| RotoGuru Football Forum View the Forum Registry XML Get RSS Feed for this thread | Self-edit this thread |
|
| 0 |
Subject: ART gets Screwed again Posted by: artforthehall - [33125223] Sat, Feb 03, 2007, 23:31 I'll be the first to admitt that I am slightly biased. Michael "the PlayMaker" Irvin gets in with plenty of off-field problems. He is flashy and selfish, but I will admitt he was good. Lets compare the numbers Irvin 750 Rec 11,904 rec. yds 65 tds 3 superbowl wins many big plays Monk 940 Rec 12,721 rec yds. 68 tds 3 superbowl wins possesion WR, went across the middle They both played with a Hall a fame RB, but washington was more of run oriented offense. Irvine had the better QB, Monk was the slot WR, one season the skins had 3 WR's that had over 1000 yds. ball was passed around. Irvin had Harper and who else? Monk was 1st WR to crack the 900 receptions mark and retired as the NFL leader. Yes, the record was broken, but he had the record. Yes, Monk player longer than Irvine, but why should he be pentalized for that. 183 straight games with a receptions that is over 10 seasons. Monk was not the speed or deep threat. He came across the middle to make the catch. His numbers are similar to hall of famers Steve Largent and Charlie Joiner, but Monk still hasn't gotten in. I guess it doesn't pay to be a player that goes out and gets the job done and doesn't draw attention to himself on or off the field. Tell me where I am wrong. Tell me why Monk isn't in the HALL yet. I took some shots at Irvin, but I have not problems with him making the hall. | |||||||
| 1 | sarge33rd ID: 76442923 Sun, Feb 04, 2007, 14:36 | I cant begin to tell you where you're wrong...because I think you're dead right. | ||||||
| 2 | Seattle Zen ID: 46315247 Sun, Feb 04, 2007, 14:36 | No excuse. Art was a better receiver than Irvin. He should be in and I can't figure out why he is not. | ||||||
| 3 | Electroman ID: 44651412 Sun, Feb 04, 2007, 14:40 | Excuse my ignorance, but for how long has he been eligable? | ||||||
| 4 | Weykool Leader ID: 41750315 Sun, Feb 04, 2007, 15:07 | Without Monk it is nothing more than the Hall of Shame. | ||||||
| 5 | Toral ID: 52621719 Sun, Feb 04, 2007, 15:10 |
I need him to get in because he's blocking Andre Reed. Unless even Reed gets in before Monk. That would show some serious anti-Monk feeling. | ||||||
| 6 | Ref Donor ID: 539581218 Sun, Feb 04, 2007, 16:22 | I felt for sure that MOnk would get in this year with Irvin. | ||||||
| 7 | tastethewaste ID: 42017617 Sun, Feb 04, 2007, 22:30 | Didnt Monk bet on the Reds? | ||||||
| 8 | ARTFORTHEHALL ID: 58157421 Sun, Feb 04, 2007, 23:06 |
I believe Monk has been eligible for 4 years. I am unsure of the rules of how much longer he can be on the ballot. I thought this would be the year. | ||||||
| 9 | Ref Donor ID: 539581218 Mon, Feb 05, 2007, 00:20 | Tagliabue should have gotten in as well. | ||||||
| 10 | Tree ID: 43133321 Mon, Feb 05, 2007, 11:34 |
Irvin 750 Rec 11,904 rec. yds 65 tds 3 superbowl wins many big plays Monk 940 Rec 12,721 rec yds. 68 tds 3 superbowl wins possesion WR, went across the middle while i won't deny that Monk probably deserves to be in the HoF, it should be noted that Irvin blew Monk away as a player. Irvin's numbers average out to 62.5 catches, 992 yards, and 5.42 TDs a year. not to mention nearly 16 yards a catch. take out his first three seasons where he didn't do much, and his final season where he only played four games, and his numbers shoot WAY up. in his 12 seasons, he surpassed 1000 yards 7 times. in the seven seasons where he caught 65+ passes, he surpassed 1000 yards each time. Monk averaged 58.75 catches, 795 yards, and 4.25 TD catches a season, with 13.5 yards per catch. in 16 seasons, he surpassed 1000 yards just five times, and in his seven seasons where he caught 65+ passes, he went over 1000 times five times. Monk's numbers only surpass Irvin's because he played longer. Irvin's numbers are FAR superior (averaging nearly 200 more yards a season!?!? that's astonishing!) and while i'll give you that Monk's numbers are similar to Joiner's, Largent blows Monk out of the water - his numbers and Irvin's match up much more than Monk and his. no disrespect to Art Monk, who probably should make the Hall of Fame one day, but Michael Irvin was a far superiour player, and that is the main characteristic for NFL Hall of Fame induction. | ||||||
