Vela: Maybe Ellis is right?

peplaw06;1524197 said:
I hope you mean Dorsett... someone else was pimping Terrell Davis earlier in this thread, but I can't find that post at the moment.

Davis isn't even assured the HOFF. How can he be in the discussion with Top 10 RBs?

Are You OUT of your mind!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?????????????? to EVEN utter The use of TD as Terrell "over hyped" Davis is sacrilege. There is and will only be one TD in my book and That Is TONY DORSETT,.
 
Alexander;1524202 said:
I don't care for this offtopic discussion in the middle of my yearly Greg Ellis bashing, but I agree with you.

Terrell Davis should not even be on the proverbial radar.

Who ever brought him up should be banned!!!!
 
DallasEast;1524200 said:
Simpson was a great back, but he didn't have near the field vision as Sayers and that's saying a lot. Desert was the man. It's a damn shame that his knees eventually gave out like Campbell's. :(


Well Tom did use TD very wisely he was a very small back and too last as long as he did was a blessing, on the other Bum drilled Campbell to the ground. I don't know what his att were I don't have the time too look them up, But I remember watching him he ran him a lot.

As for Bashing GE- who cares already I don't know anyone on here who attacked him other then what he did with the media. ( I know your being sarcastic )
 
ilovejerry;1524225 said:
Who ever brought him up should be banned!!!!

Absolutely.

In fact, I wonder why these abstruse heavy handed moderators around here have not acted upon it.
 
Alexander;1524237 said:
Absolutely.

In fact, I wonder why these abstruse heavy handed moderators around here have not acted upon it.


Because there, abstruse.
 
DallasEast;1524200 said:
Simpson was a great back, but he didn't have near the field vision as Sayers and that's saying a lot. Dorsett was the man. It's a damn shame that his knees eventually gave out like Campbell's. :(

Why do you think Simpson didn't have the field vision Sayers did? Don't get me wrong. Sayers is perhaps the greatest of them all; arguably of course. Simpson is in my top ten for sure. Don't really know how I'd rank them.
 
ilovejerry;1524221 said:
Are You OUT of your mind!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?????????????? to EVEN utter The use of TD as Terrell "over hyped" Davis is sacrilege. There is and will only be one TD in my book and That Is TONY DORSETT,.

Settle down Janice.... it was just a clarifying question.
 
jobberone;1524259 said:
Why do you think Simpson didn't have the field vision Sayers did? Don't get me wrong. Sayers is perhaps the greatest of them all; arguably of course. Simpson is in my top ten for sure. Don't really know how I'd rank them.
It's just from my own observations, I guess. Simpson's strongest ability was bouncing running plays off-tackle and using his speed to outrace defenders once he was beyond the LOS. I thought his vision was diminished somewhat more once he broke runs beyond the LOS during running plays designed to go between the tackles.

Sayers had the unique ability to scan from sideline-to-sideline just after the snap. While he didn't cut back against the grain as hard as Sanders would have, he slipped back through holes which materialized fairly cleanly. He may have been aided moreso by the Bears running more counter plays designed to maximize his skills. Once he was beyond the LOS, Sayers agility was more of an asset for him gaining yards than pure speed. He left defenders guessing which direction he was going to take next.

Both men were great backs, but imo, Sayers was the better of the two. It would've been nice if Sayers hadn't suffered his injury at that stage of his career. It would've made the discussions of his place within running back lore much more interesting.
 
:angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry:
peplaw06;1524270 said:
Settle down Janice.... it was just a clarifying question.

ewwwwwwww I'm soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo madddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd
 
Alexander;1524237 said:
Absolutely.

In fact, I wonder why these abstruse heavy handed moderators around here have not acted upon it.
We don't want to punish for rash statements.

:D
 
Hostile;1524404 said:
We don't want to punish for rash statements.

:D
What kind of punishment? You don't have to be abstruse about it, you know. :rolleyes:

:)
 
DallasEast;1524406 said:
What kind of punishment? You don't have to be abstruse about it, you know. :rolleyes:

:)
The kind that would take us away from altruism. We avoid those like rash statements.
 
Hostile;1524408 said:
The kind that would take us away from altruism. We avoid those like rash statements.
ummm..?

5434.jpg


"What do 'altruism' mean?"


,​
 
DallasEast;1524414 said:
ummm..?

5434.jpg


"What do 'altruism' mean?"


,​
According to quincyyyyyyyyyyyyyy, it has something to do with performance.
 
Hostile;1524435 said:
According to quincyyyyyyyyyyyyyy, it has something to do with performance.

i was curious so i thought i'd take a gander at this thread one last time, i cant believe you are still obsessed with me.
 
quincyyyyy;1524465 said:
i was curious so i thought i'd take a gander at this thread one last time, i cant believe you are still obsessed with me.


I though you left quincyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

Did you come back for some mo spanking?


:eek:
 
quincyyyyy;1524465 said:
i was curious so i thought i'd take a gander at this thread one last time, i cant believe you are still obsessed with me.
Ran into some abstruse mods over at the Ranch, eh? What is the Internet coming to? :huh:
 
Back
Top