The Art Monk Hall of Fame Campaign

October 11, 2007

Cris Carter on Monk

Filed under: News — DjTj @ 11:23 am

Yahoo! Sports
October 10, 2007
Ask Cris: Strategic Move
Cris Carter

“I’m a huge Washington Redskins fan and I cannot understand why Art Monk has not been selected for the Hall of Fame. Art was the all-time leading receiver (940 receptions) at one time in his career and won a couple of Super Bowls. Michael Irvin was inducted last year. Why do you think they keep passing Art by?”

Joel Shuster
Randolph, N.J.

The No. 1 argument I hear against Monk is the lack of Pro Bowl appearances. He only made it three times. When you look at the amount of time he played – 16 years – and in his conference, he was only among the top four receivers three times, then how could he be a Hall of Famer? And keep in mind here: we’re just talking about within his conference, not the whole league. And people say, if they were only going to take one receiver away from the Redskins offense, they would try to slow down Gary Clark. When you take all of that into consideration, there’s a very strong case to keep him out of Canton.


  1. Mr. Carter obviousy has a better grasp on the game than Mr. Shuster. The Hall of Fame is supposed to be a recognition for the quality of a man’s career. The Pro Bowl, on the other hand, is a purely regular season award based on individual years. The Pro Bowl does NOT take into account post season performance. In both ’88 & ’89 Monk had better stats than John Taylor of the 49ers, yet was passed over for Tatlor.

    Comment by remember the redskins — October 14, 2007 @ 10:05 am

  2. To my mind, being named to a Pro Bowl is nice, but it’s not what the game of football is ultimately about. You tell me a guy was on a lot of Pro Bowl squads, but wasn’t a strong post season performer and never won a Super Bowl, I start to yawn at those Pro Bowls. Nobody watches the Pro Bowl. A lot of the players don’t even want to play in the Pro Bowl. Apparently, the only people who really care about the Pro Bowl are the Hall of Fame voters. They seem to think that piling up big yards against the Buccaneers in week 2 is more important than playing well against a playoff team IN THE PLAYOFFS. Not me. Not ever. Induction into the Hall may be an individual honor, but football is a TEAM game. If we’re comparing Monk and Carter, what we see is the ultimate identity of the teams they played for.
    Monk and the Redskins: Good in the regular season. workmanlike. Under-represented in the Pro Bowl. Excellent in the playoffs. 3-1 in the Super Bowl.
    Carter and the Vikings: Powerful and promising in the regular season. Flashy. Piling up yards and points. Well represented in the Pro Bowl. BAD in the playoffs. NO Super Bowl appearances.

    Comment by remember the redskins — October 14, 2007 @ 6:19 pm

  3. As far as the claims that Gary Clark, Charlie Brown, and Ricky Sanders were more feared by the Redskins’ opponents than Monk, you have to wonder if this was a smart policy.
    Compare the playoff numbers put up by these guys. You’ll find that Monk had more catches per playoff game, more yards per playoff game, and more touchdowns per playoff game than Clark or Sanders. While Charlie Brown had more yards per playoff game, Monk had more catches per game and more touchdowns per game.
    Additionally, you should note that Monk was the one constant on these teams.
    Once separated from Monk, each of these guys experienced a levelling-off of their careers.

    -Charlie Brown had only one more strong season (1986) after joining the Falcons. He never made another Pro Bowl or played in the playoffs. He was out of the league within four years. He was 30.
    -Gary Clark had three very average seasons after leaving Monk’s company for Arizona and then Miami.
    He never made another Pro Bowl. He was out of the league within four years. He was 33.
    Ricky Sanders played only one more season after being split from Monk. Never a Pro-Bowler before, Sanders’ one season away from Washington produced only 1 TD and 8.9 yards per catch. These were the lowest of his career. He was out of the game the next year. He was 32.
    Monk was selected to two Pro Bowls after Charlie Brown left Washington. Monk had 8 TDs and more than 1,000 yards receiving in 1991. Then he had more than 100 yards in the Redskins’ Super Bowl victory over the Bills. He was 34. Monk played three more full 16-game seasons, becoming the record-holder for career catches. Monk’s last NFL catch, a 36-yarder from Rodney Peete as a member of the Eagles, came when he was 38.
    While Monk’s career was also trailing off by the time he was separated from Clark and Sanders, he was worthy of Pro Bowl consideration when he was a year older than any of these other guys were when they left the game. Brown, Clark and Sanders clearly enjoyed the best years of their lives while they ran with Monk. Monk, on the other hand, broke the league record for catches in a season in 1984 when Brown missed 7 games and Clark and Sanders were still in the USFL.

