Jump to content

Before Allen, Diggs, & Kelly era, there was 1st overall pick, Wall of Fame & HOFer OJ Simpson!


Chandler#81

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, scuba guy said:

Always loved how when you watch him run the opposite team players would look like they were running in quick sand.

 

The good old Rock pile those were the days.

 

The standing buffalo helmet still looks cool.

 

 

 

He made the Buffalo on the helmet look like it was standing still.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, WhoTom said:

 

Two things sealed that case for the defense:

 

1. The police captain who led the investigation had previously spoken publicly against interracial marriage. When asked whether the police planted evidence, he took the Fifth. That's reasonable doubt right there.

 

2. The glove didn't fit. As soon as Johnnie Cochran made it rhyme, there was no chance for a conviction.

 

Honestly, I'm also 100% certain that he did it and I was pissed when the verdict came back not guilty, but I understand why and, in retrospect, if I were on the jury and heard that evidence, I'd probably have voted to acquit also. The prosecution was inept.

 

 

 I too lean towards he had involvement in it.   But you have to prove it by our justice system.  I'm more concerned that it wasn't a payoff by wealth or even a fan  with pull sabotaging the case.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Kornfed said:

I wonder if the LA riots (see Rodney King) had anything to do with the acquittal. ...Duh.... The guy was my idol as a kid. Great runner. .... F--- him!

 

It certainly was a factor.   The LAPD  iirc was being called racist and they didn't want more rioting.

 

 

 

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of those brilliant long runs would have been 2 or 3 yards except for the great O line we had.  That's not to take anything away from OJ but go back and watch how many of those runs started with a pulling guard or Braxton creating a gap off-tackle.  OJ's speed and elusiveness did the rest.  Simpson always gave credit to Lou Saban for building the offense around him, after the Rauch disaster during Simpson's first couple of years. Simpson + Saban = Mahomes + Reid

 

The game was different then (50 years ago, what else would you expect) where rushing was king and the pass game was secondary.  There was a game during Simpson's years in Buffalo against the Jets where the Bills QB did not complete a single pass, and the Bills won.  Joe Namath completed two passes to the Bills, and two or three to his own receivers.  It's almost inconceivable today for an NFL team to win without an effective passing game.  

3 hours ago, 4th&long said:

I’m not even sure why someone brought this piece of crap up? 

Because it's fun to watch a great player in action.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OJ obviously is a POS for what he did. But he is the reason I became a Bills fan back in the day when he was famous for all the right reasons. I should be a Jets fan TBH. Born on LI. My dad bought Jets season tickets before I was born. I think he got them in Namath's rookie year. I started going to the games in the early 70's and that is when I became a Bills fan because of OJ. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep guy was incredibly fast, they had no chance of getting away.

 

Guy's a real piece of work honestly, even if your not sure whether he did it or not, writing a book about how he would have done and trying to profit off it is a pretty ***** thing to do. I think he's done a few more things over the years basically spitting in the face of the families.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Younger folks don't understand how preternaturally special OJ was as a player (ignoring for a moment how horrible he was as a human being).

 

While today we talk about franchise quarterbacks, in the old days most offenses were built around running backs.  RBs won more Heismans than QBs and were the #1 overall draft pick more often.  In those day, the best athletes became RBs.

 

Back then defenses were designed to stop RBs unlike the defenses of today that are schemed more for the pass.  So forget nickel and dime.  You needed more guys at the line of scrimmage to prevent the likes of Jim Brown and OJ from getting into the open field where they'd destroy you.  And LBs back then weren't small rangy guys with good coverage skills.  They were hulking, violent thumpers like Dick Butkus, Mike Singletary, and Jack Lambert who would hit you so hard that your internal organs would burst out your anus.  

 

And rules favored the defense back then.  For example, hash marks were spread further apart, making sweeps and other wide plays predictable.  And blockers couldn't use their hands like they can today.  Rules allowed for more brutal tackling back then, too (you could lead with your helmet, etc.).  

 

In his time - at the tail end of the golden era of RBs - OJ stood head-and-shoulders above his talented peers.  In 1973, OJ nearly doubled the rushing output of the next-best guy (2003 yards vs. 1144).  What RB, before or since, has ever been that dominant?  As a matter of fact, what QB has ever been that statistically dominant?  Certainly not Brady, the consensus GOAT - he was never close to OJ's level of superiority.  OJ's dominance was unmatched.  Bills opponents schemed, practiced, and planned with one thing in mind: slow OJ down.  They put Pro Bowl spies on him.  But OJ was an unstoppable Force of Nature.  