| 11 | Mattinglyinthehall ID: 49848118 Mon, Feb 05, 2007, 11:50 |
but Michael Irvin was a far superiour player As you are fond of saying, Tree, you're comparing apples to oranges. For most of his career, Art Monk was a possession receiver. He racked up the bulk of those yards fighting through traffic in the middle of the field. Those numbers are incredible for a possession receiver in his era. Monk could never have been as dangerous a post threat as Irvin. You'd be crazy to say with any confidence that Irvin would have shown the toughness, durability and longevity to do what Monk did. Of course, you think the NFL is fixed anyway, so who cares who gets into their HoF, right? | ||||||
| 12 | tastethewaste ID: 42017617 Mon, Feb 05, 2007, 16:45 | dont forget, 2 of monks seasons were strike shortened. He played all 9 games in 82 and 9 of 12 in 87. | ||||||
| 13 | Nerfherders ID: 501035289 Mon, Feb 05, 2007, 17:11 | I didnt think Irvin should have gotten in anyways, and I think Monk should. But the criteria for Pro football's HOF is much more lenient than baseball's. Dynasty team members have a greater shot at getting in than those that are not, despite the stats. If baseball's HOF voted like football's, expect to see Paul O'Neill and Tino Martinez in there. | ||||||
| 14 | Perm Dude ID: 5013158 Mon, Feb 05, 2007, 17:29 |
I can't for the life of me figure out where this "far superior" line comes from, except perhaps through real messaging of the numbers. With differing number of games/season, it doesn't make much sense to compare season numbers (unless it is to point out that both Monk and Irvin had one plus 100 reception season?). Let's first point out that Monk had 63 rushing attempts in his career, to 6 for Irvin. Monk played 224 games to 159 for Irvin. Unlike tree's description of this as something of a bad thing, the fact that Monk continued to be a possession receiver throughout his career is a testament to him as a player. But they were really two different kinds of players. You need the deep bomb on second and short? You toss it down the sideline to Irvin. You need a first down on third and seven? Monk across the middle for 12. (And if Irvin was in there, he was just a decoy to pull a defender or two away from the middle to free up the target receiver). Finally, one has to keep in mind the types of QBs we are talking about here. Joe Theisman and Mark Rypien weren't exactly bombers. | ||||||
| 15 | TB Sherpa ID: 031811922 Mon, Feb 05, 2007, 18:16 |
Great points, PD. I am guessing that people who want to dismiss Monk weren't really watching football in the early 80's. He deserves to be in. I'd like to see Andre Reed get in the Hall as well. If the Bills had managed to win just one of those four superbowls, I imagine he would have gotten his due. | ||||||
| 16 | Perm Dude ID: 5013158 Mon, Feb 05, 2007, 18:27 | BTW, I meant to add that Bruce Matthews is a very deserving selection--excellent pick, in fact. | ||||||
| 17 | Boxman ID: 211139621 Mon, Feb 05, 2007, 19:45 |
Art Monk's Career Numbers For the life of me I do not understand any argument against Art Monk getting into the Hall. I mean this seriously, the NFL HOF just cheapened itself greatly in my mind by not having Art Monk as a member. He was easily the best possession receiver of his day and he could be counted on to make the play. I know, he daggered my Bears more than a few times. I don't understand how the longevity of his career should be held against him either. Do we hold off on Cal Ripken because he played forever which helped him break Gehrig's record? In the NFL, career longevity should be considered a plus given the nature of the game. Especially in Monk's case because he went up the middle where knockout blows by MLBs are not uncommon. Michael Irvin's numbers could be helped that he had Troy Aikman passing to him for I believe his entire career. If I'm building an All Time Team or something along those lines, Art Monk makes my slot receiver position a lot easier than Michael Irvin makes my #1 receiver opening. | ||||||
| 18 | sarge33rd ID: 76442923 Mon, Feb 05, 2007, 20:13 |
Jerry Rice would get my Nr1 WR spot, with Monk my slot guy. Irvin, if he made the team, would be on the bench behind Rice and possibly even Largeant or Swann. IOW...Monk was IMHO, better at what he did, than Irvin was at what he did. | ||||||
