Quote:
Originally Posted by Beemnseven
No what? Art Monk was what?
Grimmy, you and I will go to our graves on this one. I don't mean to take anything away from Art Monk, the man deserves to be in.
But please, stop the "without Art Monk" crap. He DID have Art Monk on the opposite side of the field. He DIDN'T have mediocre stats.
You could go on and on with the "without this guy or that guy" nonsense. What if Clark didn't have Jay Schroeder or Mark Rypien throwing him the ball? I mean, you could just as easily make the argument that without Art Monk, Clark's numbers would be off the charts. Please, enough already.
My main point was to illustrate the hypocrisy of the Hall of Fame voters. If the reason they're keeping Art Monk out was that he didn't catch enough touchdowns or didn't have the signature catches, or that he didn't take the spotlight -- then Gary Clark should have been voted in long ago. I also happen to think Clark should be in too.
Put Monk in first, but the next guy we should be raising hell about is #84.
|
Go to my grave? Anyway, Clark and Monk had the same opportunities and Monk ended up with better stats. Given the people that have made the hall, Monk is a no-brainer. Clark is a legitamate contender.
Bottom line, my viewpoint is that the Hall has a bias against Redskins.