Pete Prisco the idiot

Defensewins · 02-03-2008, 11:02 AM

This is another situation that you can't just look at the stats and say this guys is better than that guys. You have to look at who they played against. During the 80's and 90's that Reed and Monk played the NFC dominated the AFC, it wasn't even close.
Every year Monk was stuck playing against awesome defense in the dominating NFC: Bears, Dallas, 49ers, Giants, Eagles, Packers.
Monk had 6 tough division games against Dallas, Giants and Eagles who traditionally have tough defenses.
Reed faced traditionally weak defense teams like Jet, Miami and Indianapolis.
From 1982 to 1998 (during their careers) the AFC only won one team won SB 1984 Raiders. This was not a luck of the draw thing. The NFC was that much better than the AFC. Kind of like the opposite situation currently of the AFC being better right now.
Stats are not a tell all.

rypper11 · 02-03-2008, 11:11 AM

The absurdity is arguing for or against players of different eras in different schemes based soley on numbers. Based on this, Vick should go in as "the greatest running threat at QB" because of his rushing yards. Or Timmy Smith deserves it for his SB record. Barry Sanders never owned the rushing yards title or any rings.
Football is an ever-changing game. Not the least of which that Carter and Irvin benefited from was the increased focus on defensive touching while receivers can push off. Judge guys based on their eras, not their numbers only.

Coff · 02-03-2008, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by #56fanatic

he brings valid points to the arguement for the sake of "numbers". However, had Monk been elected when he should have been this wouldn't even have been a debate. Monk deserved to get in 7 years ago.

I usually dont bash writers on here, as they have these jobs because they are good at what they do, but where was this arguement when Irvin was elected prior to Monk?? no one really, outside of Redskin nation, really spoke up for Monk until the last year or so when all the Redskin reports and beat writers started making a stink about it.

Exactly. Prisco is deceptively trying to frame a debate which does not actually exist. The question isn't so much who is better, Monk or Reed, but is Reed that much better than Monk that he should get into the HOF in his third year of eligibility when Monk was elected in his eighth year of eligibility? The numbers Prisco used to make his point only strengthen the argument that, if Monk didn't get in until his 8th year, than Reed should certainly not get in in his 3rd year, since the numbers were very, very comparable.

SouperMeister · 02-03-2008, 11:27 AM

Reed will get in, but comparing him to Monk on pure numbers is kind of silly. Reed played in Buffalo's pass first Red Gun offense with one of the greatest QB's of his generation. Monk played in a grind it out offense with very ordinary QB's that ran the ball probably 75-80% of the time in the Red Zone. Monk was probably the best run blocking WR of his generation, which he did selflessly to help win championships.

And for those who say that Super Bowls shouldn't count for HOF consideration, I say they should be like bonus points. If you were one of the 3 or 4 best players on teams that won multiple Super Bowls, that alone should get you serious consideration. The fact that none of the Hogs (especially Jacoby and Grimm) aren't in is ridiculous when you look at the numbers that Redskins RB's put up during those championship seasons, and ESPECIALLY in the Super Bowl victories.

celts32 · 02-03-2008, 11:28 AM

The hell with this guy...there is a counter opinion to everything.

Mattyk · 02-03-2008, 11:45 AM

I don't even care anymore. Monk is finally in, that's all that matters.

Stuck in TX · 02-03-2008, 12:04 PM

[QUOTE=Bill B;416519]Below is Pete Prisco's take on Art Monk getting in over Andre Reed. Prisco left off that Reed had zero Supre Bowl Rings while Monk had 3.

"Those two failed to get selected to the Hall on Saturday, as six other men beat them out. Dent was a better player than fellow end Fred Dean, who did get elected. Reed was a better player than Art Monk, a receiver who also was part of the 2008 six-man class.
Monk retired as the leading all-time receiver in 1995 with 940 catches, but Reed retired with 951. Reed had 87 touchdown catches, while Monk had 68. Reed averaged 13.9 per catch to Monk's 13.5 per catch.
So who deserved it more?"QUOTE]

I take what Darrell Green said in his comments he made yesterday to heart. Any modern day reciever got to where he is by wanting to be like Art Monk. Art set the bar, allowing for super-overachieving recievers like Randy Moss to excel. Before the student gets in, the teacher should go. Take away Art from the history of the NFL and who knows, recievers who had to work really hard to even get noticed like CJ and Steve Smith at community colleges maybe wouldnt have worked as hard. Reed was really good but no reciever entered the league saying "I want to be good, but not good enough to win." Art knew how to win and therefore inspire, which is greater than all the stats combined!!!!

tdSKINS1 · 02-03-2008, 12:07 PM

hell yea Monk has 3 rings. Did Monk catch a TD in the superbowl? I dont think so but doesn't matter he still was the go to guy at that time, so glad he is finally in. I've had to deal with tons of my dad's bitching for him to get in congrats monk and green.

