PDA

View Full Version : TD was far, far better than LT ever was



Pages : [1] 2

tsiguy96
02-22-2010, 08:33 PM
and its not really that close i think. TD was GREAT in the regular season. he was UNSTOPPABLE in the post season. and i mean that quite literally.

LT was GREAT in regular season. what did he accomplish in the post season? now LT is gonna finish his career with 2-3 more teams and fade away like shaun alexander and will not have accomplished the ultimate goal in football. much less have done it twice. in a row.

KyleOrtonArmySoldier#128
02-22-2010, 08:38 PM
This is fact.

tsiguy96
02-22-2010, 08:39 PM
i found this, LT postseason stats:
att/yards/avg/long/td
96 327 3.4 12 4

TD:
att/yards/avg/td
204 1140 5.6 12

NickelTG
02-22-2010, 08:51 PM
I guess that makes Dan Marino a worthless qb.

Shazam!
02-22-2010, 09:17 PM
Sorry. TD was a great Back but the Denver OLine were ****ing monsters. If LT was on those Broncos squads as the feautured FT Back, the difference would be miniscule. The OLine was that good.

tsiguy96
02-22-2010, 09:21 PM
I guess that makes Dan Marino a worthless qb.

i compared numbers directly relating to these players. the SBs are a nice bonus, but the difference is TD helped his team win 2, LT did little in that regard in the postseason.

T.K.O.
02-22-2010, 09:35 PM
Sorry. TD was a great Back but the Denver OLine were ****ing monsters. If LT was on those Broncos squads as the feautured FT Back, the difference would be miniscule. The OLine was that good.

don't EVEN try to dis T.D. he was a man amongst boys !!!!!!!!
should be in the hall soon.....as will lt

horsepig
02-22-2010, 09:51 PM
LT has been a great back, but he has not even come close to what TD accomplished.

NickelTG
02-22-2010, 10:20 PM
i compared numbers directly relating to these players. the SBs are a nice bonus, but the difference is TD helped his team win 2, LT did little in that regard in the postseason.

Sorry,I just don't buy the "he won a super bowl so that automatically means he's better then someone who hasn't" cliche'..and to say it's not even close is stretching up and beyond.

TD had 4 good years. LT has had 8. Anyone wanna argue how good those lines were vesus each other? I'd definitely take denver. It's hard to compare players,if you are just going to base stats on what is favorable to the player you like.

arapaho2
02-22-2010, 10:45 PM
come on fellers....TD was freakin awesome... hands down the best back of his time and era...no other could compare

but LT is..or was a great back also..differant style...differant team...but still a all time sure fire 1st ballot hof

had Td lasted a couple more good seasons before his injury..no doubt one of the greatest all time and i would definatly put him in above LT

but as it is... its all in the eye of the beholder...Td was suberb in regular season as well as post season...TD was heads and tails the greatest back of his day...no one player i know today put more fear in a defense then Td did...we all knw his accomplishments

Lt is a suberb back to...but was he by far the greatest back in his time?...alexander, preist holmes..might give him and in fact were better then him a season or two..no back was better then TD when he was rollin
but Lt has longevity...something TD didnt have

in the end LT is a 1st ballot HOF back...TD due to his injury not so sure he will get in at all

Devilspawn
02-22-2010, 11:00 PM
LT has been a great back, but he has not even come close to what TD accomplished.
What?




NFL records

* Holds the all-time NFL record for single season touchdowns (31). (The previous record was 28, set in 2005 by Shaun Alexander.[21])
* Holds the all-time NFL record for single season rushing touchdowns (28). (The previous record was 27, set in 2003 by Priest Holmes and in 2005 by Shaun Alexander.[22])
* Holds the all-time NFL record for the most points scored in a single season (186). (The previous record was 176, set in 1960 by Paul Hornung.[23])
* Holds the all-time NFL record for most consecutive games with a rushing touchdown (18). (The previous record was 13, set in 1983 by John Riggins)
* Holds the NFL record for most consecutive multi-touchdown games (8). (The previous record was 7, set in 1983 by John Riggins.[24])
* Tied the record for most consecutive games with a touchdown score with Hall of Fame fullback Lenny Moore (18).
* Tied for third place for most career 200-yard (180 m) rushing games with several other players (4).
* Holds the all-time San Diego Chargers record for most career rushing yards (11,760). (The previous record was 4,972, set in 1968 by Paul Lowe.)
* Holds the all-time San Diego Chargers record for most career touchdowns, 150 as of December 6, 2009. (The previous record was 83, set in 1970 by Lance Alworth.)
* Holds the all-time NFL record for fewest games needed to achieve 100 touchdowns, with his 100th career touchdown (90 rushing, 10 receiving) in his 89th game (breaking the previous record of achieving the mark in the 93rd game of a career, which was done by both Jim Brown and Emmitt Smith).
* Holds the all-time NFL record for fewest games needed to achieve 150 touchdowns, with his 150th career touchdown in his 137th game (breaking the previous record of achieving that mark in the 160th game of Emmitt Smith's career).
* Holds the all-time NFL record for overtime touchdowns (3), all rushing.
* Second place on the list of NFL all-time rushing touchdown leaders—behind Emmitt Smith.
* In 2006 Tomlinson became the second player in NFL history to score 4 touchdowns in 2 straight games (Marshall Faulk is the other).
* In 2006 Tomlinson became the only player in NFL history to score 3+ touchdowns in 4 straight games
* Holds the record for most touchdowns scored in a four game span with 14 TDs
* Holds the record for most touchdowns scored in a five game span with 16 TDs (14 rushing, 2 receiving), breaking his own record of 15 that he had set two weeks earlier. Prior to that, the record was held by Jim Brown with 14.
* Holds the record for most touchdowns scored in a six game span with 19 TDs
* Became the only player in NFL history to rush for 1,000 yards (910 m) and receive 100 passes in a single season.
* Second player in NFL history with 1,800 rushing yards and 500 receiving yards in one season.
* LaDainian joins Emmitt Smith, Priest Holmes, Shaun Alexander, and Marshall Faulk as the only running backs to record consecutive seasons of 20 or more touchdowns
* Holds the record for most seasons with 17+ touchdowns with 5;(consecutive) 2003-2007
* Holds the record for most seasons with 18+ touchdowns with 4;(consecutive) 2004-2007
* Holds the record for most seasons with 10+ rushing touchdowns with 9;(consecutive) 2001-2009
* Holds the record for most seasons with 11+ rushing touchdowns with 8;(consecutive) 2002-2009

Seriously people, Superbowls aren't the dealbreaker when accomplishments like the above are achieved by unarguably the best back during his time. All Tomlinson needs to do is lead his next team to a Championship, or just be part of it, and this Superbowl nonsense is moot.

Buff
02-22-2010, 11:06 PM
I love TD and if he would have played as long as LT, who knows... He may own all the records instead. But he didn't.

LT can't be remembered by his last 2 seasons. Guy was pretty much unstoppable for a 5-6 year period there. Best all-around back in the league despite being on some mediocre teams.

Shazam!
02-22-2010, 11:13 PM
LT has never played on an offense nearly as dangerous and talented as the Broncos was during their King Years, and I don't care what stats are thrown out disputing that.

C'mon fellas. I'm a Broncos fan through and through and we love TD and what he has helped this organization achieve. But, you throw in LT w/ Nalen and Co., this team still wins two Championships if LT is healthy, and he was in his prime.

Just being honest here.

tsiguy96
02-22-2010, 11:14 PM
I love TD and if he would have played as long as LT, who knows... He may own all the records instead. But he didn't.

LT can't be remembered by his last 2 seasons. Guy was pretty much unstoppable for a 5-6 year period there. Best all-around back in the league despite being on some mediocre teams.

this is true, but as this post is talking about, and i referenced how good he was during teh regular season, he routinely checked out once the playoffs started.

Northman
02-22-2010, 11:20 PM
Sorry,I just don't buy the "he won a super bowl so that automatically means he's better then someone who hasn't" cliche'..and to say it's not even close is stretching up and beyond.

TD had 4 good years. LT has had 8. Anyone wanna argue how good those lines were vesus each other? I'd definitely take denver. It's hard to compare players,if you are just going to base stats on what is favorable to the player you like.


Not really. I always here the whole "Denver has a system of backs" arguement. However, even though some backs have had success behind that Denver Oline both past and present NONE of the backs ever came close to accomplishing what TD did in the time that he was a Bronco. LT was impressive and most likely would of had some success behind the Denver Oline but i wouldnt say he would of duplicated what TD did. Many backs have tried and never could repeat what TD did. Just like you cant say Super Bowls means everything neither does longevity. Its not like LT played for a scrub team like Barry Sanders did so the whole "Oline" arguement is pretty mute to say the least. Guys like Turner had pretty good success behind that Charger Oline as well.

Northman
02-22-2010, 11:21 PM
What?




NFL records

* Holds the all-time NFL record for single season touchdowns (31). (The previous record was 28, set in 2005 by Shaun Alexander.[21])
* Holds the all-time NFL record for single season rushing touchdowns (28). (The previous record was 27, set in 2003 by Priest Holmes and in 2005 by Shaun Alexander.[22])
* Holds the all-time NFL record for the most points scored in a single season (186). (The previous record was 176, set in 1960 by Paul Hornung.[23])
* Holds the all-time NFL record for most consecutive games with a rushing touchdown (18). (The previous record was 13, set in 1983 by John Riggins)
* Holds the NFL record for most consecutive multi-touchdown games (8). (The previous record was 7, set in 1983 by John Riggins.[24])
* Tied the record for most consecutive games with a touchdown score with Hall of Fame fullback Lenny Moore (18).
* Tied for third place for most career 200-yard (180 m) rushing games with several other players (4).
* Holds the all-time San Diego Chargers record for most career rushing yards (11,760). (The previous record was 4,972, set in 1968 by Paul Lowe.)
* Holds the all-time San Diego Chargers record for most career touchdowns, 150 as of December 6, 2009. (The previous record was 83, set in 1970 by Lance Alworth.)
* Holds the all-time NFL record for fewest games needed to achieve 100 touchdowns, with his 100th career touchdown (90 rushing, 10 receiving) in his 89th game (breaking the previous record of achieving the mark in the 93rd game of a career, which was done by both Jim Brown and Emmitt Smith).
* Holds the all-time NFL record for fewest games needed to achieve 150 touchdowns, with his 150th career touchdown in his 137th game (breaking the previous record of achieving that mark in the 160th game of Emmitt Smith's career).
* Holds the all-time NFL record for overtime touchdowns (3), all rushing.
* Second place on the list of NFL all-time rushing touchdown leaders—behind Emmitt Smith.
* In 2006 Tomlinson became the second player in NFL history to score 4 touchdowns in 2 straight games (Marshall Faulk is the other).
* In 2006 Tomlinson became the only player in NFL history to score 3+ touchdowns in 4 straight games
* Holds the record for most touchdowns scored in a four game span with 14 TDs
* Holds the record for most touchdowns scored in a five game span with 16 TDs (14 rushing, 2 receiving), breaking his own record of 15 that he had set two weeks earlier. Prior to that, the record was held by Jim Brown with 14.
* Holds the record for most touchdowns scored in a six game span with 19 TDs
* Became the only player in NFL history to rush for 1,000 yards (910 m) and receive 100 passes in a single season.
* Second player in NFL history with 1,800 rushing yards and 500 receiving yards in one season.
* LaDainian joins Emmitt Smith, Priest Holmes, Shaun Alexander, and Marshall Faulk as the only running backs to record consecutive seasons of 20 or more touchdowns
* Holds the record for most seasons with 17+ touchdowns with 5;(consecutive) 2003-2007
* Holds the record for most seasons with 18+ touchdowns with 4;(consecutive) 2004-2007
* Holds the record for most seasons with 10+ rushing touchdowns with 9;(consecutive) 2001-2009
* Holds the record for most seasons with 11+ rushing touchdowns with 8;(consecutive) 2002-2009

Seriously people, Superbowls aren't the dealbreaker when accomplishments like the above are achieved by unarguably the best back during his time. All Tomlinson needs to do is lead his next team to a Championship, or just be part of it, and this Superbowl nonsense is moot.


If not for a freak knee accident TD crushes that record. Just being honest here.

SR
02-22-2010, 11:53 PM
TD was great, but he wasn't the best RB of his time. A lot of you youngsters forget that TD played at the same time, and a couple of times against, quite possibly the most skilled RB ever to step on a football field; Barry Sanders.

Ziggy
02-23-2010, 12:35 AM
TD was great, but he wasn't the best RB of his time. A lot of you youngsters forget that TD played at the same time, and a couple of times against, quite possibly the most skilled RB ever to step on a football field; Barry Sanders.

I'd argue that both Barry Sanders and Walter Payton were the greatest RB's of all time. Both played behind horrible offensive lines most of thier career, with bad QB's, and on bad offenses. TD and LT never had to deal with any of that. Both Sanders and Payton still dominated. Let's not forget that TD and LT not only had great offensive lines, but had great FB's blocking for them. Put Sanders or Payton on the Denver or SD offenses, and they hold every record in the book. I guess you had to watch them play to really understand how good they were though. Both faced 9 and 10 in the box thier entire career and still dominated.

Ravage!!!
02-23-2010, 01:06 AM
Sorry. TD was a great Back but the Denver OLine were ****ing monsters. If LT was on those Broncos squads as the feautured FT Back, the difference would be miniscule. The OLine was that good.

Sorry.. I think this is crap.

You can't tell me that he ran for 2000 yrds and an NFL MVP purely based on the line. TD was great. You can make this same statement about every great RB. LT had a VERY good OL, and it was NOT the OL that made TD great. He was great.

This is an insult to ANY RB.. and I find it a lame shame that someone is trying to down grade TD's accomplishments by giving the all the credit to the OL.

Shazam!
02-23-2010, 02:04 AM
Sorry.. I think this is crap.

You can't tell me that he ran for 2000 yrds and an NFL MVP purely based on the line. TD was great. You can make this same statement about every great RB. LT had a VERY good OL, and it was NOT the OL that made TD great. He was great.

This is an insult to ANY RB.. and I find it a lame shame that someone is trying to down grade TD's accomplishments by giving the all the credit to the OL.

This is why I dont read your crap and why I chose to do so today I dont know. But now I know.

I can tell you that. I can also suggest rewatching the 1998 Broncos season again a little closer.

The Broncos OLine was the best of the decade. They simply dominated up front. Teams knew what they were going to do and they were powerless to stop them in too many games to count from not a 2 year span but 3 year span.

When Habib (Detroit) and Zimm left (retired) 'experts and analysts' predicted Denver would still be successful, but the OLine wouldn't be effective.

How wrong they were. How wrong you are.

Sure he was the best Back the Broncos have had in their revolving door of RBs since, but also the OLine was in serious decline after their Championship years after age and mileage.

For all of Elway's greatness and TD's abilities, it was the OLine that was the X Factor.

If John, Mike or Terrell was asked what the single most effective thing was about those Championship teams was, they'd all tell you THE OLINE.

This is not rocket science here.

Lonestar
02-23-2010, 02:14 AM
As much as I love TD he is no LT. LT's issues were coaching and talent around him.

For years he was the bolts was the only offense they had until Gates came along and then it was split. then they got like 40 6'-4 + WR over the past couple of years and that diminished his usefulness. SAN was stupid to pay sporles what he gets.

the issue is they can't afford them both.

HAd TD not had his career ruined by greasy then I could agree with the premis but LT is an instant HOF player when he hangs them up. We all know that TD will most likely never get in unless he pays for admission.

Lonestar
02-23-2010, 02:18 AM
If not for a freak knee accident TD crushes that record. Just being honest here.


I'm not convinced that TD had more than 2 more years as he was almost run into the ground in those first few years.

His knee got nuked but it was not the ligament damage from the knee injury courtesy of greet, that got him but the lack of cartilage in it. Even after trying to do the micro blooding letting thingy he could not bear the pain playing on it.

I love the guy for his days in DEN but he was a real work horse those first few years.

Poet
02-23-2010, 02:24 AM
If you put TD on LT's teams his numbers would have been worse than LT. If you put LT on TD's teams his numbers would have been better than TD's.

Lonestar
02-23-2010, 02:24 AM
I'd argue that both Barry Sanders and Walter Payton were the greatest RB's of all time. Both played behind horrible offensive lines most of thier career, with bad QB's, and on bad offenses. TD and LT never had to deal with any of that. Both Sanders and Payton still dominated. Let's not forget that TD and LT not only had great offensive lines, but had great FB's blocking for them. Put Sanders or Payton on the Denver or SD offenses, and they hold every record in the book. I guess you had to watch them play to really understand how good they were though. Both faced 9 and 10 in the box thier entire career and still dominated.



Barry was great could have held all the rushing records but retired to allow Walter to own them, a class act that will not be seen again in the NFL.

BTW he hold the record for total yardage lost behind the LOS record also. just think if he would have had a decent OLINE and supporting cast.

He was special and classy

Shazam!
02-23-2010, 02:54 AM
It's not a disrespect to TD. It's a disrespect to the OLine, McCaffrey, Griffith, Sharpe and Smith.