| 19 | tastethewaste ID: 42017617 Mon, Feb 05, 2007, 20:19 | Swann was pretty overrated. Obviously anyone would take Rice 1. But I would take Irvin over Swann. | ||||||
| 20 | sarge33rd ID: 76442923 Mon, Feb 05, 2007, 20:38 | Swann was just so purty to watch...I'd have to have him on there somewhere. (Besides...I never much liked Michael "Wheres-my-coke" Irvin anymore than I like TO.) | ||||||
| 21 | TB Sherpa ID: 031811922 Mon, Feb 05, 2007, 21:08 | I think I would take Carter as my possession receiver. I want a burner paired with Rice and Carter so would maybe add Lance Alworth or Henry Ellard (who is also eligible for the HOF and didn't even make the semi-finalists cut) as my third guy. | ||||||
| 22 | Toral ID: 52621719 Mon, Feb 05, 2007, 21:21 |
The argument against Monk is summarized by the most knowledgeable football writer in the world, Paul Zimmerman:SI.com: Why didn't Art Monk get elected? Dr Z went on to say that he liked both Irvin and Reed better than Monk. -------------------------------------------------- Free advice for Art Monk: you need to get your teammamtyes talking you up, not just before the voting, but all the time, the way Aikman and Smith talked up Irvin, the way Kelly talked up Thomas. Otherwise you ain't going to make it. 100% seriously, if I was Monk I would secretly hire a PR firm, and coordinate a campaign of praise culminating at voting time. Oh and Art -- don't complain, bitch, whine, get caught with illegal drugs, or with 16-year-olds in the next few years. Until you get in. Then you can do what you wanjt. Toral | ||||||
| 23 | Toral ID: 52621719 Mon, Feb 05, 2007, 21:25 |
Interesting...Lance Alworth, in his early years is the last white burner that I can remember in the NFL. Largent was never a burner. Funny game...there's like 4 white receivers and 2 DBs in the league, and the liberal reporters write articles insinusting institutional racism.... Who was the last great white RB after Csonka? Open question, I don't know the answer.... Toral | ||||||
| 24 | tastethewaste ID: 42017617 Mon, Feb 05, 2007, 21:28 | hmmm, rob carpenter? | ||||||
| 25 | Perm Dude ID: 5013158 Mon, Feb 05, 2007, 22:20 |
I'm at a bit of a disadvantage, not knowing whether certain players are white or not. Does it matter? Toral, most sports reporters, "liberal" or not, write about race in terms of front office and head coaching jobs. | ||||||
| 26 | Nerfherders ID: 64532914 Tue, Feb 06, 2007, 01:14 | John Riggins was pretty good | ||||||
| 27 | TB Sherpa ID: 031811922 Tue, Feb 06, 2007, 01:52 |
Riggins was the first name that came to my mind too. It's not like there has been a lot of great white runners in the last 30 years. Toral, maybe Lofton as my 3rd WR. Forgot about him and he put up some great numbers. As a homer, I wouldn't mind having Tim Brown, Fred Biletnikoff, and Cliff Branch (not in HOF) as my starting trio. Hmm, more Raiders being left out of the hall you ask? At QB, I wouldn't mind having Jim Plunkett or Ken Stabler starting, neither in the HOF. On the defensive side, neither Tatum or Hayes are in the hall and they can be my starting corners. Other Raiders I would like to see get serious consideration: Ray Guy, Tom Flores, and Steve Wisniewski. | ||||||
| 28 | Tree ID: 43133321 Tue, Feb 06, 2007, 09:22 |
note - i never said Monk wasn't deserving of the HoF. in fact, twice i said he probably oughta be there. i'm just arguing that Irvin had better numbers (and if you really want to start throwing out seasons, such as Monk's strike-shortened ones, let's drop Irvin's first three), was a better player, and was more important to his team than Monk was. | ||||||
| 29 | TB Sherpa ID: 031811922 Tue, Feb 06, 2007, 09:56 |
Irvin didn't have better overall numbers, but he did have some better seasons. I don't know why you want to drop Irvin's first three seasons. Is it because he was never better than the fourth best receiving option until his 4th season? Irvin had a great short run from 91-95. He had two more solid seasons in 97 and 98. Sure, I think they are both deserving of the hall, but I think there are a few more deserving players who haven't made it yet. Heck, as a Cowboy's fan, what about Cliff Harris or Bob "Bullet Bob" Hayes? Hayes only has about 7,000 yards receiving, but that was a completely different era and his speed changed the game. | ||||||
| 30 | Tree ID: 43133321 Tue, Feb 06, 2007, 11:34 |
