Redskins WR Who Is The all-time Best

[hogs86]

Ok a friend and i got into a huge debate today.Who is the all -time best WR to play in the NFL.He is a 49ers fan and I am a die - hard skins fan !!I will debate with anybody Jerry Rice is the all time best WR !! The discussion was about Monk and the HOF.We both agree Monk should be in the HOF !! But the more i thought abought it the three best redskins WR ever.Are Taylor Clark and Monk.I know their is a pecking order for the HOF.So for Clark to get in the HOF Monk has to get in first.I know i will get some sh__t about this but i have a true cofession i think Gary Clark should be in the HOF before Art Monk.Clark should have been the Rookie of the year over Rice.Go back and look at his stats.I love Monk but i truly believe Clark was as good as Monk.

[BurgundyNGold]

Let the beatings begin, lol.

[CNYSkinFan]

Michael Westbrook.

[Keino]

You're out of your mind. Monk was a dominant receiver before he ever played with Clark. Clark was never a dominant receiver when he wasn't playing with Monk. Period. Stats Schmats.

[Red Bear]

Mike Espy! just kidding but apparently he is putting together a strong camp

[smoot]

Michael Westbrook.
no no no, the answer here is very easy........... jesse lumsden

[WarEagle]

Coincidentally, I saw ESPN's "Behind the Lines" or whatever its called, on Jerry Rice. I'm convinced he's the best WR ever. With his buddies, Montana and Young, the stars just lined up right for him at that place and time. The result is an astounding legacy for Rice. But he showed his better moves on ABC's "Dancing With the Stars." ;)

[redwolf1218]

it is my contention that Clark was so good because of Monk.

[hogs86]

Ok please look stats.

Clark - Attended Division I-AA James Madison University… Signed with the Redskins in 1985 after two years with the USFL's Jacksonville Bulls… Quickly proved himself to be a big-time playmaker and developed a reputation as one of the toughest receivers in the NFL despite being only 5-9 and 180 pounds… He caught 72 balls for 926 yards and 5 TDs in his rookie year.
Clark caught 7 passes for 114 yards, including a 30-yard touchdown in Super Bowl XXVI… Had five seasons over 1,000 yards receiving and four Pro Bowls appearances… During his time with the Redskins, he had 549 receptions and 8,742 yards receiving – both totals rank third on the Redskins' all-time list in those categories… He finished his career with 699 receptions and 10,856 yards.


Monk - Drafted by the Redskins in the first round of the 1980 NFL Draft, out of Syracuse… Played a major role in taking the Redskins to the Super Bowl four times during his tenure, winning three championships… Holds numerous team records including most career receptions (888), most career receiving yards (12,026), most receptions in a single game (13 against Detroit in 1990), and most receptions in a season (106, 1984).

Retired as the NFL's All-Time receptions leader with 940… Had nine 50-reception seasons… Three-time Pro Bowler

Clark made the Pro - bowl more then Monk and his SB stats are way better then Monk's.If Clark would have played just another 3 seasons we would be bashing Peter King about Clark.

[redwolf1218]

Ok please look stats.

Clark - Attended Division I-AA James Madison University… Signed with the Redskins in 1985 after two years with the USFL's Jacksonville Bulls… Quickly proved himself to be a big-time playmaker and developed a reputation as one of the toughest receivers in the NFL despite being only 5-9 and 180 pounds… He caught 72 balls for 926 yards and 5 TDs in his rookie year.
Clark caught 7 passes for 114 yards, including a 30-yard touchdown in Super Bowl XXVI… Had five seasons over 1,000 yards receiving and four Pro Bowls appearances… During his time with the Redskins, he had 549 receptions and 8,742 yards receiving – both totals rank third on the Redskins' all-time list in those categories… He finished his career with 699 receptions and 10,856 yards.


