And yet, Art still doesn't qualify?
 

Not unexpectedly, Dr. Z once again passes over Art Monk for the Hall of Fame - this time on the PRELIMINARY ballot.

Here are some of his selections and the reasons for choosing them:

AIKMAN: "Don't start reading me stats, because Aikman was the quintessential winner who sacrificed personal stats for team goals. He could have put up the big numbers anytime he wanted to."

KEN ANDERSON: "He had all the skills, including great courage."

Initially, Z. choose two receivers - Henry Ellard and (surprise, surprise) Michael Irvin, he subsequently eliminated Ellard to get from his initial 30 to 25:

HENRY ELLARD: "[W]ho I know will never have a chance, but whom I wanted to list anyway, just as a reward for long and dedicated service" and Michael Irvin.

IRVIN: "Michael annoys the hell out of me with all that nonsense he comes up with on ESPN, but we're not supposed to let that influence our ballots. I didn't. I picked him anyway. Went long, went short, possession receiver, downfield threat when he had to be."

FRED DEAN:"Maybe not, but I used to root so hard for the Niners in those days, and it seemed that he was always coming up with the key sack when needed most."

I guess Monk was just a no-skill receiver with no courage, who never sacrificed personal stats for team goals as he clearly couldn't go long when he had to and never, ever, came through in the clutch.

To his (slight) credit he had Russ Grimm on the final 25 and Jacoby on his initial list of 30 (wanna bet Russ doesn't make his next cut?).

The selectors' intellectual dishonesty is incredibly irksome to me. When stats don't justify their personal bias, they site teamwork, sacrifice, etc. BUT, someone with good stats who exhibits those same characteristics (a la' Art)will be cited for not having GREAT stats. Take the description for Aikman and substitute Monk's name - looks the same to me EXCEPT Monk had pretty damn good stats. Also - "Went long, went short, possession receiver, downfield threat when he had to be." Huh?! Again, sounds like Art to me. Strange how those getting the benefit of the doubt are fellow media personalities.

What hypocrisy.


Here is the whole article: [url]http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/writers/dr_z/11/02/hof.cutdown/index.html[/url]

Re: And yet, Art still doesn't qualify?
 

When you see something like "but I used to root so hard for the Niners in those days" it really removes all thought of impartiality

Re: And yet, Art still doesn't qualify?
 

mi irvin over a monk is a joke any way you want to look at it.if you look strictly at stats,monk wins by a mile.and if you look at rings,irvin has 3,same as monk.just goes to show,as much as the writers bitch and moan about hot dogging and showmanship,this is still what grabs their eye.

Re: And yet, Art still doesn't qualify?
 

Classic case of the "most popular kid in school" getting all the credit, girls, etc.. when there others just as deserving if not more. Monk will get his probably after he has left this world, probably after all of us have grown old and live in a nursing home.

Re: And yet, Art still doesn't qualify?
 

seriously! Monk has been passed up every year he's had a chance. For every year (except last year) he should have dominated; but no everyone hates the redskins.

Re: And yet, Art still doesn't qualify?
 

What a minute, he mentions Ellard for his long and dedicated service, and for Aikman he says stats don't matter and that he sacrificed for team goals... couldn't these same things be said for Monk??

Re: And yet, Art still doesn't qualify?
 

I am going to have to disagree with some of you here. MONK HAD FANTASTIC STATS!! Statiscally speaking when he retired he was the 2nd greatest WR ever(to Rice). Not only did he sacrifice for his team, make clutch plays, display great skills he also apparently suffers from the same thing that Dr. Ass excuses Irvin for! Just in the opposite way. He states that "but we're not supposed to let that influence our ballots" when referring to Irvin's outlandishness but totally whiffs on Monk simply because Monk was exactly the opposite. He was quiet and not exactly a media hound. But Dr. Ass apparently doesn't ignore personality when it comes to Monk. What a crock! Jesus this is one of the greatest travesties in sports today! It's not like we're talking about oh say a guy like Henry 'Frickin' Ellard who was a good receiver but certainly not great. It's Art Damn Monk! Ellard over Monk? WTF????????

Re: And yet, Art still doesn't qualify?
 

i donno about hatin on the redskins...ellard did play 4 solid seasons as a redskin toward the end of his career...his second best season can as a redskin...but i agree...lets be honest please...hes no art monk!!

Re: And yet, Art still doesn't qualify?
 

Not baggin' on my man Henry. I even like Ellard. He was a top quality WR and probably should get favorable consideration as a HOF nominee but he is nowhere even close to ARt Monk. I mean com'on!

Re: And yet, Art still doesn't qualify?
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]What a minute, he mentions Ellard for his long and dedicated service, and for Aikman he says stats don't matter and that he sacrificed for team goals... couldn't these same things be said for Monk??[/QUOTE]
No kidding. I really don't get it. Did Monk get drunk and piss on the hall of fame or somthing? There is no way he shouldn't be in there.

Re: And yet, Art still doesn't qualify?
 

:party-smi How bout we throw in arrest records.......SNIFF....SNIFF:banghead:

Re: And yet, Art still doesn't qualify?
 