I don't know why you want to drop Irvin's first three seasons. so, do people around here read only partial posts, and not full posts? i pretty much said that if you want to start dropping seasons as someone suggested with Monk, you can start dropping them with Irvin too. as a Cowboys fan, i think every Cowboy starter should be in the HoF, but that's not the issue here. :o) | ||||||
| 31 | Seattle Zen ID: 49112418 Tue, Feb 06, 2007, 12:01 |
Bah, I'll take Jerry Rice, Chris Carter and Randy Moss and whomp any three wide outs y'all pick. Say what you want about Randy, but no one combined his speed and ability to catch the long ball, no one. As for the "Great White Hope", Tim Dwight was one of the fastest men to play football, but his inability to catch the ball has let the Fürer down and got him sent to the Eastern Front. | ||||||
| 32 | Nerfherders ID: 501035289 Tue, Feb 06, 2007, 12:18 | Wes Welker is the new Tim Dwight. And he can catch! | ||||||
| 33 | TB Sherpa ID: 031811922 Tue, Feb 06, 2007, 12:20 |
Nope, I read every post completely and didn't agree that Irvan's numbers were FAR superior to Monk's. I don't think they are better, let alone far superior. Plenty of discussion on it already, though. Both are deserving HOF'ers. What I don't understand is not wanting deserving players who have been waiting longer to get in ala Harris, Hayes or Monk. Zen, seeing how I already picked Rice and Carter, I really don't think the 3rd WR is going to matter that much. Insert a today star in Reggie Wayne, Torry Holt, Chad Johnson, Marvin Harrison, or a past star in Tim Brown, James Lofton, Henry Ellard, and on and on. If I could just get the talent from Moss without any of the baggage, that would be great but you have to take the baggage too. I'll pass on him and T.O. | ||||||
| 34 | Mattinglyinthehall ID: 49848118 Tue, Feb 06, 2007, 12:47 |
i pretty much said that if you want to start dropping seasons as someone suggested with Monk, you can start dropping them with Irvin too. You don't see the difference between dropping a strike shortened season and dropping a season in which a player simply had not yet achieved prominance? | ||||||
| 35 | Perm Dude ID: 4413668 Tue, Feb 06, 2007, 12:48 | You'd only do that if you were obsessed with per-season stats. | ||||||
| 36 | The Beezer Leader ID: 191202817 Tue, Feb 06, 2007, 12:52 |
Rice + Don Hutson + Biletnikoff would be a phenomenal threesome and could probably even co-exist. I guess I'm REALLY in the minority then, because I don't think Irvin nor Monk are Hall-worthy (and that's coming from a Dallas fan). I think in the current era, too many WRs have already gotten in (I'm looking at you, John Stallworth). Meanwhile, great OLs and defensive players get passed over all the time. This year actually made better strides to getting some of that fixed than years past. They need to fix that inequity before they start throwing more skill position players into the Hall. | ||||||
| 37 | rfs ID: 450122417 Tue, Feb 06, 2007, 12:55 | I think Chris Carter and Tim Brown are eligible soon (next year). I know there isn't a "rule" about how many WR's get in, but I think those guys jump in line ahead of Art too. | ||||||
| 38 | C1-NRB ID: 24954318 Tue, Feb 06, 2007, 13:04 | Wasn't Irvin hurt most of his second and third seasons? | ||||||
| 39 | Seattle Zen ID: 49112418 Tue, Feb 06, 2007, 13:05 |
Rice + Don Hutson + Biletnikoff would be a phenomenal threesome and could probably even co-exist. Ridiculous. This isn't baseball where the game has barely changed. Rogers Hornsby would still be a great player today. On the other hand, Gerald Ford wouldn't last one week playing Michigan football today. The players are so much faster and stronger thanks to the advancements of weight training and intelligent conditioning regiments. The DB's Hudson and Biletnikoff faced back then had a small fraction of the speed and talent of today's backfields. Don Hudson and Fred B. would be fourth string wide outs on most teams. Biletnikoff particularly was very slow, he wouldn't get any separation today. | ||||||
| 40 | tastethewaste ID: 239161113 Tue, Feb 06, 2007, 13:28 | Id take Joiner, Chandler and Jefferson as my WRs and then put Kellen Winslow at TE. | ||||||
| 41 | The Beezer Leader ID: 191202817 Tue, Feb 06, 2007, 17:36 |
