NFL Discussion Forumtable

[snuffbox 0]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/foot...k.ap/index.html

 

Respect us, plz.

[Guest "Go, Mordecai!"]

It's football. Excuse me, but I didn't know that football players were expected to live injury-free lives. No, seriously, I didn't know that, since for all intents and purposes Boston has only really had a pro football team for like nine years. Belichick is just trying to win, so can you blame him? I know I can't, and I know the Sports Gal can't, and I know my my old buddy Jumper Cable doesn't blame him. One time Jumper Cable and I were out drinking after we watched Larry Legend score 40 against the Warriors at the old Boston Garden, drinking at this great pub called Tom's, and I swear, Jumper Cable must've downed a whole pitcher of Schaefer. He had to get his stomach pumped and probably had incurred some brain damage that night. Sometimes he just sort of shuffles around his apartment totally lost. It's a sad sight, almost sadder than Bucky F***ing Dent, but not quite. Now just because I bought the beer that night and didn't tell Jumper Cable to slow down, does that make his condition my fault? Of course not. He knew what he was doing, at least for a while. It's the same with Bill Belichick, but at least for this guy (I can't be bothered to remember these guys' names), he suffered for the greater good and helped New England become the greatest dynasty in football, so he should be satisfied with that deep down in his heart, even if he can't be satisfied in his mind. Otherwise he's just being a special kind of ungrateful. I call it Johnny Damon Ungrateful. You don't like the way Belichick runs his teams? Do you have three rings? Tom Brady bangs supermodels and you don't. Deep down, sports fans want to be us.

[Cartman 0]

Yet earlier this season he was willing to come back? Right.

 

Former Patriots [team stats]linebacker Ted Johnson would have considered coming back to play this year had the team called.

“After (Junior) Seau went down I must have gotten 10 messages from my friends saying, ‘You’re going to get a call, you’re going to get a call.’ And I never did,” Johnson said yesterday on 890 ESPN radio. “But say he (Bill Belichick) did call, I could go out there right now and do goal-line, short-yardage stuff.”

[snuffbox 0]

Awesome.

 

What a bunch of goons.

[snuffbox 0]

The Hall got it right and inducted Michael Irvin in today (along with Thurman, Bruce Matthews, Roger Wehrli, Charlie Sanders, & Gene Hickerson).

 

Here's another thing where the NE fans just go right over my head. They seem to be the most vocal idiots in the Favre thread yet here I am, a Dallas Cowboys hater, acknowledging the obvious skill of Irvin. Christ, someone in the Favre thread actually called him 'selfish'...its like for that one bloc of 'fans' the game doesnt even exist outside of their team.

 

Congrats, Playmaker.

[2GOLD 0]

Irvin may be one of the biggest self centered assholes in the league before the existance of T.O, but that guy should be in the Hall so I'm glad he's finally going. Last year it would have been hard after the little problems he had before voting so it's good they didn't hold it against him for long. The voters seem to be in the habit now of making people wait an extra year to vote them in.

 

And has the book fully closed on Art Monk now? I still do not understand how a man the NFL had on their all decade team for the 80s at wide receivers (the ONLY one of the four NOT in the Hall since Rice is basically guaranteed the spot), and the man that Jerry Rice had to pass for the most career receptions is still not in.

[snuffbox 0]

I don't get that either.

[Boon 0]

It's football. Excuse me, but I didn't know that football players were expected to live injury-free lives. No, seriously, I didn't know that, since for all intents and purposes Boston has only really had a pro football team for like nine years. Belichick is just trying to win, so can you blame him? I know I can't, and I know the Sports Gal can't, and I know my my old buddy Jumper Cable doesn't blame him. One time Jumper Cable and I were out drinking after we watched Larry Legend score 40 against the Warriors at the old Boston Garden, drinking at this great pub called Tom's, and I swear, Jumper Cable must've downed a whole pitcher of Schaefer. He had to get his stomach pumped and probably had incurred some brain damage that night. Sometimes he just sort of shuffles around his apartment totally lost. It's a sad sight, almost sadder than Bucky F***ing Dent, but not quite. Now just because I bought the beer that night and didn't tell Jumper Cable to slow down, does that make his condition my fault? Of course not. He knew what he was doing, at least for a while. It's the same with Bill Belichick, but at least for this guy (I can't be bothered to remember these guys' names), he suffered for the greater good and helped New England become the greatest dynasty in football, so he should be satisfied with that deep down in his heart, even if he can't be satisfied in his mind. Otherwise he's just being a special kind of ungrateful. I call it Johnny Damon Ungrateful. You don't like the way Belichick runs his teams? Do you have three rings? Tom Brady bangs supermodels and you don't. Deep down, sports fans want to be us.