Gamechanger
02-23-2010, 03:08 AM
sorry, TD was good, but LT was phenomenal

I really don't think TD could help carry some of those crap teams LT was on

if anything (I'm going to get killed for this) at these times now, he'd only be a situational back

Northman
02-23-2010, 07:08 AM
If John, Mike or Terrell was asked what the single most effective thing was about those Championship teams was, they'd all tell you THE OLINE.



Im sure LT would say the same thing about his team. Both players are very humble. Never the less, there was much more to it than just the Oline.

Northman
02-23-2010, 07:10 AM
I'm not convinced that TD had more than 2 more years as he was almost run into the ground in those first few years.

His knee got nuked but it was not the ligament damage from the knee injury courtesy of greet, that got him but the lack of cartilage in it. Even after trying to do the micro blooding letting thingy he could not bear the pain playing on it.

I love the guy for his days in DEN but he was a real work horse those first few years.

I am convinced, he was showing no signs of slowing down so i dont know why people all of a sudden think he wouldnt of been able to do it. There's more to show that he would have than not.

Northman
02-23-2010, 07:20 AM
sorry, TD was good, but LT was phenomenal

I really don't think TD could help carry some of those crap teams LT was on

if anything (I'm going to get killed for this) at these times now, he'd only be a situational back


Uh, no. A phenomenal back doesnt disappear come playoff time. And what crap team did he play on? You mean his first 3 years in the league when he and a slew of other players were young on the roster? Isnt that to be expected when a team starts rebuilding? The remaining years following that they missed the playoffs just ONCE. They also had a habit of beating your team so i wouldnt call them crap. Sorry, the only situational back ive seen lately is Joseph Addai. And he couldnt hold TD's jock. Some of you guys are just outright hilarious.

Medford Bronco
02-23-2010, 07:45 AM
TD was great, but he wasn't the best RB of his time. A lot of you youngsters forget that TD played at the same time, and a couple of times against, quite possibly the most skilled RB ever to step on a football field; Barry Sanders.

Emmitt Smith also was in that era. Pretty awesome as well.

Nomad
02-23-2010, 07:50 AM
I don't care if LT parted the Red Sea, I don't like him and if he was that great he would have carried his team. He's a system back and the Chargers (Marty systems especially) benefited him. He's a pouter and whiner and that's what I remember about him!!

TD, on the other hand, was awesome to watch (so I'm a little bias). Damn the football gods for cutting his career short!!

CoachChaz
02-23-2010, 08:04 AM
This is a ridiculous camparison. Homerism at it's finest.


By the way...Orson Mobley was better than Kellen Winslow

tsiguy96
02-23-2010, 08:49 AM
if im wrong, show me why LT disappeared when games really matter, in the playoffs, and davis played his best then. all of you dismissing TD so fast are pretty sad to forget that the chargers never even GOT to a SB while he was here, and part of that reason is because he was a horrible postseason player. the broncos won 2 SBs because TD is unstoppable. if you cant stop TD, how do you expect to stop elway as well? it was a lethal combination, but just look at the stats.

TD averaged 143ypg in the postseason. WHEN IT MATTERS. people trying to convince me that the regular season is everything will never do it, great players need to play great when its needed most.

Devilspawn
02-23-2010, 09:18 AM
I don't care if LT parted the Red Sea, I don't like him and if he was that great he would have carried his team. He's a system back and the Chargers (Marty systems especially) benefited him. He's a pouter and whiner and that's what I remember about him!!
And Terrell Davis didn't benefit from a system that turned _________ into a 1000 yard back?


TD, on the other hand, was awesome to watch (so I'm a little bias). Damn the football gods for cutting his career short!!
I say the same thing everyday about another guy!!

Devilspawn
02-23-2010, 09:18 AM
if im wrong, show me why LT disappeared when games really matter, in the playoffs, and davis played his best then. all of you dismissing TD so fast are pretty sad to forget that the chargers never even GOT to a SB while he was here, and part of that reason is because he was a horrible postseason player. the broncos won 2 SBs because TD is unstoppable. if you cant stop TD, how do you expect to stop elway as well? it was a lethal combination, but just look at the stats.

TD averaged 143ypg in the postseason. WHEN IT MATTERS. people trying to convince me that the regular season is everything will never do it, great players need to play great when its needed most.
Tomlinson changed the fortunes of the Chargers. Don't underestimate his value. The offense revolved around him and did so with three quarterbacks.

Tomlinson's pouting - yeah it's great smack fodder, but he was legitimately injured during these times, in New England and Indianapolis in 2007. His pouting was a result of not being able to help his team or losing in the playoffs. Sometimes an attitude is good for a competitor.

The Broncos didn't win 2 SBs just because TD was unstoppable. I would like to think that Elway wasn't just there for the ride, that the defense didn't give up points so that Davis could up his stats, or that the entire team didn't have the maturity to withstand adversity... AH, maturity, he said. The Chargers teams have been the most immature bunch I've ever seen in such a stretch.

Mental mistakes in 2006 vs. New England that was not Tomlinson's fault.
Nate Freaking Kaeding.
Martyball.
Norv Turner.

The Broncos had none of these because they, as a team, knew how to win. The Chargers STILL don't know how to win. It's not just Tomlinson. He could be unstoppable and the Chargers still wouldn't make it to a Superbowl. I know, the Raiders team that made the Superbowl were businesslike. They overcame a 4 game losing streak and didn't panic. The Broncos in 1998 vs. the Jets didn't panic when it was 10-10. The Chargers panic, lose control. self destruct, ect. It's a team game. Terrell Davis was the engine, but the car had to have driver, gears, tires and some bad ass rims to win the race.

The homerism in here is bananas. You're throwing away a Hall of Fame career just because he had the misfortune of playing on an immature team. He doesn't have the playoff stats, but he has the regular season stats, and that does count for something. Can you honestly say that all 5 of the Chargers losses, or even one of them, was solely on Tomlinson?

The Broncos were good when Davis arrived. The Chargers were garbage when Tomlinson arrived. Turning around a franchise while becoming the face is not something to spit at.

SR
02-23-2010, 09:22 AM
Emmitt Smith also was in that era. Pretty awesome as well.

Skill wise, he couldn't hold a candle to Barry Sanders. Accomplishment wise, Emmitt pwns.

SR
02-23-2010, 09:25 AM
if im wrong, show me why LT disappeared when games really matter, in the playoffs, and davis played his best then. all of you dismissing TD so fast are pretty sad to forget that the chargers never even GOT to a SB while he was here, and part of that reason is because he was a horrible postseason player. the broncos won 2 SBs because TD is unstoppable. if you cant stop TD, how do you expect to stop elway as well? it was a lethal combination, but just look at the stats.

TD averaged 143ypg in the postseason. WHEN IT MATTERS. people trying to convince me that the regular season is everything will never do it, great players need to play great when its needed most.

TD was the recipient of a great offensive line, a great blocking FB or two, and AMAZING blocking receivers (Eddie Mac and Rod Smith). Without any one of those variables, TD doesn't have the success he did. TD defined "system back".

That is not to discredit his ability or skill, because he had plenty of both, but if you put him behind an offensive line that was only 75% as good as ours and he doesn't have the same success he had in Denver. Period.

Nomad
02-23-2010, 09:27 AM
And Terrell Davis didn't benefit from a system that turned _________ into a 1000 yard back?


I say the same thing everyday about another guy!!

2000 yd back fella....get it right:D, so I have a little homerism in me so what!!! I personally don't like LT so I'm not going to recognize his accomplishments, but if it gets some of you around here all emotional and panties in a wad then LT did put SD on the map again!!

What other guy?? If you are referring to Bo Jackson, he was fun to watch, when not playing the BRONCOS of course!!

Devilspawn
02-23-2010, 09:39 AM
2000 yd back fella....get it right:D, so I have a little homerism in me so what!!! I personally don't like LT so I'm not going to recognize his accomplishments, but if it gets some of you around here all emotional and panties in a wad then LT did put SD on the map again!!

What other guy?? If you are referring to Bo Jackson, he was fun to watch, when not playing the BRONCOS of course!!
Yep, Bo Jack. Of all the people to chose football as a "hobby"... :mad:

Well you admitted your baised, so common sense says it was nice knowing ya.

And I did mean 1000 yard back. I wasn't talking about Davis:

Olandis Gary
Mike Anderson
Clinton Portis*
Reuben Droughns
Mike Anderson
Tatum Bell

* denotes a franchise back outside the system.

Put Tomlinson in this system. I wouldn't be surprised if he had 2000 yards himself, especially after seeing his 2006 season. And as a receiver, too? Hot diggity!

AlWilsonizKING
02-23-2010, 09:58 AM
All I remember from LT is seeing him whine on the sidelines like a baby when he didn't get his way.........TD played WHILE HE COULDN'T SEE so he could help his TEAM win a SB.....he wasn't about personal records!!!...BTW on that note...how many times was TD pulled in the 3rd and 4th quarters of games because we were winning by so much. Had he stayed in during those game, who knows how many records he would have...TD was a TEAM player and LT was a ME player.

I'm a HOMER so TD will ALWAYS be the best back in my eyes.....though I do know there are some others that were pretty good also.


PEACE!!!

AlWilsonizKING
02-23-2010, 10:16 AM
Tomlinson's pouting - yeah it's great smack fodder, but he was legitimately injured during these times, in New England and Indianapolis in 2007. His pouting was a result of not being able to help his team or losing in the playoffs.


TD went on the field of play when he couldn't see due to his migrane...did he leave his helmet on and sulk on the sidelines? No Shanny said "we need you in there" and TD put his helmet on and RAN ONTO THE FIELD to help his team win the biggest game of the year.


....but like I said before, I'm a BRONCOS HOMER and HATE any team that isn't and its players......so to me, IMO, TD is better.

PEACE!!!

CoachChaz
02-23-2010, 10:27 AM
Reality is a concept that often escapes the average man

Nomad
02-23-2010, 10:42 AM
TD went on the field of play when he couldn't see due to his migrane...did he leave his helmet on and sulk on the sidelines? No Shanny said "we need you in there" and TD put his helmet on and RAN ONTO THE FIELD to help his team win the biggest game of the year.


....but like I said before, I'm a BRONCOS HOMER and HATE any team that isn't and its players......so to me, IMO, TD is better.

PEACE!!!

In the end this is all that matters too !! Who gives a rats ass who was better, reality is you'll never know unless they would have played on the same team in the same systems!! They both excelled in the systems they played only one was cut short his career so it doesn't look as glamorous. I guess we could play the 'what if' game all day and not prove a single thing!! But I'm not one to hang off of LT's jock!!

CoachChaz
02-23-2010, 10:59 AM
In the end this is all that matters too !! Who gives a rats ass who was better, reality is you'll never know unless they would have played on the same team in the same systems!! They both excelled in the systems they played only one was cut short his career so it doesn't look as glamorous. I guess we could play the 'what if' game all day and not prove a single thing!! But I'm not one to hang off of LT's jock!!

I think there's a difference between hanging off his jock and accepting the fact he's been one of the best RB's of this generation.

Ravage!!!
02-23-2010, 11:02 AM
TD was the recipient of a great offensive line, a great blocking FB or two, and AMAZING blocking receivers (Eddie Mac and Rod Smith). Without any one of those variables, TD doesn't have the success he did. TD defined "system back".

That is not to discredit his ability or skill, because he had plenty of both, but if you put him behind an offensive line that was only 75% as good as ours and he doesn't have the same success he had in Denver. Period.

This is incorrect.... and just plain BS.

I'm not going to put down LT, and not going to call him a systems back... but you obviously...OBVIOUSLY... didn't watch TD run the ball and play the game if you say he was a systems back. Its just flat out WRONG. Not to mention, he STILL owns the record for most TDs in the post season, and in the Super Bowl.

I promise you.. our OL or not, he would have been successful no matter where he went. He had the skill set to be one of the greatest ever, and is why his name is brought up for the HoF despite having an injury shortened career.

Ravage!!!
02-23-2010, 11:06 AM
Yep, Bo Jack. Of all the people to chose football as a "hobby"... :mad:

Well you admitted your baised, so common sense says it was nice knowing ya.

And I did mean 1000 yard back. I wasn't talking about Davis:

Olandis Gary
Mike Anderson
Clinton Portis*
Reuben Droughns
Mike Anderson
Tatum Bell

* denotes a franchise back outside the system.

Put Tomlinson in this system. I wouldn't be surprised if he had 2000 yards himself, especially after seeing his 2006 season. And as a receiver, too? Hot diggity!

Sorry.. but TD wasn't just a 1000 yrd rusher. 1000yrd rushers are COMMON in the NFL. That shouldn't even be the standard anymore.

Note that this "system" didn't come before TD? Point being, he had the most yards of any back in a four year span. Comparing that to some average 1000yrd rushers, is a sham at best. Its BS, and not a fair comparison. TD didn't just rush for 1000 yrds.

I'm not going to put down LT to try and boost TDs accomplishments. No need to. But to try and state that TD was purely a back of the system is crap.

KCL
02-23-2010, 11:07 AM
To heck with both them guys...there's a new kid in town and his name is
Jamal Charles..:lol:

Northman
02-23-2010, 11:09 AM
TD was the recipient of a great offensive line, a great blocking FB or two, and AMAZING blocking receivers (Eddie Mac and Rod Smith). Without any one of those variables, TD doesn't have the success he did. TD defined "system back".

That is not to discredit his ability or skill, because he had plenty of both, but if you put him behind an offensive line that was only 75% as good as ours and he doesn't have the same success he had in Denver. Period.

LT benefiitted greatly from FB Neal. And for the record, TD at times broke through defenders far more than LT ever did at the line of scrimmage.

Northman
02-23-2010, 11:14 AM
This is incorrect.... and just plain BS.

I'm not going to put down LT, and not going to call him a systems back... but you obviously...OBVIOUSLY... didn't watch TD run the ball and play the game if you say he was a systems back. Its just flat out WRONG. Not to mention, he STILL owns the record for most TDs in the post season, and in the Super Bowl.

I promise you.. our OL or not, he would have been successful no matter where he went. He had the skill set to be one of the greatest ever, and is why his name is brought up for the HoF despite having an injury shortened career.


Its hard for some to really grasp reality isnt it? I swear none of them have ever watched Bronco ball back then. :lol:

Nomad
02-23-2010, 11:20 AM
To heck with both them guys...there's a new kid in town and his name is
Jamal Charles..:lol:

Charles was not fun to watch in his last game, though he did a kick ass job!

Nomad
02-23-2010, 11:28 AM
Its hard for some to really grasp reality isnt it? I swear none of them have ever watched Bronco ball back then. :lol:

Rod Bernstine is my all time favorite:caked:

KCL
02-23-2010, 11:31 AM
Charles was not fun to watch in his last game, though he did a kick ass job!

I beg to differ,he was alot of fun to watch...;)

He started week 9 when LJ was released and ended the season with 1120 rushing yards and I didn't know this at the time but he also became the only player in NFL history to rush for 1,100 or more yards in 200 or fewer carries.

T.K.O.
02-23-2010, 11:35 AM
I beg to differ,he was alot of fun to watch...;)

He started week 9 when LJ was released and ended the season with 1120 rushing yards and I didn't know this at the time but he also became the only player in NFL history to rush for 1,100 or more yards in 200 or fewer carries.

we'll give you simms and scheffler for him.......hmmm.......hmmmm?
well ? get on the horn to pioli lets make it happen !:beer:

Nomad
02-23-2010, 11:42 AM
I beg to differ,he was alot of fun to watch...;)

He started week 9 when LJ was released and ended the season with 1120 rushing yards and I didn't know this at the time but he also became the only player in NFL history to rush for 1,100 or more yards in 200 or fewer carries.

From a football standpoint yeah, but as a BRONCO fan NO!! As a Chiefs fan, I know you enjoyed every minute which is quite understandable:D! Hopefully he is a one year wonder!!:)

T.K.O.
02-23-2010, 11:49 AM
whats with these rb's named jamal ? they always have record days against the broncos :mad:

KCL
02-23-2010, 12:57 PM
From a football standpoint yeah, but as a BRONCO fan NO!! As a Chiefs fan, I know you enjoyed every minute which is quite understandable:D! Hopefully he is a one year wonder!!:)

:tsk:

Devilspawn
02-23-2010, 01:21 PM
Sorry.. but TD wasn't just a 1000 yrd rusher. 1000yrd rushers are COMMON in the NFL. That shouldn't even be the standard anymore.
It should be a standard when the system can get any running back this goal. It's reknown that Denver's system is friendly for a running back. I know you're not saying it never was, especially during Shanahan's first 10 years. It was a running joke at times at how successful Denver's scheme was at creating 1000 yard rushers. Was there any other team during this period that had multiple 1000 yard rushers and if so, as many as Denver, which was 6?


Note that this "system" didn't come before TD? Point being, he had the most yards of any back in a four year span. Comparing that to some average 1000yrd rushers, is a sham at best. Its BS, and not a fair comparison. TD didn't just rush for 1000 yrds.