Don Hudson and Fred B. would be fourth string wide outs on most teams. Biletnikoff particularly was very slow, he wouldn't get any separation today. Not bad considering how old they are. :) Ridiculous is a rather strong word. Rather than get into the whole debate about comparing players from different eras, I'll concede to your argument. The problem for Monk next year is that Darrell Green is up for enshrinement, who should be a lock. Who's going to vote in two Redskins the same year? | ||||||
| 42 | Seattle Zen ID: 49112418 Tue, Feb 06, 2007, 18:06 |
And to honor your politeness, I will retract my 'ridiculous' and replace it with "I beg to differ" :) | ||||||
| 43 | tastethewaste ID: 42017617 Tue, Feb 06, 2007, 19:42 |
tree, post 30. You mentioned in your initial post, post 10 that if you drop Irvins first 3 seasons and his last, he was great. So i responded with Monk played 2 strike shortened seasons. Re read. Yours was not in response, it was unprovoked, | ||||||
| 44 | TB Sherpa ID: 031811922 Tue, Feb 06, 2007, 22:25 |
And to honor your politeness, I will retract my 'ridiculous' and replace it with "I beg to differ" That is awesome. | ||||||
| 45 | Vee ID: 8750149 Wed, Feb 07, 2007, 20:56 |
Greatest White Running Backs after Csonka: 1. John Riggins 2. Mike Alstott (I know FB, but it's close, right?) 3. Christian Okoye 4. One of those pesky Detmer brothers. One of them must have panned out in the NFL, right? I know it wasn't at QB so I'll take a stab at RB. 5. What about that dude in Carolina. Wow, this fell apart quick. | ||||||
| 46 | Athletics Guy ID: 250151417 Wed, Feb 07, 2007, 21:19 |
Christian Okoye? lol | ||||||
| 47 | TB Sherpa ID: 031811922 Thu, Feb 08, 2007, 02:21 |
You remember the The  | ||||||
| 48 | Boxman ID: 211139621 Thu, Feb 08, 2007, 06:16 | Tiki Barber is whiter than Christian Okoye. Can we count Tiki? | ||||||
| 49 | Tree ID: 29082512 Thu, Feb 08, 2007, 09:58 | if we're counting FBs, then surely Daryl Johnston is on the list... | ||||||
| 50 | barilko6 ID: 3912867 Thu, Feb 08, 2007, 10:00 | We can also add that LenDale guy from Tennesee... | ||||||
| 51 | Boxman ID: 47922511 Thu, Feb 08, 2007, 12:57 |
if we're counting FBs, then surely Daryl Johnston is on the list... Yes we can, but don't call me Shirley. :) | ||||||
| 52 | ¤ Mario LeMoose ¤ ID: 351512019 Tue, Feb 20, 2007, 21:03 |
Justice Prevails, If Just for an Instant, at ESPN Controversial Ex-Receiver Irvin Not Offered a Contract By Leonard Shapiro Special to washingtonpost.com Monday, February 19, 2007; 11:22 PM Maybe there is some justice in the world, after all. Two weeks after me-first Michael Irvin was named to the Pro Football Hall of Fame ahead of classy team-first Art Monk, despite Irvin's countless run-ins with the law during and after his showboating playing career had ended, ESPN actually did the right thing by not offering the former Cowboys receiver a new contract to appear on its various NFL segments. No official reason was given by ESPN. But after Irvin's blatantly reverse-racist comments suggesting that Cowboys quarterback Tony Romo's athletic prowess had to due with the fact that some of his relatives must have slept with slaves "back in the day," someone in the worldwide leader's executive suite decided that enough was enough. They finally realized they could easily live without a guy who potentially could cause the network even bigger problems down the line, doing or saying who knows what on or off the air. I was stunned at the time of Irvin's Romo comments that the network didn't immediately suspend him and at the very least send him away for sensitivity training. But in retrospect, this is a far better solution. I only wish my fellow Hall of Fame selectors had shown more wisdom in punching his ticket to Canton ahead of Monk, a man who never brought the slightest whiff of shame or scandal to his team, his town or his family at any time since he joined the Washington Redskins a quarter-century ago. (Link above will take you to the rest of the column.) | ||||||
| Rate this thread: | If you wish, you may rate this thread on scale of 1-5. Ratings should indicate how valuable or interesting you believe this thread would be to other users of this forum. A '5' means that this thread is a 'must read'. A '1' means that this is a complete waste of time. If you have previously rated this thread, rating it again will delete your previous rating. If you do not want to rate this thread, but want to see how others have rated it, then click the button without entering a rating, or else click here. | |||||||
| ||||||||
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?) | ||||||||