Excuse!?? It's laughable that you attack me and my arguments and call them excuses. Is 1.5 pass attempts per game a big difference? Did the AFL revolutionize the passing game? Was the AFL a pass happy league. Here, I'll answer them for you.... 1.5 pass attempts per game is NOT a big difference The AFL DID revolutionize the passing game in professional football And Yes the AFL was a pass happy league. To your first point, I understand why you prorated Alworth's stats to 16 games. I said there was nothing to indicate that he would have had another prorated 70+ catch season after he had retired if he had instead kept playing. He was already on the down swing of his career. Monk on the other hand continued to play at a high level into his mid 30's (an 86 catch season in 1989 at 32 and a 71 catch season in 1991 at 34). Oh...right he was a compiler No one had more receptions than Monk from 1984-91 Only 3 receivers had more receptions than Monk from 1988-91 No one had more 70+ catch seasons prior to 1994 prorated or not prorated Monk was the first receiver to have over 900 career receptions Monk had the most career receptions when he retired Monk set the record for most receptions in a season and was the first NFL player to have over 100 receptions in a season Monk converted 64% of his receptions into first downs Monk had the most consecutive games with a catch when he retired Monk was asked to become more of a blocker and play a TE type role which he excelled at A majority of Monk's routes were over the middle into the teeth of the defense That's a pretty impressive resume no matter how you look at it.
1.5 more is more though, right? it's not a big difference but YOU were the one who made the point about Alworth playing in the pass happy AFL, right? I wasn't talking about Alworth playing past 1978, I was talking about IF he played 16 games a year in his prime he would have had 70+ recs in more seasons than Monk. those overall #s looks nice BUT: In 15+ seasons: 4 top 10 rec seasons 3 top 10 rec yd seasons 1 top 10 rec TD seasons He's not a deserving HOFer. Alot of those "firsts" for Monk had to do w/ him playing more games than others, he was one of the first good WRs to play his entire career in 16 game seasons and he played over 15 years. He was the definition of a compiler, he wasn't a great player.
Are you saying the AFL was NOT a pass happy league? Please tell me you are not making this suggestion. I understand that. What I'm saying is that it is unlikely Alworth would have had another season where he would have had a pro rated 70 catch season. This is beyond silly at this point. Not being in the Top 10 does not disqualify Monk's accomplishments. No receiver had more receptions from 1984-1991. Maybe there were a lot of compilers that pushed him out of the Top 10. I tried to explain that to you earlier. In 1988 he finished 9th in the NFL in receptions by 1 reception. In 1991 he finished 11th in receptions and was out of the Top 10 by 1 reception. Your argument consists of one reception for 1991. Is that really a big deal? The only player that would have had 900 receptions if you pro rate it out is Charlie Joiner, but that's reaching a lot as he didn't play much before he went to SD. A compiler isn't someone who had an 8 year stretch where he caught more passes than anyone. A compiler isn't someone who had more 70+ catch seasons than anyone else.
Sure the AFL was pass happy but it's a silly point to bring up in this discussion when Art's teams threw more than Alworth's teams. Not being top 10 ends this discussion, it proves he was a compiler. To be top 10 only 1,3,4 times in 15+ years is not HOF material. It doesn't matter if it was by 1 rec or by 50 recs, you don't think that happened w/ other WRs? Let's have more fun w/ prorating, let's prorate some other WRs #s using Monk's games played. Monk: 224 games, 940 recs, 12721 yds, 68 TDs Let's prorate: Alworth: 893 recs, 16909 yds, 140 TDs HUGE edge Alworth Irvin: 1057 recs, 16770 yds, 92 TDs HUGE edge Irvin I'll even go w/ Keyshawn(also a great blocker who ran routes over the middle frequently): 1092 recs, 14179 yds, 86 TDs HUGE edge Keyshawn Art was a compiler, he wasn't a great player- he does NOT belong in the HOF. Stop w/ the 70+ rec nonsense, that is skewed b/c he played more games. Even w/ those advantages he still only had 4 top 10 rec seasons, 3 yards, 1 TDs.
