[mcalderone10]

Originally Posted by SouperMeister

The argument that I've heard most often is that he was only a 3-time Pro Bowler ('84, '85, & '86) and that he wasn't even the most feared receiver on his team (King and Zimmerman have argued that Clark was). For those of us who watched Monk week in and week out, we know better. He was the guy who the Skins almost always seemed to go to on 3rd down passing plays to sustain drives. He also had far superior hands than Clark. I recall Clark having some big drops at times, often using his arms and body to catch the ball. Monk always had the best hands on the team. Monk also was the best blocking WR of his generation, a big key for the Redskins power running attack. I agree that you can make an argument for Clark also. Clark and Monk clearly would have had better stats had the other not been on the team, much like Swann and Stallworth had to share the ball in Pittsburgh. Monk alone retired with more receptions than the Steelers duo COMBINED, yet they are both in the HOF. Monk's day will come.

good points i'm a youngin so i just saw monk and clark as a kid but it seems like its like the reggie wayne marvin harrison where recently wayne is puttin up better #s ok mh is a lil injured but even earlier in the season it was the same and tj & 85. HOF is haters man. michelle irvins shoulda waited on 81 to get in there.