Who would you rather start on your team? Art Monk or...

[gbrittain]

If the HOF was all about stats. Say hello to Drew Bledsoe, Vinny Testeverde, and Keyshawn Johnson, people.

Exactly.

I will say again...I would vote for Monk to be in the HOF. However, a good argument for Monk should not be based on stats.

Hypothetical:
What happens when a RB runs for 1000 yards for fifteen consecutive seasons, although he is never considered one of the best RBs on a year to year basis.

Should that RB be in the HOF considering he is only behind Smith, Payton, and Sanders on the all time rushing yards list?

 

[Rack]

The HOF is all about longevity.

No, it isn't. I agree SOME longevity is important, but it's not ALL about longevity.

Dale Hallestrae played a lot of years... is he a HOFer?

I believe you will also find that Cliff Harris is the only member from the all pro team of the 70's that is not in...

Incorrect. There are other players from the all 70's team that aren't in (someone posted the names yesterday). I think there's like 5 players and two of them are cowboys (Harris and Pearson).

If the HOF was all about stats. Say hello to Drew Bledsoe, Vinny Testeverde, and Keyshawn Johnson, people.

To me it's real simple. Was the player EVER considered "Elite" during his playing days? Don't give me stats, I wanna know if he was an elite player at any point in his career. I believe the HOF should be reserved for players that were elite during their playing days, not players that were "Pretty good" or even "Very good".

Irvin was one of the elite at his position during his playing days.

Art Monk was not. Monk wasn't even the best WR on his team (I'd take Gary Clark over him any day).

 

[Zaxor]

Incorrect. There are other players from the all 70's team that aren't in (someone posted the names yesterday). I think there's like 5 players and two of them are cowboys (Harris and Pearson).

I thank you for the correction and should you come across that list I would be most interested in seeing it

 

[Q_the_man]

Food for thought for Skins fans. If I had a team and had to pick from any of these wideouts in their prime, I don't think I would put Art Monk ahead of any of the guys on this list. They're all receivers during his days and afterwards. Maybe, just maybe, Monk doesn't deserve the HOF yet? :

Jerry Rice
Michael Irvin
Chris Carter
Marvin Harrison
Randy Moss
Torry Holt
Chad Johnson
Andre Reed
Sterling Sharpe
Steve Largent
Terrell Owens

I get to the second tier of receivers. Names like Mark Clayton, Terry Glenn, Keyshawn Johnson, Keenan McCardell, Mushin Muhammad before I start to think Monk has a chance to even start on my team. Maybe Monk doesn't belong in the debate over greatest receivers?

Actually the only WRs to play with Monk during that time were Rice and Largent and I would take Monk over Largent. Monk was the All time leading Wr when he retired, what else can u say about him, more than Swann, Stallworth, pearson, Largent. that's like someone passes Emmitt up when it's time for his HOF vote and Emmitt doesnt get in.....

Let me ask u this, if u retire #1 ever at ur position don't u think u would be HOF material, plus u won2 rings. Monk was a great reciever, are their better ones, yes! but to retire #1 and not make it because the NFL has no Defense no more, U can't touch no one on Offense without a flag.

If monk play today he would average 90 catches a year easily...........

 

[Way 'nuff]

Monk is the only receiver of the 1980's All Decade Team not to be in the HOF. Even James Lofton is in.

http://www.redskinsdb.com/resources/Monk4theHall.wmv

It's back up now, it was taken down late last night. You guys should watch, hopefully it'll change your minds a bit.

 

[Aikbach]

I would blend them all together into a super receiver, it would be an atrociously big cap number to keep him however.