 

 

  • Like (+1) 4
  • Agree 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hondo in seattle said:

Younger folks don't understand how preternaturally special OJ was as a player (ignoring for a moment how horrible he was as a human being).

 

While today we talk about franchise quarterbacks, in the old days most offenses were built around running backs.  RBs won more Heismans than QBs and were the #1 overall draft pick more often.  In those day, the best athletes became RBs.

 

Back then defenses were designed to stop RBs unlike the defenses of today that are schemed more for the pass.  So forget nickel and dime.  You needed more guys at the line of scrimmage to prevent the likes of Jim Brown and OJ from getting into the open field where they'd destroy you.  And LBs back then weren't small rangy guys with good coverage skills.  They were hulking, violent thumpers like Dick Butkus, Mike Singletary, and Jack Lambert who would hit you so hard that your internal organs would burst out your anus.  

 

And rules favored the defense back then.  For example, hash marks were spread further apart, making sweeps and other wide plays predictable.  And blockers couldn't use their hands like they can today.  Rules allowed for more brutal tackling back then, too (you could lead with your helmet, etc.).  

 

In his time - at the tail end of the golden era of RBs - OJ stood head-and-shoulders above his talented peers.  In 1973, OJ nearly doubled the rushing output of the next-best guy (2003 yards vs. 1144).  What RB, before or since, has ever been that dominant?  As a matter of fact, what QB has ever been that statistically dominant?  Certainly not Brady, the consensus GOAT - he was never close to OJ's level of superiority.  OJ's dominance was unmatched.  Bills opponents schemed, practiced, and planned with one thing in mind: slow OJ down.  They put Pro Bowl spies on him.  But OJ was an unstoppable Force of Nature.  

 

 

I agree with all this.  In particular, I think the age factor contributes to a lot of the OJ cancellation that people want to impose.  He clearly committed horrible crimes and I have no respect for him as a man, but as a football player he was possibly the most dominant RB and overall player of the 70s.  There is an age perspective at work here.  I still watch Kevin Spacey and Woody Allen and Roman Polanski movies and shows, despite what misdeeds they may have committed. My 20-something daughter rejects any exposure to these people. We agree to disagree about this.  Somehow younger people insist on pretending they're more pure because they selectively avoid works by people on their naughty list.  I don't feel dirty or impure because I watch a good Spacey or Allen or Polanski movie, and it doesn't reflect badly on me that I can differentiate between the person and the person's achievements.  

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hondo in seattle said:

Younger folks don't understand how preternaturally special OJ was as a player (ignoring for a moment how horrible he was as a human being).

 

While today we talk about franchise quarterbacks, in the old days most offenses were built around running backs.  RBs won more Heismans than QBs and were the #1 overall draft pick more often.  In those day, the best athletes became RBs.

 

Back then defenses were designed to stop RBs unlike the defenses of today that are schemed more for the pass.  So forget nickel and dime.  You needed more guys at the line of scrimmage to prevent the likes of Jim Brown and OJ from getting into the open field where they'd destroy you.  And LBs back then weren't small rangy guys with good coverage skills.  They were hulking, violent thumpers like Dick Butkus, Mike Singletary, and Jack Lambert who would hit you so hard that your internal organs would burst out your anus.  

 

And rules favored the defense back then.  For example, hash marks were spread further apart, making sweeps and other wide plays predictable.  And blockers couldn't use their hands like they can today.  Rules allowed for more brutal tackling back then, too (you could lead with your helmet, etc.).  

 

In his time - at the tail end of the golden era of RBs - OJ stood head-and-shoulders above his talented peers.  In 1973, OJ nearly doubled the rushing output of the next-best guy (2003 yards vs. 1144).  What RB, before or since, has ever been that dominant?  As a matter of fact, what QB has ever been that statistically dominant?  Certainly not Brady, the consensus GOAT - he was never close to OJ's level of superiority.  OJ's dominance was unmatched.  Bills opponents schemed, practiced, and planned with one thing in mind: slow OJ down.  They put Pro Bowl spies on him.  But OJ was an unstoppable Force of Nature.  

 

 

All true.  That was the era of the Running Back and OJ was the greatest there was. In today’s NFL, he would be a wide receiver, and a great one, a faster, more devastating version of Debo Samuel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never seen a running back that could cut quite like OJ Simpson!


...In all seriousness, though, one of my favorite all-time football highlights is the play at 11:19 of the video below, against the Browns, where he has a few tacklers in hot pursuit, slides on his back/butt causing the defender to fall as well, gets up untouched, and proceeds to run away from them. 
 

