Art Monk vs Michael Irvin

Just an update...as of 10:24am....Monk 68% Irvin 32%!!!!

Peter King is a former Giants beatwriter who would love nothing better than to keep as many Skins out of the Hall as he can. Now I understand that he is only one guy with one vote but I'm sure alot of those guys side with hime because he is such a respected figure in journalism. I have been trying to understand his reasons for feeling that Art Monk is not "deserving" of a HOF nod and I don't think I ever will. He said that Monk not being THE guy in the WR unit and just a guy who played his role therefore helping the group succeed was correct. Why do I bring that up you may ask. Well a linebacker by the name of Carl Banks was described in the exact same way with Lawrence Taylor's name substituted for Gary Clarks yet Banks is "deserving" of a HOF vote ? What team did Mr.Banks play for ? The New York Giants of course. This writer cites FORMER GIANTS COACH Bill Parcells as saying the the Giants NEVER gameplanned for Monk yet were more worried about Clark and Sanders. So I guess that the teams that planned for Taylor instead of Banks didn't matter. He compares Monks numbers to Jerry Rice's when Monks prime wasn't during the same as Rice's was. The man epitomizes everything that people say is wrong with sports. Congradulate the guy who wins and is a dick about it, forget about the guy who wins the "right way" as long as he is a Redskin. Monk probably shafted him on an interview a long time ago and he is still salty about it. I have not been shy about my resentment towards Peter King and I won't do the be today. I'm sure he's a good guy at home, if he has children I'm sure he may be a good father. As a sportswriter/correspondent he stinks IMO. He lays at the feet of Parcells and Bill OverratedChieck. What they say is golden and that's it. He has Parcells in his top ten of guys who haven't made the hall yet, how long was he retired before he came back ? Let the fat bastard retire first. Irvin before Monk ? Come on now. I respect what Irvin did and he was definitely a baller, a pushoff artist, but still a baller. If it was such a travesty that he didn't get in then the same should be for a guy who had a great work ethic and did it "the right way". Fork Peter King, he knows alot he just denies the truth. He's a Redskin hater, I would probably be a Peter King fan if he came out and was honest saying, " Hell no I would never vote for Art Monk, he's a friggin Redskin for Christ's Sake !". If he did that I'd respect him, but giving bitchy response after bitchy response only helps my hatred grow for him. He's shitty on Inside the NFL, they should get rid of him and that fag Bob Costas. Keep Chris Carters sleepy hairy eyebrowed ass on there so he can give me my dose of Redskin hate every week. It's great when he gives reason after reason without any substanance for why the Redskins will lose every game.

Screw Peter King for helping keep Art Monk out of the Hall !




"This ain't WCW, this ain't Monday Night Raw, this ain't Smackdown ! Hell this ain't even the WWE, this my friends is E,C FUCKIN W !!!!

just voted 69-31 monk up

They both deserve to be in the HOF Monk stat wise accomplishments during his career now I've said this manny times yes the stats for Irvin 750 vs 940 of monk theres a huge difference but the thing is Irvin did that in 11 seasons (I'm not counting his last season when he got injured in the 4th game never to return) and specially since he rack the mayority of his stats in 8 years (662) he was a 5 time pro bowler and all this was done in a run oriented team that often lead the oposition before halftime and they just gave it to emmitt to run the hole second half that's why the stats of Aikman aren't so high It just was a verry talented team as a hole.

During those 11 years Irving had an average of 67 catches per year (during his top 8 83 avrg).

Monk played 15 complete good season (taking away his last season also) was a 3 time pro bowler during those 15 season he average 62.4 catches per year) if we take his 8 best years that started in 1984 and lasted to 1991 he had during that time 605 catches an avrg of 76 catches per year.

He (monk) had 68 TDs in 15 seasons Irvin had 62 in 11 (65 total) monk never had more than 8 tds in a season Irvin had1 season of 9 and one of 10 (without counting the others). Again all this in a run oriented team, we are not talking of the Rams, Colts, Vikings wich all put huge numbers on offense specially on the air.

