Green, Grimm, Monk finalists for HOF

RedskinsFreak · Post by **RedskinsFreak** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 7:37 pm

Green and Cris Carter are finalists in their first year of eligibility.

We all know too well the Monk, and to a lesser extent, Grimm stories.

http://www.sportingnews.com/yourturn/vi ... p?t=337798

jeremyroyce · Post by **jeremyroyce** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 7:50 pm

I hope all three get in

Countertrey · Post by **Countertrey** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 8:24 pm

We know how this goes.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 8:46 pm

all we need now is Peter King's explanation :puke:

there were more than a few times these last few weeks where I was sure the whole karma thing was going to go our way - hopefully we get these guys in this year

If you deserve to be in the HOF, you should be in the HOF

welch · Post by **welch** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:16 pm

Art Monk and Russ Grimm.

What else is there to say? Maybe that the Redskins offense has needed Art Monk for the last three seasons? Maybe that Art Monk's value can be seen by the results without him? Take away the Monk and see what changes: maybe that is easier than trying to look directly at the part that Monk added to all those Redskin teams.

On Russ Grimm: who doubts that The Hogs were the best offensive line for more than ten seasons? A small thing: recall that toward the end of the 1991 season, Gibbs taught the offense to run the no-huddle, and in SB 26 they ran it better than Buffalo did. Gibbs said that he could do it because the Hogs were so good, so practiced, so efficient, so coordinated. (Yes, they were the Hogs and Piglets, but that's a small detail).

So if the Hogs were so good, why isn't one of them in the Hall of Fame?

Skinsfan55 · Post by **Skinsfan55** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:53 pm

I know that this will just anger every one of his fans, but I don't know that Art Monk deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. He just doesn't have the numbers, and I don't think he was ever the best WR on his own team.

In any case, DG needs to be inducted, he was one of the best cornerbacks in the history of the NFL and played at an extremely high level for like 20 years. He's a no brainer.

skinsfan#33 · Post by **skinsfan#33** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 10:56 pm

Skinsfan55 wrote:I know that this will just anger every one of his fans, but I don't know that Art Monk deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. He just doesn't have the numbers, and I don't think he was ever the best WR on his own team.

In any case, DG needs to be inducted, he was one of the best cornerbacks in the history of the NFL and played at an extremely high level for like 20 years. He's a no brainer.

How old are you? Because you clearly never saw Monk play in his prime.

Doesn't have the numbers? Hah! Retired with three NFL records.

- More receptions than any WR currently enshrined in the Hall of (SH)ame!

- 80 more receptions than Lynn Swann and John Stallworth, COMBINED! And they got in his first two years of monks eligibility.

- Only NFL WR prior to 1990 to break 100 receptions in a year (106 an NFL record!) Since 1990 the 100 reception mark has been surpassed over 40 times and only one season did a player not reach 100.

- Caught the tough catches when everyone in the world knew the ball was going to him.

- Played w/average, at best, talent at QB (Rice had two HoF QBs), the 2 Stealers above had one their whole career, Michael "Separation Stride" Irvine had one his whole career as well. Who did Monk have? A broke down Joey T, Jay Schroeder(sp?), 40 year old Doug Williams, Jeff Rutledge, Mark Rypien, and a few other not so memorable QBs. Yet he retired as the NFL ALL TIME LEADING RECEIVER!

Turn in your Burgundy and Gold fan card!

Green should be a no brainer (but so should Monk!) The problem is there are at least 9 people on that committee that have no brainer!

Russ deserves to be in as well. So does Chris "All he does is catch TDs" Carter.

Monkinthehall · Post by **Monkinthehall** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 11:02 pm

Skinsfan55 wrote:I know that this will just anger every one of his fans, but I don't know that Art Monk deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. He just doesn't have the numbers, and I don't think he was ever the best WR on his own team.

In any case, DG needs to be inducted, he was one of the best cornerbacks in the history of the NFL and played at an extremely high level for like 20 years. He's a no brainer.

Dude, start reading some Redskins history or root for the Cowboys! That is the most ignorant statement I've ever heard from a Skins fan.