    I love all of these guys, and respect them for what they helped the ‘Skins accomplish. It is clear, however, to all Redskins fans, that they needed Monk more than he needed them.

    Comment by remember the redskins — October 15, 2007 @ 12:25 pm

  4. Sorry, Mr. Shuster. I misunderstood who had said what in the above article. It is Mr. Carter who is apparently trying to protect his Hall votes. Perhaps he would like to explain why his personal playoff stats are not as good as Mr. Monk’s. Maybe he would like to explain away why his teams won only 4 of the 14 playoff games he played in. Perhaps he would like to explain why this is the case when he was playing against lesser playoff competition than Mr. Monk was. Would everybody like to hear him talk about how important his Pro Bowl appearances were in relation to his playoff failures?
    Look, Mr. Carter probably belongs in the Hall eventually, but NOT before Art Monk. His numbers are hollow in comparison. Monk is part of the reason why the Redskins won 3 Super Bowls, while Carter bears some of the blame for the post season failures of his Eagles and Vikings teams.

    Comment by remember the redskins — October 15, 2007 @ 12:46 pm

  5. Mr. Shuster,

    Yousaid Art made to the pro-bowl 3 times and that’s not enough. Well, as you know the probowl is a joke based on popularity” Look at his numbers, the speak for themselves”. Stop talking about pro-bowl since it is not what it used to be.

    Comment by Alvaro Rodriguez — December 10, 2007 @ 3:34 pm

  6. What classless comment. Carter’s teams lost 4 postseason games at home! and never had a playoff win against a team with more than 10 wins, even though his team posted as many as 15 wins in the regular season. His postseason numbers are not great, which is even more remarkable because his team threw the ball like crazy, with over 50 passes in several games. And while Carter’s back to back 122 catch seasons is impressive, it came with a QB throwing over 1300 passes in those seasons. Turns out that Monk caught a higher percentage of passes thrown in his 84-85 seasons that Carter did in his top years.

    To suggest Monk’s lack of Pro Bowls is somehow indicative of play is absurd. In 1989, three Redskin receivers were in the top 7 in the NFL in catches, all went over 1100 yards and none went to a Pro Bowl. Its mind boggling. If a team has weapons, they should use them. Monk played 9-10 seasons next to top flight WRs. There is no need to apologize for that. Excellence is winning. Throwing a few more passes to Monk in a few seasons and he goes to 6 Pro Bowls. But its about winning, not stats, and you would think the guys at the Hall would appreciate that. Though Carter doesn’t because he never figured out how to win.

    Comment by overdue — December 30, 2007 @ 2:09 am

  7. It struck me this year that the Pro Bowl squads were announced 2 weeks before the end of the season! Has this always been the case? How could this be a legitimate judgement of the performance of players in a year?
    Would Monk have been voted in in ’89, for example, if his 130+ yd 2 TD performance against the Falcons in week 15 (no bye weeks then) was considered? Monk also had 100+ yd games in week 15 games in ’81, ’83, ’84, ’86 & ’88. In ’81 he had 148 yds and a TD in wk 15 against Baltimore, then had 2 cathces for 98 yds against the Rams in wk 16. I’d really love to know if Pro Bowl squads have always been announced so early. These late season performances might have swayed voters, especially in ’81 & ’89, years in which Monk’s numbers are very comparable to those of guys who were selected. Monk and Rashad had pretty much identical numbers in 1981, and Monk’s stats were actually far better than those of Anthony Carter in ’89. He also had more catches for more yards than John Taylor did in ’89. Did the failure of the system to consider these late season games cost Monk one or two Pro Bowl appearances? I’m not sure. I do know that not considering all games when judging the worthiness of players for an honor which is apparently so important renders the result pretty much invalid. What if your bosses ignored more than 10% of the sales you made in a day? Is there anyone out there who would argue that the final two weeks of the season are not as important as the others? If anything they’re MORE important. This is when teams are jockeying for playoff position and when true proffessionals show their stripes no matter what the situation. In both ’81 and ’89 Monk and the ‘Skins were making late-season charges, leaving them just short of a playoff berth in ’89. If the Pro Bowl did not take these performances into account, then it is not valid.

    Comment by remember the redskins — December 30, 2007 @ 9:58 am

  8. More Comparisons between Monk and Carter:

    In comparing the greatest games of Monk’s career to those of Carter, we are faced with interesting results. I’ll lay each guy’s yardage totals from his top performances out and rank them from #1 to #5, then put an asterisk next to the better stat.

