Compare for your self:
Career catches:
Monk-940 Irvin-750
Career rec. yards:
Monk:12,721 Irvin-11,904
TD's:
Monk-68 Irvin-65
Not to mention when Monk retired, he held or had held NFL records for:
Most career receptions:940
Single season receptions:103
Consecutive games with at least one reception:183 (one hundred eighty-three!)
But I did forget the one stat that Irvin beat Monk in--ARRESTS...
please help me figure this one out.
2007-02-03 10:05:12 · 13 answers · asked by HARRY S 2 in Sports ➔ Football (American)
I've been asking that too!!!
Monk was not a ballhog like Irvin was. Monk had class, dignity and respect for the game.
I think Irvin got in this year is because of Troy Aikman and Emmitt Smith complaining that he didn't get in last year!!
2007-02-03 10:46:04 · answer #1 · answered by mikea_va 6 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Monk may have beaten Irvin in every statistic you can think of except one - Super Bowl victories (3 - 2). He also picked up big numbers while playing on a highly-touted and media-focused Dallas Cowboys unit with Aikman and Emmitt Smith, so the HOF would have to include Irvin under the Cowboys Big Three with the other two aforementioned players. However, Art Monk should be getting his name put into Canton soon enough.
2007-02-03 10:21:18 · answer #2 · answered by icehoundxx 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A better case could be made for Gary Clark than Art Monk. Monk had more catches over 16 seasons, but Clark was big in the big games (like Irvin). Irvin was selected to 5 Pro Bowls in 12 seasons (41%), Clark to 4 in 11 (36%) and Monk to 3 in 16 (19%). Clark's other numbers (yds per catch, catches per TD, TDs per season, etc.) also match up better with Irvin than Monk's. I expect DBs were more concerned with Irvin and Clark than with Monk. Finally, It's the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Longevity.
2016-05-24 00:28:09 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree that monk should be in, but you need to elaborate on stats or people who disagree with you could say things like:
Monk played 4 more seasons (higher stats)
His high # of receptions makes his ypc alot lower
etc
you need to point out things like Monk played w/alot of other good WRs so he put those up despite not getting the ball as much (as Jaime Dukes pointed out).
I agree that it is weird that Monk isn't in. He can be compared statistically to one guy who is viewed as an instant HoFer now (though EVERYONE said monk was when he played)--Marvin Harrison -- sure Marvin has more yds, but he got the ball more too. Many of his years can be compared to Monks (besides 4 years where he got the ball 100+ times, and that inflated the amount of yards) ---mainly his ypc, which is acctually lower thank Monks!
Lastly, I hate how Adam Schefter (and many others ) said "name one catch that defines him" --HOW DOES THAT DO ANYTHING? I can't name ONE CATCH of Jerry Rice's or James Lofton's or most of the best WRs there were. People say he has nothing like "the catch" ---that's a catch, not a player--infact I wouldn't say Dwight Clark was all that great, he just had that good catch.
2007-02-03 10:14:52 · answer #4 · answered by Andy T 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'm not sure, that's asking why isn't Richard Dent in the HOF.
They'll both be in there soon.
But football isn't a one man team. Even if Rex ain't at his best, the Defense and Running Game always is.
So that's how Richard Dent will get into the HOF, by having Da Bears beat the colts like they were meant to.
Not sure how to solve your Art Monk problem, I guess he really wasn't that popular. Cause everyone knows Michael Irving.
2007-02-03 10:25:31 · answer #5 · answered by DaClint 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The only reason Monk is ahead statistically is because he played 5 years more than Irvin. He deserves to get in and I'd bet he will next year. I think the only reason he's not in already is how bad he was to the media and fans.
2007-02-03 10:29:22 · answer #6 · answered by Scottie Boy 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Or Derrick Thomas for that matter
People have short term memories and Irvin is on national TV every week. So they know who he is. It is a bunch of BS. I think Fans need to have some sort of say in these matters. Coaches and owners too.
2007-02-03 10:14:54 · answer #7 · answered by swksmason 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
irvin has more rings and more importantly is viewed as being a game changer where monk was never viewed as the receiver you had to stop. monk was under valued and under appreciated for the majority of his career. ask the average fan and he cant even tell you what team monk played for
2007-02-03 10:15:19 · answer #8 · answered by chandler k 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Simply because Michael Irvin was the main recieveing threat while, Art monk was always the #2 reciever. He was good but he wasnt the "playmaker" like Michael was.
2007-02-03 10:17:51 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
No, I can't.
And I can't understand why he wasn't fired from TV for making racist comments.
2007-02-03 14:50:19 · answer #10 · answered by J Z 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