I'm not going to put down LT to try and boost TDs accomplishments. No need to. But to try and state that TD was purely a back of the system is crap.
I didn't say TD was a system back. And I didn't say he was just a 1000 yard back. I said the system Denver used produced 1000 yard backs out of guys who, like you said, were average. Davis just excelled at it. But you can't tell me Denver's system with Shanahan wasn't running back friendly. That was common knowledge.

All those backs I mentioned, Portis is the only one who is still a featured back today. That's on him being a great back. Only one other guy had 1000 yards outside of Denver, and today he's third string. Anytime one of those players left Denver, the question was "was it the back, or the system?". For Portis, it was the back. The others, the system. I'm sure Davis would've been a great back on other teams, but there's no denying that he used the advantage of a great system in Denver and took it to new heights.

So that 1000 benchmark can apply to those average guys who seemed to have a hard time taking their numbers elsewhere. 1000 yards are common in the NFL, but it was also common in Denver. I never said Davis was good only because of the system, that's like saying the same about Jerry Rice. But you can't tell me that Denver's system didn't give runners a better chance to succeed.

My beef with this whole thread is the disrespect for Tomlinson because of a handful of games. Yet we all forget that, even though he didn't pout, Barry Sanders was no Barry Sanders in the playoffs, but he's still considered one of, if not the greatest back of all time.

SR
02-23-2010, 01:55 PM
and just plain BS.

As are a lot of your posts.

TD excelled in the zone blocking scheme. He was a one cut back and that system suited him perfectly. Our offensive line was great at pushing people where they wanted them to go to open holes for TD. I don't think he would've had the same success for a team that didn't use the zone blocking scheme.

He was a product of the system, just like Gary, Anderson, Portis, Droughns, and Bell, but with superior talent.

I'm not saying he doesn't deserve to be mentioned with Gayle Sayers, Barry Sanders, etc, because he does, but there were better backs than him.

SR
02-23-2010, 01:56 PM
LT benefiitted greatly from FB Neal. And for the record, TD at times broke through defenders far more than LT ever did at the line of scrimmage.

TD didn't have to as often. Denver's offensive line was the best at what they did.

underrated29
02-23-2010, 02:03 PM
There is one stat that always stands out to me when people mention the sytem back or Oline thing.


I do not remember them off the top of my head. Someone can probably look them up.... but the stats were something close to:


TD AVERAGED 4+ YPC AFTER CONTACT!

YES, After Contact. Not before, not through our all powerful OL (which it was all powerful). It didnt matter. TD would steam roll those defenders who got in his way. And take it to the house or drag them for another 5 yards before they were able to bring down the beast.


I do not recall, atleast for now any backs who have put up such a telling stat like that since....LT has done it before, but not an average for the whole season.

SR
02-23-2010, 02:47 PM
TD was a damn good back. There's no telling what kind of records he would have set had he finished out his career. I just think it's goofy that people get their orange colored glasses on and can't see the forest from the trees.

tsiguy96
02-23-2010, 02:59 PM
funny how everyone is trying to derail the conversation of what the player did when he was needed and counted on the most, in the playoffs and the big game. TD might be the best postseason player in HISTORY. LT? what did he do? he was great in the regular season, theres no denying that.

jhildebrand
02-23-2010, 03:17 PM
As are a lot of your posts.

TD excelled in the zone blocking scheme. He was a one cut back and that system suited him perfectly. Our offensive line was great at pushing people where they wanted them to go to open holes for TD. I don't think he would've had the same success for a team that didn't use the zone blocking scheme.

He was a product of the system, just like Gary, Anderson, Portis, Droughns, and Bell, but with superior talent.

I'm not saying he doesn't deserve to be mentioned with Gayle Sayers, Barry Sanders, etc, because he does, but there were better backs than him.

I don't think the OL was opening up holes quite like you remember and when they were it wasn't consistently.

What made TD great is first contact almost NEVER brought him down. When he did go down he almost always fell forward for 2-3 more yards. TD often had contact in the backfield but his style of running and physical style overcame that.

Bronco4ever
02-23-2010, 03:35 PM
Like most others here, I don't want to diminish what LT has accomplished in his career. He's a hell of a player. It's really quite hard to compare their two careers. TD did two things much better than LT: perform in the clutch, and block. It's been said throughout this thread how LT has been quiet in the biggest games while TD was a beast when it mattered most. TD was also pretty legit at pass blocking, which is pretty undervalued when you look at runningbacks. I can't recall how many times I've seen LT miss blocking assignments that have killed his quarterback. TD was definitely one of the most well rounded runningbacks the NFL has ever seen.

PS Looking at LT's recent comments about wanting to win a championship before he hangs up his cleats, I'm almost sure LT would trade his career for TD's.

Lonestar
02-23-2010, 03:41 PM
funny how everyone is trying to derail the conversation of what the player did when he was needed and counted on the most, in the playoffs and the big game. TD might be the best postseason player in HISTORY. LT? what did he do? he was great in the regular season, theres no denying that.


OK who was TD's QB for those years, John, did LT have a JOHN as a QB NOPE. not even near his quality.

How about HOF players, Sharpe someday, John, Zimmerman, Nalen (should be), Jason probably and TD should be also.

That is what makes playoff wins possible. LT carried his team he was the offense for all but the last 1.5 year. When they switched to a passing games without ehaddition of Chambers mid season, since then they found out that the other 3 receivers that are all over 6'4" can be devastating like gates was. and River is a pretty good QB.

Plus look at the coaching that he has had marty, norv and there might have been someone before them not sure when Marty came to town.

Face it, they were not mike, neither could carry mikes jock. TD also had as stated before Rod and Eddie mac as blockers down field and SR forgot to add Sharpe as a great blocker clearing out the middle as well as Mr. third down as a receiver.

Now LT did have TG and later Gates but between those three that was their passing game. Bet most folks can't name a WR on their team prior to two years ago without going to the internet.
They were one dimensional LT running and catching the ball and the TE catching the ball when LT was doubled or triple covered.

I love TD and think he is HOF worthy, but there is NO DOUBT that LT will not be a unamious first ballot guy when he is eligible.

T.K.O.
02-23-2010, 04:01 PM
both TD and LT were "freaky good" in their prime.....we'll never know how TD would have done if he had 9-10 healthy years. but LT was definately the "toast of the league" for a few years and WAS the chargers offense thats for sure.

Northman
02-23-2010, 05:13 PM
Like most others here, I don't want to diminish what LT has accomplished in his career. He's a hell of a player. It's really quite hard to compare their two careers. TD did two things much better than LT: perform in the clutch, and block. It's been said throughout this thread how LT has been quiet in the biggest games while TD was a beast when it mattered most. TD was also pretty legit at pass blocking, which is pretty undervalued when you look at runningbacks. I can't recall how many times I've seen LT miss blocking assignments that have killed his quarterback. TD was definitely one of the most well rounded runningbacks the NFL has ever seen.

PS Looking at LT's recent comments about wanting to win a championship before he hangs up his cleats, I'm almost sure LT would trade his career for TD's.

Exactly. In fact, i havent seen anyone disrespect LT in this thread. Everything that has been mentioned has been fact but people have still said he was a great back. Just not as good as TD. But, i guess there must be a lot of TD haters because i dont think ive ever seen so many people rush to devalue TD's career and accomplishments.

Northman
02-23-2010, 05:14 PM
I love TD and think he is HOF worthy, but there is NO DOUBT that LT will not be a unamious first ballot guy when he is eligible.

Who said he wasnt?

Poet
02-23-2010, 05:29 PM
I don't think the OL was opening up holes quite like you remember and when they were it wasn't consistently.

What made TD great is first contact almost NEVER brought him down. When he did go down he almost always fell forward for 2-3 more yards. TD often had contact in the backfield but his style of running and physical style overcame that.

He often had contact in the backfield when he played one an offensive line that was widely recognized as one of the best in the league at run blocking?

KCL
02-23-2010, 05:35 PM
IMO It's hard to say who is better than who? Like someone mentioned earlier,look at Barry Sanders...dude was awesome to watch.

We all have our opinions and naturally we think pretty much most of the time that the players we cheer for are better than some at their position...which is true in some cases.

I have to mention Charles again..after watching the Chiefs struggle all last season..how in the hell was Charles able to rack up the yards he did in half a season? LJ flat out sucked last season and he didn't care,didn't want to play for KC and didn't try.
He made our OL look terrible which for the most part they were.

Every back has their own style they develope and Charles was small enough and quick enough to take advantage of any opening he saw.LJ was good at one time when KC had Trent Green and that great OL he played behind..so yea sometimes it's the players all on their own and sometimes it is the line that makes them what they are.

G_Money
02-23-2010, 06:08 PM
First 4 years, TD vs. LT (regular season):
TD: 1343 attempts for 6413 yards, 61 TDs, 152 catches for 1181 yards, 16 fumbles
LT: 1363 attempts for 5899 yards, 60 TDs, 291 catches for 2022 yards, 19 fumbles

TD had 500 more rushing yards, LT had 800 more receiving. They're pretty damn comparable. If you want to be jealous of something, be jealous of LT never having a Matt Lepsis wreck his knee during an INT return, because LT's career trajectory matches what TD should have had. Plus a few yards on the ground, minus a few in the air...but comparable.

Has TD had a better post-season career? Yes. Does that make him a massively superior back? No. As has been pointed out, TD had the #1 line in football, great blocking WRs, several HOFers on offense, etc.

Would I take a prime, healthy TD over LT in the playoffs? Yes, but then I'd take him over LT in the regular season, too - barely.

But it's possible to like your guy more without denigrating another guy. LT isn't #2 all-time in rushing TDs for no reason. It's not like he had a lucky streak or something.

TD won't make it into the Hall, but he matched up against the greatest of all time in his brief career apex - and LT is one of those greatest of all time.

~G

Lonestar
02-23-2010, 06:12 PM
Who said he wasnt?

Well perhaps no one outright said it but assuming that Lt goes on the ballot he will be a first ballot guy and TD has failed a couple of times.

YET a few are arguing that TD was better than a first ballot HOFer Does that help to explain my comment..

Lonestar
02-23-2010, 06:15 PM
IMO It's hard to say who is better than who? Like someone mentioned earlier,look at Barry Sanders...dude was awesome to watch.

We all have our opinions and naturally we think pretty much most of the time that the players we cheer for are better than some at their position...which is true in some cases.

I have to mention Charles again..after watching the Chiefs struggle all last season..how in the hell was Charles able to rack up the yards he did in half a season? LJ flat out sucked last season and he didn't care,didn't want to play for KC and didn't try.
He made our OL look terrible which for the most part they were.

Every back has their own style they develope and Charles was small enough and quick enough to take advantage of any opening he saw.LJ was good at one time when KC had Trent Green and that great OL he played behind..so yea sometimes it's the players all on their own and sometimes it is the line that makes them what they are.


I have to wonder IF (have not flowed how many inexperienced OLINE guys you have had. without eh change in scheme this year, perhaps it took till mid year to GET IT.

but then he cleary did not want to play for a white coach either. He made that plain a few years ago.

KCL
02-23-2010, 06:19 PM
I have to wonder IF (have not flowed how many inexperienced OLINE guys you have had. without eh change in scheme this year, perhaps it took till mid year to GET IT.

but then he cleary did not want to play for a white coach either. He made that plain a few years ago.

I don't know JR...Even tho we had a terrible record they played pretty well in some games..the last game vs Denver the OL did do a good job of protecting Cassell and paved the way for Charles as well but he also was able to turn what looked like was nothing into something!

Lonestar
02-23-2010, 06:22 PM
I don't know JR...Even tho we had a terrible record they played pretty well..the last game vs Denver the OL did do a good job of protecting Cassell and paved the way for Charles as well but he also was able to turn what looked like was nothing into something!

Hey I was just throwing up something to see if it stuck I only got to see KC play once last year and the rookie kicked our ass.


I know that a lot of your OLINE guys are relatively new over the past couple of years and switching to a new scheme can take time to make it work.

You are the KC fan and know better than I do so if you think that was the reason as explained then I can believe it.

KCL
02-23-2010, 06:30 PM
Hey I was just throwing up something to see if it stuck I only got to see KC play once last year and the rookie kicked our ass.


I know that a lot of your OLINE guys are relatively new over the past couple of years and switching to a new scheme can take time to make it work.

You are the KC fan and know better than I do so if you think that was the reason as explained then I can believe it.

Could be..Cassell was 3rd behind Big Ben and I forget who else in getting sacked the most...Waters is the best OLM left over from the era when we had
Shields and Roaf.

Northman
02-23-2010, 06:32 PM
Well perhaps no one outright said it but assuming that Lt goes on the ballot he will be a first ballot guy and TD has failed a couple of times.

YET a few are arguing that TD was better than a first ballot HOFer Does that help to explain my comment..

Explains the comment however TD fails more for not having the years added to his resume. But yes, I think LT gets in.

Nomad
02-23-2010, 07:05 PM
IMO It's hard to say who is better than who? Like someone mentioned earlier,look at Barry Sanders...dude was awesome to watch.

We all have our opinions and naturally we think pretty much most of the time that the players we cheer for are better than some at their position...which is true in some cases.

I have to mention Charles again..after watching the Chiefs struggle all last season..how in the hell was Charles able to rack up the yards he did in half a season? LJ flat out sucked last season and he didn't care,didn't want to play for KC and didn't try.
He made our OL look terrible which for the most part they were.

Every back has their own style they develope and Charles was small enough and quick enough to take advantage of any opening he saw.LJ was good at one time when KC had Trent Green and that great OL he played behind..so yea sometimes it's the players all on their own and sometimes it is the line that makes them what they are.

Pretty much KC! I honestly don't like LT regardless what he accomplished on the football field. I liked watching Bo Jackson and he was a Raider:loco: so i can give credit to RBs other than TD....Bo knows football:D. I like TD over LT and I'll stick with it!

Ravage!!!
02-23-2010, 07:13 PM
As are a lot of your posts.

TD excelled in the zone blocking scheme. He was a one cut back and that system suited him perfectly. Our offensive line was great at pushing people where they wanted them to go to open holes for TD. I don't think he would've had the same success for a team that didn't use the zone blocking scheme.

He was a product of the system, just like Gary, Anderson, Portis, Droughns, and Bell, but with superior talent.

I'm not saying he doesn't deserve to be mentioned with Gayle Sayers, Barry Sanders, etc, because he does, but there were better backs than him.

Wrong. This is just flat out wrong.

Watch the games. Watch TD run BY, THROUGH, AROUND, Past, and JUKE OUT defensive players. If it was the OL, how was it he averaged 4 yrds AFTER first contact??? He would make one cut through the line, and three more past that to fake people out. That doesn't have anything to do with the OL. Watch him BREAK tackles, watch him run THROUGH tacklers... watch him hit and spin and break away. That is NOT a "systems" back. What you are stating, is the inability to understand and recognize talent. You can't seem to see the difference between what is talent and what is around him.

TD would have excelled in any system. Why? Because he was an incredible football player. His skills showed on the field. His ability to break free, fake out, spin away, and then RUN OVER defenders proved it. Not to mention the fact that he was a good receiver out of the back field.

You can't say in one sentence he was a produce of the system (which is BS), and then turn around and say that his name deserves to be mentioned with Gale Sayers and Barry Sanders. Make up your mind.

KCL
02-23-2010, 07:17 PM
Pretty much KC! I honestly don't like LT regardless what he accomplished on the football field. I liked watching Bo Jackson and he was a Raider:loco: so i can give credit to RBs other than TD....Bo knows football:D. I like TD over LT and I'll stick with it!

Bo knew baseball too..he played for the KC Royals...:D

Ravage!!!
02-23-2010, 07:19 PM
There is one stat that always stands out to me when people mention the sytem back or Oline thing.


I do not remember them off the top of my head. Someone can probably look them up.... but the stats were something close to:


TD AVERAGED 4+ YPC AFTER CONTACT!

YES, After Contact. Not before, not through our all powerful OL (which it was all powerful). It didnt matter. TD would steam roll those defenders who got in his way. And take it to the house or drag them for another 5 yards before they were able to bring down the beast.


I do not recall, atleast for now any backs who have put up such a telling stat like that since....LT has done it before, but not an average for the whole season.

Great point. Its not like our OL was SOOOOO good that the defenses couldn't penetrate, or get to the holes. ITs not like they just cleared the field and no defenders touched TD. He was amazing the way he could juke you out, turn on the burners and go by you, or lower his head and just flat out run over you. Then, there was his great spin-move. He would hit and spin away from everyone.... man I loved to watch that guy play!! :beer:

Poet
02-23-2010, 07:22 PM
TD wasn't a product of the system. He played on a great line, he was a great back. Emmitt Smith played on a great line but he was a great back. However, LT never played on a great line. No one recognizes his line as great. No one.

But to think that his surrounding talent didn't help him out a lot is insane. John Elway was his QB. Shannon Sharpe was his tight end. Rod Smith was his WR. He played on an offensive line that rivaled Dallas' during their 90's dynasty.

Do you actually think that his numbers would have been as good had he played on LT's team? Remember that Rivers only recently (read the past two years) took over the offense. In fact, when Rivers was still learning the offense and how to be a QB his biggest crutch was LT.

TD was a special back whose career was ended by a fluke accident. A valid argument can be made that he is a HOFer. However, I don't think you're going to find anyone other than Denver fans who think that he was a better back than LT.