So if Art got one more reception in 1986 and in 1991 he wouldn't have been a compiler...Damn those two receptions...It could have changed nyjunc's mind Irvin and Keyshawn played a majority of their career during the pass happy era of the NFL. Alworth started wearing down by game number 100 there's no way he keeps up that pace by the time he gets to game 150 never mind 200. Monk was #3 in the NFL in receptions at 32 years old. Alworth began wearing down at 29. Compilers don't end an 8 year stretch with more receptions than anyone else. You prorated some other receivers and they still didn't have more 70+ receptions seasons than Monk. It's completely valid but disproves your theory that he was a compiler which is why you don't want it discussed. Top 10's are meaningless to me. He missed the Top 10 in receptions twice by ONE reception. BFD. His game was not to get a ton of yards and the Redskins offense ran often when they got inside the RedZone limiting his TDs.
If you want to make the claim that he was a compiler becuase of his final four seasons well, this is where he was after 1991. Number 2 all time. Take a look at how many games he played versus the rest of the group. He had the third least played games. Guess what else....All of them except one is a HOFer. But yeah....He's a compiler 1 - Steve Largent ( 1976 - 1989 ) 200 games 819 rec 13089 yds 100 TDs 2 - Art Monk ( 1980 - 1991 ) 173 games 801 rec 10984 yds 60 TDs 3 - Charlie Joiner ( 1969 - 1986 ) 239 games 750 rec 12146 yds 65 TDs 4 - James Lofton ( 1978 - 1991 ) 207 games 699 rec 13035 yds 69 TDs 5 - Ozzie Newsome ( 1978 - 1990 ) 198 games 662 rec 7980 yds 47 TDs 6 - Charley Taylor ( 1964 - 1977 ) 165 games 649 rec 9110 yds 79 TDs 7 - Don Maynard ( 1958 - 1973 ) 186 games 633 rec 11834 yds 88 TDs 8 - Raymond Berry ( 1955 - 1967 ) 154 games 631 rec 9275 yds 68 TDs 9 - Harold Carmichael ( 1971 - 1984 ) 182 games 590 rec 8985 yds 79 TDs 10 - Fred Biletnikoff ( 1965 - 1978 ) 190 games 589 rec 8974 yds 76 TDs
What Murrell2878 seems to be missing is that the number of completions is not what a receiver contributes to win games for his team. The single most important statistic for a receiver (or any offensive player) is touchdowns per game. Clearly this is only an abberation if the guy played for less than a doen games but otherwise this is the best measure of greatness for a wide receiver. Tochdowns in playoff games and the superbowl should probably carry a bit more weight but otherwise this one would rank up there. Next in importance would be yards per game. While moving the chains and getting yards does not contribute to winning as directly as scoring it is very important for a receiver to rack up yards to help his team. Considering that it is possible to get a completion and lose yards or fumble the ball, completions per game would rank a distant third in order of importance. Total TDs, total yards, and total completions (in that order) would come next. With this in mind, having the second most total completions ever as of 1991 does not necessarily make Monk a great player. I would say that an average of 4.63 completions per game is a tribute to Monk's consistency but without the yards and touchdowns, greatness is a stretch.
if he gets one more rec he only has 6 top 10 season sout of 15, still very low but better. The problem is he didn't get those recs. Here we go w/ the pass happy comment. Let's look at both: Art Monk's skins: 1980-1992: averaged 511 passes per season Michael irvin's Cowboys 1988-1998: averaged 497 passes per season Key('96-'99 NYJ, '00-'02 TB, '04-'05 Dal, '06 Car): averaged 549 a season You act like Art's teams threw it 300 times a year and these other WRs teams attempted 600 a year. Compilers compile #s over time but areen't great in those individual seasons, he had about 2-3 HOF worthy seasons among 15+ seasons. He is a classic compiler. Who cares about 70 plus recs? Those WRs prorarted ended up w/ more recs, much more yds and much more TDs.
