Had an argument with a friend about Thurman Thomas

[fridge]

15 hours ago, Domdab99 said:

 

Who would you rather have in his prime, Thurman with 18 hall of famers around him, or OJ when he was the whole offense and yet he still broke records?

 

I was agreeing with you.

[Matt_In_NH]

7 hours ago, dave mcbride said:

Emmitt Smith was WAY better than people here seem to remember. He was a truly dominant back in the big-boy conference (winner of 13 straight super bowls between 1984 and 1996, and most of them blowouts). His 1995 season was one of the best performances on a game-by-game basis in NFL history in my view, and his performance against the Giants in their January 1994 playoff game was one for the ages.

 

Also, the Bills' line from 1989-1992 was one of the best NFL lines in the past 30 years. 

 

Incidentally, I think that Thomas' greatest performance also came in January 1994 after a so-so season (post-Wolford and Ritcher): the AFC championship game vs. the Chiefs. I also think the most impressive run I ever saw him have was against Dallas in the last SB. It was a relatively short td run,  but he absolutely smoked Leon Lett and another top-tier defender. Shortly after that, though, Emmitt Smith broke like 3 tackles (including an effort by Jeff Wright, who had him hogtied in the backfield) to run for the go-ahead td on third and very long.

 

 

I am sure my post came off as some mock of Emmitt Smith but it was not meant to be.  He was great but he also benefited from a great team around him that focused on running the ball.  A lot of his TD's were based on a team that just dominated the other.   The NFC did have better competition but they were the kings over a 4 year period.  When it comes to recieving, Thurman had a much larger average, he was like a WR at times whereas Smith got his catches as a dump off.   I wonder what would happen if they had switched teams but keep everything else the same?  I actually think they were both the ideal RB for their offense.

[Chicken Boo]

12 hours ago, the skycap said:

Two thumbs up!! I argue with people about this too. One guy tried to throw out Marshall Faulk. Thurman was one of the most COMPLETE RBs EVER!! I'd rank Thurman behind Marcus Allen only as the most complete.

 

For my money, Ladainian is the most complete back I've ever seen.  Prime for prime, he is second to no one. 

 

Just my opinion.

[Stenbar]

11 hours ago, formerlyofCtown said:

Well lets see

B. Sanders-1A

OJ-1B

J.Brown-3

Sweetness-4

ED-5

Marcus Allen-6

Tony Dorsett-7

Marshall Faulk-8

AP-9

Ricky Williams-10

 

 

It's really hard ranking these guys once you get past 4.

 

Most over-rated

Emmit Smith-1-put any one of the ten above players or even Thurman behind his OL

Edgerrin James-2-benefited from Manning Fear

LT-3-only because people talk like he is top 5 all-time, Marshall Faulk and then Thurman are the best of this style of RB.  He is top 15 tho.

 

 

I would add Jerome Bettis as mos over-rated.  I still do not believe he made the HOF

[Yav]

8 hours ago, NoSaint said:

 

When you put that much effort into the argument....

 

LT had more rushing yards, more receiving, and like double the TDs in fewer seasons. His efficiency/per game stats beat thurman. Better ypcarry, though Thomas won ypcatch. LT had 20 fewer fumbles despite more touches.

 

he weighed more, put up more reps on the bench but still had a better 40, better in all the explosives (vertical and broad), better in the shuttles. 

 

Make your case for Thomas over LT... 

 

 

I didn’t even say smith in there. Just rattled off some names. I think we can all agree that it’s not a slam dunk to put him top ten - he’s right in that next group that can be debated. If you start that group at 9, or 10 or 11 through 20ish is fine. 

 

Ill buy thomas paved the way for a guy like LT, and did a GREAT job, but there aren’t many spots he was just as good (measurables or stats). 

There would be no Faulk or LT with out Thurman. Thurman was an every down back and really was the first to come out and line up at WR. On top of that Thurman had to share the field with a stacked offense that had great skill players. 

 

Thurman can be summed up in 1 game vs Miami where he single handily beat the Dolphins very early in his career, those games and plays became the normal and while kids like LT and Faulk were developing their games they tried to mimic Emit and Thurman and Thurman was doing it all. 

 

LT was a great player just like Barry was a great player but Walter Payton is the best RB of all time no matter what the stats say. Just because there are younger players doesn’t mean they are better. 

[Dr.Sack]

Thurman played an entire career missing an ACL, that’s quite impressive. 

[ehfeuh57]

6 hours ago, Binghamton Beast said:

 

I’d definitely take Thurman over LT, Dickerson and Faulk.

There was a good year or 2 where LT (or LDT as Bill Simmons put it) in his prime was the greatest back i have seen play. (started watching in thurman's era)

 

Edited April 15, 2018 by DrDare

[NoSaint]

3 hours ago, Yav said:

There would be no Faulk or LT with out Thurman. Thurman was an every down back and really was the first to come out and line up at WR. On top of that Thurman had to share the field with a stacked offense that had great skill players. 