    Monk’s #1 game in yardage: 230*
    Carter’s #1 game in yards: 168

    Monk #2: 200*
    Carter #2: 167

    Monk #3: 174*
    Carter #3: 162

    Monk #4: 168*
    Carter #4: 157

    Monk #5: 164*
    Carter #5: 151

    Monk’s #1 game in yardage: 163*
    Carter’s #1 game in yards: 120

    Monk #2: 126*
    Carter #2: 106

    Monk #3: 122*
    Carter #3: 93

    Monk #4: 113*
    Carter #4: 83

    Monk #5: 94*
    Carter #5: 83

    So, as you can see, in both the regular season and playoffs, Art Monk’s top five games in yardage are better than Cris Carter’s top five.

    “But wait!” you say, “this list doesn’t consider touchdowns!”

    This is true… OK let’s find each guy’s best five regular season and playoff games based on fantasy scoring. We’ll use the scoring system which the fantasy league I belong to employs. Every ten yards the player gains will earn 1 point and each touchdown will earn the player 6 points.


    Monk’s #1 Game: 32 pts=
    Carter’s #1 Game: 32 pts=

    Monk’s #2 Game: 29 pts*
    Carter’s #2 Game: 27 pts

    Monk’s #3 Game: 28 pts*
    Carter’s #3 Game: 27 pts

    Monk’s #4 Game: 27 pts*
    Carter’s #4 Game: 26 pts

    Monk’s #5 Game: 25 pts=
    Carter’s #5 Game: 25 pts=

    Monk’s #1 Game: 23 pts*
    Carter’s #1 Game: 21 pts

    Monk’s #2 Game: 20 pts*
    Carter’s #2 Game: 18 pts

    Monk’s #3 Game: 18 pts*
    Carter’s #3 Game: 16 pts

    Monk’s #4 Game: 15 pts*
    Carter’s #4 Game: 14 pts

    Monk’s #5 Game: 12 pts=
    Carter’s #5 Game: 12 pts=

    So in a comparison of Art Monk’s and Cris Carter’s top 5 regular season and playoff games based on fantasy scoring, which takes both yardage and TDs into account, a Win-Loss-Tie record for Monk comes out as 7-0-3. Carter does not win outright in any one of these comparisons. The best Carter does is to tie Monk on three occasions.

    This is simply another example of how Monk is actually a better candidate for the Hall of Fame than Carter is. Each guy will have his own strengths and weaknesses, but the perception that Carter is a clearly better candidate is simply erroneous. Both of these great professionals belong in the Hall of Fame, but Monk is the one with three Super Bowl rings in comparison to Carter’s zero Super Bowl appearances. Monk is the one who held three league records in comparison to Carter’s one. Monk is the one who had better personal stats in the playoffs when compared to Carter. Monk is the one who has been patiently waiting for several years, while Carter is in his frist year of eligibility.

    If only one of these guys can get in this year, it should be Monk.

    Comment by remember the redskins — January 8, 2008 @ 5:13 pm

  9. Cris Carter has gone on the Mike Tirico radio show and named Art Monk as one of four players he would like to see inducted. This stands in contrast to previous Carter statements. Maybe he has reconsidered his position or maybe he is now trying to play nice.

    Either way, we should continue to point out the ways in which we believe Art Monk is a more deserving candidate than Carter. I’m glad to hear this reversal (or clarification) though.

    Comment by remember the redskins — January 16, 2008 @ 3:41 pm

  10. In the past, Hall of Fame voters have criticized Art Monk’s career yards per catch stat for being too low…Just so you know-

    ART MONK’S YPC: 13.5


    This trend continues in the playoffs-

    Art Monk’s playoffs YPC: 15.4

    Cris Carter’s playoffs YPC: 13.7

    Comment by remember the redskins — January 17, 2008 @ 1:22 pm

  11. I couldn’t agree more. Check out

    Comment by Mike Frandsen — January 18, 2008 @ 1:29 am

  12. Of course, one thing to be mentioned regarding the All-Pro thing is that no matter how many times monk was or was not named to the All-pro squad, he was one of four WR named to the 1980’s all-decade team…which somehow speaks of sustained performance more than individual all-pro years.

    The other three? Rice, Largent, and Lofton…all of whom are already in the HOF…

    Comment by bwana — January 30, 2008 @ 10:17 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Create a free website or blog at

%d bloggers like this: