Saturday, August 26, 2006
Where's the Justice?...
Here are two lines of two former NFL Wide Receivers...
a. 336 catches, 5,462 yards, 51 touchdowns, never had 1,000 yards, best season: 61 catches for 880 yards, only twice 50 or more catches
b. 940 catches, 12,721 yards, 68 touchdowns, five 1,000-yard seasons, 6 seasons over 70 catches
Care to guess which line belongs to an NFL Hall of Famer?
If you guessed b, you all logic says you are right but logic does not seem to count with the NFL Hall of Fame voters because the answer is a.
The a. line belongs to Lynn Swann while the b line belongs to Art Monk who inexplicably is not in the Hall of Fame. Monk not being in the Hall of Fame makes about as much sense as giving Mike Tyson a Nobel Peace Prize.
Look at what the guy did during his career. Not only was he steady, but for a few years in the mid 80s he was the game’s best receiver. He was the first person to catch 900 passes and in 1984, he broke the single-season record for catches with 106. Before Jerry Rice came along, Monk also held the record for most consecutive games with at least one catch at 183. That means he was good enough to get open in over 100 straight games and catch a pass. As of now, he has more catches than any other receiver in the Hall of Fame? And yet he is not a Hall of Famer? Talk about a crime.
Hey, I like Lynn Swann and he was a clutch receiver but to put him in the Hall of Fame and leave Monk out is a travesty. Listen, I understand that numbers alone should not be the only barometer for a person earning Hall of Fame status. If a person does not have lofty numbers I can understand them still getting in if they were steady for a long time or if they always delivered in the clutch or if they were at least dominant for a few years.
Let’s examine Swann’s case. Obviously, his career numbers are hardly Hall of Fame material. He does not even rank in the top 50 in any major category. Granted, he played in a different era but the bottom line is he did not even come close to being a major producer long enough to warrant Hall of Fame status. The guy only played nine years. His rookie year he caught 11 balls and his last two he was not a factor. So the guy had six decent years, but not six eye-popping years.
Okay, you say, but he was outstanding in Super Bowls. No argument here on that one. He had two 100-yard super bowl games and caught a touchdown pass in three games as well. And everyone knows about the amazing catches he made in Super Bowl X when he won MVP. But if they’re going to put players in the Hall of Fame for great super bowl performances alone then they might as well let guys like Doug Williams, Timmy Smith and Jim Plunkett in.
Here’s something else to chew on. Terrell Davis is up for the Hall of Fame this year and a lot of talk that I hear is that he will not get in. I agree with that because as dominant as he was for a few years he didn’t do it long enough. However, using the Swann theory he should get in because unlike Swann, Davis did dominate, did consistently post big numbers and also excelled in big games. In fact, Davis rushed for over 100 yards in his last 7 playoff games. Still, Davis likely will not get in and Swann will.
But I’m getting off the subject. Let’s get back to Art Monk.
Now as his numbers above show, Monk was much more steady for a longer period of time than Swann. However, as regular readers on here know it’s not so much with me as how much you produce as when you produce (that’s why I always prefer a guy like Tom Brady to Peyton Manning, although Manning is a Hall of Famer because he meets the criteria of putting up outstanding numbers for a long period of time unlike Swann did).
But Monk answers the bell there as well since he played on three Redskins teams that won super bowls and four that reached the super bowl. He also had a 100-yard game in Super Bowl XXVI. Like Swann’s Steelers, the Redskins consistently won when he played. And unlike Swann, Monk did not play with a team that had the most dominant defense and he did not play with a Hall of Fame quarterback. In fact, Monk put up solid numbers on three world championship teams that were led by three different quarterbacks, Joe Theismann, Williams and Mark Rypien...three guys that will never whiff the Hall of Fame. So Monk shatters the criteria while Swann comes up short and yet Swann is in and Monk is out.
Where’s the justice?
Here’s the bottom line. One can make all the excuses they want about Monk. They can say he wasn’t dominant or that he wasn’t as feared as other receivers of his time. They can debate his greatness and things of that nature. But what it comes down to is you have to measure him against the other receivers in the Hall and when you do that, it is clear that Monk belongs.
Here are two other names to think about: Steve Largent and Charlie Joiner. These two guys held the receptions record before Monk. Both are in the Hall of Fame. Largent was a great receiver who put up some darn good numbers like Monk. But unlike Monk, Largent led the Seahawks to one division championship and was part of teams that won three playoff games during his career. He made it to the AFC championship just once as well, in 1983.
Then there’s Joiner who played for 18 years and was never higher than third in receptions or yards. The case a lot of people make against Monk is that he was steady but not great (even though he broke the single-season record for receptions). Yet Joiner is in the Hall and Monk isn’t.
This is a sham and each year these idiot voters do not check Monk’s name the Hall loses more and more credibility and talk of politics becomes more rampant. Think about it. Swann and Largent were regarded as great people and they always seemed to do interviews. Monk also has been a great person in his community, doing wonderful charity work, but he shied away from interviews and the spotlight.
Makes one wonder if he’s now being blacklisted by those same people.
I would like to think that the voters are not that petty but as the years go by and Monk continues to get snubbed it looks more and more as if that could be the case.
Do the right thing next year, voters. Put Art Monk in the Hall of Fame and salvage your credibility.
|