SR
02-23-2010, 07:26 PM
You can't say in one sentence he was a produce of the system (which is BS), and then turn around and say that his name deserves to be mentioned with Gale Sayers and Barry Sanders. Make up your mind.

It's not one or the other dude, because obviously they go hand in hand.

Northman
02-23-2010, 10:54 PM
TD wasn't a product of the system. He played on a great line, he was a great back. Emmitt Smith played on a great line but he was a great back. However, LT never played on a great line. No one recognizes his line as great. No one.

But to think that his surrounding talent didn't help him out a lot is insane. John Elway was his QB. Shannon Sharpe was his tight end. Rod Smith was his WR. He played on an offensive line that rivaled Dallas' during their 90's dynasty.

Do you actually think that his numbers would have been as good had he played on LT's team? Remember that Rivers only recently (read the past two years) took over the offense. In fact, when Rivers was still learning the offense and how to be a QB his biggest crutch was LT.

TD was a special back whose career was ended by a fluke accident. A valid argument can be made that he is a HOFer. However, I don't think you're going to find anyone other than Denver fans who think that he was a better back than LT.

LT had Lorenzo Neal, Antonio Gates, Phillip Rivers (who is considered one of the best QB's in the game right now). Was the SD Oline AS good as Denver's? No. But they arent scrubs either as Turner and Sproles have had success behind that very line. For anyone trying to paint this picture that SD is average is just flat out insane. Barry Sanders played on a crappy team, LT played on a very good one and TD played on a great one. But, do i think he could of succeeded on that SD team? Absolutely. No doubt in my mind. And while LT may have had to somewhat carry Phillip while he found his footing TD had to carry his team in a Super Bowl when Elway wasnt his best. No one here is short footing LT, but your never going to convince me that he was better than TD despite having played longer. As i said, great backs step up come crunch time, LT has never done that even when the team was very good around him.

Shazam!
02-23-2010, 10:58 PM
For every position on SD's offense, Denver was far, far better in their Super Bowl years. Like light years ahead better.

This thread is ridiculous.

TXBRONC
02-23-2010, 10:59 PM
sorry, TD was good, but LT was phenomenal

I really don't think TD could help carry some of those crap teams LT was on

if anything (I'm going to get killed for this) at these times now, he'd only be a situational back

Exactly what did LT carry those early Charger team too? It sure as hell wasn't the playoffs.

Poet
02-23-2010, 11:02 PM
Exactly what did LT carry those early Charger team too? It sure as hell wasn't the playoffs.

Relevance. He carried them to relevance.

SR
02-23-2010, 11:02 PM
He carried them to the playoffs. Once they got there, he went on vacation.

Lonestar
02-23-2010, 11:04 PM
LT had Lorenzo Neal, Antonio Gates, Phillip Rivers (who is considered one of the best QB's in the game right now). Was the SD Oline AS good as Denver's? No. But they arent scrubs either as Turner and Sproles have had success behind that very line. For anyone trying to paint this picture that SD is average is just flat out insane. Barry Sanders played on a crappy team, LT played on a very good one and TD played on a great one. But, do i think he could of succeeded on that SD team? Absolutely. No doubt in my mind. And while LT may have had to somewhat carry Phillip while he found his footing TD had to carry his team in a Super Bowl when Elway wasnt his best. No one here is short footing LT, but your never going to convince me that he was better than TD despite having played longer. As i said, great backs step up come crunch time, LT has never done that even when the team was very good around him.


When you are the offense like LT was for much of his career, in the playoffs they just make sure they can stop it .. How many games have we taken away the run or pass and forced the other team into doing something they do not really want to do.

IN SAN case it was 80% LT either running the ball or making catches for big gains.

IN the playoff you meet a much more talented opposition for the most part, than regular season.

YOU also forget who his coaches were that is probably the biggest factor in PO wins and loses.

TXBRONC
02-23-2010, 11:06 PM
Reality is a concept that often escapes the average man

And this coming from the guy who says without a doubt Jabar Gaffney is more than capable of replacing Marshall production if he is traded away.

Northman
02-23-2010, 11:08 PM
Im going to also add that in some of the games that TD played in he did not play the second half. And in those games and in other ones his backup backs did not fair even close to as well as he did in rushing. As too the "coaching" excuse, you can only go so far with that. At the end of the day he didnt step up to the plate whether it was fighting through an injury or just not performing well. The Chargers can pass the ball so stopping LT wasnt going to shut the team down. San Diego has also had success in the playoffs so it isnt like they failed everytime they got there. But by all means, keep throwing out excuses im getting a real laugh out of this.

Ravage!!!
02-23-2010, 11:10 PM
TD wasn't a product of the system. He played on a great line, he was a great back. Emmitt Smith played on a great line but he was a great back. However, LT never played on a great line. No one recognizes his line as great. No one.

Reallly? An OL with Dielman, Goff, Hardwick and McNeil and Lorenzo Neil isn't considered to be a top OL??


Do you actually think that his numbers would have been as good had he played on LT's team?
Honestl, King... I'm just not sure he wouldnt' have. I know LT has been one of the very best backs in the last 8 years, but I think TD had every bit as much skill, and more power... than LT. I'm sure I'm biased, even when I'm trying not to be. But when you watch TD run, his skill set was amongst the elite...great OL or QB aside.


TD was a special back whose career was ended by a fluke accident. A valid argument can be made that he is a HOFer. However, I don't think you're going to find anyone other than Denver fans who think that he was a better back than LT.
Agreed. This is absolutely true.... and I think thats because his career ended short. Again, i have absolutely the utmost respect for LT and what he has accomplished in his NFL career, and being able to stay healthy is a huge part in being recognized as being great. Emmit Smith is a perfect example of this. But IF (big giant if) TD would have stayed healthy, I think we absolutely would be putting his name ahead of LTs. But hey, thats all speculation...because he didn't stay healthy. But when talking abilities and skills.... I truly believe that TD was jsut as good as LT.... with more power.

Ravage!!!
02-23-2010, 11:14 PM
Pretty much KC! I honestly don't like LT regardless what he accomplished on the football field. I liked watching Bo Jackson and he was a Raider:loco: so i can give credit to RBs other than TD....Bo knows football:D. I like TD over LT and I'll stick with it!

As much as I hate the Raiders.. that is one football player that I truly wish would have been able to stay healthy..... I would have loved to see how his football career would have gone. That man was just a freaking AMAZING athlete.... and still considered the greatest athlete to ever play in the NFL.

TXBRONC
02-23-2010, 11:15 PM
Relevance. He carried them to relevance.

The Chargers were still drafting in top portion of the first round during the first four or fives years of his career. Sorry that falls why short of relevance.

Ravage!!!
02-23-2010, 11:17 PM
Yeah.. I think Marty Schottenheimer is what carried them to relevence.. just as he did for the Chiefs in the 90's

SR
02-23-2010, 11:22 PM
And this coming from the guy who says without a doubt Jabar Gaffney is more than capable of replacing Marshall production if he is traded away.

I'd listen to Charlie before I listen to 98% of the other people on this board...

Ziggy
02-23-2010, 11:22 PM
As much as I hate the Raiders.. that is one football player that I truly wish would have been able to stay healthy..... I would have loved to see how his football career would have gone. That man was just a freaking AMAZING athlete.... and still considered the greatest athlete to ever play in the NFL.

Bo Jackson was the greatest athlete I've ever seen play in any sport. He had power, speed, balance, agility, and heart. Pro bowler in the NFL and all-star in MLB. As a matter of fact, I watched his first at bat in the MLB all-star game. Knocked it out of the park. The guy was amazing. Sucks that he was a Raider, but he was flat out incredible.

Ziggy
02-23-2010, 11:24 PM
I'd listen to Charlie before I listen to 98% of the other people on this board...

I 2nd that motion.

TXBRONC
02-23-2010, 11:24 PM
Yeah.. I think Marty Schottenheimer is what carried them to relevence.. just as he did for the Chiefs in the 90's

How long was Marty with Chargers before they made the playoffs?

KCL
02-23-2010, 11:24 PM
And this coming from the guy who says without a doubt Jabar Gaffney is more than capable of replacing Marshall production if he is traded away.

Well I don't know how Gaffney did all season but look at how many rec'v yards he had in that last game against KC...He was pretty much Orton's go to guy in that game.

TXBRONC
02-23-2010, 11:29 PM
Well I don't know how Gaffney did all season but look at how many rec'v yards he had in that last game against KC...He was pretty much Orton's go to guy in that game.

That's just one game, he's been in the League for eight years. Besides that he had a lot yards and catches but no touchdowns.

Poet
02-23-2010, 11:30 PM
Reallly? An OL with Dielman, Goff, Hardwick and McNeil and Lorenzo Neil isn't considered to be a top OL??

Neil was a fullback. He was a beast, but let's not try to add another 'OL' to the list, and no, I never said his line wasn't an adequate good blocking OL, but no one raves about them like people do for the Broncos OL. It's not even close.

One of the things I like to do, because I like football so much, is discuss teams of the pasts with people. The typical ' who is the best qb/wr/rb/team/group/secondary/ol' type of thing. Your Broncos OL of those years has been mentioned with the Dallas line of the 90s, the Redskins line with Joe Gibbs as their coach, the Steel Curtain oline, the Colts of this decade, etc etc etc.

No one, and I do mean no one, thinks that LT's line was that great. I'm not even sure that they were great. They were good, there's no doubting that, but they weren't great.


Honestl, King... I'm just not sure he wouldnt' have. I know LT has been one of the very best backs in the last 8 years, but I think TD had every bit as much skill, and more power... than LT. I'm sure I'm biased, even when I'm trying not to be. But when you watch TD run, his skill set was amongst the elite...great OL or QB aside.


LT has been one of the best backs ever. People discussed him being one of the best backs of all-time when he broke that record, and while that was just hyperbole based solely on fantasy football and ESPN blowhards, he was a HOF RB then.

Bo Jackson ran with elite skill. Shaun Alexander ran with great skill. Corey Dillon ran with great skill. Travis Henry ran with great skill. **** me, Willis McGahee runs with great skill. Gale Sayers who shouldn't be in the damn HOF ran with great skill.

Drew Brees was only a good QB and actually struggled at times when he was LT's QB. Rivers has only become an elite QB when LT was starting to decline. His offense consisted of him and Gates as far as good skill players.

LT was a better back in every sense. He was faster, he was better at catching the ball, his blocking is underrated, he was a much better scoring threat, he could throw the ball if he had to and he PRODUCED MORE AND LONGER! TD's best year was beastly, but I'd take LT's 1800 yard season with 31 total touchdowns over TD's 2008 yards and 23 touchdowns.





Agreed. This is absolutely true.... and I think thats because his career ended short. Again, i have absolutely the utmost respect for LT and what he has accomplished in his NFL career, and being able to stay healthy is a huge part in being recognized as being great. Emmit Smith is a perfect example of this. But IF (big giant if) TD would have stayed healthy, I think we absolutely would be putting his name ahead of LTs. But hey, thats all speculation...because he didn't stay healthy. But when talking abilities and skills.... I truly believe that TD was jsut as good as LT.... with more power.
Had TD stayed healthy he would have done many more wondeful things in the NFL. I would never say that he was a total product of his system beacuse I've seen the guys after TD in that same system with some of the same players and it's not even close. He was a special player.

However, I don't think LT's supporting cast was on the same level as TD's, and I think that LT would have outproduced him in either situation. I think TD has an argument for the HOF, I don't think he's one but I wouldn't lose any sleep over him being in there, but he was no LT. If TD had more power LT had more speed, fwiw.

SR
02-23-2010, 11:31 PM
Warrick Dunn was the best running back EVER.

/thread

KCL
02-23-2010, 11:33 PM
That's just one game, he's been in the League for eight years. Besides that he had a lot yards and catches but no touchdowns.

Like I said I didn't know how he's done all season...I just remembered he did well in the KC game...I can't remember if he scored any TDs...I just remember that he caught alot of passes.

Poet
02-23-2010, 11:33 PM
The Chargers were still drafting in top portion of the first round during the first four or fives years of his career. Sorry that falls why short of relevance.

Who carried their team to the playoffs year after year? LT.

Who kept them in games and gave them a fighting chance? LT.

Who was the offense? LT.

He was their franchise.

KCL
02-23-2010, 11:34 PM
Warrick Dunn was the best running back EVER.

/thread

You're certain about that? ;)

Ziggy
02-23-2010, 11:37 PM
I would wager that Coach isn't saying that Gaff could replace Marshall solely on the basis of the last game he played in.

TXBRONC
02-23-2010, 11:38 PM
Who carried their team to the playoffs year after year? LT.

Who kept them in games and gave them a fighting chance? LT.

Who was the offense? LT.

He was their franchise.

You could stand to read a little more carefully. As I said they weren't relevant in the first 4 or years of his career. And they didn't start making the playoffs until the defense was built.

Northman
02-23-2010, 11:40 PM
You could stand to read a little more carefully. As I said they weren't relevant in the first 4 or years of his career. And they didn't start making the playoffs until the defense was built.

Indeed. I pointed to that earlier in this thread.

Poet
02-23-2010, 11:41 PM
You could stand to read a little more carefully. As I said they weren't relevant in the first 4 or years of his career. And they didn't start making the playoffs until the defense was built.

No, I read it just fine. But it's an irrelevant point. I can think of a lot of players past and present that are monsters who didn't get to the playoffs a lot because their teams were trash.

The fact of the matter is that there are a lot of backs who could have done very well in TD's situation. They aren't many who could do what LT did.

Northman
02-23-2010, 11:43 PM
No, I read it just fine. But it's an irrelevant point. I can think of a lot of players past and present that are monsters who didn't get to the playoffs a lot because their teams were trash.

The fact of the matter is that there are a lot of backs who could have done very well in TD's situation. They aren't many who could do what LT did.

Problem is, LT wasnt on a crappy team so im not sure where your going with that.

TXBRONC
02-23-2010, 11:43 PM
I would wager that Coach isn't saying that Gaff could replace Marshall solely on the basis of the last game he played in.

I'll bet he isn't either. But I haven't seen anything would indicate that he feels that Gaffney could be the center piece of passing game.

Lonestar
02-23-2010, 11:47 PM
How long was Marty with Chargers before they made the playoffs?

The real question was how long was Marty there before the choked in the playoffs.
:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Poet
02-23-2010, 11:48 PM
Problem is, LT wasnt on a crappy team so im not sure where your going with that.

It was a point-to-point thing. TXBRONC pointed out that the first few years of his career he didn't to to the playoffs and used it as a slight to him.

KCL
02-23-2010, 11:50 PM
The real question was how long was Marty there before the choked in the playoffs.
:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

ahhhhh...poor Marty :pout:

Ravage!!!
02-23-2010, 11:53 PM
The fact of the matter is that there are a lot of backs who could have done very well in TD's situation. They aren't many who could do what LT did.

Thats not really the question though, in this instance. I would feel very confident in saying that TD could have and would have done just as well as LT in his situation. With Schottenheimer as the coach for their running game? Absolutely TD would have been as good.

You may not believe that, you may not see it. You may feel that TD purely gained advantages because of the players around him. However... he still gained 4 yrds AFTER first contact.. thus that takes the OL out of the equation. Its not like he purely ran though wide open holes.

LT is a first ballot HoF'er.. for sure. Earned. I just don't believe (in my heart) that TD's skill set, running ability, catching ability, ability to take over a game and put the ball IN the endzone was less than LT

Ravage!!!
02-23-2010, 11:54 PM
ahhhhh...poor Marty :pout:

Still a GREAT coach... great coach :salute:

Lonestar
02-23-2010, 11:55 PM
ahhhhh...poor Marty :pout:

a great regular season coach but Elway owned his soul, in the playoffs.

I can't remember him ever winning a playoff game. Certainly no title games.

He played not to lose, Marty ball. But, then he never won in the playoffs.

TXBRONC
02-23-2010, 11:55 PM
No, I read it just fine. But it's an irrelevant point. I can think of a lot of players past and present that are monsters who didn't get to the playoffs a lot because their teams were trash.

The fact of the matter is that there are a lot of backs who could have done very well in TD's situation. They aren't many who could do what LT did.

Ok so you can name several players that were monsters that played on bad teams so can I. So what's your point?

You said L.T. made the Chargers relevant how? A great player on a bad team doesn't make the team relevant.

KCL
02-23-2010, 11:57 PM
a great regular season coach but Elway owned his soul, in the playoffs.

I can't remember him ever winning a playoff game. Certainly no title games.

He played not to lose, Marty ball. But, then he never won in the playoffs.

With Joe Montana in KC

Shazam!
02-24-2010, 12:00 AM
I have to clarify something first.

I (and people who feel as I do here) are not in anyway suggesting that LT is some RB that TD cannot compare to. Far from it.

TD was a product of a brilliant blocking scheme.

Howard Griffith was one of the most overshadowed players then and one of the most important pieces.

Then there was Eddie Mac who was brought in by Shanahan because "He's the best blocking WR I've ever seen."

Then there was Sharpe who was a blocker.

And Smith.

They were all great at blocking.

