Should T.O. be a first ballot Hall of Famer?

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Over Rice? I love Monk but let's come back down to reality.

I think I agree with you. If given the choice and I can't have both..... I'll take Rice over Monk everyday and twice on Sunday. Monks my boy but Rice is to WR's what D.Green (Skins) was to CB's.

[SFREDSKIN]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Over Rice? I love Monk but let's come back down to reality.

Who did Monk have for QB's and who did Rice have? Monk's #'s with 1 good QB and 2 average QB are impressive, what would he have done with back to back HOF QB's. Don't under estimate Monk.

[Leader In Sports]

Originally Posted by SFREDSKIN

Who did Monk have for QB's and who did Rice have? Monk's #'s with 1 good QB and 2 average QB are impressive, what would he have done with back to back HOF QB's. Don't under estimate Monk.

Montana had success before Jerry Rice. Steve Young however would not be in the HOF without have the benefit of Rice's talent.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by SFREDSKIN

Who did Monk have for QB's and who did Rice have? Monk's #'s with 1 good QB and 2 average QB are impressive, what would he have done with back to back HOF QB's. Don't under estimate Monk.

Not underestimating him at all. I just don't put Monk in the class of Rice. I wouldn't put anyone in his class.

Monk was very good, Rice was great. Some even argue the single best football player to have played the game. Never heard anyone make that argument for Monk.

[sportscurmudgeon]

Originally Posted by SFREDSKIN

I second that and for that matter, I would take Monk over Rice any day.

You would take Art Monk over Jerry Rice any day?

Should you ever apply for a job as a scout or in a personnel department for any NFL team, be sure to erase completely and permanently that comment from the Internet. That sentence alone will prevent you from getting that job.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by sportscurmudgeon

You would take Art Monk over Jerry Rice any day?

Should you ever apply for a job as a scout or in a personnel department for any NFL team, be sure to erase completely and permanently that comment from the Internet. That sentence alone will prevent you from getting that job.

Maybe he could intern at the school of Vinny?

[freddyg12]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Maybe he could intern at the school of Vinny?

To bring this full circle; TO was drafted by Vinny!

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by SFREDSKIN

I second that and for that matter, I would take Monk over Rice any day.

SFREDSKIN your homerism is hilarious. As much as we all love Art Monk, he was simply not the wr Jerry Rice was. Rice was a game breaker who could take a 5 yard slant all the way. Monk simply didn't have those kind of skills and very few did. Yeah having great QB's helped, but even if you put Monk in the old 49ers offense w/ Montana and Young, he's still not the TD producer that Rice was.

[dmek25]

and how does one "carry" ones self like a hall of famer? like LT? this shouldnt matter at all. hell, a murderer is in the hall

[freddyg12]

Originally Posted by dmek25

and how does one "carry" ones self like a hall of famer? like LT? this shouldnt matter at all. hell, a murderer is in the hall

Maybe I should restate that more simply; he never carried himself like a professional! One carries himself like a professional by doing their job, taking responsibility for their actions & considering the orgranization they work for & its goals.

Sure, there are plenty of guys that were likely less than stellar teammates that made the hall, but most of them kept their opinions & team biz out of the media.

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by dmek25

and how does one "carry" ones self like a hall of famer? like LT? this shouldnt matter at all. hell, a murderer is in the hall

And

[freddyg12]

Originally Posted by Monkeydad

And

smilin in his mug shot, great media presence!

[Leader In Sports]

Originally Posted by dmek25

and how does one "carry" ones self like a hall of famer? like LT? this shouldnt matter at all. hell, a murderer is in the hall

While LT was a slimeball off the field, he was a real leader and contributor to his team.

[Monkeydad]

Yes, the numbers don't lie.

We've had some questionable characters get into the HOF, so that's not the issue. On the field, he was a beast. Teams (including us) game-planned around him and the only man I ever saw stop him in his prime was Sean Taylor. Owens actually looked intimidated against him, cutting routes short, not stretching to make catches...for good reason.

Even at age 37, he's still a physical specimen and I think he'll be back sooner or later. He's not the player he once was, but he had matured and can still help a team. I actually would not mind seeing him here IF we needed a vet WR but we don't, our WR depth chart looks promising.

He always played for teams I hated and at times, I could not stand him as a person, but I have grown to respect him as time has gone on, as a player and in recent years as a person. He never got into real trouble (legally), he was just a nuisance and joker.

If Michael Irvin got in, Owens should.

[freddyg12]

Originally Posted by Monkeydad

Yes, the numbers don't lie.

We've had some questionable characters get into the HOF, so that's not the issue. On the field, he was a beast. Teams (including us) game-planned around him and the only man I ever saw stop him in his prime was Sean Taylor. Owens actually looked intimidated against him, cutting routes short, not stretching to make catches...for good reason.

Even at age 37, he's still a physical specimen and I think he'll be back sooner or later. He's not the player he once was, but he had matured and can still help a team. I actually would not mind seeing him here IF we needed a vet WR but we don't, our WR depth chart looks promising.

He always played for teams I hated and at times, I could not stand him as a person, but I have grown to respect him as time has gone on, as a player and in recent years as a person. He never got into real trouble (legally), he was just a nuisance and joker.

If Michael Irvin got in, Owens should.

Again, I don't think the comparison is valid. Let's distinguish between off the field or what I would call personal issues, versus behavior that is related to job performance. I'm not even considering personal behavior in this debate, I think the hall has in recent past not considered that too much. Just in terms of performance related to your teams goals, Irvin was so much greater than TO.

Michael Irvin was a winner. Although he could be a pain for his qb & OC, it was never to the point that dallas wanted to get rid of him. In the end, teams couldn't count on TO. Skip Bayless called it best - TO = "TEam obliterator."