I would've gone with Carter before Monk. I actually agree with junc on this one, on that Monk was a compiler. He was a good player for a long time, but I don't think he was ever the dominant player some other HOF WRs were.
Monk played on a team that was adept at running the ball in goal-to-go situations. Look at the Redskins leading TD-scorer at the RB position during Monk's years in Washington- 1980- Clarence Harmon, 4 1981- John Riggins, 13 1982- John Riggins, 3 (strike-shortened season) 1983- John Riggins, 24 1984- John Riggins, 14 1985- John Riggins, 8 (George Rogers, 7) 1986- George Rogers, 18 1987- George Rogers, 6 (15-game season; Rogers played 11 games) 1988- Timmy Smith, 3 1989- Earnest Byner, 7 1990- Earnest Byner, 6 and Gerald Riggs, 6 1991- Gerald Riggs, 11 1992- Earnest Byner, 6 1993- three players tied, 3 This is similar to the Michael Irvin-Emmitt Smith touchdown phenomenon.
Who cares about touchdowns. If Riggins takes it 98 yards, breaks 6 tackles and Monk catches a 2 yard TD pass while wide open...who did all the work. Who should get credit for the TD? TD's are the most overrated stat ever.
I will have to disagree with you about the compiling thing. As I wrote in another thread, I found Monk to be the 2nd best WR in the game in the 1980s. I could never say that a guy was 2nd best at his position over the course of a decade and then say the guy was a compiler. I understand the compiler phenomenon as it applies to baseball. Don Sutton is perhaps the best example. He was very good for a long time, but was never truly great. He pitched for 23 seasons and compiled 324 victories. One thing that does not show up on Monk trading cards and his pro-football-reference bio was his incredible blocking ability. Prior to my time, the best two blocking WRs were probably Paul Warfield and Charley Taylor. In my time, Monk is one of the top few. He ranks up there with Ed McCaffrey, Hines Ward, and Keyshawn Johnson. Blocking does count for something. His fine blocking is yet another feather in Monk's cap.
This post works in my favor, but I would disagree you with some because TDs are obviously important. Exhibit A- two weeks ago, the Chargers failure to score TDs cost them the AFC title game. But, as for Monk, obviously he can't score TDs if the coaching staff wants to run the ball inside the 10-yard line because they have bulls in Riggins, Rogers, and Riggs.
Aside from the original post, I don't believe Green was mentioned yet in this thread. I think he's the weakest player of this class. He was the cornerback equivalent of Jackie Slater. Green played 20 seasons and was a consensus 1st team All-Pro one time. Slater played 20 seasons and was a consensus 1st team All-Pro zero times. Both were nice players, but neither were great. One of my favorite plays ever was Green's punt return for a TD against the Bears in an '87 divisional playoff game. It was the key play in a playoff game and was also notable for the fact Green injured a rib on the runback. [YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZVp90P6GYM[/YOUTUBE] Lester Hayes was a better cornerback. Hayes and Broncos linebacker Randy Gradishar are the biggest omissions right now.
If that's your excuse then why did Gary Clark in 8 seasons starting for Washington(compared to 15 for Monk) finish top 10 in rec TDs 5 times? So w/ that offense that was reliant on the run he finished top 10 in the LEAGUE 5 times in 9 years while Monk did it ONE time in 15 years. Gary Clark(in 9 seasons as a starter while Monk had 15 full seasons as a starter): -4 time pro bowler and 4 time all-pro(that's 1 more than Monk) -top 10 in recs 4 times(tied w/ Monk) -top 10 in rec yds 5 times(2 more than Monk) -top 10 in rec TDs 5 times(4 more times than Monk) They played together for 8 seasons(1985-1992) 1985 Monk led in recs & yds, Clark TDs 1986 Clark led in all 1987 Clark led in all 1988 Monk led in recs and yds, Clark in TDs 1989 Monk led in recs, Clark in TDs and Yds 1990 Clark led in all 1991 Monk led in recs(by ONE), Clark led in yds and TDs 1992 Clark led in all In 8 seasons: Led in Recs: Monk 4, Clark 4 Led in yds: Monk 2, Clark 6 led in TDs: Monk 0, Clark 8 In Super Bowls: Monk(3 SB's played): 9 recs, 179 yds, ZERO TDs Clark(2 SBs played): 10 recs, 169 yds, 2 TDs Their SB averages: Monk 3 recs, 60 yds, ZERO TDs Clark 5 recs, 85 yds, 1 TD Is this enough info for you to prove who was Washington's best WR in those days?