The OL was quite simply one of the best I have ever seen. To downplay their contribution, not to just TDs career but to the team, is a disgrace to the 97-98 NFL Chamipons. The Broncos OLine is what made them who they were.

You put LT on those teams, they still win two Super Bowls. Bottom line.

TD was a brilliant Back and the best on the team. Derek Loville? C'mon.

I do not claim to be a football genius or professor. Far from it. Certain people's comments on this Board hold validity here a lot more than others (you know who you are). Some are full of crap (you know who you are). But I know what I know, and when I know it to be that's the way it is, I'll say it. And I don't mean that in an opinion sense.

Football is won upfront. We all know this.

If you don't believe it was the OLine that made those Broncos teams great, made everyone better, prolonged Elway's career and made TD look like a frickin' RB God and it was their biggest strength, you don't know shit about football. You dont know anything. And your posts aren't to be taken seriously.

TXBRONC
02-24-2010, 12:00 AM
It was a point-to-point thing. TXBRONC pointed out that the first few years of his career he didn't to to the playoffs and used it as a slight to him.

Wrong I did not slight Tomlinson in the least. You claimed he made the Chargers relevant but still haven't proven how he made the Chargers relevant.

Ravage!!!
02-24-2010, 12:02 AM
So if we don't look at it the same way you do, we don't know shit. From now on, we should defer all opinions to you, and find what you think first before we form our own! Got it :coffee:

TXBRONC
02-24-2010, 12:05 AM
So if we don't look at it the same way you do, we don't know shit. From now on, we should defer all opinions to you, and find what you think first before we form our own! Got it :coffee:

Are you talking to King?

Poet
02-24-2010, 12:06 AM
Thats not really the question though, in this instance. I would feel very confident in saying that TD could have and would have done just as well as LT in his situation. With Schottenheimer as the coach for their running game? Absolutely TD would have been as good.
The thing is that it sorta is. No one is going to take TD's career over LT. You're sorta forced to do the 'what if' game if argue that TD is better than LT.



You may not believe that, you may not see it. You may feel that TD purely gained advantages because of the players around him. However... he still gained 4 yrds AFTER first contact.. thus that takes the OL out of the equation. Its not like he purely ran though wide open holes.

Now hold on a second, it's quite clear that he had advantages. There's no 'feeling to it'. Elway...Rivers....Sharpe...Gates...oh wait, LT's two best players were still developing when he was tearing it up. Come on man.

And that whole after contact thing doesn't come close to telling the whole story. It's contact, not specific contact, so if his offensive line got to the second level and the first player he touched was a secondary player it counts that. It counts when his offensive line busted open a hole and he had a lone defender to beat. It counts when his line busted open a hole and the only tackler around him was out of position because their play broke down.

It doesn't just count when he was met directly at the LOS or in the backfield. It's a good stat to have, but context is important here.




LT is a first ballot HoF'er.. for sure. Earned. I just don't believe (in my heart) that TD's skill set, running ability, catching ability, ability to take over a game and put the ball IN the endzone was less than LT

I could give you the running part, but as far as catching and scoring TD was far from LT's equal.

KCL
02-24-2010, 12:06 AM
TD wasn't the best RB ever...there is no such thing..there are great ones and not so great ones.

not saying anyone here is saying he was the best..but damn comparing him and LT is ridiculous...there are several RBs both these guys can be compared to.

Come on people...stop..end the thread...:lol:

KCL
02-24-2010, 12:07 AM
Are you talking to King?

No he's talking to you TX.

Poet
02-24-2010, 12:07 AM
So if we don't look at it the same way you do, we don't know shit. From now on, we should defer all opinions to you, and find what you think first before we form our own! Got it :coffee:

Now when in the hell did I say that? I try to not belittle people (it doesn't always work out) but if my 'tone' in arguing was abrasive or belittling you have my apologies. Seriously.

But, on a side note, yes! :D

Poet
02-24-2010, 12:08 AM
TD wasn't the best RB ever...there is no such thing..there are great ones and not so great ones.

not saying anyone here is saying he was the best..but damn comparing him and LT is ridiculous...there are several RBs both these guys can be compared to.

Come on people...stop..end the thread...:lol:

No, we don't want to stop the thread. We want to keep arguing about it because we enjoy football debates and we don't want to be productive right now! :D:D:D;):salute:

Shazam!
02-24-2010, 12:08 AM
No, Ravage is talking to me. Because he knows who I was referring to as 'he who knows shit.'

Because having one of the best OLines ever does nothing to help a RB suddenly, and football isnt won upfront!

KCL
02-24-2010, 12:09 AM
No, we don't want to stop the thread. We want to keep arguing about it because we enjoy football debates and we don't want to be productive right now! :D:D:D;):salute:

I'm just messing with you guys!

Ravage!!!
02-24-2010, 12:14 AM
No, Ravage is talking to me. Because he knows who I was referring to as 'he who knows shit.'

Because having one of the best OLines ever does nothing to help a RB suddenly, and football isnt won upfront!

I would say that the entire game isn't won there, and.. you saying that TD is a product of the system is more insulting to him, as a player.

I also don't take your opinion as to who knows what seriously at all. So I'm all good.

Shazam!
02-24-2010, 12:14 AM
Apparently people forget that the 1998 Broncos were practically the AFC Pro Bowl squad.

Ravage!!!
02-24-2010, 12:15 AM
No, we don't want to stop the thread. We want to keep arguing about it because we enjoy football debates and we don't want to be productive right now! :D:D:D;):salute:

No no dude.. not you at all.

I'm talking to Shazam who said that anyone that doesn't agree with his comments, don't know shit about football. After all, he's the all-knowing.

TXBRONC
02-24-2010, 12:15 AM
TD wasn't the best RB ever...there is no such thing..there are great ones and not so great ones.

not saying anyone here is saying he was the best..but damn comparing him and LT is ridiculous...there are several RBs both these guys can be compared to.

Come on people...stop..end the thread...:lol:

I think that's true for every position in football. I don't know if there is such a thing as the greatest of all time. I think every era has a handful players that stand head and shoulders above the rest.

SR
02-24-2010, 12:15 AM
I have to clarify something first.

I (and people who feel as I do here) are not in anyway suggesting that LT is some RB that TD cannot compare to. Far from it.

TD was a product of a brilliant blocking scheme.

Howard Griffith was one of the most overshadowed players then and one of the most important pieces.

Then there was Eddie Mac who was brought in by Shanahan because "He's the best blocking WR I've ever seen."

Then there was Sharpe who was a blocker.

And Smith.

They were all great at blocking.

The OL was quite simply one of the best I have ever seen. To downplay their contribution, not to just TDs career but to the team, is a disgrace to the 97-98 NFL Chamipons. The Broncos OLine is what made them who they were.

You put LT on those teams, they still win two Super Bowls. Bottom line.

TD was a brilliant Back and the best on the team. Derek Loville? C'mon.

I do not claim to be a football genius or professor. Far from it. Certain people's comments on this Board hold validity here a lot more than others (you know who you are). Some are full of crap (you know who you are). But I know what I know, and when I know it to be that's the way it is, I'll say it. And I don't mean that in an opinion sense.

Football is won upfront. We all know this.

If you don't believe it was the OLine that made those Broncos teams great, made everyone better, prolonged Elway's career and made TD look like a frickin' RB God and it was their biggest strength, you don't know shit about football. You dont know anything. And your posts aren't to be taken seriously.

Abso-*******-lutely.

TXBRONC
02-24-2010, 12:17 AM
No he's talking to you TX.

No he's not. :eviltongue: :lol:

Ravage!!!
02-24-2010, 12:18 AM
I could give you the running part, but as far as catching and scoring TD was far from LT's equal.

I'll give you Catching.. but I think TD was as good at finding the end-zone.... especially in the big games.

SR
02-24-2010, 12:18 AM
Apparently people forget that the 1998 Broncos were practically the AFC Pro Bowl squad.

IIRC< we had 8 players in the game that year.

KCL
02-24-2010, 12:18 AM
No he's not. :eviltongue: :lol:

OH he wasn't? I could have sworn he was...:D

SR
02-24-2010, 12:18 AM
No no dude.. not you at all.

I'm talking to Shazam who said that anyone that doesn't agree with his comments, don't know shit about football. After all, he's the all-knowing.

That isn't what he said.

Shazam!
02-24-2010, 12:21 AM
I'm talking to Shazam

No you're not.


Today, 12:18 AM
Remove user from ignore list - Ravage!!!
This message is hidden because Ravage!!! is on your ignore list.

Been there a long time.

KCL
02-24-2010, 12:21 AM
No no dude.. not you at all.

I'm talking to Shazam who said that anyone that doesn't agree with his comments, don't know shit about football. After all, he's the all-knowing.

LOL-That can be said about alot of people who post here!!! :laugh:

Ravage!!!
02-24-2010, 12:22 AM
...TD was a product of a brilliant blocking scheme.


I do not claim to be a football genius or professor. Far from it. Certain people's comments on this Board hold validity here a lot more than others (you know who you are). Some are full of crap (you know who you are). But I know what I know, and when I know it to be that's the way it is, I'll say it. And I don't mean that in an opinion sense.

Football is won upfront. We all know this.

If you don't believe it was the OLine that made those Broncos teams great, made everyone better, prolonged Elway's career and made TD look like a frickin' RB God and it was their biggest strength, you don't know shit about football. You dont know anything. And your posts aren't to be taken seriously.

Thats exactly what he said.

TXBRONC
02-24-2010, 12:23 AM
OH he wasn't? I could have sworn he was...:D

:tsk:

Shazam!
02-24-2010, 12:23 AM
IIRC< we had 8 players in the game that year.

Nine... I think....

But apparently nobody else deserved it, should've been only TD.

Lonestar
02-24-2010, 12:47 AM
With Joe Montana in KC

Ok I'll give you that one, :salute:but which year did he win a Lombardi? :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Lonestar
02-24-2010, 12:54 AM
OK folks lets get back to debating the issue

TD was far, far better than LT ever was

and not measuring penis sizes

debate the issue not the issuer


Lets get


:focus:

jhildebrand
02-24-2010, 01:07 AM
Neil was a fullback. He was a beast, but let's not try to add another 'OL' to the list, and no, I never said his line wasn't an adequate good blocking OL, but no one raves about them like people do for the Broncos OL. It's not even close.

1. LT's numbers declined the moment SD let Neil go.

2. In a year the Chargers sent 11 to the ProBowl their line was heralded as the best in the league and expected to be for years.

Shazam!
02-24-2010, 01:22 AM
LT's numbers declined the moment SD let Neil go.

This is also a testimony to Howard Griffith, another huge reason they were so good upfront. He was part of the machine. No one person was responsible.


In a year the Chargers sent 11 to the ProBowl their line was heralded as the best in the league and expected to be for years.

0 Championships

slim
02-24-2010, 01:22 AM
Never been a big fan of LT.

In my mind TD > LT, but I can't reconcile that with stats and such.

But I can tell you I KNEW that TD was special the first time I saw him run the ball in a Denver uni. Not sure what it was, but I kept telling my dad "man, this guy is good". In fact, I said it so many times that my dad got pissed and told me to shut the hell up.

Obviously, this was before the offensive juggernaut was completely in place.

I won't dispute what Shazam is saying...that OL was freaking amazing.

But if you were to give me the RB of my choice (as rookies, without knowledge of future injuries, etc), I would take TD.

frenchfan
02-24-2010, 02:44 AM
Never been a big fan of LT.

In my mind TD > LT, but I can't reconcile that with stats and such.

But I can tell you I KNEW that TD was special the first time I saw him run the ball in a Denver uni. Not sure what it was, but I kept telling my dad "man, this guy is good". In fact, I said it so many times that my dad got pissed and told me to shut the hell up.

Obviously, this was before the offensive juggernaut was completely in place.

I won't dispute what Shazam is saying...that OL was freaking amazing.

But if you were to give me the RB of my choice (as rookies, without knowledge of future injuries, etc), I would take TD.Nice post...

I'd take either TD or LT in a heart beat...

Anyway, I don't think people can say TD wasn't a great RB... he was... Sure, he had a great system and OL (and QB) to help him... But look at how he ran... Especially after the 1st contact... Have you watch the SB against Packers? When TD was out, we weren't able to move the ball... Period (but we have the whole same players on the field then)... TD was a master piece of our (great) O...

Bashing him because of the surrounding cast means you can say Montana was just an average system QB who benefited from a great team with 49ers... Sorry... Montana is one of the best ever...

TD is too... LT is too... IMO, TD was better in the money time though...
Sure, we can talk about Sanders, Payton and so on... certainly better backs than both LT and TD...

I don't know if TD > LT or not (except in the playoffs... TD was better)... But I'm damn glad TD was a Bronco...
It's the same (useless) kind of debate we could have with Elway > Montana and so on... You'll never know... TD was lucky to play with that O... But that O was lucky to have TD too... Too bad his career was so short :(

:salute:

Northman
02-24-2010, 07:17 AM
Never been a big fan of LT.

In my mind TD > LT, but I can't reconcile that with stats and such.

But I can tell you I KNEW that TD was special the first time I saw him run the ball in a Denver uni. Not sure what it was, but I kept telling my dad "man, this guy is good". In fact, I said it so many times that my dad got pissed and told me to shut the hell up.

Obviously, this was before the offensive juggernaut was completely in place.

I won't dispute what Shazam is saying...that OL was freaking amazing.

But if you were to give me the RB of my choice (as rookies, without knowledge of future injuries, etc), I would take TD.


Well, unfortuantely there are a lot of people saying he wasnt really special because of the "system". :lol:

But i agree with you, TD was special and the stats and facts are there to prove it. **** the haters.

Northman
02-24-2010, 07:18 AM
Nice post...

I'd take either TD or LT in a heart beat...

Anyway, I don't think people can say TD wasn't a great RB... he was... Sure, he had a great system and OL (and QB) to help him... But look at how he ran... Especially after the 1st contact... Have you watch the SB against Packers? When TD was out, we weren't able to move the ball... Period (but we have the whole same players on the field then)... TD was a master piece of our (great) O...

Bashing him because of the surrounding cast means you can say Montana was just an average system QB who benefited from a great team with 49ers... Sorry... Montana is one of the best ever...

TD is too... LT is too... IMO, TD was better in the money time though...
Sure, we can talk about Sanders, Payton and so on... certainly better backs than both LT and TD...

I don't know if TD > LT or not (except in the playoffs... TD was better)... But I'm damn glad TD was a Bronco...
It's the same (useless) kind of debate we could have with Elway > Montana and so on... You'll never know... TD was lucky to play with that O... But that O was lucky to have TD too... Too bad his career was so short :(

:salute:

Best post of the thread.

CoachChaz
02-24-2010, 08:03 AM
Is this thread about TD being a good RB or TD being better than LT?

The responses throughout are confusing. TD was an amazing back...LT was better overall simply due to the fact he's played longer. Simple enough

frenchfan
02-24-2010, 09:50 AM
Is this thread about TD being a good RB or TD being better than LT?

The responses throughout are confusing. TD was an amazing back...LT was better overall simply due to the fact he's played longer. Simple enoughFair enough...

Sadly, TD career was really too short... I don't know if LT > TD or not... But I'm glad TD was here with us to help us winning 2 Lombardi ;)

:salute:

Peace.

Broncolingus
02-24-2010, 09:51 AM
TD was far, far better than LT ever was...

In their primes, I'd be happy having either in my backfield...

SR
02-24-2010, 11:05 AM
Bashing him because of the surrounding cast means you can say Montana was just an average system QB who benefited from a great team with 49ers... Sorry... Montana is one of the best ever...

I don't think anyone is bashing TD. I think we're all in agreement TD was a great back, and skill wise he may have been as good as LT, but I think what some of us are trying to get at was that there were better backs than TD who possess more skill and had greater success...which is all subjective.

Ravage!!!
02-24-2010, 11:31 AM
Is this thread about TD being a good RB or TD being better than LT?

The responses throughout are confusing. TD was an amazing back...LT was better overall simply due to the fact he's played longer. Simple enough

yeah... I think that does need to be the end of the discussion.

I just always get my ire up when I hear people call him a systems back, or that he was only good because of his OL. Ignorant stuff like that.

I'm certainly not attempting to take away from LT, by any means.

Shazam!
02-24-2010, 11:43 AM
Nobody is saying he wasn't a great Back. Nobody is saying LT is better than he was. Nobody is saying that he wasn't easily the best Back the Broncos had on their roster, as seen when he was out.

Nobody is questioning his instincts or ability.

What I am saying is the OLine was arguably the best we'll ever see and the best of the decade, his entire cast was excellent blockers, he had one of the best FBs in front of him in the biz at the time. If it was LT or a plethora of talented Backs of the period, in those years the success would be the same.

I can't imagine how so many people have forgotten how good the Denver OLine was, the Broncos blew mother****ers up at the LoS almost every game. And most of the games they lost were attributed to exactly that, they couldn't dominate up front.

Ravage!!!
02-24-2010, 11:46 AM
yes.. I think its safe to say he was the best back on the team :lol:

Shazam!
02-24-2010, 11:55 AM
Also, for the record, some (not me) would say even a Back like Curtis Martin was better than TD simply for his longevity alone.

