Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Hall of Fame - Class of 2008 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Norseman
- Start date
it absolutely is the record. that's what you and koya and others have been expressing throughout this entire discussion.if Monk did not hold the all-time career receptions record at one point, would he still be a definite HOF in your opinion?Not sure why you can't understand that it's not just the record. It's the fact that he held multiple significant receiving records and won three Super Bowls and was one of the best at his position in the entire league. Name another player at any position in the history of the league that this applies to that isn't considered a legitimate Hall of Famer.
as for the records, the significance of a couple of them is very subjective.
as for him winning 3 super bowls, didn't Gary Clark do the same? Clark was clearly the better WR on those teams and the only thing that gives Monk the edge over him is the receptions record and the fact he played for a longer time.
dgreen
Footballguy
If he kept playing and was challening Marino's stats, it likely means he was playing VERY well.For some reason, you've switched from pass yards to pass completions.
I don't understand your point here.when I say a player is a lock, that means I am 100% certain that player will be in the HOF someday. it may happen in their first year of eligibility or it may not, but it will absolutely happen eventually.
when I say a player is a borderline candidate, that means I am not sure whether the player will ever make it in or not. They could get in, or they could be kept out. Could go either way depending on the voters in the room, the persuasiveness of the person presenting the player, or simply the overall public perception regarding the player.
a player can be a lock HOFer and still not get in on their first year of eligibility.
Last edited by a moderator:
dgreen
Footballguy
Clark was not on the first SB winning team in 1982 nor the SB losing team in 1983. He arrived in 1985.
b/c it was brought up that completions was a much better comparison for Monk's receptions record, and I agree with that.as Testaverde and Bledsoe have proven, where you rank in terms of career completions is not a very good indicator of how you rank among the greatest QBs of all time.
Last edited by a moderator:
my bad then. he was still a much more dominant WR when they played together, IMO. I understand they filled different roles and all, but when I watched those teams Clark was the one I remember teams having to worry about hurting them.anyway, I've said several times, this Monk argument has been done to death. I'm ready to drop it if everyone else arguing with me in here is as well. I wouldn't put him in if it were up to me, but it's not like he's the worst guy to ever make it in and it's not that big of a deal. If anything, I hope it clears the way for Andre Reed to make it in at some point.
Last edited by a moderator:
Despyzer
Lousy Attention Whore
Once again, we only continue to bring it up because you continue to ignore it when you compare him to guys like Gary Clark.
dgreen
Footballguy
You know, I was thinking today about the whole "all Monk did was catch 800 10-yard button hooks" phrase we always hear. How in the world was Monk able to do that? I mean, if there's this guy, and all he can do is run button hooks, how does even a halfway decent NFL CB continue to allow him to do that?
Despyzer
Lousy Attention Whore
I think the outrage displayed at his being overlooked is just as significant as the fact that he was passed over.
lol. I just remember Clark being better than Monk. that's all.the only reason you're rolling your eyes is because Clark played 5 fewer seasons so his career numbers pale in comparison.Clark had 48 TDs over a 6-year stretch from 1986 to 1991. During the same 6-year span when Monk was arguably in the prime of his career, he put up 36.Once again, we only continue to bring it up because you continue to ignore it when you compare him to guys like Gary Clark.
Despyzer
Lousy Attention Whore
No, I'm only rolling my eyes because I watched them both play quite a bit. Clark was a huge beneficiary of DBs having to give Monk so much attention. If the single-season reception record and the consecutive games with a catch record were so simple to attain, why didn't Clark hold either of them when he was the "better" WR in the exact same system?
Despyzer
Lousy Attention Whore
You do realize you are talking about the difference of two TDs per season (or 0.125 TDs per game), right? This is what you are basing your argument of Clark being so much better than Monk on? I'm thinking you should back out of this argument like you tried to do earlier.
Last edited by a moderator:
b/c he was too busy scoring TDs?
Despyzer
Lousy Attention Whore
Yes, exactly 0.125 more per game. I can see how that had him distracted.
ok.if Monk is so awesome, why did the writers vote him down for 7 straight years?
Despyzer
Lousy Attention Whore
And if he sucked so bad, why was there so much justifiable outrage every time they did?You follow up your 2-TDs-per-season argument by defending the institution that jumped at the chance to hand out jackets to Troy Aikman and Lynn Swan?
b/c he's a borderline candidate and people on both sides have a legit argument.
