2007 Pro Football Hall of Fame Finalists

[dblanch66]

Us members here on the board that have a "4" beginning their age have probably watched Monk play more. I was 15 when Art was drafted. I watched his whole career and have NO doubts that he belongs in the Hall. And it isn't just Redskin fans that think he belongs. Watch the GREAT video that is floating around here. MOST ex-players and coaches think he belongs. But, as always, everyone has an opinion.
Just for shits and giggles, take a look at some of the receivers currently in the Hall and then tell me Art doesn't belong.
Dallas Sucks!
Go Skins, '07 -'08

[Hog1]

Good point just brought out on Redskins lunch. Why are there no Hogs in the HOF? Best O-line ever? Who does not know them? How can that be???Grimm might change that, but?????????????
#1313

[Monkeydad]

1. Monk
2. Matthews
3. Tagliabue
4. Grimm
5. Thurm Thomas

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by dblanch66

Us members here on the board that have a "4" beginning their age have probably watched Monk play more. I was 15 when Art was drafted. I watched his whole career and have NO doubts that he belongs in the Hall. And it isn't just Redskin fans that think he belongs. Watch the GREAT video that is floating around here. MOST ex-players and coaches think he belongs. But, as always, everyone has an opinion.
Just for shits and giggles, take a look at some of the receivers currently in the Hall and then tell me Art doesn't belong.
Dallas Sucks!
Go Skins, '07 -'08

Well, I dont have a '4' in front my age, but I'm close enough Yes, the Monk era was something to see and behold. The one thing that really sticks out to me about his career, is that he was very graceful for a big guy. And he was money in the clutch and over the middle.

I was actually convinced, at the time, he would have been a first ballot vote.

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

Former Redskin Andre Reed!

Ha, I didn't even remember that we had him. After I looked up his stats for 2000 and saw he had an incredible 10 receptions for us...I remembered.

[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.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Hog1

Good point just brought out on Redskins lunch. Why are there no Hogs in the HOF? Best O-line ever? Who does not know them? How can that be???Grimm might change that, but?????????????
#1313

I've always wondered that too. I guess the only reason I can think of is if you vote in, you've got to vote them all in (plus Lachey...and maybe even McKenzie) but the NFL is not about to vote in 7 linemen (LINEMEN!) from the Redskins

[hooskins]

I swear to god if they are gonna put in that crackhead Irvin in before Monk I am gonna go crazy.

[dblanch66]

That 3rd down catch against Denver in the Super Bowl was the reason the Skins won. Sure, the 2nd quarter was huge, but if Monk doesn't make a play on that ball on like...3rd and 17 from the Redskin 11 yard line, we punt and Denver has the ball AND momentum. Biggest game turning play. It's a case of 'out of sight, out of mind'. If he were playing today, he'd STILL be one of the top receivers in the league. Name ONE receiver better than Monk that is playing today. Don't say Harrison, 'cause he isn't 'better'.

[BigSKINBauer]

ESPN.com: SPORTSNATION - SportsNation Trivia

A nice little ballot for fans



I can't believe one of the main points people against monk use is that only skin fans think he should be in. He has the most votes of the 17

[Gmanc711]

Honestly.....


If Monk dosent get in this year, I dont know if he ever gets in. This is a very weak class.

[ArtMonkDrillz]

Originally Posted by BigSKINBauer

ESPN.com: SPORTSNATION - SportsNation Trivia

A nice little ballot for fans



I can't believe one of the main points people against monk use is that only skin fans think he should be in. He has the most votes of the 17

Well, we're part of a big fan base.
J/K

That arguement is complete BS, because if you look back at the telecasts from old games you constantly hear the announcers saying things like "future hall of famer Art Monk," and whatnot.

[gibbsisgod]

Originally Posted by Gmanc711

Honestly.....


If Monk dosent get in this year, I dont know if he ever gets in. This is a very weak class.

Sadly, I believe that people will point to the "weak class of '07" as the only reason Monk ever got in in the first place, and I think thats disgusting.

[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.