Monk - Drafted by the Redskins in the first round of the 1980 NFL Draft, out of Syracuse… Played a major role in taking the Redskins to the Super Bowl four times during his tenure, winning three championships… Holds numerous team records including most career receptions (888), most career receiving yards (12,026), most receptions in a single game (13 against Detroit in 1990), and most receptions in a season (106, 1984).

Retired as the NFL's All-Time receptions leader with 940… Had nine 50-reception seasons… Three-time Pro Bowler

Clark made the Pro - bowl more then Monk and his SB stats are way better then Monk's.If Clark would have played just another 3 seasons we would be bashing Peter King about Clark.
i thought Clark was the one who had 9 straight 50+ reception seasons?

[Keino]

Ok please look stats.

Clark - Attended Division I-AA James Madison University… Signed with the Redskins in 1985 after two years with the USFL's Jacksonville Bulls… Quickly proved himself to be a big-time playmaker and developed a reputation as one of the toughest receivers in the NFL despite being only 5-9 and 180 pounds… He caught 72 balls for 926 yards and 5 TDs in his rookie year.
Clark caught 7 passes for 114 yards, including a 30-yard touchdown in Super Bowl XXVI… Had five seasons over 1,000 yards receiving and four Pro Bowls appearances… During his time with the Redskins, he had 549 receptions and 8,742 yards receiving – both totals rank third on the Redskins' all-time list in those categories… He finished his career with 699 receptions and 10,856 yards.


Monk - Drafted by the Redskins in the first round of the 1980 NFL Draft, out of Syracuse… Played a major role in taking the Redskins to the Super Bowl four times during his tenure, winning three championships… Holds numerous team records including most career receptions (888), most career receiving yards (12,026), most receptions in a single game (13 against Detroit in 1990), and most receptions in a season (106, 1984).

Retired as the NFL's All-Time receptions leader with 940… Had nine 50-reception seasons… Three-time Pro Bowler

Clark made the Pro - bowl more then Monk and his SB stats are way better then Monk's.If Clark would have played just another 3 seasons we would be bashing Peter King about Clark.

Projections Schmojections. He didn't play another 3 seasons and as much as I love Gary, he wasn't the total package WR that Monk was. As I stated earlier, and as others have stated, Clark never posted dominant numbers without Monk on the opposite side of the field.

And as far as your SB stat, Monk was injured in 2 of them. He still managed 1catch for 40 yards in the Denver SB, and had 7 for 113 in the Buffalo SB.

[hogs86]

Projections Schmojections. He didn't play another 3 seasons and as much as I love Gary, he wasn't the total package WR that Monk was. As I stated earlier, and as others have stated, Clark never posted dominant numbers without Monk on the opposite side of the field.

And as far as your SB stat, Monk was injured in 2 of them. He still managed 1catch for 40 yards in the Denver SB, and had 7 for 113 in the Buffalo SB.

When the conduct of men is designed to be influenced, persuasion, kind unassuming persuasion, should ever be adopted. It is an old and true maxim that 'a drop of honey catches more flies than a gallon of gall.' So with men. If you would win a man to your cause, first convince him that you are his sincere friend. Therein is a drop of honey that catches his heart, which, say what he will, is the great highroad to his reason, and which, once gained, you will find but little trouble in convincing him of the justice of your cause, if indeed that cause is really a good one.
Abraham Lincoln


Ok it is kind of like comparing Lynnn Swann VS John Stallworth.For Clark to get in Monk has to go first.And for Bostic Grimm must go first and Jacoby -May.etc.

[Wild Bore]

But the more i thought abought it the three best redskins WR ever.Are Taylor Clark and Monk..I would argue with one of your basic premises.