Sidewinder16
Footballguy
b/c becoming a finalist and reaching the top-15 doesn't mean a player is going to get in eventually. some players get in and some don't. whether someone is worthy or not is obviously subjective and a matter of opinion. the obvious HOF players get in right away...the borderline ones usually have to wait a while, if they ever get in at all. so, in a sense, the length of time a player has to wait to be inducted is related to the strength of their candidacy.personally, I don't see any reason to keep Carter out, and like most people, I am surprised he didn't make it this year. he'll get in at some point for sure though. Monk was more of a 50/50 guy that could have gone either way.
Last edited by a moderator:
What's wrong is that only five modern players are allowed to get in the HOF in any year.If there were no cap on inductees, and each player were judged individually on their merits (as in baseball), then Carter would probably be in.
5Rings
Lurker
at you putting Monk in Rice's and Harrison's category. The difference between Monk and Rice and Harrison is that Rice and Harrison were good teammates who were also dominant threats in the passing game. Coaches simply did not gameplan around Art Monk.
The guy was the third option on the Skin O. I think most non-Redskin fans see him for what he was: a good WR2 who played for 16 years. Maybe those are HOF credentials for some, but IMO he falls way short.The dude who called him a "benchmark WR"? 
for WR2s who could block? Hello, Ed McCaffery. John Taylor. Welcome to Canton?MarshallRob
Footballguy
LOL. I should have known. Ok, here's my final contribution to the Monk talk: a detailed list of Art Monk's and Gary Clark's respective contributions in Championship Games and Super Bowls. It sure looks like one guy was more clutch than the other. I didn't have play-by-play data for the conference finals, only the Super Bowls. ART MONK
1) 1983 NFC Title Game: WAS 24 SF 21
3/35/0
2) Super Bowl XVII, OAK 38 WAS 9
1/26/0
4th Quarter
Twelfth WAS Drive: OAK leading 35-9. 1st-and-10 at WAS 24. 26-yard catch. WAS punts 4 plays later.
3) 1986 NFC Title Game: NYG 17 WAS 0
8/126/0
Obviously none of Monk's catches led to any points. With his team down 10-0, Monk caught a 48-yard pass that set up a botched 51-yard FG try.
4) Super Bowl XXII: WAS 42 DEN 10
1/40/0
1st Quarter
Third WAS Drive: DEN leading 10-0. 3rd-and-16 at WAS 10. 40-yard catch. WAS punts 4 plays later.
5) 1991 NFC Title Game: WAS 41 DET 10
5/94/1
Monk caught a 21-yard TD to increase his team’s lead to 34-10. Earlier Monk had a 17-yard catch to lead off the drive that made it 17-10 in the 2d quarter.
6) Super Bowl XXVI: WAS 37 BUF 24
7/113/0
1st Quarter
Second WAS Drive: Game tied 0-0. 1st-and-10 at WAS 11. 12-yard catch. 1st-and-10 at WAS 23. 17-yard catch. 3rd-and-14 at WAS 48. 19-yard catch. 1st-and-10 at BUF 33. 31-yard catch. On third-and-goal from the two , Rypien’s TD pass to Monk reversed by replay official because Monk did not get both feet in bounds. WAS then botches FG attempt. Score remains 0-0.
2nd Quarter
Fifth WAS drive: WAS leading 3-0. 2nd-and-4 from BUF 29. 8-yard catch. WAS subsequently scores a TD to take a 10-0 lead.
3rd Quarter
Tenth WAS drive: 2nd-and-10 at WAS 30. 9-yard catch. Team punts two plays later.
Twelfth WAS drive: WAS leading 31-10. 2nd-and-20 at BUF 24. 17-yard catch. WAS scores on 25-yard FG to take a 34-10 lead.
GARY CLARK
1) 1986 NFC Title Game: NYG 17 WAS 0.
0/0/0
Clark's first and worst championship game performance. 0 catches. Trailing 10-0 in the 1st quarter, Clark dropped a perfect Jay Schroeder's third-down pass into the wind. It would have at least been a 35-yard reception.
2) 1987 NFC Title Game: WAS 17-MIN 10
3/57/1
On Washington's final drive with the score 10-10, Clark caught a 43-yarder from Doug Williams to put his team in scoring position. Clark then caught what proved to the winning TD on 3d-and-6 from the MIN 7. Clark improvised his pattern when he saw the planned corner route was covered.
