Steve Czban on Art Monk

What all these anti Monk guy's fail to bring up is how many HOF QB's did Monk have throwing him the ball? I do believe the answer is zero, so in closing I would love to see how well some of these WR's would have faired without a great QB like Aikmen, Bradshaw, Manning, Montana, and the list goes on and on, Monk also had more QB changes without the luxury of a real bond with a QB for 8 to 10 years that a lot of the greats had!

What all these anti Monk guy's fail to bring up is how many HOF QB's did Monk have throwing him the ball? I do believe the answer is zero, so in closing I would love to see how well some of these WR's would have faired without a great QB like Aikmen, Bradshaw, Manning, Montana, and the list goes on and on, Monk also had more QB changes without the luxury of a real bond with a QB for 8 to 10 years that a lot of the greats had!

This is exactley why he is a better candidate than Irvin will ever be.

As to his "Signature catch", from now I think everyone should say "Third and 10". The guy was money on that conversion.... for a decade.

I want alive for it but I remember watching it 1000 times. NFC Championship game, might not have championship game, against Dallas 72' I think....

"Joe Theisman straight drop, he's got ARt monk open, at the 5! TD washington redskins."

Damn, why couldnt I have been born earlier....

Not to muddy the waters when it comes to Monk but I am pretty sure that he was hurt in the NFC Championship game vs. Dallas (and during all of the playoffs that year).

I find this signature catch criteria amusing. First of all, for all of the "old timers" (many of whom have stats no where near Monk's) what is their signature catch? Most don't have one, you know why, because barely anyone saw them play.

I have said it before but in my eyes the proof that the Hall process is complete BS is the fact that Stallworth and Swann are in and Monk isn't. Their stats are mediocre at best compared to Monk's. Of course to get them in the voters said things like, "they were on the most dominant team of their era" and "they won four championships". Well, Monk won 3 and was on the second most dominant team of his era. You can't tell me that only winning 3 instead of 4 is a good reason to exclude a player from the hall.

I find this signature catch criteria amusing. First of all, for all of the "old timers" (many of whom have stats no where near Monk's) what is their signature catch? Most don't have one, you know why, because barely anyone saw them play.

That's a good point. How old is Adam Scheffter?

I'll bet he was wearing Huggies when Monk was tearin' it up.

LOL, I think he meant 82', or atleast i hope
He's probably thinking of Charley Taylor's AWESOME diving catch in Championship game vs Dallas in 72'. They said they only saw it on video clips and was not born yet. That must have been Taylor's "signature" catch to get him in the Hall. :rolleyes:

To me his signature catch was when he broke the consecutive games with a catch record. You know i think it shouldnt matter if you have a single "signature catch" in a carrer if you end that career as THE MOST PROLIFIC RECIEVER EVER... hes being screwed

The Hall of Fame at this point is a media lobbying event. Art doesn't stand a chance when Irvin is on ESPN every day yakking his mouth. Meanwhile, Art is in DC doing quiet charitable work. Irvin gets his cronies like Aikman to lobby for him. Art declines interviews.
Next year, Cris Carter (who I like) will be up for election. Carter is on HBO every week and this public exposure no doubt creates a subtle advantage over Monk. The only way Monk gets in the Hall is if Carter himself (who was much like Monk as a receiver, sans three rings) uses his pulpit and looks in the camera telling the viewers (and voters) that Monk should get in before him--or at the very least they go in together. Do I think it will happen? No. But if I see Carter outside the HBO studios on 23rd street (and I have seen Costas and Marino before)--I'll suggest my idea to him.
As for signature catches, Art's was, as mentioned, the catch on 3rd and long. Irvin's signature? He pushed off on most of his catches...

Czabe did make one mistake in his argument - Monk's only Super Bowl TD (opening drive against Buffalo) was correctly reversed by instant replay (Monk's 2nd foot barely touched the back line.

I've got to pull you up about this. Art Monk's TD against the Bills should not have been reversed. Watch the game again and you will see that after his first foot comes down in bounds the heel of his second foot also comes down in bounds and at that point it is a TD regardless of where his toes came down moments later. How many times have you seen receivers come down with their toes in bounds before their heels come down out of bounds? Nobody questions those TDs.

Bit of a crusade for me this, I've been trying to convince people of this ever since the game.

I've got to pull you up about this. Art Monk's TD against the Bills should not have been reversed. Watch the game again and you will see that after his first foot comes down in bounds the heel of his second foot also comes down in bounds and at that point it is a TD regardless of where his toes came down moments later. How many times have you seen receivers come down with their toes in bounds before their heels come down out of bounds? Nobody questions those TDs.

Bit of a crusade for me this, I've been trying to convince people of this ever since the game.


Doesn't matter. The reversal was correct. Both feet have to be in bounds.

Doesn't matter. The reversal was correct. Both feet have to be in bounds.

Did you actually read my post?