[redwolf1218]

When the conduct of men is designed to be influenced, persuasion, kind unassuming persuasion, should ever be adopted. It is an old and true maxim that 'a drop of honey catches more flies than a gallon of gall.' So with men. If you would win a man to your cause, first convince him that you are his sincere friend. Therein is a drop of honey that catches his heart, which, say what he will, is the great highroad to his reason, and which, once gained, you will find but little trouble in convincing him of the justice of your cause, if indeed that cause is really a good one.
Abraham Lincoln


Ok it is kind of like comparing Lynnn Swann VS John Stallworth.For Clark to get in Monk has to go first.And for Bostic Grimm must go first and Jacoby -May.etc.
it is my belief that Monk should have gotten in before Swann or Stallworth.

[hogs86]

it is my belief that Monk should have gotten in before Swann or Stallworth.
Yep you are 100% correct !!

[Keino]

When the conduct of men is designed to be influenced, persuasion, kind unassuming persuasion, should ever be adopted. It is an old and true maxim that 'a drop of honey catches more flies than a gallon of gall.' So with men. If you would win a man to your cause, first convince him that you are his sincere friend. Therein is a drop of honey that catches his heart, which, say what he will, is the great highroad to his reason, and which, once gained, you will find but little trouble in convincing him of the justice of your cause, if indeed that cause is really a good one.
Abraham Lincoln


Ok it is kind of like comparing Lynnn Swann VS John Stallworth.For Clark to get in Monk has to go first.And for Bostic Grimm must go first and Jacoby -May.etc.


I don't believe in kind unassuming persuasion, especially in the face of absurdity.

[bgforever]

Joe Gibbs clearly stated that MONK was asked to give up the "potential" for even greater stats, for the sake of getting Clark and Sanders open. It was a known fact, that it was important to use all the receivers skills for the benefit of the offense, and team. That meant that Clark would be used primarily the same as he would always be. It was MONK who gave up the potential to do the damage you saw Marvin Harrison do, and in doing so, pumped up Manning's numbers.

This mean that Monk could have EASILY surpassed 150 catches in a season, 20 TD's and as many as 9-11 Pro Bowls.

In fact, Rice was doing exactly what he wanted back then, but when SF used him as a decoy, the numbers dropped dramatically.

[redskin_rich]

Clark was the flashier receiver but Monk was more reliable.
What stats don't show is how may crucial 1st downs Monk made to keep drives alive or how many drops Clark had. Stats don't show what a great blocker Monk was and how he approached the game with a workman's attitude, to do whatever was asked of him and not complain, unlike Clark, who once threw a fit while we were winning a playoff game.

Clark was a very good player and one of my favorites but Monk was a legend. Clark is borderline HOF material and I am being generous. Monk absolutely belongs and the Hall is a sham until he gets in.

[hogs86]

I don't believe in kind unassuming persuasion, especially in the face of absurdity.

Ok lets take it back to Jack Kent Cooke.Who was from Canada . In French Vous avez été la Fraise sur notre gateau les gars, merci ! (vous vous reconnaitrez:) ::)
Hail Redskins !!

[redwolf1218]

Yep you are 100% correct !!
thanks! Monk was never the type of guy who would grab the limelight, and that should not be rewarded for this type of honor. maybe if he toted a gun or got busted for drugs, or became a comentator, he would have made it.

[redwolf1218]

Clark was the flashier receiver but Monk was more reliable.
What stats don't show is how may crucial 1st downs Monk made to keep drives alive or how many drops Clark had. Stats don't show what a great blocker Monk was and how he approached the game with a workman's attitude, to do whatever was asked of him and not complain, unlike Clark, who once threw a fit while we were winning a playoff game.

Clark was a very good player and one of my favorites but Monk was a legend. Clark is borderline HOF material and I am being generous. Monk absolutely belongs and the Hall is a sham until he gets in.
good post. i remember Clark throwing a fit, and he had a lot of drops. look at the the Denver super bown victory, Clark had some drops at the beginning which made me cringe.