3) Super Bowl XXII: WAS 42 DEN 10
3/55/1
2nd Quarter.
Sixth WAS drive: DEN leading 10-7. 3rd-and-1 at DEN 27. 27-yard TD catch. WAS takes 14-10 lead and never trailed again.
Seventh WAS drive. WAS leading 14-10. 1st-and-10 at WAS 26. 16-yard catch. Tim Smith scores a TD on the next play.
3rd Quarter
Eleventh WAS drive: WAS leading 35-10. 1st-and-10 at 50. 12-yard catch. Drive results in missed FG try.
4) 1991 NFC Title Game: WAS 41 DET 10
4/77/1
With his team leading 20-10 with 2:23 left in the third quarter, Clark caught a 45-yard TD to break the game open. On Washington's earlier 74-yard drive that gave them a 17-10 lead, Clark kept the drive alive with a 6-yard catch on 3d-and-5 and he later grabbed a 16-yarder on the drive.
5) Super Bowl XXVI: WAS 37 BUF 24
7/114/1
1st Quarter
First WAS drive: 0-0. 2nd-and-8 at WAS 22. 4-yard catch. WAS punts two plays later.
2nd Quarter
Fifth WAS drive: WAS leading 3-0. 1st-and-10 at WAS 49. 16-yard catch. Drive ends in WAS TD.
Sixth WAS drive: WAS leading 10-0. 3rd-and-9 and BUF 49. 34-yard catch. WAS scored a TD two plays later.
3rd Quarter
Twelfth WAS drive: WAS leading 24-10. 1st-and-10 at WAS 21. 6-yard catch. 3rd-and-4 at WAS 27. 10-yard catch. 2d-and-4 at WAS 43. 14-yard catch. 3rd-and-10 at BUF 30. 30-yard TD catch. WAS leads 31-10. Clark accounts for 60 yards and the score on the 79-yard game-clinching drive.
TOTALS
Monk
6 games
25/434/1
Clark
5 games
17/303/4
Road Warriors
Footballguy
I can see Monk getting in, but I think the characterization of him being borderline is spot on. What I find very surprising is that he got voted in on the same ballot that Carter did not. Really hard for me to see how that makes sense.
![[scooter]](/data/avatars/m/22/22287.jpg?1659477690){kind=avatar}
[scooter]
Footballguy
Carter didn't have legion of supporters singing his praises for 8 years.
Despyzer
Lousy Attention Whore
Recite for me the number of receiving records held and the number of Super Bowls won by McCaffrey, Taylor, and Clark. I'll be willing to listen to the arguments if they are equal to Monk's.
Iwannabeacowboybaby!
Footballguy
A Lock is someone that is way above the normal expectation of what you think a borderline type candidate would be.Cris Carter is definately borderline. I say that as a compliment, to be a borderline HOFer means you're pretty darn good. He's no lock.Sidewinder16 said:
Iwannabeacowboybaby!
Footballguy
Still with that said,,,,I'd agree with the statement. Just comparing the two individuals, Cris Carter isn't any better than Art Monk was. If you Tier'd those two wide receivers they'd be right next to each other.
dcgangstas
Footballguy
Not in the TD department they wouldn't.
encaitar
Footballguy
Or in the career receptions, or career yards, or number of All-Pros and Pro Bowl selections, or the number of 1000 yard seasons, but yeah other than that they'd be right next to each other.
Last edited by a moderator:
Despyzer
Lousy Attention Whore
Or Super Bowls won, or the number of receiving records held...
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
McCaffrey has three Super Bowl wins, just like Monk. And what records does Monk hold now? Records he once held don't mean squat, especially when they are as meaningless as the ones you keep bringing up.And the fact that you are suggesting that Monk is more deserving of the HoF than Carter is just laughable. Super Bowl wins by a wide receiver and records he hasn't held in 20 years are not that important, ya know. I guess, according to you, Troy Brown is a possible HoF candidate because he has three Super Bowl rings with the Patriots, right? And guess this, he is probably more deserving than Carter, too, right?
Last edited by a moderator:
dgreen
Footballguy
FWIW, I believe Monk drew a big PI penalty to set up the game winning FG. Washington led 21-0 in that game and Montana and the 49ers roared back in the 4th quarter to tie the game. Then Moseley kicked the winning FG.
