Does Art Monk stand a better chance this year than last in HOF voting?

BrudLee · 12-20-2005, 10:53 PM

I know, I know. "The horse is dead, Brud. Leave it alone."

Last year following the announcement of the finalists, Dr. Z of Sports Illustrated made the following statement here:

"Monk was hurt by Michael Irvin being eligible this year. It's done alphabetically, and Irvin was presented before Monk. I think that really hurt him."

Irvin is still eligible, but may carry a taint because of his recent arrest for possession of drug paraphenalia. It may cause some voters to say "not this year" and pass on him, giving the alphabetically-challenged Monk a better chance with the voters.

Discuss. Or don't. I'm not getting paid.

SouperMeister · 12-20-2005, 11:17 PM

It's ridiculous that Monk didn't get in his first year eligible - he retired the all-time leader in receptions and consecutive games with a reception, not to mention being the go-to receiver during the Gibbs I era that yielded multiple Super Bowl wins. If Lynn Swann and John Stallworth are in, Monk definitely belongs. I blame the likes of Dr. Z and Peter King, who have spoken against Monk's worthiness for the HOF.

ST21 · 12-21-2005, 03:29 AM

Hell No!!!!!!

SmootSmack · 12-21-2005, 03:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrudLee

I know, I know. "The horse is dead, Brud. Leave it alone."

Last year following the announcement of the finalists, Dr. Z of Sports Illustrated made the following statement here:

"Monk was hurt by Michael Irvin being eligible this year. It's done alphabetically, and Irvin was presented before Monk. I think that really hurt him."

Irvin is still eligible, but may carry a taint because of his recent arrest for possession of drug paraphenalia. It may cause some voters to say "not this year" and pass on him, giving the alphabetically-challenged Monk a better chance with the voters.

Discuss. Or don't. I'm not getting paid.

Maybe he should just drop his last name and go by Art so he could shoot to the top of the list alphabetically

dmek25 · 12-21-2005, 07:16 AM

im not getting the part where art monk isnt worthy of the hall.whats the reasoning?

56FAN · 12-21-2005, 08:37 AM

there is no resoning,anyway you look at it he belongs in there and it proves that the people who choose are not doing their job properly.the ego's of media types should make them improper for the committee,it isn't about them.hof needs to put him in therre.

Skinsfanforlife · 12-21-2005, 09:13 AM

Not if Peter King has anything to say about it.

Every year he's dogging Art M.

dmek25 · 12-21-2005, 09:17 AM

then what would be the reasoning for putting mike irvin in?especially instead of monk?

FRPLG · 12-21-2005, 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dmek25

im not getting the part where art monk isnt worthy of the hall.whats the reasoning?

Nobody around her gets it. How people view Art Monk as anything less than a lock HOFer is beyond us.

12-20-2005, 10:53 PM	#1
BrudLee Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Rehoboth Beach, DE Posts: 3,494	Does Art Monk stand a better chance this year than last in HOF voting? I know, I know. "The horse is dead, Brud. Leave it alone." Last year following the announcement of the finalists, Dr. Z of Sports Illustrated made the following statement here: "Monk was hurt by Michael Irvin being eligible this year. It's done alphabetically, and Irvin was presented before Monk. I think that really hurt him." Irvin is still eligible, but may carry a taint because of his recent arrest for possession of drug paraphenalia. It may cause some voters to say "not this year" and pass on him, giving the alphabetically-challenged Monk a better chance with the voters. Discuss. Or don't. I'm not getting paid. __________________ There's nowhere to go but up. Or down. I guess we could stay where we are, too.

12-20-2005, 11:17 PM	#2
SouperMeister Playmaker Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Leesburg, VA Age: 60 Posts: 3,419	Re: Does Art Monk stand a better chance this year than last in HOF voting? It's ridiculous that Monk didn't get in his first year eligible - he retired the all-time leader in receptions and consecutive games with a reception, not to mention being the go-to receiver during the Gibbs I era that yielded multiple Super Bowl wins. If Lynn Swann and John Stallworth are in, Monk definitely belongs. I blame the likes of Dr. Z and Peter King, who have spoken against Monk's worthiness for the HOF.

12-21-2005, 03:29 AM	#3
ST21 Impact Rookie Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Texas Posts: 519	Re: Does Art Monk stand a better chance this year than last in HOF voting? Hell No!!!!!! __________________ SAY HELLO TO THE BAD GUY........

12-21-2005, 07:16 AM	#5
dmek25 MVP Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: lancaster,pa Age: 63 Posts: 10,672	Re: Does Art Monk stand a better chance this year than last in HOF voting? im not getting the part where art monk isnt worthy of the hall.whats the reasoning?

12-21-2005, 08:37 AM	#6
56FAN Special Teams Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: MANASSAS VA Age: 62 Posts: 323	Re: Does Art Monk stand a better chance this year than last in HOF voting? there is no resoning,anyway you look at it he belongs in there and it proves that the people who choose are not doing their job properly.the ego's of media types should make them improper for the committee,it isn't about them.hof needs to put him in therre.

12-21-2005, 09:13 AM	#7
Skinsfanforlife Camp Scrub Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 76	Re: Does Art Monk stand a better chance this year than last in HOF voting? Not if Peter King has anything to say about it. Every year he's dogging Art M.

12-21-2005, 09:17 AM	#8
dmek25 MVP Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: lancaster,pa Age: 63 Posts: 10,672	Re: Does Art Monk stand a better chance this year than last in HOF voting? then what would be the reasoning for putting mike irvin in?especially instead of monk?

Does Art Monk stand a better chance this year than last in HOF voting?

Locker Room Main Forum