2007 Pro Football Hall of Fame Finalists

[jsarno]

1- Monk
2- Grimm
3- Dent
4- Matthews
5- Reed
6- D. Thomas
7- T. Thomas

Grimm might be the only one not as deserving, but of course I gave him the heart pick. Take away Grimm, I'd still vote for all 6 of them.

Irish...why would you not vote for Monk? He was THE best receiver in NFL history when he retired.

[irish]

Originally Posted by jsarno

1- Monk
2- Grimm
3- Dent
4- Matthews
5- Reed
6- D. Thomas
7- T. Thomas

Grimm might be the only one not as deserving, but of course I gave him the heart pick. Take away Grimm, I'd still vote for all 6 of them.

Irish...why would you not vote for Monk? He was THE best receiver in NFL history when he retired.

I think when you look at his numbers now they just dont look like HOF numbers. I know he held those records when he retired but its obvious they were not good enough for induction back when he was 1st eligible and now these many years later they just dont make it. Someone mentioned Andre Reed having numbers better than Monk. Well IMO there is no way AR is a HOFer so if he isnt then there is no way Monk can go in. Like I said, he was a very good receiver but just not quite HOF material.

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by irish

I think when you look at his numbers now they just dont look like HOF numbers. I know he held those records when he retired but its obvious they were not good enough for induction back when he was 1st eligible and now these many years later they just dont make it. Someone mentioned Andre Reed having numbers better than Monk. Well IMO there is no way AR is a HOFer so if he isnt then there is no way Monk can go in. Like I said, he was a very good receiver but just not quite HOF material.

If you look at it from THAT standpoint, then there would hardly ever be anyone in the Hall of Fame. You can't compare today's numbers to those during Monks' time. You have to think of it from the stand point of what was considered great amongst WRs in the league back in the 80's and early 90's.

[irish]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

If you look at it from THAT standpoint, then there would hardly ever be anyone in the Hall of Fame. You can't compare today's numbers to those during Monks' time. You have to think of it from the stand point of what was considered great amongst WRs in the league back in the 80's and early 90's.

He retired in 1995 so he was eligible in 2000 and apparently his numbers were not deemed good enough then or anytime since, now its 2007 and they just dont seem HOF worthy anymore. I think thats part of the rationale for the 5 year wait, to see if a players numbers hold up and for whatever reason it appears that Monk's didnt.

[The Huddle]

Originally Posted by irish

He retired in 1995 so he was eligible in 2000 and apparently his numbers were not deemed good enough then or anytime since, now its 2007 and they just dont seem HOF worthy anymore. I think thats part of the rationale for the 5 year wait, to see if a players numbers hold up and for whatever reason it appears that Monk's didnt.

Numbers have nothing to do with the five year wait. They are viewed relative to the era the player competed in. Go check Lynn Swann's numbers if you don't believe me. Utterly pedestrian by todays standards.

When Monk set the single season reception mark with 106 in 1984, 100 catches in a season wasn't good, it was outrageous.

[dblanch66]

Originally Posted by The Huddle

Numbers have nothing to do with the five year wait. They are viewed relative to the era the player competed in. Go check Lynn Swann's numbers if you don't believe me. Utterly pedestrian by todays standards.

When Monk set the single season reception mark with 106 in 1984, 100 catches in a season wasn't good, it was outrageous.

So true. Again. Name one receiver playing today that is better than Monk. ONE. Not only that, how many receivers have broken the 100 catch mark????? More than once?

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by dblanch66

So true. Again. Name one receiver playing today that is better than Monk. ONE. Not only that, how many receivers have broken the 100 catch mark????? More than once?

Well I mean I love Monk. But there are some great receivers in the league today. And a few who've had more than two seasons of 100+ catches:

Marvin Harrison-115 in 1999, 102 in 2000, 109 in 2001, 143 in 2002

Rod Smith-100 in 2000, 113 in 2001

Randy Moss-106 in 2002, 111 in 2003

Incidentally-Randy Moss (2002) 106 receptions, 12.7 ypc, 7 TDs
Art Monk (1984) 106 receptions, 12.9 ypc, 7 TDs

[irish]

Originally Posted by The Huddle

Numbers have nothing to do with the five year wait. They are viewed relative to the era the player competed in. Go check Lynn Swann's numbers if you don't believe me. Utterly pedestrian by todays standards.

When Monk set the single season reception mark with 106 in 1984, 100 catches in a season wasn't good, it was outrageous.

You dont need to compare Swann's numbers to today's numbers because he got in in 2001 so one has to look at how they held up relative to 2001. Unfortunately for Monk this is 2007 and 6 years have gone by since 2001 for his numbers to fade even further. I'm not saying its right or fair but that's the way it is.