MONK is a SEMI-FINALIST!!! Let's hope he makes it!

[ZB9]

Quote: Originally Posted by SPTO

Ah ok then, I guess I jumped the gun. I get very defensive when it comes to my childhood heroes

lol i can understand that

i think we both agree that Reed is a HOFer...I just dont think that number of pro bowls is a good way of comparing players

btw, Rison was a pro bowl player but he was never in Reed's class talent wise imo. They are in two different "tiers". Reed is a HOFer imo, and Rison is a tier below that imo

[emalloy3]

Quote: Originally Posted by Freelance

No. I can't remember a single Monk catch. He didn't do anything transcendent. He wasn't the focus of defensive gameplans. I don't remember ever thinking "Oh, no, Art Monk is coming to town." And to say he didn't play with good quarterbacks is absurd. Joe Theismann and Mark Rypien? Are you kidding me? To me, he's another Al Toon or Mark Clayton.

Are you kidding me, so I guess being the first WR in NFL HISTORY to catch 100 passes is nothing. You compare him to Al Toon, so I guess when Al Toon retired he was the all time leader in a number of WR statistical categories just like Art Monk was. Your statement comparing him to Al toon and Mark Clayton makes you lose all creditbilty when talking about this subject.

[coogrfan]

Quote: Originally Posted by emalloy3

Are you kidding me, so I guess being the first WR in NFL HISTORY to catch 100 passes is nothing. You compare him to Al Toon, so I guess when Al Toon retired he was the all time leader in a number of WR statistical categories just like Art Monk was. Your statement comparing him to Al toon and Mark Clayton makes you lose all creditbilty when talking about this subject.

Greatness is not measured solely by numbers. Vinny Testaverde and Drew Bledsoe rank sixth and seventh respectively in career passing yards. Do you think either one of them will be in Canton someday?

Monk was a very good possession wr who had a long career, but he was not a great player.

[moose1619]

Quote: Originally Posted by platic

But isn't it true that Art Monk was never the best, the 2nd best, the 3rd best, or even the 4th best receiver in the NFL in any single year during his long career? He had good stats, and was always considered a very good WR... but he never came close to being the best at any one time. If fact, in many years he wasn't even the best receiver on his own team. I just don't think Art Monk deserves the Hall of Fame. Players enshrined in the Hall should be the ones who were considered among the best at some point in their career. Art Monk doesn't fit the criteria. He was just very good for a very long time. Merge Art Monk (extended longevity) and Terrell Davis (short-term greatness) together, and you have the perfect candidate. Individually, neither guy deserves to be in Canton. Even though it'd be heart warming to see nice guys like Art Monk and Terrell Davis rewarded with a place in Canton, I don't think it's right. You have to draw the line somewhere, or else the Pro Football Hall of Fame becomes cheap and meaningless. Like Baseball Hall of Fame, where everyone and their grandmother gets enshrined.

If stallworth and swann are in for the steelers than Monk deserves to be in. He has more TD's than both and only 1 SB short. Sometimes consistent longevity is greater than superstar status for a few years.

[SPTO]

I wish I could find that old Monk for the Hall video. I think I posted it a long time ago when it was first released on the net. It showed a lot of what made Monk so good. So what if he was a possession receiver? Are you going to automatically disqualify someone for being very good at his role for just about every year of his career?

[moose1619]

just did a quick check of stats:
Lynn Swann 336 reception 5,462 yards 51 td's
ranked in top 10 of receptions in a season twice in rec. yards 3 and rec td's 3 times

John Stallworth 537 receptions 8,723 yards, 63 TD's
ranked in top 10 of receptions 3 times, rec yards 4, rec TD 5

Art Monk 940 receptions 12,721 yards 63 TD's
ranked in top 10 of receptions 4 times, rec yards 3 times and TD's 1 time.

Monk made the Pro Bowl 3 times, Swann made it 3 times and Stallworth I believe 4.
StallWorth played 14 seasons, Swann played 9 seasons and Monk played 16 season.

playoff stats Monk 69 1067 and 7 td's in 15 games
swann 48 for 907 and 9 tds in 16 games
stallworth 57 for 1054 and 12td in 17 games

do the average over a season and you will see monk is better than both in receptions and yards per year. he averages about 1 ledd td per year over his career.

YOu can't argue stats.

[SPTO]

Quote: Originally Posted by moose1619

YOu can't argue stats.

Well to be fair to Swann and Stallworth it's a bit apples to oranges. You have to remember that the majority of Stallworth's career and all of Swann's career was in the '70s where defense reigned supreme. Add the fact that the first half of the Steelers dynasty they were a run first team that passed almost as a last resort. It was only after Bradshaw matured as a QB that they became more dynamic on offense and even then it was still a very defensive league.

It's like comparing modern day baseball pitchers to pitchers that pitched pre-1968 when the mound was lower. It's almost impossible to do a direct comparison.

That being said Stallworth is definitely a HOF'er and Swann is somewhat iffy but I think he deserves it. I don't know what's taking Canton so long to induct Drew Pearson though.

[moose1619]

Quote: Originally Posted by SPTO

Well to be fair to Swann and Stallworth it's a bit apples to oranges. You have to remember that the majority of Stallworth's career and all of Swann's career was in the '70s where defense reigned supreme. Add the fact that the first half of the Steelers dynasty they were a run first team that passed almost as a last resort. It was only after Bradshaw matured as a QB that they became more dynamic on offense and even then it was still a very defensive league. It's like comparing modern day baseball pitchers to pitchers that pitched pre-1968 when the mound was lower. It's almost impossible to do a direct comparison. That being said Stallworth is definitely a HOF'er and Swann is somewhat iffy but I think he deserves it. I don't know what's taking Canton so long to induct Drew Pearson though.

wow how you spin it, mid 70's and 80's football was not that different. Think about it Monk played behind a powerful running game with Riggins. He also played for 3 QB's and went to 3 SB with 3 really different teams in terms of players. Besides we are talking a difference of a decade. not a span of several different decades. Sounds like you are biased to me.