Not enough references to Bird and the Yankees, but otherwise spot on.

 

Here's another thing where the NE fans just go right over my head. They seem to be the most vocal idiots in the Favre thread yet here I am, a Dallas Cowboys hater, acknowledging the obvious skill of Irvin. Christ, someone in the Favre thread actually called him 'selfish'...its like for that one bloc of 'fans' the game doesnt even exist outside of their team.

Thank God for you.

[naiwf 0]

Monk only made the Pro Bowl 3 times, may have had one great season in his entire career (in '84, 106 for 1372 & 7 TD). He only had 5 1,000 yard seasons, only had 6 seasons were he caught at least 70 passes, 3 with 80, 2 with 90 and never caught more than 8 TD passes in a year.

 

He was only in the top 10 in receptions 4 times: 1984-1, 1985-2, 1988-9t, 1989-3t

3 times for receiving yards: 1984-4, 1985-3, 1989-10

and a meager once in receiving TDs: 1991-9t

 

He wasn't a great receiver in any given year, he just played for a long time and compiled largely meaningless stats. Basically the whole, "this isn't the Hall of Very Good" argument.

 

 

EDIT: Just for comparison's sake here's Isaac Bruce's career to date.

 

He's made the Pro Bowl 4 times, with his best season at 119 for 1781 & 13 TD. He has 8 1,000 yard seasons, 7 seasons were he caught at least 70 passes, 4 with 80, 1 with 90 and 3 seasons with at least 9 TD passes in a year.

 

2x in Receptions: 1995-4, 2004-8t

4x in Receiving yards: 1995-2, 1996-1, 2000-3, 2004-5

3x in Receiving TDs: 1995-6t, 1999-2t, 2000-6t

2x in Yards from scrimmage: 1995-4, 1996-10

2x in Rush/Receive TDs: 1995-10t, 1999-7t

 

Career wise Monk has more catches 940 to 887, but Bruce has surpassed him in both yards and TDS (13,376 & 80 to 12,721 & 68). I'm not sure if Bruce is retiring this year, but in any case I don't think too many people would be adamant about Isaac making the HOF and numerically he's superior to Monk.

[NoCalMike 0]

Monk only made the Pro Bowl 3 times, may have had one great season in his entire career (in '84, 106 for 1372 & 7 TD). He only had 5 1,000 yard seasons, only had 6 seasons were he caught at least 70 passes, 3 with 80, 2 with 90 and never caught more than 8 TD passes in a year.

 

He was only in the top 10 in receptions 4 times: 1984-1, 1985-2, 1988-9t, 1989-3t

3 times for receiving yards: 1984-4, 1985-3, 1989-10

and a meager once in receiving TDs: 1991-9t

 

He wasn't a great receiver in any given year, he just played for a long time and compiled largely meaningless stats. Basically the whole, "this isn't the Hall of Very Good" argument.

 

 

EDIT: Just for comparison's sake here's Isaac Bruce's career to date.

 

He's made the Pro Bowl 4 times, with his best season at 119 for 1781 & 13 TD. He has 8 1,000 yard seasons, 7 seasons were he caught at least 70 passes, 4 with 80, 1 with 90 and 3 seasons with at least 9 TD passes in a year.

 

2x in Receptions: 1995-4, 2004-8t

4x in Receiving yards: 1995-2, 1996-1, 2000-3, 2004-5

3x in Receiving TDs: 1995-6t, 1999-2t, 2000-6t

2x in Yards from scrimmage: 1995-4, 1996-10

2x in Rush/Receive TDs: 1995-10t, 1999-7t

 

Career wise Monk has more catches 940 to 887, but Bruce has surpassed him in both yards and TDS (13,376 & 80 to 12,721 & 68). I'm not sure if Bruce is retiring this year, but in any case I don't think too many people would be adamant about Isaac making the HOF and numerically he's superior to Monk.

 

1. Art Monks #'s Rec - 940 Yards - 12721 Y/R - 13.5 Tds - 68

 

2. Micheal Irvin #'s Rec - 750 Yards - 11904 Y/R - 15.9 Tds - 65

 

Art Monk also played with Ricky Sanders and Gary Clark, and before they came along it was a run-oriented offense with Riggins.

Michael Irvin was the lone Wide Receiving threat besides the couple of years Al Harper was worth a damn.