Skinsfan55 · Post by **Skinsfan55** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 11:09 pm

Monkinthehall wrote:
Skinsfan55 wrote:I know that this will just anger every one of his fans, but I don't know that Art Monk deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. He just doesn't have the numbers, and I don't think he was ever the best WR on his own team.

In any case, DG needs to be inducted, he was one of the best cornerbacks in the history of the NFL and played at an extremely high level for like 20 years. He's a no brainer.

Dude, start reading some Redskins history or root for the Cowboys! That is the most ignorant statement I've ever heard from a Skins fan.

I've read Redskins history and I can say that if I could only have one I would have taken Clark or Sanders over Monk. He was a very good player, but he was a complimentary player on a good offense, not a superstar, and not a hall of famer. Sorry.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 11:23 pm

Skinsfan55 wrote:.. I know that this will just anger every one of his fans, but I don't know that Art Monk deserves to be in the Hall of Fame.

there are rules about flaming here and this surely post applies - I have seen some posts here that really did not make sense but in most cases you could tell that the people who were posting the trash did not know any better.

Over a period of time I have learned where regular posters stand on certain things pertaining to our team but this statement from you really does show your support or lack thereof for this team - and to then casually state " In any case ...." is just mind boggling to me - I will not be surprised to read some of the posters here asking to meet you in the smack forum - this post indicates a lot to me - I will never respond to anything you post again.

We are not allowed to personally attack posters here but you are very tempting :puke:

Skinsfan55 · Post by **Skinsfan55** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 11:25 pm

This isn't a subject I really like to talk about because some of the Art Monk supporters think that anyone who isn't with them is a Redskins hater with a hidden agenda.

Art Monk had a LOT of receptions, but receptions alone are a terrible, terrible way to measure a WR's effectiveness. The west coast offense is built upon the idea that it's easy to make short receptions. In any offense a WR can make a couple short catches a game in the NFL by taking what the D gives you.

Monk was only a three time Pro-Bowl/All-Pro selection. 84-86 so he had three years where he was considered by fans, coaches and peers to be one of the best, later in his career he had some good years too, but not enough to stand out. He was overshadowed by stars like Henry Ellard, Flipper Anderson, Andre Reed, Andre Rison, Jerry Rice, Micheal Irvin...

Not only that, but for a possession guy and a tall WR, Monk's career high in TD catches was 8...

Monk just wasn't a star, and isn't really a serious candidate for the Hall of Fame IMO, but try to make a logical argument to a band of Monk foamers and prepare to be pelted by rocks.

*Btw, Stallworth and Swann were much, much more dynamic players with better YPC and TD per game numbers. Monk's overall numbers look better because he played for a long time, but Stallworth and Swann were STARS during their careers who were among the best when they played. Monk was simply above average, nothing more... and I don't see how someone could make a logical argument otherwise. (Maybe that's why Monk supporters are so easy to anger, because they don't have a leg to stand on.)

JansenFan · Post by **JansenFan** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 11:55 pm

When will you people realize that posts like this are just a cry for attention and ignore them?

LOSTHOG · Post by **LOSTHOG** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 3:16 am

Wow, one of the greatest Redskins of all time betrayed by one of his own.

Keep in mind that the Redskins were a run first offense in the era before the entire NFL went freakin pass happy. Monk was not as flashy as some of the other receivers. Charlie Brown only cought bombs. Gary Clark had such easy glide on the deep post. Sanders was one of the fastest receivers I have ever seen. When we needed a catch it was Monk that pulled it in. When a man retires as the number one pass receiver of all time and doesn't get into the HOF it cheapens the honor for those already in with far less numbers. I never thought I would have to say any of this to another Skins fan. I thought it was understood.

brad7686 · Post by **brad7686** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 4:17 am

Skinsfan55 wrote:This isn't a subject I really like to talk about because some of the Art Monk supporters think that anyone who isn't with them is a Redskins hater with a hidden agenda.

Art Monk had a LOT of receptions, but receptions alone are a terrible, terrible way to measure a WR's effectiveness. The west coast offense is built upon the idea that it's easy to make short receptions. In any offense a WR can make a couple short catches a game in the NFL by taking what the D gives you.