How can you say Monk should be in but Green should not be? The various sites don't differentiate 1st or 2nd team all-pro but according to the HOF site Green made the AP team 4 times which is actually 2 more thqan Monk. At Pro football reference it says 3 for Monk but at the HOF site it says 2 for Monk.
The original statement "TD's are the most overrated stat ever." I think was meant to refer to TDs as an individual stat, not a team stat. I think its an important difference because teams with a low # of TDs lose. As you said, individuals with a lower than expected # of TDs may be the result of offensive playcalling or the defensive choices of the other team.
I wasn't referring to Clark vs. Monk specifically. My personal take on Monk was that he was a good #1b receiver for a long time. Clark's stats during their time playing together are in Clark's favor. Whether his play makes Monk HOF worthy is up to someone else. The pro football and baseball Halls of Fame became the halls of very good years ago.
Nice reading on your part. I never wrote Green does not belong in the PFHOF. Monk and Green each were consensus 1st team All-Pros once- Monk in 1984 and Green in 1991. Monk was on the AP 1st team in 1984 and 2nd team in 1985. Monk also got 2nd team All-Pro votes from United Press International in 1986.
Whatever, you said he was the weakest player of this class when he has more credentials than Monk. Anyway you slice it Green had more all-pro years than Monk. He didn't hang around long enough to compile the #s Monk did but Clark was clearly better than Monk- they weren't close. Monk does NOT belong in the HOF.
I'll take this slowly because it's the offseason and we have time. Then again, I don't really need to respond to anything. Monk's in. I think it's right. I'm happy. Clark was never a consensus 1st team All-Pro. Monk was one time. When these guys were playing The Sporting News, Pro Football Weekly, United Press International, Associated Press, Newspaper Enterprise Association, and Professional Football Writers of America were giving out All-Pro honors. If a player was a 1st team choice by one organization, then he wasn't going to be a consensus 1st teamer that year. Example- 1987 Gary Clark was on the AP 1st team and the NE 2nd team. He was not selected by any other organizations. Jerry Rice and J.T. Smith were the two consensus 1st team WRs. Steve Largent was the third guy and Clark was 4th. Rice was on everyone's 1st team. Smith was on the 1st team of PW, UP, SN, and PFWA. He was on the AP 2nd team. Clark received All-Pro honors four seasons, but was never a consensus 1st teamer. Monk received All-Pro honors three seasons and was a consensus 1st team selection in 1984.
Would it hurt for you to apologize once in a while, like a normal person? You are dead wrong. I did NOT say Green does not belong in the PFHOF. Then you respond with a sly, "Whatever." I wrote that I feel he is the weakest player in this class. I wrote that Green was a nice player, that he wasn't great. Well, he did have a great year and three other near great seasons. So, he was great at one time. Then he had another 16 years of pretty good ball. That warrants an induction. Darrell Green- 4/1 (years with All-Pro nods/years as consensus choice) Monk- 3/1 Not a big difference there at all. I'm now going to use one of your Gary Clark excuses. Green played more years than Monk.
Monk did not compile numbers. He had 801 receptions through 12 seasons. He was one of the top WRs in the game and he started in a Super Bowl during his 12th season. A top player on a top team in his 12th season is not a compiler. Gary Clark was NOT clearly better than Monk. Monk DOES belong in the HOF.
