JAMIEBUF12 Posted January 14, 2007 Posted January 14, 2007 Here is how they compare: MONK — 940 catches for 12,721 yards (13.5-yard average) and 68 TDs in 224 games. Three Pro Bowls. REED — 951 catches for 13,198 yards (13.9-yard average) and 87 TDs plus 75 carries for 500 yards (6.7-yard average) and 1 TD. Seven Pro Bowls. IRVIN — 750 catches for 11,904 yards (15.9-yard average) and 65 TDs plus 6 rushes for 6 yards. Five Pro Bowls. so they go on to say that reed should wait till after art monk goes in and that mike irvin is a shoe in. well i know michael irvin won those 3 superbowls and andre won none,but.............andre had 22 more touchdowns than mike,he had 1294 more yardsand he had 201 more catches.andre reeds catches from what i remember were always hard ones as well.i remember the 1st superbowl were reed was getting creamed in the middle on those catches,they were brutal.7 pro bowls to 5 pro bowls.i mean if it were baseball andre reed was the dominant player of his era. now compare reed to art monk.........reed had 19 more touchdowns than art,he had477 more yards and 11 more catches and lastly 7 pro bowls to 3... so why must andre wait behind the likes of michael irving and art monk?
Tcali Posted January 14, 2007 Posted January 14, 2007 Here is how they compare: MONK — 940 catches for 12,721 yards (13.5-yard average) and 68 TDs in 224 games. Three Pro Bowls. REED — 951 catches for 13,198 yards (13.9-yard average) and 87 TDs plus 75 carries for 500 yards (6.7-yard average) and 1 TD. Seven Pro Bowls. IRVIN — 750 catches for 11,904 yards (15.9-yard average) and 65 TDs plus 6 rushes for 6 yards. Five Pro Bowls. so they go on to say that reed should wait till after art monk goes in and that mike irvin is a shoe in. well i know michael irvin won those 3 superbowls and andre won none,but.............andre had 22 more touchdowns than mike,he had 1294 more yardsand he had 201 more catches.andre reeds catches from what i remember were always hard ones as well.i remember the 1st superbowl were reed was getting creamed in the middle on those catches,they were brutal.7 pro bowls to 5 pro bowls.i mean if it were baseball andre reed was the dominant player of his era. now compare reed to art monk.........reed had 19 more touchdowns than art,he had477 more yards and 11 more catches and lastly 7 pro bowls to 3... so why must andre wait behind the likes of michael irving and art monk? Monk has already waited several years. And irvin was a better receiver.
rockpile Posted January 15, 2007 Posted January 15, 2007 Monk has already waited several years. And irvin was a better receiver. I agree that Monk is due. I think Reed was a better receiver than Irvin, but Irvin is a higher profile personality and has League and Super Bowl MVP titles. The article does not say Reed must wait, as much as he it saying that he will probably be a next year pick based on HOF "pecking order".
GDTRFB Posted January 15, 2007 Posted January 15, 2007 I agree, Rockpile. Monk has waited his time and Reed will have to wait a bit as well. The #'s are certainly there for Andre. His time will come. This way we'll get to watch Bills being inducted into the HOF for the next 2 ceremonies. They certainly won't live up to Jim Kelly's induction but it wil be a proud day for Bills fans. Bruce should be coming up soon as well.
Recommended Posts