And yet, Art still doesn't qualify?

[JoeRedskin]

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: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...own/index.html