you noisy.

FYI, just voted in the poll and it's 70-30 for Monk![/quote]

I suppose King thinks Owens was the leader of the Eagles last year. Besides, he was on the news more than any other Eagle.

:smashfrea

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

IMO PK is knows Monk is going to get in soon and is oozing his slimy ass on to the band wagon. He reminds of one of that kid in school that was the biggest gossip - he never does anything himself just talks about others yap...yap...yap.

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

Ok guyz I tought I should post this linked I posted a thrend in a Cowboys board about the same topic I just tought you like to see the reactio nof other Cowboys fans.......

[URL="http://www.cowboysboard.com/"]http://www.cowboysboard.com/[/URL]

Is in Dallas Cowboys discussion under Irvin vs Monk

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

[quote=D'BOYZ]Ok guyz I tought I should post this linked I posted a thrend in a Cowboys board about the same topic I just tought you like to see the reactio nof other Cowboys fans.......

[URL="http://www.cowboysboard.com/"]http://www.cowboysboard.com/[/URL]

Is in Dallas Cowboys discussion under Irvin vs Monk[/quote]

i somewhat odd monk lovefest on a cowboys board...

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

[QUOTE=offiss]I wonder how many Wr's in the HOF played with HOF QB's? That may also shed some light on their success compartiably to Monk. Jerry Rice played with 2, Ervin played with 1, how bout someone do a breakdown on that one, Tafkas you may be useful in this area.:)[/QUOTE]

OK. Well this is a really rudimentary breakdown-doesn't really get into how much the QB and WR played together-but here you are:

[B]Lance Alworth[/B]-no HOFers really, except for Roger Staubach Alworth's final year. Interesting to note a copule of the QBs who threw to him while he was in San Diego, Don Breaux and Dan Henning

[B]Raymond Berry[/B]-Johnny Unitas

[B]Fred Biletnikoff[/B]-George Blanda. random stat alert-both Alworth and Biletnikoff caught passes from Dick Wood...too bad Vernon Davis (VD) wasn't around then

[B]Tom Fears[/B]-Bob Waterfield, Norm Van Brocklin

[B]Elroy Hirsch[/B]-Bob Waterfield, Norm Van Brocklin

[B]Charlie Joiner[/B]-Dan Fouts

[B]Steve Largent[/B]-none, though Dave Krieg does have some impressive statistics

[B]Dante Lavell[/B]i-Otto Graham

[B]James Lofton[/B]-Jim Kelly

[B]Don Maynard[/B]-Joe Namath. Also, in 1960 and 61 his head coach was none other than Sammy Baugh and Maynard too was the proud recipient of Dick Wood passes. On a side note, looking at his numbers Joe Namath doesn't belong in the HOF. Is he in simply because of a guarantee?

[B]Tommy McDonald[/B]-Sonny Jurgensen, Norm Van Brocklin

[B]Bobby Mitchell[/B]-Len Dawson (but just a handful of plays), Sonny Jurgensen

[B]Pete Pihos[/B]-None

[B]John Stallworth[/B]-Terry Bradshaw

[B]Lynn Swann[/B]-Terry Bradshaw

[B]Charley Taylor[/B]-Sonny Jurgensen

[B]Paul Warfield[/B]-None

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

just read a king article were he says he has recieved 16 million e-mails from people saying monk should be in the hall.

so i sent king an e-mail, it says "why is it that 16 million people think monk should be in the HoF but you disagree ? you need to get over your grudge aginst the skins and give monk what he deserves, a place in the hall".

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

is this even a debate...wtf...this thread should be closed we all know Monk is better, and no one in the media is gonna accept it...old news...

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

[QUOTE]Don Maynard-Joe Namath. Also, in 1960 and 61 his head coach was none other than Sammy Baugh and Maynard too was the proud recipient of Dick Wood passes. On a side note, looking at his numbers Joe Namath doesn't belong in the HOF. Is he in simply because of a guarantee?
[/QUOTE]

Actually I believe he was put in the HOF because he bagged more broads than any player in the history of the NFL.:pimp:

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

[QUOTE=wolfeskins]just read a king article were he says he has recieved 16 million e-mails from people saying monk should be in the hall.

so i sent king an e-mail, it says "why is it that 16 million people think monk should be in the HoF but you disagree ? you need to get over your grudge aginst the skins and give monk what he deserves, a place in the hall".[/QUOTE]

I think King may have been using an old literary technique we like to call "hyperbole," (i.e. exaggeration for the point of emphasis.)

If not, I feel really bad for the IT guys who had to fix the email servers after SI got nailed with 16 million + emails in one day.

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

[QUOTE=offiss]Actually I believe he was put in the HOF because he bagged more broads than any player in the history of the NFL.:pimp:[/QUOTE]

Don't I get a "thank you" for putting this together for you? My feelings are hurt now

Re: Art Monk vs Michael Irvin
 

[QUOTE=D'BOYZ]Ok guyz I tought I should post this linked I posted a thrend in a Cowboys board about the same topic I just tought you like to see the reactio nof other Cowboys fans.......

[URL="http://www.cowboysboard.com/"]http://www.cowboysboard.com/[/URL]

Is in Dallas Cowboys discussion under Irvin vs Monk[/QUOTE]

Well I gotta give your guys over there some credit - that was a surprisingly intelligent and balanced discussion.

That should be the ultimate in proof for King - the fact that even the Dallas Cowboys fans, the most hated rivals of the Redskins, actually believe Monk should go in before or at least at the same time as Irvin. Doesn't get any more clear than that.