The whole Art Monk thing is just baffling...the guy held the all time NFL receptions record for f-ks sake. End of story...

Re: And yet, Art still doesn't qualify?
 

Monk not is the HOF is a travesty. Don't look for it to happen til Skins with Gibbs win a playoff game and are the media buzz. He'll be a shoe in.

Re: And yet, Art still doesn't qualify?
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]What a minute, he mentions Ellard for his long and dedicated service, and for Aikman he says stats don't matter and that he sacrificed for team goals... couldn't these same things be said for Monk??[/QUOTE]

Absolutely agree. If you look up "Wide Reciever epitomized by long and dedicated service who was always willing to sacrifice for team goals" in the Football dictionary.....you'd have to see Art Monk's picture there.

Monk not being in the hall (and guys like Stallworth and Swan being there and Irvin being considered) is an absolute crime. And I really don't understand how this has happened. Even here in Philly, I have NEVER spoken with a single Eagles Fan (as unreasonable as they usually are) who has not been absolutely apalled by the fact that Art Monk is not in the Hall of Fame. If even rival Eagles fans get it, how can the voters be so out of touch?

Re: And yet, Art still doesn't qualify?
 

Maybe it's time that those whos cast the ballots change, after all it's for the fans. too many times i've tears falling because so and so wouldn't be nice and submit to the media's game.what says these guys are more qualified? college degree doesn't say anything to me.it's sick and has nothing to do with the game but is someone's power play.to me, he is a Hall of Famer.the voters are just flamers.

Re: And yet, Art still doesn't qualify?
 

If Monk was on TV and made an A$$ of himself every week he would probably get in first ballot.
Monk should be in.
BUt at least Dr Z show who he votes for. A lot of the others never say, and the Dr also has a healthy respect for the Olinemen and Dlinemen.

If Dr Z thinks Ellard ahead of Monk okay, but then that begs the question - who the hell are the other guys voting for!?!?!

Re: And yet, Art still doesn't qualify?
 

[QUOTE=5RINGS]If Dr Z thinks Ellard ahead of Monk okay, but then that begs the question - who the hell are the other guys voting for!?!?![/QUOTE]

I agree he can prefer anyone he wants, and yes he does give reasons - but the bottom line (which he will never admit) is that it comes down to players he likes. Once he likes you, you get his vote and he then justifies it either through stats or "un"-stats (Ellard's long years of service). But his justifications are simply not consistent. He doesn't like Monk - and no stats or arguments that Monk sacrificed for the team, made clutch catches, wasn't showy but quietly proficient, or had long years of service etc. will change his mind - Even though all of those are reasons he gives for voting others in who don't have Monk's stats. I would like to see him admit his f***ing hypocrisy, but he will never do it.

More Z quotes:
From a 1999 Article ([url]http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/your_turn/chat_channel/news/1999/08/05/chatreel_hof_drz/[/url])
"If you want the '80s there's Art Monk, but I wouldn't vote for him because he made a living on eight-yard hooks."

"I've always been very much in Lynn Swann's corner. At the selection committee meetings the argument against him was that he didn't have the numbers. My argument is that I'll take quality over quantity. He saved his best for the biggest moments."

"Why isn't Bullet Bob Hayes a Hall of Famer?
Dr. Z: Not enough catches, too many other great athletes on that team, the drug stuff puts off some people."


From 2005 ([url]http://redskins.scout.com/2/350044.html):[/url]
"SI.COM: How about Art Monk?
Dr. Z: Monk was hurt by Michael Irvin being eligible this year. It's done alphabetically, and Irvin was presented before Monk. I think that really hurt him."

Also from 2005 ([url]http://www.basketballdraft.com/2004/writers/dr_z/07/21/05.hof/):[/url]
"Art Monk is another four-timer. A great possession receiver. Caught a lot of balls in Joe Gibbs' system. Every time I mention that I didn't vote for him because I simply felt that other people were more deserving than a guy who caught 900 eight-yard hooks[.]"

Re: And yet, Art still doesn't qualify?
 

Michael Irvin and any other of today's prima donna receivers owe a great deal of their success to Art Monk. Maybe Art didn't make a broadway production over every first down he caught in a tight game but he was one of the pioneering "go to" receivers. Without guys like Monk, there wouldn't even be any room for Irvin and Owens because all they would be doing is blocking and catching an occasional pass. Irvin over Monk in the HOF is unheard of in any other sport. You need to give props to the people who moved the game forward and Monk is one of those players.

Re: And yet, Art still doesn't qualify?
 

I cannot accurately explain in words how sick it makes me to think Monk is so disrespected. I must keep posting about it just to take the edge off of it a little. Just sickening. Totally sickening. I feel so bad for the guy. He deserves this as much as anyone deserves anything in sports.

Re: And yet, Art still doesn't qualify?
 

Art Monk Carrer Stats

16 year carrer- 950 rec 12721 yards 68 TDS

Irvins Stats

12 year carrer 750 rec 11904 yards 65 TDS

I know stats aren't everything they take into account for the HOF but i believe Monk won a Super Bowl. Also Monks stats a little higher due to playing four more years. but i subtracted monks rec by irvins and if you average it out monk averaged 47 catches over the last four years