 

Thurman can be summed up in 1 game vs Miami where he single handily beat the Dolphins very early in his career, those games and plays became the normal and while kids like LT and Faulk were developing their games they tried to mimic Emit and Thurman and Thurman was doing it all. 

 

LT was a great player just like Barry was a great player but Walter Payton is the best RB of all time no matter what the stats say. Just because there are younger players doesn’t mean they are better. 

 

Im honestly not sure your argument. Because Thomas was older he’s better?

 

you point at thomas having a better supporting cast - im assuming to say it as limiting his volume stats... but with less help LT still had a better YPC.

 

bigger, stronger, faster, did more per touch despite more focus on him and turned the ball over considerably less despite more touches. And scored A LOT more often. Two seasons with more yards from scrimmage than Thurman’s best. Elected first team all pro more times.

 

This isn’t to beat up TT- it’s just you haven’t made much of a case other than him being ahead of his time. Which counts for something but im not sure it counts for all that 

[dave mcbride]

14 hours ago, Yav said:

There would be no Faulk or LT with out Thurman. Thurman was an every down back and really was the first to come out and line up at WR. On top of that Thurman had to share the field with a stacked offense that had great skill players. 

 

Thurman can be summed up in 1 game vs Miami where he single handily beat the Dolphins very early in his career, those games and plays became the normal and while kids like LT and Faulk were developing their games they tried to mimic Emit and Thurman and Thurman was doing it all. 

 

LT was a great player just like Barry was a great player but Walter Payton is the best RB of all time no matter what the stats say. Just because there are younger players doesn’t mean they are better. 

? - Lydell Mitchell was doing everything Thurman Thomas was doing 15 years before.  No joke. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/MitcLy00.htm

11 hours ago, NoSaint said:

 

Im honestly not sure your argument. Because Thomas was older he’s better?

 

you point at thomas having a better supporting cast - im assuming to say it as limiting his volume stats... but with less help LT still had a better YPC.

 

bigger, stronger, faster, did more per touch despite more focus on him and turned the ball over considerably less despite more touches. And scored A LOT more often. Two seasons with more yards from scrimmage than Thurman’s best. Elected first team all pro more times.

 

This isn’t to beat up TT- it’s just you haven’t made much of a case other than him being ahead of his time. Which counts for something but im not sure it counts for all that 

He wasn't ahead of his time. See above and also Roger Craig. Check out Craig's 1985 season - https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/C/CraiRo00.htm

 

Thomas was NOT a trendsetter in this area.

Edited April 15, 2018 by dave mcbride

[NoSaint]

3 hours ago, dave mcbride said:

? - Lydell Mitchell was doing everything Thurman Thomas was doing 15 years before.  No joke. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/MitcLy00.htm

He wasn't ahead of his time. See above and also Roger Craig. Check out Craig's 1985 season - https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/C/CraiRo00.htm

 

Thomas was NOT a trendsetter in this area.

 

 

I let it slide as it seems a more common skill set after TT than before and he was pretty iconic. That said, I Agree with you again.

[Yav]

22 hours ago, dave mcbride said:

? - Lydell Mitchell was doing everything Thurman Thomas was doing 15 years before.  No joke. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/MitcLy00.htm

He wasn't ahead of his time. See above and also Roger Craig. Check out Craig's 1985 season - https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/C/CraiRo00.htm

 

Thomas was NOT a trendsetter in this area.

Craig and Sweetness were around before Thomas, and I think Thomas gets forgotten about just like Craig does. 

Thomas seemed to get more talk during the SB runs because that team was so popular. 

 

That all being said I'd take Thomas and his unselfish play over LT and Faulk. I would also take Marcus Allen over them as well. If an argument is going to be made because of a bench press or combine numbers then Bo Jackson. 

 

Some of the things Thurman did on the field were just amazing for a RB. One handed catches, diving catches, and he could track the deep ball like a WR on top of that he could run with power and with elusiveness. Adding in personality and sorry, Thurman is head and shoulders above LT and Faulk. 

 

I'm not saying TT is a top 5, because there are so many greats that played the position but he's in the top 20's as is LT and Faulk, but I would rank TT above both of them and I'd have Marcus Allen above TT, LT and Faulk. 

[papazoid]

Top 10 ? no

Top 15 - yes

 

 thurman ran behind 5 Pro-Bowlers  Wilfork, Richter, Hull, Davis, Ballard

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d829ef5e8/article/top-10-running-backs-ever-what-is-ladainian-tomlinsons-rank

[dbflaBill]

On 4/13/2018 at 11:29 PM, Augie said:

It’s not fair or maybe even correct, but I knock Faulk down because he’s an idiot. And AP hardly ever caught a ball and was not the pass protection guy Thurman was. 

 

Yes, I’m biased.  

AP isnt close to the overall back Thurman was. AP was a 2 down back and a liability in the pass game. Thurman could do it all. I think people look pass or forget how good he really was. He was one of the first backs that were also really good in the passing game. 

[SoCal Deek]

The image that sticks with me from the end of Thurman's career was his tendency to back into the hole and fall backwards (forwards) for two more yards.  He became the Fosbury Flop of Running Backs.  It was a unique style and really worked for him.