Northman
02-24-2010, 02:24 PM
Also, for the record, some (not me) would say even a Back like Curtis Martin was better than TD simply for his longevity alone.

And i would disagree whole heartily.

horsepig
02-24-2010, 09:25 PM
Do any of you guys remember the 2'nd quarter against the Packers?

Bye the bye, hasn't LT played for years for "the best team in the NFL",?

Shazam!
02-24-2010, 09:59 PM
Do any of you guys remember the 2'nd quarter against the Packers?

Who was blasting GB at the Line again?

TD was the best Back on the roster. Without question. Nobody is disputing that.

Derek Loville? Vaughn Hebron? Please.

I'm just saying it was the OLine that made those Broncos teams great. TD was a major factor in those teams, but without them it wouldnt have happened.

Take your pick of any talented top tier Back. Throw them on those Broncos teams the difference wouldnt be anything. A prime LT included.

This thread proves why OLinemen are the unsung heroes, the unappreciated warriors.

silkamilkamonico
02-24-2010, 10:46 PM
TD was great for a couple years. IMHO it was mainly because of Elway. The year after Elway retired Olandis Gary turned out to be better than Davis, and that was before Davis was injured.

Devilspawn
02-24-2010, 11:22 PM
Also, for the record, some (not me) would say even a Back like Curtis Martin was better than TD simply for his longevity alone.
The argument should start by defining what "better" means in the NFL.

After contact?
Rushing Yards?
Receiving Prowess?
Consistency?
Longevity?

Martin should be credited with longevity, especially since he won the rushing title in his 10th season. Flash in the pans, average backs, even Hall of Fame backs never achieve this feat in their 10th year, if they're even a featured back at that time. We all talk about Tomlinson being finished as he turned 30. Martin won the rushing title at 32, and led the league with carries. Don't scoff at longevity, it means A LOT. Not just longevity, but producing throughout the years. Curtis Martin was a great player mostly because he produced while maintaining a long, established career. Sure he didn't do anything outstanding compared to Davis. But he's #6th all-time in rushing and there are probably 20, 30, 50 backs who have gone through the NFL who we can say would've shattered what Martin did if they played for 11 years, because their 3 or 4 years showed they could.

But of course, they didn't.

You guys are defining Davis mostly by 2 seasons and 2 post seasons. The problem with that is that's all Davis has, and it's not enough to define a FULL career. The NFL is much more than that. Davis got a bad break like a plethora of NFL players do. Just shows you how longevity can establish a HOF career when you play well throughout.

SR
02-24-2010, 11:32 PM
TD was great for a couple years. IMHO it was mainly because of Elway. The year after Elway retired Olandis Gary turned out to be better than Davis, and that was before Davis was injured.

That is either total sarcasm or complete idiocy.

G_Money
02-24-2010, 11:39 PM
Could be either. Are we takin bets?

~G

jrelway
02-25-2010, 12:26 AM
TD was great for a couple years. IMHO it was mainly because of Elway. The year after Elway retired Olandis Gary turned out to be better than Davis, and that was before Davis was injured.

this here deserves the NFL Countdown special , "come on maaaaan!!"

silkamilkamonico
02-25-2010, 12:32 AM
TD was awesome with Elway. Probably the best RB in the game. Unfortunately the year after Elway retired, he averaged a paultry 3.1 ypc before the knee injury took his season away. Instead of taking pressure off young Grieseballs, he struggled along with him.

Terrible injury though. I felt so bad for the guy. Class act on and off the field and a great representation for the Broncos.

Shazam!
02-25-2010, 01:59 AM
I wasnt scoffing at Curtis Martin DS. Far from it.

Hell, he was Drafted the same year as Davis.

I'm just saying he had 3 great years and IMO was largely due to the OLine and great blockers in front of him.

OLine OLine OLine.

Also, hearing what non-Broncos and Chargers fans have to say about this holds a lot of weight too. They arent as biased as we are.

bennie
02-25-2010, 03:03 AM
Well This is fact

Immigration Attorney Temecula (http://duiattorneyriversideca.com)

Northman
02-25-2010, 07:08 AM
This thread proves why OLinemen are the unsung heroes, the unappreciated warriors.

It does? Who said the Olineman sucked? We were comparing the backs themselves. Denver's line was really good and San Diego's wasnt too shabby either so they both benefitted from good lines. But, this subject is about the backs themselves.

Northman
02-25-2010, 07:13 AM
The argument should start by defining what "better" means in the NFL.

After contact?
Rushing Yards?
Receiving Prowess?
Consistency?
Longevity?

Martin should be credited with longevity, especially since he won the rushing title in his 10th season. Flash in the pans, average backs, even Hall of Fame backs never achieve this feat in their 10th year, if they're even a featured back at that time. We all talk about Tomlinson being finished as he turned 30. Martin won the rushing title at 32, and led the league with carries. Don't scoff at longevity, it means A LOT. Not just longevity, but producing throughout the years. Curtis Martin was a great player mostly because he produced while maintaining a long, established career. Sure he didn't do anything outstanding compared to Davis. But he's #6th all-time in rushing and there are probably 20, 30, 50 backs who have gone through the NFL who we can say would've shattered what Martin did if they played for 11 years, because their 3 or 4 years showed they could.

But of course, they didn't.

You guys are defining Davis mostly by 2 seasons and 2 post seasons. The problem with that is that's all Davis has, and it's not enough to define a FULL career. The NFL is much more than that. Davis got a bad break like a plethora of NFL players do. Just shows you how longevity can establish a HOF career when you play well throughout.

For most i would agree. However, in Davis's case i can see the exception. He was the best of the best before the injury and there was NOTHING to show he was slowing down. And unfortuantely for guys like LT and Martin they were unable in their longetivity to show up come crunch time and so while Davis may not have a longer resume what he does have is stats that usually takes years to get from guys with longetivity. So while i can appreciate guys like Martin and LT there is no question in my mind that TD is a HOF. Obviously, you cant let any player just get in after a few seasons but then again NONE of them have had the kind of short lived careers that TD had. TD was a special case and the reason is he was THAT ******* GOOD.

Shazam!
02-25-2010, 09:52 AM
It does? Who said the Olineman sucked? We were comparing the backs themselves. Denver's line was really good and San Diego's wasnt too shabby either so they both benefitted from good lines. But, this subject is about the backs themselves.

I never said that. Some people here refuse to see (not you) that TD's performance and the OLine are linked at the hip... and they are. Also, SD's line may be 'not to shabby' but they don't even come CLOSE to the Broncos Line of their Championship years. It's not even close.

frenchfan
02-25-2010, 10:00 AM
It does? Who said the Olineman sucked? We were comparing the backs themselves. Denver's line was really good and San Diego's wasnt too shabby either so they both benefitted from good lines. But, this subject is about the backs themselves.Indeed... We can't say LT hasn't have a good OL in his career too... And I don't think anyone said that LT wasn't a great back... He was... TD too...

The best back I've seen (I didn't have the luck to see much of Walter Payton) is Barry Sanders... This guy was the real deal... He could run all by himself... May be the best of the bests from what I've seen.

TD was a great back too... I won't try to compare him to LT and so on... As I said before, it's useless and it took too many parameters to be fair IMO.
What I liked about TD was his ability to cut (well designed for the kind of running game we used to play) and his ability to run over the 1st contact... Sure, his quality was highlighted by our system... But I'm pretty sure he could have been successful within a more classical running system...
As I'm sure LT would have been terrific too in our offense...

But in the money time, I think TD was really great... He always plays better when it matters the most... He elevated his level in those moments... I don't think that was really the case for Martin or LT...

JMHO though...

:salute:

frenchfan
02-25-2010, 10:03 AM
I never said that. Some people here refuse to see (not you) that TD's performance and the OLine are linked at the hip... and they are. Also, SD's line may be 'not to shabby' but they don't even come CLOSE to the Broncos Line of their Championship years. It's not even close.I hear you about that Shazam... Same about QB...

We can't forget football is a TEAM sport... So, it's not easy to compare individual performances... TD played with a great OL and great schemes that fitted well his qualities... now, he was a really hard runner... Hard to tackle him for a loss... hard to put on the ground on the 1st contact... He read the play very well too... May be a lack of speed sometimes...

TXBRONC
02-25-2010, 10:05 AM
TD was great for a couple years. IMHO it was mainly because of Elway. The year after Elway retired Olandis Gary turned out to be better than Davis, and that was before Davis was injured.

I would like to know how Gary better than Davis prior to Davis' injury in light of the fact that Gary had NO CARRIES until the week after Davis was injuried. In fact Gary's first game as a starter he had 64 yards on 20 carries that's a 3.2 ypc.

Biz1
02-25-2010, 10:22 AM
It does? Who said the Olineman sucked? We were comparing the backs themselves. Denver's line was really good and San Diego's wasnt too shabby either so they both benefitted from good lines. But, this subject is about the backs themselves.

Actually, the Charger OL was not very good from 2000-2005 when LT gained much of his career stats. That's why SD had Lorenzo Neal clearing the way with horse collar tackles.

This thread reminds me of one of my own that is now locked on chargers.com after a 40 page debate spanning almost 2 years. I actually had dozens of silly bolts fans trying to convince me that LT was better than Walter Payton!...Muhahahahaha!.:lol:

Northman
02-25-2010, 11:13 AM
Indeed... We can't say LT hasn't have a good OL in his career too... And I don't think anyone said that LT wasn't a great back... He was... TD too...

The best back I've seen (I didn't have the luck to see much of Walter Payton) is Barry Sanders... This guy was the real deal... He could run all by himself... May be the best of the bests from what I've seen.

TD was a great back too... I won't try to compare him to LT and so on... As I said before, it's useless and it took too many parameters to be fair IMO.
What I liked about TD was his ability to cut (well designed for the kind of running game we used to play) and his ability to run over the 1st contact... Sure, his quality was highlighted by our system... But I'm pretty sure he could have been successful within a more classical running system...
As I'm sure LT would have been terrific too in our offense...

But in the money time, I think TD was really great... He always plays better when it matters the most... He elevated his level in those moments... I don't think that was really the case for Martin or LT...

JMHO though...

:salute:

Indeed. If there is anyone who can bitch about not having a line, QB, etc is Barry. He was definitely a one man show.

Northman
02-25-2010, 11:16 AM
Actually, the Charger OL was not very good from 2000-2005 when LT gained much of his career stats. That's why SD had Lorenzo Neal clearing the way with horse collar tackles.

This thread reminds me of one of my own that is now locked on chargers.com after a 40 page debate spanning almost 2 years. I actually had dozens of silly bolts fans trying to convince me that LT was better than Walter Payton!...Muhahahahaha!.:lol:

Well, i can definitely agree that Payton was better than both.

Biz1
02-25-2010, 12:04 PM
Indeed. If there is anyone who can bitch about not having a line, QB, etc is Barry. He was definitely a one man show.

Had Sanders taken the open holes instead of trying to create in the backfield, he would have more rushing yards than Payton. I've seen a lot of all-time RB ranking lists etc. Most of them now have TD and LT between 10-20. The reason I don't see Sanders(or Jim Brown)as the best RB ever was due to the intangibles. Neither of those 2 players could block, catch, or even throw like Payton or Emmit Smith or even guys like Marshall Faulk(who is always overlooked). Those intangibles make a RB complete, a rare commodity in the NFL today.

On a side note, Moreno can block and catch...don't know how much he did it last year in Denver but his college films show promise.

T.K.O.
02-25-2010, 12:05 PM
did anyone else catch the split second on nfln when L.T. said something like "well,i wont be going to the raiders".
i guess it was part of a response to who he would like to play for.
it cracked me up that he has been saying he wants a ring or he would have retired and the only team he completely dismissed was the fade !:laugh:
i would love for him to spend a year or 2 with the broncos because he would teach knowshon ( and he said a big part of his role would be to mentor a young rising star) and still be a weapon if used properly.

Poet
02-25-2010, 01:39 PM
Had Sanders taken the open holes instead of trying to create in the backfield, he would have more rushing yards than Payton. I've seen a lot of all-time RB ranking lists etc. Most of them now have TD and LT between 10-20. The reason I don't see Sanders(or Jim Brown)as the best RB ever was due to the intangibles. Neither of those 2 players could block, catch, or even throw like Payton or Emmit Smith or even guys like Marshall Faulk(who is always overlooked). Those intangibles make a RB complete, a rare commodity in the NFL today.

On a side note, Moreno can block and catch...don't know how much he did it last year in Denver but his college films show promise.

That is so wrong. Jim Brown's receiving numbers were insane for his day. His numbers are even better when you factor in that he played in the 12 and 14 game eras. Saying Jim Brown can't catch is like ridiculous. Jim Brown was also a great blocker.

Jim Brown IS the greatest running back ever because he was good at everything. He had the size and speed to play TODAY.

KCL
02-25-2010, 02:01 PM
did anyone else catch the split second on nfln when L.T. said something like "well,i wont be going to the raiders".
i guess it was part of a response to who he would like to play for.
it cracked me up that he has been saying he wants a ring or he would have retired and the only team he completely dismissed was the fade !:laugh:
i would love for him to spend a year or 2 with the broncos because he would teach knowshon ( and he said a big part of his role would be to mentor a young rising star) and still be a weapon if used properly.

I read that he was asked if the Raiders wanted to sign him would he be interested and he said no.

silkamilkamonico
02-25-2010, 02:03 PM
I would like to know how Gary better than Davis prior to Davis' injury in light of the fact that Gary had NO CARRIES until the week after Davis was injuried. In fact Gary's first game as a starter he had 64 yards on 20 carries that's a 3.2 ypc.

Wow. So you're saying the week after TD got hurt, Gary came in and actually had a higher ypc average than TD's 3+ games up to that point? I rest my case.

Do I need to take it a step further and show that Gary's ypc was 4.2 for the season, which isn't really comparable to TD's lowly 3.1, on the same team, with the same oline (maybe even a little worse if you factor injuries in throughout the course of the season)?

I'm not saying Gary was a better RB than Davis by any means, but I'm also not going to sit here and pretend that a huge part of TD's success wasn't beneficial from playing with arguably the G.O.A.T. in #7.

SR
02-25-2010, 03:13 PM
I'm not saying Gary was a better RB than Davis by any means

Yes. You are.


Olandis Gary turned out to be better than Davis

Lonestar
02-25-2010, 03:48 PM
Wow this has devolved from discussing two HOF players, to one and a hack.

Can't we all agree that TD was special and end this thread.

KCL
02-25-2010, 03:53 PM
Wow this has devolved from discussing two HOF players, to one and a hack.

Can't we all agree that TD was special and end this thread.

No this thread cannot end til we all determine who was/is better than TD...and don't say no one cause that would be a lie...:D

T.K.O.
02-25-2010, 03:59 PM
No this thread cannot end til we all determine who was/is better than TD...and don't say no one cause that would be a lie...:D

could we end if some says "jamal charles" ?
of wait his initials are jc and we all know that means over-hyped loser:laugh:
except for the original JC of course ;)

KCL
02-25-2010, 04:12 PM
could we end if some says "jamal charles" ?
of wait his initials are jc and we all know that means over-hyped loser:laugh:
except for the original JC of course ;)

who is this loser you speak of?

LOSER=LARRY JOHNSON!

EDIT-Jay Cutler...:doh:

silkamilkamonico
02-25-2010, 04:31 PM
Yes. You are.

LMAO Nice reach. And way to leave out part of the sentence that actually construes the "real" meaning.


The year after Elway retired Olandis Gary turned out to be better than Davis, and that was before Davis was injured

And that was true. Unless you feel like arguing 3.1 > 4.2. Then again, you'll probably omit part of thse stats to favor your argument like you did this.

If you're going to quote someone trying to prove their argument for them, make sure you at least quote an entire sentence next time.

Biz1
02-25-2010, 04:37 PM
That is so wrong. Jim Brown's receiving numbers were insane for his day. His numbers are even better when you factor in that he played in the 12 and 14 game eras. Saying Jim Brown can't catch is like ridiculous. Jim Brown was also a great blocker.

Jim Brown IS the greatest running back ever because he was good at everything. He had the size and speed to play TODAY.

Shall I look up the stats, or will you do me the benefit?

silkamilkamonico
02-25-2010, 04:40 PM
Jim Brown >>> any other RB to ever play the game. Probably the single most dominant football player of his generation, of all generations.

AlWilsonizKING
02-25-2010, 05:13 PM
I don't think the OL was opening up holes quite like you remember and when they were it wasn't consistently.

What made TD great is first contact almost NEVER brought him down. When he did go down he almost always fell forward for 2-3 more yards. TD often had contact in the backfield but his style of running and physical style overcame that.


And how could anyone forget the spin move that made many a defender look silly......I can remember one run where he made two players miss with two different spin moves....still love watching that move to this day.


PEACE!!!

Ravage!!!
02-25-2010, 06:01 PM
I don't think the OL was opening up holes quite like you remember and when they were it wasn't consistently.

What made TD great is first contact almost NEVER brought him down. When he did go down he almost always fell forward for 2-3 more yards. TD often had contact in the backfield but his style of running and physical style overcame that.