Monk was only a three time Pro-Bowl/All-Pro selection. 84-86 so he had three years where he was considered by fans, coaches and peers to be one of the best, later in his career he had some good years too, but not enough to stand out. He was overshadowed by stars like Henry Ellard, Flipper Anderson, Andre Reed, Andre Rison, Jerry Rice, Micheal Irvin...

Not only that, but for a possession guy and a tall WR, Monk's career high in TD catches was 8...

Monk just wasn't a star, and isn't really a serious candidate for the Hall of Fame IMO, but try to make a logical argument to a band of Monk foamers and prepare to be pelted by rocks.

*Btw, Stallworth and Swann were much, much more dynamic players with better YPC and TD per game numbers. Monk's overall numbers look better because he played for a long time, but Stallworth and Swann were STARS during their careers who were among the best when they played. Monk was simply above average, nothing more... and I don't see how someone could make a logical argument otherwise. (Maybe that's why Monk supporters are so easy to anger, because they don't have a leg to stand on.)

So basically, you're saying that only catching deep balls/TD's are important in judging a WR, and that moving the chains has no value. I would think that receptions would be an important stat for a "receiver".

Gnome · Post by **Gnome** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 4:54 am

Monk does not deserve induction. He's a Skins' great, an NFL great, but not HOF great. I remember Clark struck more fear into opponents than Monk did. Sure Monk was productive but not jaw dropping like Rice, Moss, or even Swann. And he always had several teamates who were more dynamic than he was in Brown, Clark, Sanders, and even backfield recievers like Washington and Bryant. Monk was steady, sure handed, and an all time NFL great but his skill set doesn't rise to the level of HOF. Neither does Carter's for that matter.

Green and Grimm are HOF great and hopefully the constant whinning about Monk won't hurt their chances with the fickle voters.

welch · Post by **welch** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 8:58 am

From today's Post:

The other modern-era finalists are former NFL commissioner Paul Tagliabue and former players Fred Dean, Richard Dent, Randy Gradishar, Ray Guy, Bob Kuechenberg, Randall McDaniel, Andre Reed, Derrick Thomas, Andre Tippett and Gary Zimmerman.

Of that group, Richard Dent was a formidable defensive player, and Derrick Thomas was also better than "pretty good". But, other than Dent, who can equal Monk and Grimm...as great at their position and as great for their team?

Whenever Monk was hurt, the Redskin offense turned upside-down, and people wondered if the team could move the ball.

That was the story during the astonishing playoff tournament following the 1982 season. Monk broke a toe at the end of the season, and the "experts" decided that the Redskins would fold because Monk's injury took out the long passing game.

No, Charlie Brown was never the main threat, nor the number one receiver, nor the receiver who frightened opponents. Brown was a good small guy who got open because teams concentrated on Art Monk.

No "experts" thought that the Hogs and Riggins could carry the entire offense. Riggins and the Hogs did, which makes Russ Grimm, or anyone else from the Hogs, absolutely deserving of selection to the Hall of Fame.

*

I'm hopeful. Maybe good sense will prevail this year.[/i]

Skinsfan55 · Post by **Skinsfan55** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 9:11 am

Chris Carter had 8 consecutive seasons of over 1,000 yards and overlapping those seasons were 5 consecutive years of 10+ touchdowns. (He almost made it six but caught only 9 TD's in 2000.

I think this is a perfect example of a Hall of Famer, he was one of the best of his time for years.

To respond to brad7686, a guy doesn't have to be a big gain receiver, Chris Carter's YPC stats are inferior to Art Monk's, but Chris Carter scored touchdowns and was considered a top receiver, where are Monk was only considered above average and did not find the endzone as successfully. (And yes, receptions alone is a terrible way to judge a receiver.)

I hope people also see some fans steer the argument about Monk's HOF candidacy away from facts by saying anyone who disagrees has an alternate agenda (that they just want attention.) Obviously no one could disagree based on the facts... :roll:

Warmother · Post by **Warmother** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 9:14 am

Skinsfan55 wrote:Monk was only a three time Pro-Bowl/All-Pro selection. 84-86 so he had three years where he was considered by fans,

John Riggins only went to 1 pro bowl and that was when he was with the Jets. I guess he shouldn't be in the HOF either.