There is no problem that he didn't get 1 more reception during those seasons. His numbers were comparable to the guys who were in the Top 10 and that's all that matters. It's very likely that there were a few receivers that compiled extra receptions during the season because there teams were behind in the 4th quarter and threw more while the Redskins ran the ball in the 4th. Even though you keep saying it doesn't make it true. He was not a compiler. I have proven that to be true in so many different posts here. Here's another one: Alworth - 136 games had 542 receptions. Monk thru 136 games had 633 receptions. I'll quote myself again to you in case you missed it
Not only is Dick Felt my favorite Jet players name but in college he scored 4 TD's in one quarter. Also was a great American playing service football for the Air Force. I can honestly say I love my Dick Felt.
What?! This is complete BS JH. Touchdowns are typically determined by philosophy and play call. The Redskins didn't throw often when they got inside the RedZone. Monk was not a yards guy but that doesn't mean he didn't help his team win. Especially considering 64% of his receptions went for first downs. Monk contributed to his teams success in other ways as well such as blocking and playing the middle of the field that allowed Clark and Sanders to succeed on the outside.
I came across a list of the top 10 greatest receivers of all time that I think is pretty accurate (see below). There are one or two guys that might be more deserving but these ten guys clearly belong in the top 12. One thing all of these guys have in common is that they were the # 1 WR on their teams and they found their way into the RedZone. They didn't just help their teammates look good, they dominated opposing defenses and left their mark. January 6, 2008 Long bombers All-time greatest NFL receivers By TED WYMAN Football fans everywhere have a unique opportunity to watch three of the best players at their positions in the history of the game during the NFL playoffs. Yes, that description would certainly apply to quarterbacks Brett Favre, Tom Brady and Peyton Manning, but it could just as easily be about the current crop of wide receivers and three particular players who figure to be front and centre in the post-season. Love them or hate them, you can't dispute Randy Moss and Terrell Owens are extraordinary game-breakers who make quarterbacks better and make defensive backs wish they worked at Taco Bell. The same goes for Marvin Harrison, although the classy Colts star certainly doesn't share an ability to annoy as much as entertain with Moss and Owens. Of course, the presence of these three stars in the NFL playoffs (assuming Harrison and Owens recover from nagging injuries) gets us to thinking about just where they fit in among the greats of all time. And so we present our top 10 NFL receivers (not including tight ends) in history. 10. Steve Largent This former Seattle Seahawks star was once the most prolific pass-catcher in the game, although his career records for receptions (819), receiving yards (13,089) and touchdown catches (100) have all been surpassed by numerous players. The seven-time Pro Bowler wasn't particularly fast, but was as sure-handed as any receiver who ever played and averaged 16 yards per catch before moving into the political arena to become a congressman. 9. Cris Carter Once cut by Eagles coach Buddy Ryan because of persistent off-field problems, Carter flourished as a Minnesota Viking and finished his career second in all-time receptions with 1,101 and touchdowns (130) and played in eight Pro Bowls. He racked up 13,899 yards and averaged 12.6 yards per catch, a relatively low average which was offset by the fact that 12% of his catches were for touchdowns. In fact, it was Ryan who once derogatorily said: "All he does is catch touchdowns." You got that right, Buddy. 