 

Edited by Logic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...
On 8/18/2023 at 1:41 PM, Utah John said:

I agree with all this.  In particular, I think the age factor contributes to a lot of the OJ cancellation that people want to impose.  He clearly committed horrible crimes and I have no respect for him as a man, but as a football player he was possibly the most dominant RB and overall player of the 70s.  There is an age perspective at work here.  I still watch Kevin Spacey and Woody Allen and Roman Polanski movies and shows, despite what misdeeds they may have committed. My 20-something daughter rejects any exposure to these people. We agree to disagree about this.  Somehow younger people insist on pretending they're more pure because they selectively avoid works by people on their naughty list.  I don't feel dirty or impure because I watch a good Spacey or Allen or Polanski movie, and it doesn't reflect badly on me that I can differentiate between the person and the person's achievements.  

Well said! Great point noting those movie directors as I watch their movies too when I feel like it. I have no problem doing it. It can be a struggle for me, at times, to separate out a persons creative ability and accomplishments from their character and personal history. But I am usually able to do it. The OJ situation is an exceptional example 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My childhood sports hero and the reason a young boy from NJ became a Bills’ fan and has been ever since—in a few years it will be my mid-century anniversary as a Bills’ fan … true loyalty knows no bounds (for the team not the murderer—though I still have his rookie card).  

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was at every home game the year he went for 2k, I was 12.

My brother was an usher and would bring me with him early to the games. I would stand with him in the opening to his section and run through the hallway following the team up and down the field. What an amazing year that was, 3 200+ yd games, 6 150+ yd  games in a 14 game season, he was incredible to watch. Like a million other kids, I had a big poster of him on my bedroom wall.

 I got to go early to the Sabres and Braves games too. Greeted the French Connection many times, got them to sign broken sticks I got from Mr Regan the penalty timekeeper  and pucks I would run through the hallways to get. 

 I was picked as the Jr Buffalo Brave ball boy for a game vs the Bucks. Sat under the basket during the game and helped Lew Alcindor (Kareem Abdul Jabbar) get rebounds at halftime.

 Got to see Bob Lanier, Calvin Murphy play a bunch of times as well.

That was such an amazing time for me, full of memories I cherish to this day. My older brother was the greatest, he was seven years older but often took me along and let me hang out with him and his friends. I would be in the back of a station wagon full of guys handing out beers. 

  Happy to say that even though I have been out west 42 years while he has been in Rochester,  my brother and I are still best buddies.

 OJ didn't turn out to be such a good role model, but remembering those days reminds me of some special times in my life and how great my brother was to me. 

 

 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Awesome! (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/17/2023 at 4:28 PM, WhoTom said:

 

The glove was evidence submitted by the prosecution. If they knew it didn't fit, regardless of shrinkage, then they shouldn't have had him try it on in court. The visual (coupled with the rhyme) is a more powerful influence on the jury than an executive's testimony. 

 

I remember experts discussing the glove thing after it happened, saying that you should never ask a question of a witness unless you already know the answer and it works in your favor. I suppose it's possible that if the prosecution hadn't mentioned the glove, then the defense would have anyway, knowing that it didn't fit. But then they'd have to admit that a bloody glove was found in his car. 

 

 

It wasn’t shrinkage. Simpson put on a lot of weight prior to this. I’ve read he also did things physically that swelled his hands prior, as the Defense knew this would be an attempt by the prosecution to see him put the gloves on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/18/2023 at 1:41 PM, Utah John said:

I agree with all this.  In particular, I think the age factor contributes to a lot of the OJ cancellation that people want to impose.  He clearly committed horrible crimes and I have no respect for him as a man, but as a football player he was possibly the most dominant RB and overall player of the 70s.  There is an age perspective at work here.  I still watch Kevin Spacey and Woody Allen and Roman Polanski movies and shows, despite what misdeeds they may have committed. My 20-something daughter rejects any exposure to these people. We agree to disagree about this.  Somehow younger people insist on pretending they're more pure because they selectively avoid works by people on their naughty list.  I don't feel dirty or impure because I watch a good Spacey or Allen or Polanski movie, and it doesn't reflect badly on me that I can differentiate between the person and the person's achievements.  

I hear you. I just watched Hannah and her Sisters the other night. But I can’t watch Manhattan anymore, and that used to be one of my favorites.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, MarkyMannn said:

You need really bad luck to die of prostrate cancer. Survival after 5 years is 99+%

 

There are different kinds of prostate cancer. Most are slow growing, and you'll die of something else before you die of that. A small percentage are very aggressive, and very nasty.

 

I still find it hard to believe that OJ once ran for 273 yards himself in a single game on Thanksgiving against the Lions...and the Bills somehow managed to lose the game.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a very specific reason to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...