especially the superbowl
2007-02-04 05:49:14 · 7 answers · asked by fatreticle 1 in Sports ➔ Football (American)
the answer toward the both is one is very media friendly the other one was not. Art Monk would not talk to reporters , and they are the ones that vote for HOF. he ended his career in New York and that s just one city you can not be cold to the media. and Mr. Monk did contribute in both Super Bowls he played in.
2007-02-04 06:02:01 · answer #1 · answered by rap1361 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree that Irvin made much more big plays than did Art Monk. And the fact that he is a commentator on TV doesn't hurt either. People know who he is much more than Art Monk. And maybe Joe Theisman and his other teammates should push for him like Aikman and Smith have for Irvin? Still, even though I am a huge Cowboys fan, I do believe that Art Monk should have been in the Hall of Fame a long time ago. He had some great games against us and the rest of the league in the 80's. And set the standard for posession type receivers such as Keyshawn Johnson and Jimmy Smith. But, Michael Irvin had a certain swagger to him that has made people remember him and he was by far more of a leader than was Monk. But, like I said they should both be in the Hall of Fame.
2007-02-04 06:04:38 · answer #2 · answered by artist 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Lets Get this straight. They both won 3 Super Bowl Rings. Monk actually helped his team get to four, without the benefit of a Hall of Fame QB throwing to him. Everyone puts up comparable stats and says Monk only got his numbers because he played more years. Well then, lets compare the initial 12 seasons only
Irvin 750 catches 11904 yards 65 TD's
Monk 801 catches 10884 yards 60 td's
Take into account that two of Monk's first twelve seasons were strike shortened seasons as well 1982 and 1987 (11 less regular season games ( so if you factor in his cpg and yds/game and tds per game.....its going to give him right around the same stats as Mr. Irvin. . He played with two other WR's who he unselfishly shared the ball with. He was the man that everyone knew was going to get the ball on 3rd down, and they still couldn't stop him. I take nothing away from Irvin, he was a HOF Wr in my opinion, but there is no way he should have gone there before Monk, no way at all. There are some people on here who didn't obviously watch football in the 80's but to say Monk was a "jackXXX" to the media is so terribly wrong. He just didn't self promote himself to the media every opportunity he got...unlike, I'm sorry to say Mr. Irvin. He was as classy a man as the NFL will ever see....its too bad non players get to actually have the single say on who gets in. Here is a list of people who have publically said Art Monk deserves the HOF without a doubt.
1. Joe Gibbs - HOF Coach
2. John Madden (the man who annouced most of his games in the 80's
3. Bill Walsh- HOF Coach
4. Bill Parcells- Future HOF Coach
5. Eric Allen- CB who actually had to play against Monk
6. Jerry Rice -Future HOF WR
7. last but not least-----Michael Irvin himself.
2007-02-04 08:18:59 · answer #3 · answered by Chip H 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
How did Monk change the game. He didn't.
Not to discount anything that he did he was a good receiver, but that is just the thing. He was just a good receiver.
Bullet Bob Hayes should have been in before any of them including Irvin. Hayes did more to change game from a receiver standpoint than any receiver in the history of the game. He was the first true "deep" threat, at one point the worlds fastest man.
To step off my soapbox it is a great injustice to keep this man out of the hall just because he screwed up off the field.
So no the question is not Monk vs Irvin. The question is Hayes vs the voters for the hall of fame.
I am sure Monk will get in when the time is right. Hayes is no longer eligible, and that is sad very sad.
2007-02-04 06:26:47 · answer #4 · answered by luvformypit 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No, the reason Irvin got in this year is because of Troy Aikman and Emmitt Smith complaining last year that Irvin didn't get in!
Plus Irvin is more of a ball hog and media hog that Monk was!!
2007-02-04 06:44:42 · answer #5 · answered by mikea_va 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No the answer is that Irvin was regarded as a go to guy, and Monk was looked at more as a possesion reciever.
2007-02-04 05:53:10 · answer #6 · answered by Kenneth W 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Monk played on 2 Super Bowl winning teams, winning Super Bowl XXII and XXVI with the Redskins.
The answer isn't in the postseason.
2007-02-04 05:54:51 · answer #7 · answered by TheOnlyBeldin 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