 

I'm sorry, but WTF is a meaningless stat? Is catching the ball for a third down conversion a "meaningless stat" because it didn't make sportscenter? Define meaningless stat. If it is third down and the ball is coming your way, whether 13 yards are needed or 4 yards are needed, how is it "meaningless" to be the go-to guy in those situations throughout your entire career!?! Yes, I understand a lot of players sometimes compile garbage yards at the end of games when the game is out of hand, but I dare you to show me that is how Monk compiled his stats. Plus, and people need to realize this, you should be judged against Wide Receivers of YOUR OWN ERA, not the next generation or two generations later. It would be silly to suggest that we go through the HOF and throw out players from the 60's and 70's because their stats don't compare to players of today, yet that is exactly what people are doing with Monk who played his prime years in the 80's. It doesn't matter which of Art Monk's records have been broken SINCE HE RETIRED. The more important fact is that he retired with those records. Oh and number of probowls is the most meaningless stat ever and should by courtesy to all NFL players, be thrown out as a consideration for the HOF. I am not even trying to say Irvin shouldn't be in, but Art Monk should have been in years ago.

[snuffbox 0]

He's not famous enough! Not enough Pro Bowls 'n' shit!

[The Robfather 0]

in a bit of other news...

 

Church To Defy NFL, Show Super Bowl With Projector

[2GOLD 0]

in a bit of other news...

 

Church To Defy NFL, Show Super Bowl With Projector

 

Jesus vs The National Football League...I smell a Budweiser ad.

[Guest]

I'm not sure if Bruce is retiring this year, but in any case I don't think too many people would be adamant about Isaac making the HOF and numerically he's superior to Monk.

Sorry, but I'd put both of them in.

[Vern Gagne 0]

Jerry Rice isn't eligible until 2012. One of the two should make it between 08-11.

[naiwf 0]

1. Art Monks #'s Rec - 940 Yards - 12721 Y/R - 13.5 Tds - 68

 

2. Micheal Irvin #'s Rec - 750 Yards - 11904 Y/R - 15.9 Tds - 65

 

Art Monk also played with Ricky Sanders and Gary Clark, and before they came along it was a run-oriented offense with Riggins.

Michael Irvin was the lone Wide Receiving threat besides the couple of years Al Harper was worth a damn.

 

I'm sorry, but WTF is a meaningless stat? Is catching the ball for a third down conversion a "meaningless stat" because it didn't make sportscenter? Define meaningless stat. If it is third down and the ball is coming your way, whether 13 yards are needed or 4 yards are needed, how is it "meaningless" to be the go-to guy in those situations throughout your entire career!?! Yes, I understand a lot of players sometimes compile garbage yards at the end of games when the game is out of hand, but I dare you to show me that is how Monk compiled his stats. Plus, and people need to realize this, you should be judged against Wide Receivers of YOUR OWN ERA, not the next generation or two generations later. It would be silly to suggest that we go through the HOF and throw out players from the 60's and 70's because their stats don't compare to players of today, yet that is exactly what people are doing with Monk who played his prime years in the 80's. It doesn't matter which of Art Monk's records have been broken SINCE HE RETIRED. The more important fact is that he retired with those records. Oh and number of probowls is the most meaningless stat ever and should by courtesy to all NFL players, be thrown out as a consideration for the HOF. I am not even trying to say Irvin shouldn't be in, but Art Monk should have been in years ago.

 

No one is saying to throw people OUT of the HOF. The simple fact is that the more years that pass without Monk IN the Hall of Fame the more meager his stats are going to look and the less impressive he'll appear. As far as meaningless stats go, it's for those guys who could have retired at their peak but were so in love with chasing numbers/paychecks that they extended their careers anywhere from 3 to 5 extra years as a shell of themselves. Emmitt and Favre immediately comes to mind, Monk extending his career by going to the Jets and then Philly after 2 seasons where he put up combined numbers of 87 catches for 1,042 yards and 5 TDs. The last 4 seasons (if you include the 3 games w/Philly) of his career were meaningless.

 

Irvin was arguably one of, if not the most dominant receiver(s) in his era not named Jerry Rice. Monk wasn't even the dominant receiver on most of the TEAMS he played for. Had Irvin not been hurt he too could have stayed a few years beyond his prime and added another 120-200 catches for 1,000 to 1,500 yards and another 6-12 TDs and put Monk in his rear view mirror by a wide margin. Monk's not a Hall of Famer because he was never great or dominant.

[snuffbox 0]

I'll never stop laughing at how the naifs of the world can equate "2005" to 3-5 years.

[KingPK 0]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/foot...k.ap/index.html

 

Respect us, plz.

