Bwahahahahah

dolfan25

Finheaven VIP
Joined
Oct 24, 2001
Messages
631
Reaction score
33
Age
47
Location
Ontario, Canada
I don't usually like typing my laughing but I gotta tell you guys about this one. I had an argument with a poster over on the BBI. This clown is convinced that in the all time rankings of RB's in NFL history that Thurman Thomas should be ranked higher than Jim Brown. He says Brown only played 9 years so that counts against him. What he doesn't seem to realize is that most great RB's have about 7 years of great production and that's it. Don't get me wrong I think Thurman was a nice back and 1 of the all time greats but better than Jim Brown. Please. What a joke.

Here's the link it's at the end where this D-Rocafella spouts off.

http://buffalorange.temppublish.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=19799

I know everyone has an opinion and a right to it but some things are so stupid you just can't believe it. This is equivalent to saying that Eddie Murray was a better home run hitter than Ruth.
 

RobertHoover

Convinced WCF is a moron
Joined
Jul 3, 2002
Messages
269
Reaction score
0
Location
NewJersey
Please ignore D-Roca, some stupid stuff comes out of him on a regular basis. His views in no was reflect the rank and file Bills fan.
 

BuffBillsMan90

is Clumpalicious!!
Joined
Dec 24, 2001
Messages
9,331
Reaction score
0
Age
55
Location
Clumptowaga
No true comparison because they were totally different style of Rbs........Thurman was clearly a better receiver than Jim Brown, but no doubt, Jim Brown was vastly superior "running" RB
 

TigerJ

Bills fan
Joined
May 7, 2002
Messages
428
Reaction score
0
I don't know if offensive coordinators even tried to involve RBs in the passing game much back when Jim Brown played the game. When it came to running the ball Jim Brown was a man among boys. To some extent I think football has caught up to where Jom Brown was years ago. Players have become bigger and faster over the years. If Jim Brown were playing today, he would still be a great running back, but he might not have been as completely dominating as he was in his own time. That's only speculation though. The bottom line is there is no one in NFL history to compare with Jim Brown.
 

baccarat

Adam the Quarterback
Joined
Jan 20, 2002
Messages
3,534
Reaction score
0
Originally posted by TigerJ
If Jim Brown were playing today, he would still be a great running back, but he might not have been as completely dominating as he was in his own time. That's only speculation though. The bottom line is there is no one in NFL history to compare with Jim Brown.

You have to consider all the conditioning and whatnot modern players have that old school players didn't. I remember Deacon Jones saying that he didn't workout on the offseason b/c he had to work other jobs for money. After one year's worth of play, today's players are set for life. See the difference?
 
Top Bottom