Kronz21 · 02-03-2008, 12:19 PM

Prisco, I agree, is an idiot. He may have some valid points, but it shouldn't have taken Monk 8 times to get in. M. Irvin stats are not better than Art Monk and he got in. Prisco is an idiot, but Monk and Green are in finally!

pg86 · 02-04-2008, 02:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tdSKINS1

hell yea Monk has 3 rings. Did Monk catch a TD in the superbowl? I dont think so but doesn't matter he still was the go to guy at that time, so glad he is finally in. I've had to deal with tons of my dad's bitching for him to get in congrats monk and green.

Monk made the plays that set some of those up though

pg86 · 02-04-2008, 02:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 724Skinsfan

1) Prisco is an idiot.
2) Reed was a 'Skin and deserves to be in asap.

OH SHIT UR RIGHT....I forgot all about that run...

Wasn't irving fryar a Skin once too I seem to recall a number 86 Fryar when we went to the playoffs under Norv.

sportscurmudgeon · 02-05-2008, 04:45 PM

Well if Pete Prisco is an idiot, then so are all of the posters here on Warpath for the past five years who used stats to "prove" that Art Monk should be in the HoF.

If Art Monk's stats get him in, then Andre Reed should be in too - - because in EVERY statistical category the NFL keeps for receivers, Reed is ahead of Monk.

The fact is that Monk AND Reed belong in the Hall of Fame. People here were righteously indigninant when Monk kept getting hosed. For them to denigrate Andre Reed's accomplishments now is pure hypocrisy.

Mattyk · 02-06-2008, 09:03 AM

Nah, it's just called homerism, SC.

Objectivity isn't always part of the equation for being a fan.

JoeRedskin · 02-06-2008, 09:15 AM

Monk and Reed both deserved to go in. Prisco's implied suggestion that Reed should have gone in before Monk is what gets everyone upset.

As for the stats - yes Reed has better ones. Reed was the number one receiver in a pass based offense. Arguably, he was the first of the modern receivers.

Monk and Reed comparison's are somewhat apples to oranges given the offenses they played in and the roles they played in those offenses. What I think makes them HOF worthy is that, if they had switched places, they still would have posted phenomenal numbers.

firstdown · 02-06-2008, 09:17 AM

Well its an argument that has some merit but its not like Reed does not have next year. Yes the three SB's do add to Monks history but if thats the only case then what about Dan Marino.

02-03-2008, 11:02 AM	#16
Defensewins Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Houston, Texas Posts: 2,753	Re: Pete Prisco the idiot This is another situation that you can't just look at the stats and say this guys is better than that guys. You have to look at who they played against. During the 80's and 90's that Reed and Monk played the NFC dominated the AFC, it wasn't even close. Every year Monk was stuck playing against awesome defense in the dominating NFC: Bears, Dallas, 49ers, Giants, Eagles, Packers. Monk had 6 tough division games against Dallas, Giants and Eagles who traditionally have tough defenses. Reed faced traditionally weak defense teams like Jet, Miami and Indianapolis. From 1982 to 1998 (during their careers) the AFC only won one team won SB 1984 Raiders. This was not a luck of the draw thing. The NFC was that much better than the AFC. Kind of like the opposite situation currently of the AFC being better right now. Stats are not a tell all.

02-03-2008, 11:11 AM	#17
rypper11 The Starter Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Winston Salem, NC Posts: 1,217	Re: Pete Prisco the idiot The absurdity is arguing for or against players of different eras in different schemes based soley on numbers. Based on this, Vick should go in as "the greatest running threat at QB" because of his rushing yards. Or Timmy Smith deserves it for his SB record. Barry Sanders never owned the rushing yards title or any rings. Football is an ever-changing game. Not the least of which that Carter and Irvin benefited from was the increased focus on defensive touching while receivers can push off. Judge guys based on their eras, not their numbers only. __________________ Playing a kids game for a kings ransom.

02-03-2008, 11:27 AM	#19
SouperMeister Playmaker Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Leesburg, VA Age: 48 Posts: 2,917	Re: Pete Prisco the idiot Reed will get in, but comparing him to Monk on pure numbers is kind of silly. Reed played in Buffalo's pass first Red Gun offense with one of the greatest QB's of his generation. Monk played in a grind it out offense with very ordinary QB's that ran the ball probably 75-80% of the time in the Red Zone. Monk was probably the best run blocking WR of his generation, which he did selflessly to help win championships. And for those who say that Super Bowls shouldn't count for HOF consideration, I say they should be like bonus points. If you were one of the 3 or 4 best players on teams that won multiple Super Bowls, that alone should get you serious consideration. The fact that none of the Hogs (especially Jacoby and Grimm) aren't in is ridiculous when you look at the numbers that Redskins RB's put up during those championship seasons, and ESPECIALLY in the Super Bowl victories.

