Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
Just now, Augie said:

 

There’s a reason Barry didn't Start sooner in college. A really, really GOOD reason to keep a HOF RB on the bench. 

 

Barry was ridiculous at Oklahoma State once he took over in 1988.

Posted

Also, Career length always makes judgement of players hard. 

 

Did Smith benefit unfairly by playing so long (which in of itself is a great boost in his favor) 

 

What about Sayers? Give him two good knees and is he the best to ever touch a pigskin? 

Posted
1 minute ago, Buffalo716 said:

 

Yes thank you that was another point of mine... my friend is a hockey player at heart not football 

 

i tried saying that just because I’m saying Thurman was better than Emmitt in no way am I knocking Emmitt...

 

all these first ballad RBs are legends and are sooo close respectively. You can’t say with a straight face that Sweetness was better than Barry

 

they are both legends and it’s more a preference of style

 

Sweetness was a better all around player than Sanders. Neither had much of a supporting cast for most of their respective careers. 

Posted
8 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:

 

Yup. My point was how well rounded Thurman was...

 

You can make the case he was the Engine that kept the K gun running... he did everything for the Bills

 

i don’t think he’s the best but being as well rounded and versatile as he is pushes him up the list imo

 

give him 4000 Carries like Emmitt and he has the rushing title

 

I agree, Thurman was a great all around back.  He was also a good blocker; I remember him picking up many blitzers that otherwise would have got to Jim Kelly.

Posted
Just now, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Sweetness was a better all around player than Sanders. Neither had much of a supporting cast for most of their respective careers. 

 

That’s why I’m using thurmans all around game as my argument 

 

he was a very violent runner who could break it multiple ways. Juking you, running by you, or running through you with his patented truck spin

 

His all around game puts him in that category becaause he could do it all at a HoF level

Posted
1 minute ago, Happy Gilmore said:

 

I agree, Thurman was a great all around back.  He was also a good blocker; I remember him picking up many blitzers that otherwise would have got to Jim Kelly.

 

I’m really not sure if I can think of a better RB at picking up the blitz. He was amazing! Add in the pass catching and he was MUCH more than a typical RB. 

Posted
2 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

I’m really not sure if I can think of a better RB at picking up the blitz. He was amazing! Add in the pass catching and he was MUCH more than a typical RB. 

 

Payton was the best at that.

Posted
Just now, Augie said:

 

I’m really not sure if I can think of a better RB at picking up the blitz. He was amazing! Add in the pass catching and he was MUCH more than a typical RB. 

 

Plus...he was one of the few (maybe the only back) that took the snap directly and ran through the 'A' Gap.  I don't think too many backs do that even now.  Thurman was multi talented, maybe not a 'flashy' runner, but a very effective one...in multiple facets.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
36 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:

I argued that Thurman is overlooked in the world of modern running backs and is a top 10 RB in NFL history...

 

sure he didn’t dazzle like Barry or churn out 5 yard runs at a whack like Emmitt... but he was the most complete back of his time... 

 

his running, receiving, blocking and toughness made him the most rounded back of his Era

 

his power / speed ratio was the best in the NFL and he was a violent runner

 

led the NFL in yards from scrimmage an NFL record 4 consecutive seasons... an NFL MVP... a first ballot HoF

 

As a student of the game I don’t find it foolish to say Thurman is a top 10 modern back

 

That line back then was dominating..

Posted
7 minutes ago, Happy Gilmore said:

 

Plus...he was one of the few (maybe the only back) that took the snap directly and ran through the 'A' Gap.  I don't think too many backs do that even now.  Thurman was multi talented, maybe not a 'flashy' runner, but a very effective one...in multiple facets.

Yes..between Hull and Ritcher.

Guest K-GunJimKelly12
Posted

Thurman, Barry, Emmitt, which one does Bill Belichick want for his offense?

Posted (edited)

In his era, thomas was a clear #3 behind Smith and especially Sanders. They were both clearly better. Thomas was a great player, to be sure, but I remember this debate at the time and no one in good conscience was arguing that Thomas was as good as those two. It's not like the Bills didn't have an elite o-line between 1989 and 1992 (his elite years). News flash: Emmitt Smith was really effing good. 

Edited by dave mcbride
Posted

It’s hard to say this because his career was cut so short. But I would say Bo might be the greatest player to play the position. Period. End of story 

  • Like (+1) 1
×
×
  • Create New...