[skins74]

I am partial to 50/50

[openallnight]

I love Clark and don't want to denigrate him in any fashion. But, most of us "semi-old-timers" will tell you how Clark would drop easy passes on 3rd down in the 1st half of football games much akin to 50-50. Now, the thing that Clark did was come up big when we needed it. But, Monk was the epitome of reliability from the coin toss to the gun shot. Without Monk we're not even in those games to give Clark the opportunity to make the big play. Monk was the Man is the Man and forever will be the Man!!!

[redwolf1218]

I love Clark and don't want to denigrate him in any fashion. But, most of us "semi-old-timers" will tell you how Clark would drop easy passes on 3rd down in the 1st half of football games much akin to 50-50. Now, the thing that Clark did was come up big when we needed it. But, Monk was the epitome of reliability from the coin toss to the gun shot. Without Monk we're not even in those games to give Clark the opportunity to make the big play. Monk was the Man is the Man and forever will be the Man!!!
Clark did have a lot of drops. he even said once in an interview that he would not "keep his eyes on the ball" because that would be a good way to get your head taken off, or something to that effect. watch the Denver superbowl and you'll see him make about 3 drops at the beginning of that game that really had me cussing him out, and i went to JMU with him and he is one of my all time favorites.

Monk was the consumate professional and everyone else who had any success while he played owes a lot of that success to his being on the field.

[BurgundyNGold]

Ok lets take it back to Jack Kent Cooke.Who was from Canada . In French Vous avez été la Fraise sur notre gateau les gars, merci ! (vous vous reconnaitrez:) ::)
Hail Redskins !!
You stand to do better arguing in English, because a) most people don't speak French, and b) the French haven't won an argument -- let alone any other heated conflict in either of our lifetimes.

Party on.

[Keino]

You stand to do better arguing in English, because a) most people don't speak French, and b) the French haven't won an argument -- let alone any other heated conflict in either of our lifetimes.

Party on.


Or our Grandfather's lifetimes.....

[shally]

I love Clark and don't want to denigrate him in any fashion. But, most of us "semi-old-timers" will tell you how Clark would drop easy passes on 3rd down in the 1st half of football games much akin to 50-50. Now, the thing that Clark did was come up big when we needed it. But, Monk was the epitome of reliability from the coin toss to the gun shot. Without Monk we're not even in those games to give Clark the opportunity to make the big play. Monk was the Man is the Man and forever will be the Man!!!

loved them both, but honestly, charley taylor was THE MAN...

[BurgundyNGold]

Or our Grandfather's lifetimes.....
I know. I'm not trying to incite Seebs. ;)

[flave1969]

You're out of your mind. Monk was a dominant receiver before he ever played with Clark. Clark was never a dominant receiver when he wasn't playing with Monk. Period. Stats Schmats.

Sean is right. When Clark left it became clear just what influence Monk had on his career. Clark actually went into a decent young receiving core in Arizona that included Ricky Proehl. They also had Larry Centers. Clark simply couldn't produce in the same way without the disruption Monk used to cause.

[DCGreys]

Is this MONK/Clark thing really going on here?

Monk was great, with talent and leadership that dominated every game he played. If you saw him, you knew immediately you were watching a classic receiver.

Clark was very very good.

[flave1969]

Ok please look stats.

Clark - Attended Division I-AA James Madison University… Signed with the Redskins in 1985 after two years with the USFL's Jacksonville Bulls… Quickly proved himself to be a big-time playmaker and developed a reputation as one of the toughest receivers in the NFL despite being only 5-9 and 180 pounds… He caught 72 balls for 926 yards and 5 TDs in his rookie year.
Clark caught 7 passes for 114 yards, including a 30-yard touchdown in Super Bowl XXVI… Had five seasons over 1,000 yards receiving and four Pro Bowls appearances… During his time with the Redskins, he had 549 receptions and 8,742 yards receiving – both totals rank third on the Redskins' all-time list in those categories… He finished his career with 699 receptions and 10,856 yards.


