F... the HOF voters!!!!

[ncskinsfanec]

It's an absolute travesty that Monk has not been elected to the Hall of Fame before now. It's even more of an insult that Michael Irvin, of all people, gets in before he does. Monk was a better player on the field and has ten times more character than Irvin will ever have! I'd take the "Quiet Man" anyday before the so-called "playmaker!"

[ncskinsfanec]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

I think Irvin should be there, he just shouldn't have gotten in ahead of Monk. But the voters are looking at postseason too and that's where the difference lies.

Looking at the postseason? What on earth are you talking about? Monk was just as good as Irvin was in the postseason.

[ncskinsfanec]

Originally Posted by dmek25

does anyone have their career post season stats to compare? i cant believe there is that much difference. and i know monk was injured one year, and another missed the majority of another

Monk had 69 postseason catches and Irvin had 87, really not that huge of a disparity if you ask me. Also he had seven td catches to Irvin's eight.

[Warpath]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

I think Irvin should be there, he just shouldn't have gotten in ahead of Monk. But the voters are looking at postseason too and that's where the difference lies.

Pro Bowl appearances have alot to do with it to.

Monk 85, 86, 87: 3 Pro Bowls

Irvin 91, 92, 93, 94, 95: 5 Pro Bowls

[Pocket$ $traight]

Every one of them that voted Captain Crackpipe in over Monk shouldn't be allowed to write about football ever again. They obviously have no knowledge on the subject.

[dblanch66]

Originally Posted by Warpath

Pro Bowl appearances have alot to do with it to.

Monk 85, 86, 87: 3 Pro Bowls

Irvin 91, 92, 93, 94, 95: 5 Pro Bowls

well sure. Monk was at the end of his career. If both had been playing in their prime at the same time, Monk would have gone to more pro bowls. There was a lack of quality receivers when Irvin was going to pro bowls.

[AlvinWalton'sNeckBrace]

Pro Bowls aren't all of it...Riggins only went to 1...its just that guys like Riggins have signature plays (70 chip). Its still the most asinine explanation ever though, and if that's the deciding factor, why don't they call it the hall of plays?

[AlvinWalton'sNeckBrace]

Isn't he on the "All Decade Team" as well???? I'd like to see how many people on an all decade team aren't in the hall of fame

[FRPLG]

I dont get the whole 'defining catch' bullsh*t excuse. I can't name one defining catch from just about any reciever. Good WRs have LOTS OF GOOD CATCHES. Monk was no different. And just because he wasn't a media whore ass-clown doesn't mean that he wasn't a brilliant WR. The only reason one remembers signature plays is because the player plays to the hype enough to make it huge. It is perhaps the most ridiculous reasoning behind anything I have heard.

[AlvinWalton'sNeckBrace]

Did anyone read the Dr. Z article and notice anything weird...when he was talking about cornerbacks...he never mentioned DARRELL GREEN...in my mind, one of the greatest cornerback to play the game...I wonder if he's setting up a future snub...this guy clearly hates the skins

[ncskinsfanec]

Originally Posted by AlvinWalton'sNeckBrace

Did anyone read the Dr. Z article and notice anything weird...when he was talking about cornerbacks...he never mentioned DARRELL GREEN...in my mind, one of the greatest cornerback to play the game...I wonder if he's setting up a future snub...this guy clearly hates the skins

Him and Peter King both.

[FRPLG]

Ole petey supposedly jumped on the Monk bandwagon this year.

[ncskinsfanec]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

Ole petey supposedly jumped on the Monk bandwagon this year.

Oh really? That's good. I just know King has wrote some things I deem unflattering about the Skins and Joe Gibbs in the past. That said, I do enjoy his Monday morning columns.

[Luxorreb]

Monk not in before Irvin?

F*CKIN' RIDICULOUS!!!

WTF!?!?!?!?!

Irvin is a gun-HOE slappin cocaine enhancin' type of guy. Who had Aikman, #22 and lotsa great players helping him. Art Monk didn't use cocaine and retired with the most catches in a season EVER!

[#56fanatic]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

I dont get the whole 'defining catch' bullsh*t excuse. I can't name one defining catch from just about any reciever. Good WRs have LOTS OF GOOD CATCHES. Monk was no different. And just because he wasn't a media whore ass-clown doesn't mean that he wasn't a brilliant WR. The only reason one remembers signature plays is because the player plays to the hype enough to make it huge. It is perhaps the most ridiculous reasoning behind anything I have heard.

If it takes a signature catch to get voted into the hall of fame, then they are not looking at the individuals body of work as a player. Sports writers have way too much say in who is voted in or not. Former players and actual Hall of Fame members should have some say in who gets in. To say Monk doesn't have what it takes is an injustice to the members in the Hall of fame. He was the leading receiver in NFL history when he retired, let the league in receptions multiple years, single season receptions leader, still 6th all time in receptions. He was nothing but class. Crackpipe willie gets in on his 3rd attempt?? That is a shame to everyone in the hall of fame. How people can leave that room knowing the travisty of not having Monk in the Hall, is beyond me. Totally discrediting to those who votes against him.