02-03-2008, 11:28 AM	#20
celts32 Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Hackettstown NJ Age: 41 Posts: 2,643	Re: Pete Prisco the idiot The hell with this guy...there is a counter opinion to everything. __________________ Section 115 Row 23 “Goal line, goal line. I-left, tight wing, 70 chip on white.” http://victorybeer.com/

02-03-2008, 11:45 AM	#21
Mattyk ‎\m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Age: 40 Posts: 72,674	Re: Pete Prisco the idiot I don't even care anymore. Monk is finally in, that's all that matters. __________________ Support The Warpath! \| Warpath Shop

02-03-2008, 12:04 PM	#22
Stuck in TX Impact Rookie Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Colorado Springs, CO Age: 27 Posts: 545	Re: Pete Prisco the idiot [QUOTE=Bill B;416519]Below is Pete Prisco's take on Art Monk getting in over Andre Reed. Prisco left off that Reed had zero Supre Bowl Rings while Monk had 3. "Those two failed to get selected to the Hall on Saturday, as six other men beat them out. Dent was a better player than fellow end Fred Dean, who did get elected. Reed was a better player than Art Monk, a receiver who also was part of the 2008 six-man class. Monk retired as the leading all-time receiver in 1995 with 940 catches, but Reed retired with 951. Reed had 87 touchdown catches, while Monk had 68. Reed averaged 13.9 per catch to Monk's 13.5 per catch. So who deserved it more?"QUOTE] I take what Darrell Green said in his comments he made yesterday to heart. Any modern day reciever got to where he is by wanting to be like Art Monk. Art set the bar, allowing for super-overachieving recievers like Randy Moss to excel. Before the student gets in, the teacher should go. Take away Art from the history of the NFL and who knows, recievers who had to work really hard to even get noticed like CJ and Steve Smith at community colleges maybe wouldnt have worked as hard. Reed was really good but no reciever entered the league saying "I want to be good, but not good enough to win." Art knew how to win and therefore inspire, which is greater than all the stats combined!!!! __________________ We will miss you Sean. RIP 1983-2007 REMEMBER VT Go Hokies

02-03-2008, 12:07 PM	#23
tdSKINS1 Impact Rookie Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Altavista Virginia Age: 23 Posts: 708	Re: Pete Prisco the idiot hell yea Monk has 3 rings. Did Monk catch a TD in the superbowl? I dont think so but doesn't matter he still was the go to guy at that time, so glad he is finally in. I've had to deal with tons of my dad's bitching for him to get in congrats monk and green. __________________ #21 Never Forget HOKIES!

02-03-2008, 12:19 PM	#24
Kronz21 Camp Scrub Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 13	Re: Pete Prisco the idiot Prisco, I agree, is an idiot. He may have some valid points, but it shouldn't have taken Monk 8 times to get in. M. Irvin stats are not better than Art Monk and he got in. Prisco is an idiot, but Monk and Green are in finally!

02-05-2008, 04:45 PM	#27
sportscurmudgeon Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 3,159	Re: Pete Prisco the idiot Well if Pete Prisco is an idiot, then so are all of the posters here on Warpath for the past five years who used stats to "prove" that Art Monk should be in the HoF. If Art Monk's stats get him in, then Andre Reed should be in too - - because in EVERY statistical category the NFL keeps for receivers, Reed is ahead of Monk. The fact is that Monk AND Reed belong in the Hall of Fame. People here were righteously indigninant when Monk kept getting hosed. For them to denigrate Andre Reed's accomplishments now is pure hypocrisy. __________________ The Sports Curmudgeon www.sportscurmudgeon.com But don't get me wrong, I love sports...

02-06-2008, 09:03 AM	#28
Mattyk ‎\m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Age: 40 Posts: 72,674	Re: Pete Prisco the idiot Nah, it's just called homerism, SC. Objectivity isn't always part of the equation for being a fan. __________________ Support The Warpath! \| Warpath Shop

02-06-2008, 09:15 AM	#29
JoeRedskin Contains football related knowledge Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Second Star On The Right Age: 50 Posts: 7,144	Re: Pete Prisco the idiot Monk and Reed both deserved to go in. Prisco's implied suggestion that Reed should have gone in before Monk is what gets everyone upset. As for the stats - yes Reed has better ones. Reed was the number one receiver in a pass based offense. Arguably, he was the first of the modern receivers. Monk and Reed comparison's are somewhat apples to oranges given the offenses they played in and the roles they played in those offenses. What I think makes them HOF worthy is that, if they had switched places, they still would have posted phenomenal numbers. __________________ My Little Pony: Friendship is magic? or ... a repressive matriarchal society where individuals' roles are defined by their immutable physical characteristics and governance is reserved for those who demonstrate the genetic purity of the pony master race?

02-06-2008, 09:17 AM	#30
firstdown Living Legend Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: chesapeake, va Age: 49 Posts: 15,189	Re: Pete Prisco the idiot Well its an argument that has some merit but its not like Reed does not have next year. Yes the three SB's do add to Monks history but if thats the only case then what about Dan Marino.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Pete Prisco the idiot

Redskins Locker Room