Does Thurman Thomas Get His Due? (Offseason rehash topic)

[folz]

Yes, obviously Thurman is in the Hall of Fame and on the Wall of Fame in Buffalo, but his star has seemed to fade in comparison to his contemporaries (Barry Sanders and Emmitt Smith). He almost never gets mentioned when speaking of great running backs and seems overshadowed by the other two backs of his era. Even on say Youtube, it is much harder to find good highlights/highlight videos of Thurm compared to the other guys. 

 

Now first let me get this out of the way. Barry was special...probably the best pure RB I ever watched (didn't get to see Jim Brown, and really only saw the tail-end of O.J.'s career, etc.). But, I have often said that Barry is the GOAT (or at least near the top of that conversation). So, I'm not trying to say that Thurman was better overall than Barry Sanders. Thurman obviously did not have Barry's breakaway speed, etc. I may be saying it about Emmitt Smith though. I always felt that that era was Barry, then, Thurman, then Smith. Always felt that Smith was a bit of a product of volume and having one of the greatest O-lines of all-time (and a TON of short goal-line carries). Always felt Thurman was the better of those two at least. But not sure if that is just my Bills' bias.

 

So, the negatives on Thurm, or why the other guys may be seen as higher: two big things I can see are touchdowns and longevity. Emmitt had 134 career TDs, Barry had 109 career TDs, and Thurman only had 84 career TDs---but generally, the Bills had way more weapons to spread the ball around too than the other two teams (save Dallas' SB years) and as I said, Emmitt got a lot of goal line carries (where in Buffalo, Kenny Davis stole a lot of goal-line touches from Thurm). Thurman's peak was about 8-9 years, Barry's peak was 10 years, and Emmitt's peak was about 12 years. And then, of course, Emmitt has three rings, while Thomas' team had the four failed SB attempts. Also, Thurman hit a wall in his career (as did that whole Bills team), to where his last 3-4 years in the league, he was not very productive, while Barry retired on top, and Emmitt's trail off was not as significant. But, if Thurm retired after 10 years like Barry did, he wouldn't have had that trail-off, 3 weak seasons to end his career. [I don't know, maybe I just answered my own question.]

 

But, to counter, from 1989 to 2000, each of the three RBs had 4 seasons each of being on top of the others in yards from scrimmage. Pretty evenly split in that category.

 

From 1989-1993* (for 5 seasons), here are their yards from scrimmage:

(*Emmitt came into the league in 1990, so for him I did 1990 to 1994, to even the comparison)

 

Thurman Thomas 9,595 yards and 55 TDs (4.48 yards/att)

Emmitt Smith 8,759 yards and 65 TDs (4.42 yards/att)

Barry Sanders 8, 288 yards and 60 TDs (4.76 yards/att)

 

So, for 5 years, you could argue that Thurman outperformed both of the others, or at worst was on par with the other two (5 years is half of Barry's career). Thurman easily would have been the SB MVP of SBXXV if Norwood's kick went through. He has a league MVP in 1991 (Barry and Emmitt also have 1 league MVP each). And Thurman was kind of the progenitor of the Marshall Faulk, Tomlinson-type of backs to come, and he led the NFL in yards from scrimmage for four consecutive years (that's a pretty big feat---and all four of those years, Barry was in the league, and Emmitt was around for 3 of those 4 years---so he did that with those guys being in the league).

 

Obviously Emmitt will be remembered because of the Super Bowls and the career rushing title, and Barry is remembered because he was magical---not knocking either guy, they both deserve their due. But I feel that Thurman should be seen as at least an equal to those guys (not better, but just as lauded for his own skillset and stats)...yet outside of Bills fans, most seem to forget him or not even really know about him (for younger fans). I don't know, what do you think? If you agree, why do you think Thurm gets forgotten? Should Thurman receive more laurels and be seen on par with those other two backs? I know he never won a SB (like Smith), but he at least made 4 Super Bowls, while Barry had a hard time even making the playoffs on Detroit, with only one playoff victory in his career (no fault of Barry's of course, that's on the Lions---but should Thurman be knocked for not winning Super Bowls then---I mean two of Emmitt's rings were against Thurman's team. IF, BIG IF, those games had gone the other way, would we see things differently? Is that all it is that changes how someone's career is viewed---one or two games in a team sport?). 

 

And as I said, Emmitt and Barry's peaks were both a bit longer than Thurman's peak, but even with that, Thurman is still #12 overall in NFL history in yards from scrimmage (Barry is #7, Emmitt is #2). Only 11 players in the history of the NFL have more yards than Thomas, yet he is so rarely talked about.

 

 

[Just an offseason thought/discussion after recently watching a highlight video of Thurman and remembering just how good he actually was. But, I realize this is old news/an old debate.]

 

 

[(aside) in looking up yards from scrimmage, I saw that Frank Gore retired with 19,985 yards. Couldn't the Jets have found 15 more yards for him his last season so he could hit that 20,000-yard mark? Would have been just the fourth player in history to do so.]

 

[RoscoeParrish]

Thurman’s star doesn’t shine as bright because they didn’t win. Winning matters, a lot. It’s the point of the sport.

 

But I also think that Emmitt’s doesn’t shine as bright as Barry’s anymore. Even though he did win.

 

And part of that is because the most respected/remembered RBs are the ones that were one-man offenses.

 

The most fondly remembered RB from the 2000s-2010s is going to be Adrian Peterson. And in large part, that will be because he was dragging those crummy Vikings teams to the playoffs. 
 

Those Cowboys and Bills teams were stacked. Too much credit to go around.

 

So when you have a great HoF back who never won, also on an offense with a ton of HoF talent, that’s gonna work against the way folks remember you.