Irvin passed the 1000 yard mark 7 times, monk only did it 5 times in my book that's why people are saying Irving theserves to get in first..... don't get me wrong I believe Monk is a HOF also and should had be in there long ago.

But when you analyse both carriers you see the diference (taking away off the field issues).

They both deserve to be in the HOF Monk stat wise accomplishments during his career now I've said this manny times yes the stats for Irvin 750 vs 940 vs monk theres a huge difference but the thing is Irvin did that in 11 seasons (I'm not counting his last season when he got injured in the 4th game never to return) and specially he raked the mayority of his stats in 8 years (662) he was a 5 time pro bowler and all this was done in a run oriented team in a power team that often lead the oposition before halftime and they just gave it to emmith tu run the hole second half that why the stats of Aikman aren't so high It just was a verry talented team as a hole.

During those 11 years Irving had an average of 67 catches per year (during his top 8 83 avrg).

Monk played 15 complete good season (taking away his last season also) was a 3 time pro bowler during those 15 season he average 62.4 catches per year) if we take his 8 best years that started in 1984 and lasted to 1991 he had during that time 605 catches an avrg of 76 catches per year.

He (monk) had 68 TDs in 15 seasons Irvin had 62 in 11 (65 total) monk never had more than 8 tds in a season Irvin 1 season of 9 and reached double digits once. Again all thsi in a run oriented team, we are not talking of the Rams, Colts, Vikings wich all put huge numbers on offense specially on the air.

Irvin passed the 1000 yard mark 7 times, monk only did it 5 times in my book that's why people are saying Irving theserves to get in first..... don't get me wrong I believe Monk is a HOF also and should had be in there long ago.

But when you analyse both carriers you see the diference (taking away off the field issues).

For the love of God, please use punctuation marks!!! If I have to read another run-on sentence like that I might shoot myself.

Regarding your point though, the Redskins and Cowboys were both run oriented teams during the times when Monk and Irvin were playing. It's not like the Redskins were running the run and shoot.

And Irvin did post his numbers over fewer seasons, which is impressive (expecially on a TD per Season basis). But you can't totally discount Monk's longevity as a non-factor. Monk has to get credit for playing 36% longer than Irvin did (15 seasons compared to 11).

A strong case can be made for both for the hall. I think they're both top 15 type WRs of all-time. I'd put both in the hall of fame. And if I were ranking them, I'd probably put Monk 12th and Irvin 13th or so. They're very close in my mind - ignoring all biases associated with the Skins/Boys rivalry.

dboyz, dont forget that irvin was the man when he played at dallas. can you even name another reciever other than harper that played along side with irvin? monk played with clark, sanders,and clint didier, who in his time was probably the best recieving tight end of his era( pardons to jay novacek)

yeah Dmek25 monk played with other greta players that took catches from him that's why the point that PK has is tha the wasn't "the man" in was as irvin was in Dallas....

Irvin demanded double coverage all the time and still got the job done, monk didn't (always) and the other's took some attention away from him.... again I believe that Monk should be in the HOF and a long time ago I'm just trying to post why PK has been so addament of not giving credit to Monk where credit is do.

dboyz, dont forget that irvin was the man when he played at dallas. can you even name another reciever other than harper that played along side with irvin? monk played with clark, sanders,and clint didier, who in his time was probably the best recieving tight end of his era( pardons to jay novacek)very good point! monk caught 900+ balls while he had some real good wr's opposite him that were taking away from his production. peter king says that monk wasnt even the best reciever on his team. how could that be?? did any other wr have 900 rec for the skins ??he also gives the argument that the giants never game planned for monk. that is because they couldnt. if they did we would just run it down their throat, which we did anyway on our way to 3 rings.

hey peter king, the last time i checked 3 rings is more that 2, you jealous f*ck.

and this is my point to king. playing along side other good recievers and still setting the record for most catches ever. monk was the nfl's very first "big' possesion receiver. i guess king is still pissed the giants havent had a good wr since frank gifford left

i have no problem with irvin getting in, as long as the writers dont have an issue with his off the field problems. irvin was exactly what he said he was, a playmaker that got the benefit of a very good ground game. but no way he goes before monk. that would be a flat out joke