I think there are a couple that remember the OL being just a bit better than they actually were. Sure they were good. But to be named "the greatest OL we've ever seen" is making a HUGE over-statement. its not like TD was never touched. Its not like he wasn't hit behind the LoS. Its not like we could run freigh trains through the open holes. TD himself made SOOOOO much happen. The way he would get defenders to commit inside before out running them to the edge. His slight stutter-step.. his vision to find the hole, and his amazing spin after contact.

Oh well. People always remember what they want to remember. Even Elway says that his legacy gets better and better as time passes. I guess the same goes with some, for our OL.

Northman
02-25-2010, 06:09 PM
No this thread cannot end til we all determine who was/is better than TD...and don't say no one cause that would be a lie...:D

Thats not accurate at all. No one has said that TD is the best ever only that he is better than LT.

Poet
02-25-2010, 06:33 PM
Thats not accurate at all. No one has said that TD is the best ever only that he is better than LT.

Northman, I say this to you with the utmost respect.

No one other than Denver fans are going to think that. Terrell Davis' career only really spans four years. The rest of his years were just attempts to try to make a comeback, and unfortunately for football he failed.

But TD is a far cry from TD. I've seen a lot of your arguments about TD and the postseason, but they're not consistent with your other arguments for other players. You've said that Elway is the best QB ever but he lost more SBs than he won, but you say that TD is better than LT because of the postseason.

KCL
02-25-2010, 06:47 PM
Thats not accurate at all. No one has said that TD is the best ever only that he is better than LT.

That was friend was sarcasm in my reply to JR!

Ravage!!!
02-25-2010, 06:49 PM
Northman, I say this to you with the utmost respect.

No one other than Denver fans are going to think that. Terrell Davis' career only really spans four years. The rest of his years were just attempts to try to make a comeback, and unfortunately for football he failed.

But TD is a far cry from TD. I've seen a lot of your arguments about TD and the postseason, but they're not consistent with your other arguments for other players. You've said that Elway is the best QB ever but he lost more SBs than he won, but you say that TD is better than LT because of the postseason.

King... I dont think anyone here... pro or con, is saying his CAREER is better. Obviously TD was cut short with injury. I don't think anyone is comparing their careers as a whole.

I think some of us, are saying that TD, as a PLAYER, is/was as good as LT. Thats where some perspectives are coming from. TD's career can't stand on such a short time span. But I can say, that as a player, he was just as good before injury.

Poet
02-25-2010, 06:57 PM
King... I dont think anyone here... pro or con, is saying his CAREER is better. Obviously TD was cut short with injury. I don't think anyone is comparing their careers as a whole.

I think some of us, are saying that TD, as a PLAYER, is/was as good as LT. Thats where some perspectives are coming from. TD's career can't stand on such a short time span. But I can say, that as a player, he was just as good before injury.

Ravage, I've had this conversation (fun one, mind you) before, and I'm pretty sure I've seen Northman say he was a better back than LT.

Ravage!!!
02-25-2010, 07:04 PM
Ravage, I've had this conversation (fun one, mind you) before, and I'm pretty sure I've seen Northman say he was a better back than LT.

RIGHT.. thats what I'm saying. I think TD, when healthy and in his prime, was just as good as if not better than, LT. But I was taking this as a comparison to the PLAYERS, and not the whole of their career. ALthough, in the short time that TD played he has accomplished more accolades than LT.... health plays a big factor in what some consider to be 'great.' TD was a GREAT player. So much so, that I think as a player he was better than LT.

Now... I could turn around and say that Bo Jackson could have been better than both if he stayed healthy. But he didn't. TD didn't. So its all conjecture. But when TD was in his prime, I think he was just as good if not better running back than LT.

Northman
02-25-2010, 07:40 PM
Northman, I say this to you with the utmost respect.

No one other than Denver fans are going to think that. Terrell Davis' career only really spans four years. The rest of his years were just attempts to try to make a comeback, and unfortunately for football he failed.

But TD is a far cry from TD. I've seen a lot of your arguments about TD and the postseason, but they're not consistent with your other arguments for other players. You've said that Elway is the best QB ever but he lost more SBs than he won, but you say that TD is better than LT because of the postseason.


And my biggest arguement is that TD accomplished much more in his 4 years than LT has in his entire career. Hence, why in some cases longetivity doesnt mean squat. Again, not saying LT is horrible but having watched the Broncos for a long time there just hasnt been another Bronco back who can be compared to TD even in the same system. Although TD did have a great QB and a quality OL that can only go so far. Especially since ive seen TD break a lot of tackles at the line of scrimmage. It isnt just the postseason that TD shined, but it does show that TD was consistent unlike LT. Even in his best years LT was unable to break 2000 yds. Yet, Chris Johnson broke it this year and there's no way someone's going to sell me that Tenn has best Oline in football. Special players are special players and TD was one of those guys. I agree i dont think he will make the HOF but i do believe he belongs there. I also believe in this instance he is a better back than LT. Just my opinion, going by what ive seen from both players that is my conclusion. Is TD the best back ever? No. And ive never stated as such. As to the Elway comment about Super Bowls. That was one guy at the most important position forced to carry his team on his back to 3 of those. LT had more help than Elway ever did when it was relied on John to carry those teams in the 80's. People trying to claim otherwise are just naive. But, i respect your position King but i certainly dont agree with it. :beer:

SR
02-25-2010, 07:50 PM
LMAO Nice reach. And way to leave out part of the sentence that actually construes the "real" meaning.



And that was true. Unless you feel like arguing 3.1 > 4.2. Then again, you'll probably omit part of thse stats to favor your argument like you did this.

If you're going to quote someone trying to prove their argument for them, make sure you at least quote an entire sentence next time.

Olandis Gary was NEVER better than TD. Just because he had a higher YPC doesn't make him a better back in any way, shape, or form. Gary couldn't carry TD's lunchbox.

SR
02-25-2010, 07:54 PM
The thing I miss most about TD = mile high salute

horsemeat
02-25-2010, 08:41 PM
and its not really that close i think. TD was GREAT in the regular season. he was UNSTOPPABLE in the post season. and i mean that quite literally.

LT was GREAT in regular season. what did he accomplish in the post season? now LT is gonna finish his career with 2-3 more teams and fade away like shaun alexander and will not have accomplished the ultimate goal in football. much less have done it twice. in a row.



What are you smoking? TD was great but please don't disrespect LT just because of the SB ring. In my eyes Barry Sanders was better then both even though he didn't even play a super bowl.

SR
02-25-2010, 09:00 PM
Wait a tick Northman. Did you just call LT inconsistent? He had EIGHT years STRAIGHT of over 1,000 yards. Five of those years were above 1,400 yards. Three of those were above 1,500 yards. ALL NINE years he had over 10 touchdowns and four of those years he was over 15. How the eff is that not consistent????

Shazam!
02-25-2010, 09:34 PM
Originally Posted by jhildebrand
I don't think the OL was opening up holes quite like you remember and when they were it wasn't consistently.

It must be tough watching football with your eyes closed.

Poet
02-25-2010, 09:37 PM
Shall I look up the stats, or will you do me the benefit?

http://www.nfl.com/players/jimbrown/profile?id=BRO483276

You can bask in the glory of maybe the best football player of all-time.

silkamilkamonico
02-25-2010, 09:52 PM
Olandis Gary was NEVER better than TD. Just because he had a higher YPC doesn't make him a better back in any way, shape, or form. Gary couldn't carry TD's lunchbox.

Perhaps you missed the 1999 season or jsut don;t understand the concept of "that season". And again, you're changing my argument of one season versus the course of a career. Olandis Gary WAS a better RB for Denver than TD was that year. Again, we still had "arguably" one of the best oline's in the league, a HOF TE in Sharpe, a great 1-2 WR unit with Smith/McCaffery and the best RB in the NFL in Davis, with a young Griese. Instead of carrying the load and taking pressure off Griese, Davis struggled to a measley 3.1 ypc and almost a quarter of the season. Perhaps if Gary was lucky enough to play with the G.O.A.T. in #7, he might have put up monster stats too.

TD sure didn't without him.

Devilspawn
02-25-2010, 09:58 PM
http://www.nfl.com/players/jimbrown/profile?id=BRO483276

You can bask in the glory of maybe the best football player of all-time.
Note that Jim Taylor of the Packers and John Henry Johnson of the Steelers were the only running backs during Brown's career that ran for more than 1000 yards in multiple seasons. Taylor did it for 5 straight seasons, nothing much before or after that. Johnson did it in 1964 and 1966 and retired as the NFL's 4th all-time leading rusher. Both are in Canton.

Also note that Dick Bass, J.D. Smith and John Crow were the only other guys who ran for 1000 yards during this time, each doing it once.

And, no season during this time has more than three 1000 yard rushers.

Considering the era he played in and the competition around him, Brown was a man among boys. It was unfair at times.

Also note that he was badass in I'm Gonna Git You Sucka. An actor, too!

Shazam!
02-25-2010, 10:01 PM
Perhaps you missed the 1999 season or jsut don;t understand the concept of "that season". And again, you're changing my argument of one season versus the course of a career. Olandis Gary WAS a better RB for Denver than TD was that year. Again, we still had "arguably" one of the best oline's in the league, a HOF TE in Sharpe, a great 1-2 WR unit with Smith/McCaffery and the best RB in the NFL in Davis, with a young Griese. Instead of carrying the load and taking pressure off Griese, Davis struggled to a measley 3.1 ypc and almost a quarter of the season. Perhaps if Gary was lucky enough to play with the G.O.A.T. in #7, he might have put up monster stats too.

TD sure didn't without him.

I expected Denver to do far worse than 6-10 in 1999. You dont lose a player of Elway's caliber who was the leader fo the franchise on and off the field for nearly two decades and expect them not to suffer.

It doesnt matter anyway, because apparently the OLine sucks.

This shitty thread has gone out of control.

silkamilkamonico
02-25-2010, 10:11 PM
I expected Denver to do far worse than 6-10 in 1999. You dont lose a player of Elway's caliber who was the leader fo the franchise on and off the field for nearly two decades and expect them not to suffer.

It doesnt matter anyway, because apparently the OLine sucks.

This shitty thread has gone out of control.

I don't think the oline sucked. I think the G.O.A.T. #7 was just that good. This is he same guy that single handily brought 2 of the worst SuperBowl appearing teams ever, to the SuperBowl.

Shazam!
02-25-2010, 10:14 PM
I don't think the oline sucked.

Never said you did Silk.

See page 14.

silkamilkamonico
02-25-2010, 10:17 PM
Never said you did Silk.

See page 14.

I was just offering my opinion on the oline. I didn't say you did.

:D

Biz1
02-25-2010, 10:30 PM
http://www.nfl.com/players/jimbrown/profile?id=BRO483276

You can bask in the glory of maybe the best football player of all-time.

You can bask on the fact that Payton has more than 2,000 career receiving yards over Jim Brown and a comparable YPA on receptions to boot.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/P/PaytWa00.htm

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/B/BrowJi00.htm

:lol:

Ya Bungle fan!

Poet
02-25-2010, 10:40 PM
You can bask on the fact that Payton has more than 2,000 career receiving yards over Jim Brown and a higher YPA on receptions to boot.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/P/PaytWa00.htm

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/B/BrowJi00.htm

:lol:

Ya Bungle fan!
Uhh....do you understand the concept of an era? People make a big deal out of Barry Sanders retiring early, when it was Jim Brown who easily had several more productive years ahead of him. What Brown did in his era as far as receiving is more impressive than Payton did because of his era. Payton also played how many more years than Brown?

You went for the "his team is usually bad so he's wrong," line of reasoning, how cute.

However, YOU were the one who gave us this little gem.


Had Sanders taken the open holes instead of trying to create in the backfield, he would have more rushing yards than Payton. I've seen a lot of all-time RB ranking lists etc. Most of them now have TD and LT between 10-20. The reason I don't see Sanders(or Jim Brown)as the best RB ever was due to the intangibles. Neither of those 2 players could block, catch, or even throw like Payton or Emmit Smith or even guys like Marshall Faulk(who is always overlooked). Those intangibles make a RB complete, a rare commodity in the NFL today.

On a side note, Moreno can block and catch...don't know how much he did it last year in Denver but his college films show promise.


You were the one telling me that Jim Brown didn't have the 'intangibles' to be the G.O.A.T. when Payton ONLY had more receiving numbers because he played longer in a more friendly passing league and had a 'comparbale ypc'.

Here's a thought, I'll give you a number...we'll go with 5.5. You go look at the stats for Brown and Payton and we'll see if you can keep up with this 'Bungle' fan.

Oh, btw, the Blackhawks suck.

Devilspawn
02-25-2010, 10:44 PM
Payton played in 72 more games than Brown, equal to exactly 4 1/2 more seasons. As a result, Payton should accumulate more.

Biz1
02-25-2010, 11:34 PM
Uhh....do you understand the concept of an era? People make a big deal out of Barry Sanders retiring early, when it was Jim Brown who easily had several more productive years ahead of him. What Brown did in his era as far as receiving is more impressive than Payton did because of his era. Payton also played how many more years than Brown?

You went for the "his team is usually bad so he's wrong," line of reasoning, how cute.

However, YOU were the one who gave us this little gem.




You were the one telling me that Jim Brown didn't have the 'intangibles' to be the G.O.A.T. when Payton ONLY had more receiving numbers because he played longer in a more friendly passing league and had a 'comparbale ypc'.

Here's a thought, I'll give you a number...we'll go with 5.5. You go look at the stats for Brown and Payton and we'll see if you can keep up with this 'Bungle' fan.

Oh, btw, the Blackhawks suck.
ole
**** you, LT would never consider coming to a dump of an NFL city such as yours.

TXBRONC
02-26-2010, 12:06 AM
Wow. So you're saying the week after TD got hurt, Gary came in and actually had a higher ypc average than TD's 3+ games up to that point? I rest my case.

Do I need to take it a step further and show that Gary's ypc was 4.2 for the season, which isn't really comparable to TD's lowly 3.1, on the same team, with the same oline (maybe even a little worse if you factor injuries in throughout the course of the season)?

I'm not saying Gary was a better RB than Davis by any means, but I'm also not going to sit here and pretend that a huge part of TD's success wasn't beneficial from playing with arguably the G.O.A.T. in #7.

One tenth of a yard isn't anything rest your case on. In fact it's rather ridculous.

Your right its not comparable T.D. played in 4 games and Gary played in 12. There is no way prove Gary would have still had a higher ypc if T.D. had stayed healthy.

Oh yeah you did say Gary was better which is also ridiculous.


The year after Elway retired Olandis Gary turned out to be better than Davis, and that was before Davis was injured.

Poet
02-26-2010, 12:58 AM
ole
**** you, LT would never consider coming to a dump of an NFL city such as yours.

Why is it that people always get shitty with me first, and then when I get shitty with them back they do this?

Look, Biz, I don't really care about you one way or another, but you got caught talking out of your ass. When that happens the best thing to do is just to admit that you were wrong. Dogfish got me the other day and that's what I did, it happens. I'm sorry that you really don't have an inkling as to how good Jim Brown was, or what he could do on the field.

Oh, and LT isn't going to get many suitors. He very well could end up in stripes. We aren't that unattractive as a team for him because we run the ball and Palmer is in need of a back with good hands and some semblance of speed.

As an organization we like to back up backs who are on the decline and give them a niche role. Recent backs who fit that mold include Larry Johnson, Brian Leonard, Cedric Benson (definitely the exception and not the rule), guys like that have come into Cincinnati and contributed one way or another.

Would we be his first choice? No. He knows that he isn't a real starter anymore, but I would bet that he COULD find places where he would get more playing time than Cincinnati, BUT he could also find a lot of other places that he'd get LESS playing time.

So please, stop sending me PMs or trying to call me out.

silkamilkamonico
02-26-2010, 03:11 AM
One tenth of a yard isn't anything rest your case on. In fact it's rather ridculous.

LMAO one tenth of a yard? try 1 yard and 2 tenths.


There is no way prove Gary would have still had a higher ypc if T.D. had stayed healthy.

I don't have to prove anything other than 4.2ypc > 3.1ypc, which is a fact.


Oh yeah you did say Gary was better which is also ridiculous.

Again, if you're seriously trying to argue that 3.1 ypc is better than 4.2 ypc, then I can't help you. Next you're going to tell me Larry Johnson was a better RB for the Chiefs than Jamaal Charles was "this year" because LJ's 2.9 ypc (with KC) triumps Jamaal Charles' 5.9 ypc. That's even more ridiculous.

Northman
02-26-2010, 07:02 AM
Wait a tick Northman. Did you just call LT inconsistent? He had EIGHT years STRAIGHT of over 1,000 yards. Five of those years were above 1,400 yards. Three of those were above 1,500 yards. ALL NINE years he had over 10 touchdowns and four of those years he was over 15. How the eff is that not consistent????

Postseason baby.