Skinsfan55 · Post by **Skinsfan55** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 9:20 am

welch wrote:
Whenever Monk was hurt, the Redskin offense turned upside-down, and people wondered if the team could move the ball.

That was the story during the astonishing playoff tournament following the 1982 season. Monk broke a toe at the end of the season, and the "experts" decided that the Redskins would fold because Monk's injury took out the long passing game.

But they were wrong. The Redskins did move the ball.

Also, Monk was a third year guy in 82, and Brown was a rookie then... but he was a pro-bowler and an all-pro. Monk had decent numbers... how could ANYONE think that Monk was better than Brown? I mean, before you saw how the rest of his career would pan out, Brown's numbers were much better.

Which only goes back to the argument that Monk was never the best WR on his own team.

cleg · Post by **cleg** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 9:22 am

Gnome wrote:Monk does not deserve induction. He's a Skins' great, an NFL great, but not HOF great. I remember Clark struck more fear into opponents than Monk did. Sure Monk was productive but not jaw dropping like Rice, Moss, or even Swann. And he always had several teamates who were more dynamic than he was in Brown, Clark, Sanders, and even backfield recievers like Washington and Bryant. Monk was steady, sure handed, and an all time NFL great but his skill set doesn't rise to the level of HOF. Neither does Carter's for that matter.

Green and Grimm are HOF great and hopefully the constant whinning about Monk won't hurt their chances with the fickle voters.

Chris Carter is a HOFer and Art Monk is too. The two folks who are saying Monk is not a HOFer clearly did not see the man play. In my opinion if there was no Monk then Clark would have been less effective as well. Art Monk was one of the greatest receivers of the 1980s and should be in the Hall of Fame - even that dope Peter King changed his mind on him.

DEHog · Post by **DEHog** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 9:23 am

Not only that, but for a possession guy and a tall WR, Monk's career high in TD catches was 8...

What the Skins wouldn't give for a WR like that right now!!

Skinsfan55 · Post by **Skinsfan55** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 9:26 am

Warmother wrote:
Skinsfan55 wrote:Monk was only a three time Pro-Bowl/All-Pro selection. 84-86 so he had three years where he was considered by fans,

John Riggins only went to 1 pro bowl and that was when he was with the Jets. I guess he shouldn't be in the HOF either.

It's a pretty poor way to make a case when you pick one small segment of a larger argument to attack while ignoring all the other facts.

Riggins was a two time all-pro. Top ten in rushing yards 4 times, top ten in rushing TD's 5 times (including leading the league twice in a row with an amazing 24 rushing scores in 83 which is 5th all time, single season), top ten in rushing yards per game 8 times... Riggins' candidacy seems pretty open and shut to me.

langleyparkjoe · Post by **langleyparkjoe** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 9:27 am

Glad this isn't in smack or else dude woulda been torched.

I guess Monk wasn't good when he broke Largent's record :roll:

.. oh well, he's still the my favorite WR of all time with the other posse members and fun bunch close behind.

Skinsfan55 · Post by **Skinsfan55** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 9:33 am

DEHog wrote:
Not only that, but for a possession guy and a tall WR, Monk's career high in TD catches was 8...

What the Skins wouldn't give for a WR like that right now!!

Yes, the Redskins offense would greatly improve if they had an above average receiver who could move the chains. Someone like Nate Burleson, Patrick Crayton, Shaun McDonald, Santonio Holmes or even Jerry Porter.

Our offense would be a lot better if we added any of those guys, but that doesn't make them a Hall of Famer.

Skinsfan55 · Post by **Skinsfan55** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 9:35 am

langleyparkjoe wrote:Glad this isn't in smack or else dude woulda been torched.

I guess Monk wasn't good when he broke Largent's record .. oh well, he's still the my favorite WR of all time with the other posse members and fun bunch close behind.

because typing in caps, swearing and carrying on like idiots is the only real tool some Monk supporters have. They need the Smack forum to make their "arguments".