F... the HOF voters!!!!

[SkinEmAll]

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

Postseason stats:

Michael Irvin: 16 games, 87 catches, 1314 yards, 8 TDs

Art Monk: 15 games, 69 catches, 1062 yards, 7 TDs

But Monk also had 6 carries for 17 yards, whereas Irvin had 0 for 0....so ha!

Thank you very much TAFKAS!!

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by dmek25

i would really like to here the reasoning behind Irvin over Monk. they were alot alike in their games. and Monks stats are miles ahead of Irvin's

His stats AND his reputation...

This is a sick joke.

[12thMan]

I just posted this in another thread.
************************************************** ********

Mark Schlereth (sp) (former Skin) just totally ripped the voters on ESPN for not voting Art Monk in. He said he was personally dumbfounded and called the 39 voters "clowns".

He was so livid, he referred to Monk as James Arthur Monk,...hillarious! He said no wide receiver deserves to be in the Hall before Monk, Irvin included. I was suprised that he called out Irvin like that.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

I just posted this in another thread.
************************************************** ********

Mark Schlereth (sp) (former Skin) just totally ripped the voters on ESPN for not voting Art Monk in. He said he was personally dumbfounded and called the 39 voters "clowns".

He was so livid, he referred to Monk as James Arthur Monk,...hillarious! He said no wide receiver deserves to be in the Hall before Monk, Irvin included. I was suprised that he called out Irvin like that.

I saw it too. He called the voters a bunch of clowns which they are. You could really tell how mad Schlereth was. I don't think he called out Irvin becasue he said that he deserved to be there. He just believes, like the rest of us, that Monk should have gotten in before Irvin.

[jbcjr14]

Schlereth played along side of Monk. It doesn't surprise me at all he would go out on a "limb" and make this kind of statement. I would suspect we will see Joey T with a comment or two in the coming days as well.

[mheisig]

Absolutely ridiculous. At the same time, you got to wonder whether Monk deserves to be in a Hall of Fame run by clowns who voted Irvin in first. Monk's better than that - he deserves to be in a legitimate Hall of Fame, not this joke masquerading as an honor.

[LBrown43]

I am ****ing OUTRAGED.
Wearing my new Monk Jersey in protest all day.

[Skins fan 44]

WE could go to Canton and yell Monk got screwed during Irvin's induction.

Edit: but that would be really classless...wouldnt want to snoop to Philly's level.

[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!"

[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.

[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.

[#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.

[Monkeydad]

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.

Exactly...Lynn Swann and John Taylor (not HOF-worthy) are the only "defining catch" WRs I could think of. Dwight Clark at TE.

This is a lame excuse for denying a worthy player to the Hall in favor of a drug-addict piece of trash. This isn't even my Redskins/Cowboys bias kicking in, it's just a simple fact that someone like Irvin should NOT be representing the NFL's greatest players.