LT playoff stats:

2004 26 carries, 80 yds
2006 23 carries, 123 yds
2007 21 carries, 42 yds
7 carries, 28 yds
2 carries, 5 yds
2008 5 carries, 25 yds
2009 12 carries, 24 yds


TD's playoffs stats:

1996 14 carries, 91 yds
1997 31 carries, 184 yds
25 carries, 101 yds
26 carries, 139 yds
30 carries, 157 yds
1998 21 carries, 199 yds
32 carries, 167 yds
25 carries, 102 yds


And all this goes along with what he did through the regular season even when he had to sit the second half of games. Consistency.

frenchfan
02-26-2010, 07:37 AM
Damn North... 1140 yards on 204 carries ! 5,59 yards/carries... :shocked:
Really impressive !!!!

Especially the 1st game of 98 : 199 for 21... Almost a 1st down by carry !!!!! wow... just wow...

About this thread, I don't know (and I don't care) if TD > LT or not... But what I'm sure is that TD was a beast in the money time !
7 Games on 8 over 100 yards in the playoffs (and the only one was close with only 14 carries)...

I think that deserves a huge :salute:

I miss you TD ! (and the whole 98's O)...

Northman
02-26-2010, 07:40 AM
Damn North... 1140 yards on 204 carries ! 5,59 yards/carries... :shocked:
Really impressive !!!!

Especially the 1st game of 98 : 199 for 21... Almost a 1st down by carry !!!!! wow... just wow...

About this thread, I don't know (and I don't care) if TD > LT or not... But what I'm sure is that TD was a beast in the money time !
7 Games on 8 over 100 yards in the playoffs (and the only one was close with only 14 carries)...

I think that deserves a huge :salute:

I miss you TD ! (and the whole 98's O)...


Yep, i agree. It wont even matter if TD doesnt get into the Hall, he will always be one of my favorite Broncos ever. Even if others think he was a system back i myself know better. The proof is in the pudding as they say.

frenchfan
02-26-2010, 08:39 AM
Yep, i agree. It wont even matter if TD doesnt get into the Hall, he will always be one of my favorite Broncos ever. Even if others think he was a system back i myself know better. The proof is in the pudding as they say.He's one of my fav. Broncos ever too... My one is #7 though ;)

Don't know if he'll get into the Hall or not, but what matters the most is the 2 Lombardi he helped us to win...

System back???? LMAO... No way... yeah, he played with a great surrounding cast : a very good OL + great WR who knew what "block" means + great QB... and in a good system that fitted him very well...
Anyway, we both saw him running... How many times did he break the 1st tackle? How hard he was to put on the ground? How good he was at reading the cut and make the play?

He could have been successful in many systems... Not as dominant as a Walter Payton, Barry Sanders or Jim Brown... But a heck of a player for sure...

TXBRONC
02-26-2010, 09:58 AM
LMAO one tenth of a yard? try 1 yard and 2 tenths.



I don't have to prove anything other than 4.2ypc > 3.1ypc, which is a fact.


Again, if you're seriously trying to argue that 3.1 ypc is better than 4.2 ypc, then I can't help you. Next you're going to tell me Larry Johnson was a better RB for the Chiefs than Jamaal Charles was "this year" because LJ's 2.9 ypc (with KC) triumps Jamaal Charles' 5.9 ypc. That's even more ridiculous.

I will try to explain it again. Read slowly and from left to right then you will stand a much chance comprehending what is said. You made the statement that Gary was better back from the beginning of season. I pointed out that Gary didn't until the 5th game of the year. So that is stupid you can't be better if you have accumulated any stats. I also said that in Gary's first game he had a 3.2 ypc. Simple subtraction Gary's 3.2 ypc (his first start)-3.1=.1ypc. He had 11 more games to improve upon that. Then I said that if T.D. had stayed healthy you can't prove that his ypc would not have gotten better. So instead trying obfuscate stick to what is actually being posted.

CoachChaz
02-26-2010, 10:12 AM
Why is theis ridiculous debate continuing? Both are/were great backs. Both will get a bias nod from their teams fans. So be it.

Nomad
02-26-2010, 10:20 AM
TD > LT :werd:

frenchfan
02-26-2010, 10:27 AM
Why is theis ridiculous debate continuing? Both are/were great backs. Both will get a bias nod from their teams fans. So be it.Indeed...

But I guess it's off season ;) :laugh:

TD 4 president ? :D

:salute:

Biz1
02-26-2010, 10:50 AM
Why is it that people always get shitty with me first, and then when I get shitty with them back they do this?

Look, Biz, I don't really care about you one way or another, but you got caught talking out of your ass. When that happens the best thing to do is just to admit that you were wrong. Dogfish got me the other day and that's what I did, it happens. I'm sorry that you really don't have an inkling as to how good Jim Brown was, or what he could do on the field.

Oh, and LT isn't going to get many suitors. He very well could end up in stripes. We aren't that unattractive as a team for him because we run the ball and Palmer is in need of a back with good hands and some semblance of speed.

As an organization we like to back up backs who are on the decline and give them a niche role. Recent backs who fit that mold include Larry Johnson, Brian Leonard, Cedric Benson (definitely the exception and not the rule), guys like that have come into Cincinnati and contributed one way or another.

Would we be his first choice? No. He knows that he isn't a real starter anymore, but I would bet that he COULD find places where he would get more playing time than Cincinnati, BUT he could also find a lot of other places that he'd get LESS playing time.

So please, stop sending me PMs or trying to call me out.

I concede halfway, if you utilize an adjusted yardage system JB and WP almost mirror each other in stats. So yes, the 2 are interchangeable. With respect to LT going to Cincy, his wife wouldn't allow it(and if you doubt that, watch the 60 minutes segment aired 0n 12/25/07). There is no chance in hell that 2 devout Christians would move their family and work for an organization with a long history of player legal problems. That's not a knock on the team(BTW, is Tank Johnson available?...we'd like him back), but simply a statement that Cincy is the wrong fit. As Dusty Baker once said:

"It is what is dude"

In response to your Blackhawks suck comment:

Muhahahahahahahahahaha!!. When I turn on NBC in 4 hours, I'll be looking for any players from the state of Ohio.:lol:

Nomad
02-26-2010, 10:56 AM
Indeed...

But I guess it's off season ;) :laugh:

TD 4 president ? :D

:salute:

Many different opinions on the matter frenchy and no way to prove who's right or wrong! I've always wonder which one is the better peanut butter.....Jif or Petter Pan. I'm a Petter Pan guy!!:)

T.K.O.
02-26-2010, 11:58 AM
Many different opinions on the matter frenchy and no way to prove who's right or wrong! I've always wonder which one is the better peanut butter.....Jif or Petter Pan. I'm a Petter Pan guy!!:)

what a crock ! you can't have an intelligent pb discussion if you dont include "SKIPPY".....it just so ridiculous !:laugh:

TXBRONC
02-26-2010, 12:17 PM
Many different opinions on the matter frenchy and no way to prove who's right or wrong! I've always wonder which one is the better peanut butter.....Jif or Petter Pan. I'm a Petter Pan guy!!:)

However, choosy mother's choose Jif. :D

T.K.O.
02-26-2010, 12:52 PM
i'm pretty sure "petter pan" is a child molester.....

smith49
02-26-2010, 03:53 PM
come on fellas, this is an argument that you cant win either way. TD was a stud, LT was a stud, Sweetness was a stud, Sanders was a stud, and so on and so forth. it makes little sense to try and compare them when they all played on different teams with different systems etc. etc. fact is, TD deserves the HOF, as well as LT does. i like them both and would have loved to have either one if not both on my favorite team.

silkamilkamonico
02-26-2010, 04:00 PM
I will try to explain it again. Read slowly and from left to right then you will stand a much chance comprehending what is said. You made the statement that Gary was better back from the beginning of season.

I also said "that year". Funn how you completely ignored that part. Then again you completely chose to ignore the Mike Vrabel "average to below average" as well. And if you're seriously arguing a span of 3+ games when Gary didn't even play, I feel sorry for you. Then again, you're the one also trying to argue 3.1 ypc > 4.2 ypc, so I guess I'm not surprised.



I pointed out that Gary didn't until the 5th game of the year. So that is stupid you can't be better if you have accumulated any stats.

LMAO no you didn't. You didn't say anything about "Gary's 5th game". Nothing whatsoever until this post. You don't even know what your own argument is.



I also said that in Gary's first game he had a 3.2 ypc. Simple subtraction Gary's 3.2 ypc (his first start)-3.1=.1ypc. He had 11 more games to improve upon that. Then I said that if T.D. had stayed healthy you can't prove that his ypc would not have gotten better.

"If if's and but's were candies and nut's, we'd all have a very merry christmas. How about this for an "if". If Olandis Gary played with the G.O.A.T. in #7, he would have been one of the best RB's in the NFL too. But we'll never know that will we. Just like we'll never about you arging "if TD stayed healthy".


So instead trying obfuscate stick to what is actually being posted.

How about you figure out what your own argument is, and quit trying to change mine. My initial post stated Gary was better than TD "the year after the G.O.A.T in #7 retired", and then you went off on a tangent about how 3.1 ypc > 4.2 ypc.

Maybe you're a Larry Johnson fan after all.

Delgoth
02-27-2010, 10:17 AM
God I hate to say this cause I really dont ever get along with Silk or anything he says but I do agree with him here. TD was great but he was GREAT because he payed behind #7 and in the friendliest of all systems to RB's. Lets face it Mike made garbage look good. I am not nocking one of my favorite players but He did play behind the greatest of all time in QB's and he played for the greatest system for RB's. Take those both away and he is still a great RB just not the GOAT! Now with the situation the way it was YES he is the GOAT because he played in all the right circumstances. I just wish #7 would have stayed another year so we could have 3 in a row!

Ravage!!!
02-27-2010, 11:04 AM
TD was not great because he had the system. Other RBs played behind #7, and didn't succeed. Other backs played with our OL, and although had success at getting 1000 yrds, were NEVER EVER considered the BEST PLAYER IN THE NFL. Terrell Davis, at the time, was considered the BEST PLAYER in the entire league.... period. Thats not because of a system.

I have a couple questions

1) Who had the best OL in'09??? I don't know, not without looking it up. I doubt many knew without having to look it up. But I DID know who had one of the best OLs in the league in '08. Why? Because it was MY TEAM. As fans, we read every article about the Broncos. Our ear picks up anything talked about the Broncos on the radio or tv. We come to message boards to read what other information is about the Broncos. Its VERY easy to assume and believe that every football fan out there, reads the same stuff we do and sees the same comments about or OL. I think some people are REALLY REALLY over-exaggerating our OL. They were VERY Good. THey were the best in the NFL, but they were NOT the "greatest we've ever see" as we've seen posted in this thread. They didn't just "BLOW TEAMS AWAY."

Some seem to remember them absolutely manhandling every team we played, leaving holes that we could drive buses through. If that were the case, TD's name would never be mentioned in HoF talk, and it is (and not just in Denver). TD made them better.

There was a 2000yrd rusher in the NFL this season, Chris Johnson. I don't believe he had the best OL in football.

2) SO my question is, to those that want to say that TD was a product of the system and a product of our OL, "DO you guys believe Chris Johnson is a better RB than TD was?"

Shazam!
02-27-2010, 11:06 AM
It is still mindboggling that people apparently forgot how AWESOME the Broncos OLine was those years.

Northman
02-27-2010, 11:07 AM
No one forgot, but its mindboggling how people try to cheapen TD's legacy because of it.

Ravage!!!
02-27-2010, 11:15 AM
No one forgot, but its mindboggling how people try to cheapen TD's legacy because of it.

its mindboggling that some people have exaggerated just how good they were over time.

Elway himself says it amazes him how much his own legacy has grown over the years after his retirement. I think its the same thing with our OL. They were very good, but they weren't "the greatest we've ever seen."

Just because we had the top OL in the NFL, doesn't mean they were what won us the SB. Manning's OL is better because of Manning. Chris Johnson's OL got to lead a 2000 yrd rusher this season becaus of Chris Johnson.

Its mindboggling that people don't see that TD made our OL better. Its mindboggling that people try to take away from such a talent, and take away from his abilities like that. :beer:

Northman
02-27-2010, 11:19 AM
its mindboggling that some people have exaggerated just how good they were over time.

Elway himself says it amazes him how much his own legacy has grown over the years after his retirement. I think its the same thing with our OL. They were very good, but they weren't "the greatest we've ever seen."

Just because we had the top OL in the NFL, doesn't mean they were what won us the SB. Manning's OL is better because of Manning. Chris Johnson's OL got to lead a 2000 yrd rusher this season becaus of Chris Johnson.

Its mindboggling that people don't see that TD made our OL better. Its mindboggling that people try to take away from such a talent, and take away from his abilities like that. :beer:


I wont sell them quite as short as they were able to really create some holes at times. But i get the drift of what your saying. People just forget about the many times that TD actually had to make a cut or shake off defenders to get his yards. But as you pointed out ( i did that just the other day ) Chris Johnson was working behind the Titan Oline and i know they arent the best in football. Special players make special things happen and TD was a player very much like that. Its just a shame that people cant see how special TD was but again, his stats and accolades all speak for themselves. And although he would be the first to say his Oline was a big part of it as he is a humble guy i know he also believes he was a great back and rightfully so.

Shazam!
02-27-2010, 11:41 AM
Nobody is trying to cheapen or taint his legacy. TD was a great cutback runner, with great instincts. Nobody is disputing that.

Nobody is cheapening TDs legacy but some cheapen the Broncos OLine and practically shits on it in the process, by saying 'they were inconsistent' (puhleeze) or 'exagerrated how good they were' (yeah OK). The Broncos OL were the best in the biz during their runs. Period. Period. That is what is being failed at grasping here.

They blew mother****ers up at the LOS.

Delgoth
02-27-2010, 11:56 AM
You know it amazes me how people love to only pull out parts of what others say. I stated TD was great and that his situation made him the GOAT!! It is the same argument that people have had for years over who is better Montana or Elway. Montana was incredible he had IT but his team was by far superior to Elway's team. Switch the two and there would be no comparison. Put Sanders on a team that was good and he would make them great. Put him in the same position as TD and we wouldnt be talking. There is no mistaking how good TD was but his situation his QB his Oline made him that much better.

In the end we can agree to disagree but there is no arguments that I would put the 08 Bronco's against any team in history.

Shazam!
02-27-2010, 11:58 AM
There is no mistaking how good TD was but his situation his QB his Oline made him that much better.

That is all Im trying to say.

Northman
02-27-2010, 12:01 PM
You know it amazes me how people love to only pull out parts of what others say.

Pot meet kettle.

Ravage!!!
02-27-2010, 01:37 PM
I wont sell them quite as short as they were able to really create some holes at times. But i get the drift of what your saying. People just forget about the many times that TD actually had to make a cut or shake off defenders to get his yards. But as you pointed out ( i did that just the other day ) Chris Johnson was working behind the Titan Oline and i know they arent the best in football. Special players make special things happen and TD was a player very much like that. Its just a shame that people cant see how special TD was but again, his stats and accolades all speak for themselves. And although he would be the first to say his Oline was a big part of it as he is a humble guy i know he also believes he was a great back and rightfully so.

Exactly.... very well said. ( I didn't see your Chris Johnson comparison)

I know our OL was very good. But I'm not going to say they were "the greatest we've ever seen" (as stated in the thread). Thats an exaggeration. Just because they weren't the greatest we've ever seen,doesn't mean they weren't good. They Dominated some DLs... some they didn't.

We weren't 17 point underdogs to the Packers after winning the AFCCG because everyone saw just how much our OL completely "blew people up" (it eventually went down to 14 I believe after the betting took place). We were 17 point underdogs because the Packer's DL was better. Terrell Davis helped make that line great. Terrell Davis on the outside, made them gas.

TD wasn't just a "great cutback" runner. He would plow over people. He would shake and bake and COMPLETELY fake people out of their shoes, not to mention that great spin move he had. When he was in the open field, he was GONE (unlike a RB we have on the roster now).


Man.. I miss watching him run. He was considered to be the best player in the NFL (not just the NFL MVP, but the best PLAYER). That says a lot.

Northman
02-27-2010, 01:43 PM
Exactly.... very well said. ( I didn't see your Chris Johnson comparison)

I know our OL was very good. But I'm not going to say they were "the greatest we've ever seen" (as stated in the thread). Thats an exaggeration. Just because they weren't the greatest we've ever seen,doesn't mean they weren't good. They Dominated some DLs... some they didn't.

We weren't 17 point underdogs to the Packers after winning the AFCCG because everyone saw just how much our OL completely "blew people up" (it eventually went down to 14 I believe after the betting took place). We were 17 point underdogs because the Packer's DL was better. Terrell Davis helped make that line great. Terrell Davis on the outside, made them gas.

TD wasn't just a "great cutback" runner. He would plow over people. He would shake and bake and COMPLETELY fake people out of their shoes, not to mention that great spin move he had. When he was in the open field, he was GONE (unlike a RB we have on the roster now).


Man.. I miss watching him run. He was considered to be the best player in the NFL (not just the NFL MVP, but the best PLAYER). That says a lot.

It is kind of funny. When i go back and watch some of the old games with TD when he breaks into the open field NOBODY could catch him. I really dont know how fast he was but for people to say he was slow is hilarious. I know one game i watched as the Cowboy secondary tried desperately to catch him and they couldnt even come close. Dude was a beast.