8. Paul Warfield Playing with the Browns and Dolphins in the '60s and '70s, Warfield hauled in only 427 passes, but racked up an incredible 8,565 yards, an average of 20.1 per catch. The fact that a whopping 20% of his catches went for touchdowns (he had 85 in his career) proves that he was one of the truly great deep threats of all time. 7. Tim Brown Originally more highly regarded as a kick returner than a receiver, Brown shed that stigma to become a star in both disciplines. The 1987 Heisman Trophy winner retired with the second-most receiving yards in NFL history (14,934) and the third-most receptions (1,094) and had 100 receiving touchdowns. He made the Pro Bowl nine times and averaged 13.7 yards per catch. 6. Lance Alworth A former AFL star with the San Diego Chargers, who later played in the NFL with the Dallas Cowboys, Alworth racked up 10,266 yards on 542 receptions over 10 seasons. His average of 18.9 yards per catch set him apart, as did the fact that he scored 85 touchdowns (he scored a TD on 16% of his catches). He still holds the record for the most 200-plus-yard games in his career, with five. 5. Marvin Harrison With Peyton Manning throwing and Harrison catching, the Indianapolis Colts have been an offensive juggernaut for many years. Harrison, 35, had an NFL record 143 catches in 2002 alone and has 1,042 overall, with time to build on his legacy. Before this injury-plagued season, Harrison averaged 93 catches per season, another all-time high. Harrison has 13,944 yards and 123 touchdowns and had been named to the Pro Bowl eight times. 4. Terrell Owens He's a buffoon for the most part and has been run out of two cities because of it, but the man can play football. Owens has 129 receiving touchdowns, which is third all-time and has hauled in 882 passes for 13,070 yards. Imagine if only he'd had a decent quarterback at any time prior to hooking up with Tony Romo in Dallas (his words, not ours). Good thing he has the numbers on the field because Owens is also one of the all-time leaders in creating controversy, what with the Sharpie incident, the "suicide attempt," the Desperate Housewives skit and his suggestion that former teammate Jeff Garcia was gay, even though the QB is now married to a Playboy playmate. 3. Randy Moss Perhaps the best of all time at going over top of defensive backs to make big catches, Moss has flourished this season with the mighty New England Patriots, setting an NFL record for touchdowns by a receiver (23) and forming a lethal combination with gunslinger Tom Brady. At age 30, Moss already has 774 receptions for 12,193 yards and 124 touchdowns. He's a six-time Pro Bowler and huge deep threat who averages 15.8 yards per catch and scores on 16% of his receptions. 2. Don Hutson Starring for the Green Bay Packers from 1935-1945, Hutson led the league in receptions eight times, receiving yards seven times and receiving touchdowns nine times, all NFL records which still stand. He caught only 488 passes, but 99 of them went for touchdowns (20%) and he averaged 16.4 yards per catch while compiling 7,991 yards. Hutson was one of four receivers named to the NFL's 75th Anniversary Team and was No. 6 on Football's 100 Greatest Players put together by The Sporting News. 1. Jerry Rice This one is a no-brainer. Rice retired with career records for receptions (1,549), yards (22,895) and touchdowns (209 overall, 197 receiving) and is considered a candidate as the best player of all-time, let alone the best receiver. He had 448 more receptions than Carter, 7,961 more yards than Brown and 67 more receiving touchdowns than Carter. He holds numerous other records, including the single-season receiving yards mark of 1,848, set in 1995. Rice made the Pro Bowl 13 times, was named to the NFL's 75th Anniversary Team and was No. 2 (behind Jim Brown) on The Sporting News Top-100. Honourable Mentions: Raymond Berry, Elroy (Crazy Legs) Hirsch, Art Monk, Fred Biletnikoff, Charlie Joiner, James Lofton, Michael Irvin, Isaac Bruce.
You are posting in a thread where Pro Bowl appearances, All-Pro recognition, retired players, and statistics are being mentioned. You had better get your facts right and spell names correctly. If you can't do that, then bow out.