 

The guy's life has gone to shit the last few years, so now he's trying to find anything to put the blame on. He probably should have got the message BEFORE he got THREE more concussions, but it seems like he didn't, so he's gotta blame himself just as much. If he really wants to play that game, blame the players union for having no real program for retired players who struggle with life after football and the physical toll it takes on their bodies and become addicted to painkillers. Gene Upshaw needs to grow some balls and challenge the league on this stuff and put more padding in the helmets or something.

 

If he blames Belichick in part for what's happened to him, he wouldn't have wanted to come back as referenced earlier. Besides, he says in that article that Belichick told him he made a mistake, so that's pretty much a non-story.

[naiwf 0]

I'll never stop laughing at how the naifs of the world can equate "2005" to 3-5 years.

 

2005, 2006, 2007.

 

Looks like 3 to me. That also assumes Brett doesn't come back in 2008 and beyond.

[snuffbox 0]

Do you even watch football? He had almost 4,000 yards this season, his team went from 4-12 to a playoff-contending-until-the-final-afternoon-of-the-season 8-8, and AGAIN played through several injuries. And, uh, the 2007 season wont start for several months.

 

A bad season, a good season, and a season in the future = 3-5 bad seasons played. Jesus Christ.

[naiwf 0]

We agree, a 70.9 QB rating with a -9 (20/29) TD/INT ratio is a bad season. This was easily his worst season statistically speaking.

 

We disagree here because a 72.7 QB rating (good for 6th WORST in the league) with an even (18/18) TD/INT ratio is NOT a good season. It's strikingly mediocre, and rates as his 3rd worst season by the numbers. Lowest completion %, 2nd lowest YPA, one of the 4 seasons where he didn't throw more TDs than INTs.

 

I don't see him doing that much better in 2007 since he'll be a year older and playing against a tougher schedule. But hey feel free to tell me about the yardage and how the Packers were in it to the end of the season in a conference where the Giants lost 6 of their last 8 and STILL made the postseason. He's not as good as he once was, doesn't need the money, his team isn't thisclose to a championship. He's the definition of a guy hanging on too long, which is his choice, but doesn't negate what it is.

[KingPK 0]

I'm looking through Favre's 2006 game log right now. His performance was REALLY inconsistent and his passer rating steadily declined month to month (87.2 in Sept, 75.8 in Oct, 72.7 in Nov, 62.2 in Dec). His December rating is actually saved a bit by a big game against San Fran (111.5); his highest rating the rest of the month was a 70.0 in the finale against Chicago. He threw 10 TDs to just 5 INTs in the first two months, but then threw 13 INTs to 8 TDs in the second half. That's NOT something you want to see from a QB you are counting on in January.

 

I wouldn't call his '06 season "good" by any stretch. He had good games, but they came against the likes of Detroit, Arizona and SF. When he played good teams, or at least, good defenses (NE, Philly, Jets, Buffalo), he was pretty poor. He had one good game against Miami, but that's it. He threw for a lot of yards but compounded that by not throwing TDs/throwing too many picks. Example: Against Seattle, he threw for 266 yards, but he also threw three picks to just one TD.

 

If anything, the Packers were in the hunt because of the relative mediocrity of the NFC this year.

Edited February 4, 2007 by KingPK

[Boon 0]

Guys, Brett Favre's passes cure AIDS.

[tominator89 0]

Art Monk will probably be robbed again next year with Cris Carter being eligible.

[Guest "Go, Mordecai!"]

Guys, Brett Favre's passes cure AIDS.

Let's stop while we're ahead.

[snuffbox 0]

Nah, saying he had a pretty obvious comeback season that showed he can still play well in a system he's familiar with while surrounded by a team that respects him/wants to play with him/wants to win for & with him is a concept far too dificult to grasp. Mindless hyperbole is the way to go here.

[Guest "Go, Mordecai!"]

Clearly, Brett Favre should be unceremoniously fired while Packers fans applaud the brilliant decision. That's the Belichick Way. Well, that and banging secretaries. But yeah, out with the old, in with the new. In with...Aaron Rodgers.

 

I wish the guy would go away, since I still fear that he'll rekindle the magic exclusively against the Chicago Bears, but I can respect that as one of the greatest quarterbacks in history, he controls his own destiny. And he should, really.

[naiwf 0]

Eli Manning had better seasons than Brett Favre each of the last 2 years and he's TERRIBLE. Let that sink in. It's not mindless hyperbole, but I guess homers can't stomach the truth.

[Brett Favre 0]

Eli isn't terrible.

[Guest "Go, Mordecai!"]

Not sure I'd call Eli TERRIBLE, but then again I wouldn't call Rex Grossman TERRIBLE either, so maybe I'm just not as discriminating as naiwf. Still, Favre is better than the alternatives.