Here is what Sports Illustrated's Dr. Z (a voter for the NFL Hall of Fame) had to say about the deliberations concerning Irvin:
[snip]
SI.com: How heated was the debate on Michael Irvin?
Dr. Z: Very heated. I think some people just didn't like him. But for me, it was just too logical that he belonged in. He was the do-it-all receiver for a three-time champion. He could catch anything. He was a leader who helped get the team to work hard. He blocked. He was tough. And he never had any help at the other receiver position. Maybe his numbers weren't as big as some others, but the Cowboys had Emmitt Smith, so of course they weren't going to throw that much.
SI.com: Why didn't Art Monk get elected?
Dr. Z: My feeling is that Monk was a great player. But when you played the Redskins, he was not the guy you had to stop. He was a very functional player. A great team guy. But I liked two wideouts better this year. Irvin and Andre Reed.
Will the improvement of receivers' statistics in recent years hurt Monk's chances of making it in the future?
Oh yeah. I think his best chance might have been when he first came on the ballot, because he was still near the top of the all-time lists then, but he' falling.
[snip]
It's interesting, but not surprising, that some writers just don't like Irvin. But Dr. Z's arguments for Irvin's admission are compelling.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/football/nfl/specials/playoffs/2006/02/03/drz.qa/index.html