Comments

1. 

   Drizzle

   February 5, 2007

   Show the stats per season and you will see Irvin has much better numbers. Still can’t stand the guy.

2. 

   cd's nuts

   February 5, 2007

   I don’t necessarily think Monk doesn’t belong but I’ll play Devil’s Advocate for you. I looked a lot of this up to back up some basic thoughts with specific numbers.

   Monk – Seasons among the league’s top 10
   Receptions: 1984, 1985, 1988, 1989
   Receiving yards: 1984, 1985, 1989
   Receiving TDs: 1991
   Yards from scrimmage: none

   Irvin – Seasons among the league’s top 10
   Receptions: 1991, 1992, 1993, 1995
   Receiving yards: 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1997
   Receiving TDs: 1991, 1992, 1993, 1995, 1997
   Yards from scrimmage: 1991, 1992, 1993, 1995

   Items of note:
   -Their bottom line stats may be similar but as Drizzle pointed out, Monk played 224 games to Irvin�s 159. The per game stats break out much differently. When you factor in that Irvin�s career was ended by injury, not obsoleteness, you can see where Irvin probably would have ended up with better stats.
   -Monk didn�t play in the first SB he won a ring for (injury) so his team won in �91 and �87. Compare that to when Monk was top 10, not much overlap.
   -Irvin�s team won in �92, �93 and �95, compare that to his top 10 in the league, looks like he made a significant difference

3. 

   Mike

   February 6, 2007

   There\’s something to be said for longevity. Cal Ripken wasn\’t exactly an amazing ballplayer, but he made the HoF with ease.

4. 

   cd's nuts

   February 6, 2007

   Cal Ripken is better ballplayer than Monk (or Irvin) is a better receiver.

   -was an All-Star 19 of his 21 seasons
   -won several MVPs including the ’91 Player of the Year
   -won 8 Silver Slugger awards

   …and he did all that before he played 2600+ games straight. Are you telling me Monk deserves to becase he played a lot of games like Ripken?

   Monk’s longest streak was 8 season. While impressive, going 8 seasons without getting hurt (or getting into the Pro Bowl for that matter) shouldn’t get you in the HoF. He was there 3 times but Irvin was there for 5.

   Like I said, I’m not against Monk being there. Saying it’s unfair because Irvin (or Ripken) is there is not a valid reason.

5. 

   mjc504

   February 6, 2007

   Thank the Iggles for ending Irvin’s career….I actually think the fans cheered when they realized he was hurt. What a town…..I miss it.

6. 

   cd's nuts

   February 7, 2007

   I went to school in Philly and was actually at that game… and yes, they cheered when the stretcher came out.

7. 

   Mike

   February 7, 2007

   I know of all the awards Cal received, but look at his stats. They aren\’t godly by any means as the awards would leave you to believe.

8. 

   gula

   February 22, 2007

   Monk spent most of his career on a team with two other receiving stars / deep threats (Clark/Sanders, btw, Clark played for JMU, Go Dukes!). Irvin didn’t, he was pretty much the goto guy. That franchise of Cowboys will always only be known for Aikman, Smith, and Irvin. The decade of question for Monk is nowhere near like that. 3 different QBs, atleast as many different RBs, two other receivers that more often than not stole the show.

   HoF picks are retardedly skewed. One of the voters (SI’s Dr. Z) has said Vermeil will get his vote immediately simply because he sent the guy a case of wine back in the 90’s so he’s a “nice guy and deserves it.” Same has been said about Warren Moon, he was nice to the media so despite the strong field he made it.

   http://kissmesuzy.blogspot.com/2006/08/you-can-be-hall-of-famer.html

   Monk was a great player and had great character. Irvin was a great player and a loud mouthed soon to be unemployed coke head.