NoCalMike 0 Report post Posted November 25, 2005 The problem with Monk, is he was from the 80's era of the NFL, and he is being judged against the 90's era WRs. If you look at Monk's stats from the 80's, only Jerry Rice kept up with him. No other receivers were close, it wasn't normal for WRs to being what Monk and Rice did in the 80's, but he is unfairly being judged by TODAY's Standard of WR. Your HOF credentials should be judged based on when you retire, not the current year it is today. Monk also had Williams, Theismann, and Rypien, while Rice had Montana and Young. Monk also had Ricky Sanders and Gary Clark as fellow WRs which definately would help reduce the number of balls thrown his way. You ask all the "experts" and analyists who actually were old enough during the 80's and they all say hands down that Monk is a HOFer and that it is a travesty that he keeps getting passed on. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
the pinjockey 0 Report post Posted November 25, 2005 I disagree that he is being compared to today's players, at least in my arguement. Going back to my arguement showing where he ranks in the Top 10 each season and in Pro Bowls is comparing him to his generation of receivers. I just don't see how everyone could have seen him as a sure fire HOFer when they only put him in 3 Pro Bowls. While Pro Bowls certainly aren't always right in who gets the spots, but they do typically portray what the reputation of the player is around the league. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