Monk - Drafted by the Redskins in the first round of the 1980 NFL Draft, out of Syracuse… Played a major role in taking the Redskins to the Super Bowl four times during his tenure, winning three championships… Holds numerous team records including most career receptions (888), most career receiving yards (12,026), most receptions in a single game (13 against Detroit in 1990), and most receptions in a season (106, 1984).

Retired as the NFL's All-Time receptions leader with 940… Had nine 50-reception seasons… Three-time Pro Bowler

Clark made the Pro - bowl more then Monk and his SB stats are way better then Monk's.If Clark would have played just another 3 seasons we would be bashing Peter King about Clark.

Firstly, the number of Pro Bowls means little. John Riggins went to one, Chris Hanburger played in nine. Who is in the Hall?

Monk had Six Pro Bowl worthy seasons. In 1981 Monk had just as good a season as Ahmad Rashad in nearly every measure, Rashad(a four time Pro Bowler) went as the established star.

In 1989 Monk had 86 receptions for 1186 yards and a TD, a Pro Bowl calibre season yet didn't go as players had career years including the likes of Mark Carrier who had 1422 yards. I might add that despite having three 1000 yard receivers that year not one played in the Pro Bowl.

Clark's SB stats are only way better because he was able to play. Monk against Denver had not played since the beginning of December and only took the field on a handful of plays. I will remind you that it was his catch in that Denver Game that gave the team belief that it could beat the Denver Secondary. As for Buffalo Monk had 7 catches for 113 yards, Clark 6 catches for 114 yards, hardly way better.

[flave1969]

Is this MONK/Clark thing really going on here?



I am afraid it is because it is easy to look at something and just see the flash.

I always refer to 1984 and the Monk's 106 catch season. He caught more catches than all the other Wide Receivers on the team combined 106 to 80.
The closest player had 42 receptions.

Had Monk been asked to carry the team every year like this you know that he would have been able too. We would not have been as successful as a team but Monk would be at least 150 catches better off.

[IowaSkinsFan]

You're out of your mind. Monk was a dominant receiver before he ever played with Clark. Clark was never a dominant receiver when he wasn't playing with Monk. Period. Stats Schmats.

Additionally, Clark also benefitted from having Ricky Sanders here for the majority of his career.

Clark never accomplished anything after he left DC and didn't have complimentary receivers around him.

Bobby Mitchell was a better receiver than Clark, IMO.

[smoak]

I am afraid it is because it is easy to look at something and just see the flash.

I always refer to 1984 and the Monk's 106 catch season. He caught more catches than all the other Wide Receivers on the team combined 106 to 80.
The closest player had 42 receptions.

Had Monk been asked to carry the team every year like this you know that he would have been able too. We would not have been as successful as a team but Monk would be at least 150 catches better off.

Amen to that. Having Clark and Sanders made the Redskins a better team, but it doesn't mean they were better than Monk. The receivers were complimentary and Monk was never the type to cry about his touches (to Gibbs or the QB). He wanted to win and led this team through the greatest stretch in the history of the franchise. It is a joke that Riggins is the only player from Gibbs 1.0 to be in the HOF, and Monk was important as anyone to the success of those teams.

[shally]

Additionally, Clark also benefitted from having Ricky Sanders here for the majority of his career.

Clark never accomplished anything after he left DC and didn't have complimentary receivers around him.

Bobby Mitchell was a better receiver than Clark, IMO.

bobby mitchell was a better receiver than anyone who ever played wideout for the skins, except charley taylor..

[Wild Bore]

bobby mitchell was a better receiver than anyone who ever played wideout for the skins, except charley taylor..Bingo. We may have some degree of discussion on who was number 1 and who was number 2, but I agree with your direction.

This is the point I was trying to make earlier when someone said that it was Monk, Clark and Taylor as the best 3 WR in history. It wasn't. You need to have Bobby in the mix. I think Jerry Smith has a case to be included too. In any event, it was claimed in one of those "no brainer" type manners.