Despyzer
Lousy Attention Whore
Are you joking or just blinded by your own opinion? Do we kick people out of Canton just because their records have been broken? The fact that he held the records of people that are enshrined shows how significant he was. You really think career receptions and single season receptions are meaningless records? This must be fishing.
Bringing up a guy who matches one of the criteria is simple. Name me another receiver (other than Rice) who has held multiple receiving records, has multiple Super Bowls, and was considered one of the very best at his position? Until you can do that, stop trotting out stupid examples like Troy Brown.
buster c
Footballguy
this confirms my suspicions that most of the anti-Monk crowd likely are too young to have seen him play and are simply comparing receiving stats of players from different eras. anyone who saw the Redskin teams of the 80's - that would be the decade where Monk was the All-Decade WR - simply know that Clark/Sanders/Brown were able to be as good as they were because Monk was on the other side of the line of scrimmage.By and large, the Redskins were a running team throughout Monk's career. Take a look at the boxscore from the Miami Super Bowl. I'd bet they had a 2:1 run/pass ratio. So it is even more of an accomplishment for Monk to have been such a dominant force on a runnning team.
encaitar
Footballguy
Anyone that says Monk isn't worthy of being in is being ridiculous, because he deserves it. The point most people are making is that choosing him over Cris Carter is just terrible. It's almost as poor as choosing Irvin over Monk last year.
Dexter Manley
Footballguy
If Carter is such a great player, why was he outright cut by the Eagles in the preseason of his fourth year? It's not like that Eagles team was loaded at wr.
Is there a single other skill player, or any player for that matter, in the HOF that was outright cut by their team in his 3rd, 4th, or 5th season? Just curious......
Is there a single other skill player, or any player for that matter, in the HOF that was outright cut by their team in his 3rd, 4th, or 5th season? Just curious......
IM666
Footballguy
I *heart* Wikipedia:
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
I think you are missing my point. Holding those two records temporarily and being the 3rd or 4th best offensive player on three Super Bowl winning teams does not make someone a no-brainer HoFer, especially when that someone's overall numbers aren't that impressive (unless scoring 68 TDs in 15 seasons impresses you).
Hey, you are the one who seems to think that being a part of three Super Bowl winning teams is so important for a wide receiver; I am just discussing things on your level. And why is Troy Brown (who was an All-Pro once, so you could throw that in to argue that he was once considered one of the best at his position) a stupid example? I could say that his efforts as a defensive back were crucial to New England's 2004 championship. Has Monk ever been an important contributor on defense? I dare say that Brown's efforts as a DB in 2004 were more impressive than Monk's ability to catch a single pass in however many consecutive games. Hypothetically speaking, of course.
Also, do you think Terrell Davis is a Hall of Famer? If not, why not? He was the best or the second best player at his position for at least three years, was a two-time Super Bowl winner, a two-time MVP (once in the regular season and once in the Super Bowl), a four-time All-Pro, has the record for most consecutive 100-yard games in the playoffs, and is tied for the record for most rushing TDs in a Super Bowl . Since multiple records and Super Bowls are so important to you, Davis should be in the Hall, right?
Amen.
Aren't you the guy who, earlier in this thread, said that Carter was never the best WR on his team? Yes, I think you are.
Last edited by a moderator:
dgreen
Footballguy
Dexter Manley
Footballguy
Yea, I read that. But that still doesn't answer my question. Many players, like Brett Farve for example, have struggled with drug addiction and their teams didn't cut them. Don't get me wrong, I think Carter deserves to be in the HOF, and I would have had no problem if him and Monk both got in this year. But there is no reasonable argument that justifies Carter getting in before Monk.
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
Why are you laughing? In '91, Rypien and Gary Clark were their two best offensive players. Monk was probably the 3rd best. In '87, Monk had a total of 483 receiving yards, so I don't see how you could argue that he was one of their two best players. In '83, the Redskins three best offensive players were undoubtedly Theismann (29 TD passes), John Riggins (1,347 rushing yards), and Charlie Brown (1,225 receiving yards). Monk had 746 yards that year. In fact, if you take the three Washington teams that won the Super Bowls, in those three years, Monk's numbers were a combined 156/2,278/19. That means his average in those three seasons was 52/759/6. Hardly overwhelming or even note-worthy. But oh that's right, Monk's numbers don't tell the whole story, except when it comes to records he no longer holds, right?And let's put the receptions in a season record in perspective. It is not like that was some legendary record that took forever for someone to break. Monk's mark of 106 catches in a season is now 24th all-time. 24th! So, to me, him holding a record that has been obliterated many times over since is pretty meaningless.