[Gregg]

Yes, he gets his due. With the exception of not winning a Super Bowl he has accomplished everything there is in the NFL from both a team and individual standpoint.

 

One of the core players along with Jim, Bruce, Andre of the great teams of the late 80's and early 90's.

In the HOF

On the Bills WOF and has his #34 retired by the Bills

Considered one of the best RBs in NFL history

Kelly even said he was the heart and soul of their offense. When #34 was on the offense was unstoppable.

 

Only thing missing was a Super Bowl championship season.

Edited 2 hours ago by Gregg

[Bill from NYC]

Not enough people talk about Earl Campbell imo. His career was cut a bit short, but; in his prime he was as good as anybody.

 

Jmo.

[Low Positive]

30 minutes ago, Bill from NYC said:

Not enough people talk about Earl Campbell imo. His career was cut a bit short, but; in his prime he was as good as anybody.

 

Jmo.

I'll see your Earl Campbell and raise you Marcus Allen. He is the best comp for Thurman because, in his prime years, he also caught a lot of balls. Also, people have forgotten Eric Dickerson. So I guess my bigger point is that guys don't get their due because there were a lot of great RBs back then.

[Ethan in Cleveland]

What a timely thread. I was rewatching Bills KC with Kelly, Thurman, Bruce, Montana, and Allen. 

I almost started a thread on most underappreciated HOF players. 

Marcus Allen doesn't get nearly enough publicity or recognition amongst the greats of all time.  My guess is because so many dual threat RBs came in quick succession with Faulk, James, and Tomlinson. But Marcus Allen and Thurman did it better than anyone in their era.

[SoCal Deek]

How much recognition do you want him to get? He’s in the Hall of Fame for heaven’s sake! 

[skibum]

Thurman was the most complete RB of the group. Yeah, he could carry the rock with the best, but he could also run great routes and had hands like a proper wide receiver. He was a deadly weapon all over the field. Barry had the best juke moves of all time, but I think he gets more GOAT talk than he should. Emmitt was an amazing RB, and for a long time. His highlight reel is exciting to watch. He also won titles. He also ran behind an all-time O-line. 

 

One reason I think Thurman gets overlooked is that Marshall Faulk, LT, and Edgerrin James arrived on the scene soon after him, and they quickly brought the dual threat RB game to a new level. There just wasn't a lot of time for football fans to appreciate Thurman before he was surpassed by a new generation. 

Edited 57 minutes ago by skibum

[billsbackto81]

I love Thurman and he definitely got his due for his accomplishments. 2X All Pro, 1991 MVP and HOF. Lead in All Purpose scrimmage yards for 4 straight seasons. 

He had a terrific SB25 and was mvp worthy.

But let's face it, he had terrible games in SB 26/27/28.

 

I know its a team effort and everyone played a part. Whether you want to blame Kelly for not moving the offense and costly interceptions or the D not being able to produce stops. He was tough to watch.

 

Super Bowl XXVI: 10 rushes for 13 yards, 1 touchdown, and 4 receptions for 27 yards. 

Super Bowl XXVII: 11 rushes for 19 yards, 1 touchdown, and 4 receptions for 10 yards. 

Super Bowl XXVIII: 16 rushes for 37 yards, 1 touchdown, and 7 receptions for 52 yards. 

 

I realize his regular season stats are impressive and elite level. From 1989

to 1993 he was a freaking machine. 

 

Emmitt has the rings and awards and Barry godlike numbers in a short time.

 

And remember, Thurman was a 2nd Ballot HOF'er. He was great, but nobody should be upset if he's considered 3rd amongst the bunch.

 

 

 

 

 

 

5 minutes ago, skibum said:

Thurman was the most complete RB of the group. Yeah, he could carry the rock with the best, but he could also run great routes and had hands like a proper wide receiver. He was a deadly weapon all over the field. Barry had 

 

One reason I think Thurman gets overlooked is that Marshall Faulk, LT, and Edgerrin James arrived on the scene soon after him, and they quickly brought the dual threat RB game to a new level. There just wasn't a lot of time for football fans to appreciate Thurman before he was surpassed by a new generation. 

That is a solid point. 👍

[chris heff]

Thurman was a great all around back, yes he didn’t have break away speed, but he could run, catch and doesn’t get enough credit for what a good blocker he was. 
 

I once saw a homeless guy wearing a Thurman Dolphins jersey. Not sure what that means.

[Pete]

1 hour ago, Bill from NYC said:

Not enough people talk about Earl Campbell imo. His career was cut a bit short, but; in his prime he was as good as anybody.

 

Jmo.

Billy Simms

 

Bo Jackson is greatest athlete I’ve ever seen.  A top NFL and MLB player.  He still holds records in both leagues.  He averaged 5.4 yards a carry in career.  Bo had one of greatest OF arms I’ve ever seen.  
 

Bill- did you catch the 30 for 30 on Bo?  He was shooting crossbow bullseyes from good distance, shot with his feet.  Other world athlete.

 

How about Eric Dickerson?  He gets not enough respect 

 

[Augie]

2 minutes ago, chris heff said:

Thurman was a great all around back, yes he didn’t have break away speed, but he could run, catch and doesn’t get enough credit for what a good blocker he was. 
 

I once saw a homeless guy wearing a Thurman Dolphins jersey. Not sure what that means.

 

He could read and pick up a blitz like and make it look beautiful in some way. He made it look that easy sometimes, like an art form.  

[SoonerBillsFan]

So many great backs.  To me the GOAT is Jim Brown.  Then it's Barry Sanders hands down.  Thurman is one of the greatest all around backs to play the game.