Art Monk vs Michael Irvin

[offiss]

Originally Posted by Redskins8588

So you are putting Young ahead of Elway, Marino, Favre, Moon, Montana, Tarkenton, Johnny Unitas, Jim Kelly, Dan Fouts, and hell even Peyton Manning is ahead of Young in yards, TD's, and completions. I just dont see why everyone is sold on Young, yeah he was good but not top 5, IMO...

You got that right, he was the benefactor of the west coast dink and dunk offense, he did nothing in the pro's until he arrived in san fran, and look how long it took him to accomplish that offense, but as usual people fall in love with a media darling and Young was definitly that, he was one of the greatest running QB's ever though I will give him that much. He couldn't come close to Montana in the same offense. 4-1 SB victories Montana

[TheInspector]

Sports writers are stupid, and they only make statements which are popular. That way, when they are proven wrong, they don't catch too much gruff because what they said was what everyone else was saying. Peter King wrote the book on this strategy.

[bigmarley4]

How do you email Peter King? I want to give him a piece of my mind.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Redskins8588

So you are putting Young ahead of Elway, Marino, Favre, Moon, Montana, Tarkenton, Johnny Unitas, Jim Kelly, Dan Fouts, and hell even Peyton Manning is ahead of Young in yards, TD's, and completions. I just dont see why everyone is sold on Young, yeah he was good but not top 5, IMO...

He completed more than 64% of his passes. Even in the west coast offense, that's unbelieveable. No one else is even close to that. Not even Montana who played in the same system. For my money, only Elway, Marino, and Montana have achieved more greatness than Young.

[ArtMonkDrillz]

bigfatdouchebag@si.com

Stats wise, I know Monk didn't do that much in the four Super Bowls he was in (although I think he was injured for one, right?), but how did he perform throughout his playoff career? The Skins routed everyone in the '91 playoffs, what were Monk's numbers in those games?

Also, how has Skip Bayless not written an article about Monk/HOF yet? He obviously would refer to it as "The Hall of Shame" and use other such stupid puns to make his point, but at least I bet he'd be on Monk's side.

[dmek25]

elway, favre and montana would be the only three on your list i would consider ahead of young. marino and moon put up monstorous numbers playing in a throw first offense with exactly 0 super bowl wins between them. in my eyes greatness almost always = championships

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by dmek25

elway, favre and montana would be the only three on your list i would consider ahead of young. marino and moon put up monstorous numbers playing in a throw first offense with exactly 0 super bowl wins between them. in my eyes greatness almost always = championships

then where's tom brady or terry bradshaw?

[dmek25]

im not sure about bradshaw? thatguy, do you have any stats on him? i was younger when the whole steel curtain thing went down and couldnt tell how good he was because that team was just so superior to everyone else. brady is on the fast track to the hall but longevity is also a key factor

[#56fanatic]

Originally Posted by Redskins8588

Why? I am not saying that Aikman should not have ben a first ballot HOF just because he was a cowboy, I am saying it because look at the talent that he had with him and then look at his stats. He is lucky to break the top 15 in each major QB stat catagory.

Out of Passing Completion, Passint TD's, and Passing Yards, Aikman only breaks the top 20 in Passing Completion where he is ranked #12 with 2,898. In the other catagories he is non-existant in the top 20. Now that is HOF worthy?

His career was cut way short due to concussions (yeah #56). His numbers are pretty damn good for the years he played, plus winning 3 bowls. the guy deserves to be in the hall no matter what his numbers say against current members. Had he played another 5 years he would probably be in the top 5 in just about all catagories.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Not saying I agree with it, but here's what he will say: Monk never actually had a significant role in any of the Superbowls he played in, (he was injured in XXII against the Broncos) and never once caught a touchdown in any of the three Big Games he was a part of.

Gotta disagree here.

In XXVI against Buffalo he had 7 catches for 113 yards and simply dominated the Bills on one of the first half drives that ended in his TD being taken away by replay. It always amazes me how people like King don't even acknowledge this performance.

[amorentz]

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

[MonkFan4Life]

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 !!!!

[Yellow31]

just voted 69-31 monk up

[D'BOYZ]

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).

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by D'BOYZ

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.