Last edited by a moderator:
Dexter Manley
Footballguy
I never said that silly. People were bewildered by the fact that Carter wasn't selected to the HOF, and I merely parroted the standard lines that the anti-Monkinites have been throwing out there for years. I'm assuming the fish hacks that make up the HOF committee probably threw some of those one-liners out there during the Carter discussion.Carter was obviously the best wr on the Vikings for the middle part of his career with the team.I think you are missing my point. Holding those two records temporarily and being the 3rd or 4th best offensive player on three Super Bowl winning teams does not make someone a no-brainer HoFer, especially when that someone's overall numbers aren't that impressive (unless scoring 68 TDs in 15 seasons impresses you).Hey, you are the one who seems to think that being a part of three Super Bowl winning teams is so important for a wide receiver; I am just discussing things on your level. And why is Troy Brown (who was an All-Pro once, so you could throw that in to argue that he was once considered one of the best at his position) a stupid example? I could say that his efforts as a defensive back were crucial to New England's 2004 championship. Has Monk ever been an important contributor on defense? I dare say that Brown's efforts as a DB in 2004 were more impressive than Monk's ability to catch a single pass in however many consecutive games. Hypothetically speaking, of course.Amen.Aren't you the guy who, earlier in this thread, said that Carter was never the best WR on his team? Yes, I think you are.
Despyzer
Lousy Attention Whore
Somehow you still aren't getting it. Winning those Super Bowls was only a component of what he did. He also set records. He was also considered not only the best for a single year, but one of the best for an entire decade. People steal 50 bases nearly every year, so naming me a guy who has done it isn't that impressive. Someone hits 50 homeruns just about every year, so finding me another guy who has done it isn't difficult. But if a guy does both in one season, that's rarified air and worthy of accolades.Once again, let's name all the players in the history of the league that have set mutliple records, won multiple Super Bowls, and were considered one of the very best at their position. THAT'S who you can compare Monk to.
is this shtick?Cris Carter:8 consecutive Pro Bowls4 times All Pro1101 receptions (2nd all time behind only Jerry Rice)13899 receiving yards (6th all time)130 receiving TDs (2nd all time behind only Jerry Rice)8 seasons ranked among the league's top-10 in receptions (including back-to-back 122 reception seasons in 1994/1995 while Monk was still in the NFL)5 seasons ranked among the league's top-10 in receiving yards8 seasons ranked among the league's top-10 in receiving TDs (including 3 seasons as #1)
Despyzer
Lousy Attention Whore
Rypien may have been more important due to the position he played, but he was NOT better. Clark benefitted from the attention that DBs were giving to Clark. If Clark was so much better, why didn't he set any records in that exact same system?
The strike-shortened year? You really stretch your credibility when you try to twist the facts like this.
Riggins was unquestionably the force on that team. Theisman was the QB, but he wasn't a better player. Brown had a great year, but he wasn't a better player either. He also was a beneficiary of the attention Monk was receiving.
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
I already mentioned Terrell Davis, and not surprisingly, you ignored that example.
Maybe because Clark was much better after the catch than Monk was, so he could turn a short pass into a long gain, meaning he could get just as many yards without catching as many passes. In '91, Monk caught one more pass than Clark, but Clark had 291 more yards. That is pretty significant. And your "Clark benefited from the attention Monk got" argument doesn't wash, as defenses are generally going to fear a deep threat much more than a possession receiver. What is next? You gonna tell me that Randy Moss benefited from the attention Wes Welker got this year?
Gary Clark had over 1,000 yards that same season, and Monk finished 4th on his team in receiving yards. And the strike only eliminated one game. Looks like you are ignoring facts again.
That last statement is bullocks. Monk wasn't that much of a threat at that point in his career (he averaged 713 yards a season prior to '83). And Brown had been an All-Pro in '82, not Monk, so if anything, Monk should have been the one thriving off the attention an All-Pro like Brown would have gotten.
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