Yes, I know that. I think that farce was the last straw for me as far as the Pro Bowl was concerned. There were two or three AFC QBs who sat out the Pro Bowl due to real or phony injuries. I was pissed that O'Brien got to go to Hawai'i and go down in history as a Pro Bowler when he was incredibly mediocre in 1991. Hey, helped take the team to the playoffs and all, but he was up and down that year for sure. I think you thought I was clueless on the matter because I wrote that O'Brien "made" the Pro Bowl in 1991. There was nothing wrong with me writing it in that manner. Every Pro Bowler "made" the Pro Bowl. Some made it through voting and some made it as injury replacements. That's fair commentary there. I am not going to disagree with that. I was thinking that because this is the 3rd or 4th separate time we've debated on Art Monk and nobody ever changes anyone else's opinion, that maybe we should do something different. I was thinking that maybe Murrell2878 and myself should present solid reasons as to why Monk should not have been enshrined in the PFHOF. Then, nyjunc and James Hasty would comment on why Monk absolutely does belong in the PFHOF. If we were all to do such a thing, I'd attack Monk's lack of All-Pro recognition. My #2 argument would be his lack of touchdowns relative to his reception total. I wouldn't have anything substantial to argue after that. Those two points would provide all the ammunition I would need. For the most part, I think you are being fair here. I don't agree with everything you've written, but at least you are not coming out of left field like another guy in this thread. That's right. He broke his foot prior to the postseason. He didn't play again till Week 5 of 1983. I think he sprained his knee that summer. He was a key contributor to the 1983 Redskins offense which was one of the best in league history and certainly Washington's history. My point here is that the Washington offense during the first Gibbs era achieved great things without Clark. Monk, on the other hand, was one of the only constants. Clark and Monk complemented one another. I liked both almost equally and really don't want to knock either one.
You could have mentioned the spelling mistake earlier instead of making subtle wiseass comments and I would have spelled it correctly the next time. Also, I was going through a lot of material so some of the posts were rush jobs. As for the pro bowl stats I provided a link to the website that I used where they bolded the starters. If pro-football-reference.com has an error as to who the starter is then my posts contain that error. Feel free to point those errors out but trying to discredit my other comments over these fine points or spelling is intellectually dishonest.
The spelling error was pointed out once. You then made it again. I then pointed it out a scond time. It was the second time when the "subtle wiseass comments" were made. I pointed out those errors and, yes, it is fair for me to discredit some of your commentary after some of the particular errors you made. If you were paying attention to the NFL in 1985, you would have known that Ron Brown was a Pro Bowl returner and not a Pro Bowl WR. You did not simply copy and paste p-f-r's list. Rather, you looked at it and then presented a list in your own words. I don't even know how you came up with "James" Tilley. Your Brown and Henry Ellard errors are inexcusable. You presented factually incorrect material to use in your crusade against Monk. Now that is intellectually dishonest.
I gave you the website I referenced. I took material from that website, organized it in Excel and posted my conclusions in this thread. Admittedly it was a rush job and there was a lot of material to go through but I did correctly post all of the NFC WRs in the pro bowl for each year. My only error was that I interpreted bolding to indicate which receivers started. With that being said, Gary Clark and Jerry Rice clearly outperformed Monk in terms of touchdowns, yards, and even completions in 1986. I listed Monk as a possible starter in 1985 but mentioned that three players were bolded for that year. The only mistake I made was when I stated that Ellard started over Monk in 1984. Having watched Ellard connect on many deep passes with Jim Everett in the 1980s I still think Everett was a better WR than Monk but in 1984 Monk was the better receiver of the two.
Privately, somebody else also found some of your mistakes to have been embarrassing. See the problem is that by claiming Ellard started at WR in the Pro Bowl after the '84 season and Ron Brown the same thing the following year it casted doubt if you actually experienced those seasons as a fan. For all we know, you could be a 15-year old kid relying on p-f-r to have all their shit together. (On a scale of 1-10, I'll give that reference site a 7 at this time. They have cleaned up some errors in recent years, but there is still a lot of incorrect and/or confusing data there.) You hit on something here. Ellard was a speedy deep threat. That is what he did best. He did not do the dirty work that Monk did. In my opinion, there is no question that Monk was the better player than Ellard. There's been a lot of talk in this thread about how Monk was a compiler. Well, let's compare Ellard and Monk using regular season stats. Ellard- 228 career games, 814 receptions Monk- 224 career games, 940 receptions Monk had 126 more receptions in four fewer games. Perhaps achiever is a more appropriate label than compiler.
Rod Smith, Ed Macaffrey, Jeff Garcia, Brad Johnson, Jason Elam, Curtis Martin, Tim Brown, Troy Brown, Sebastien Janikowski, Mike Anderson...
The problem with your logic is that the achiever had more than 1,000 less yards than Ellard did. Completions are all well and good but TDs and yardage contribute more to the success of the team.
