Who's better- Travis Henry or Thurman Thomas?

[Judge]

Wys posted on another thread that he considers Travis Henry to be a better RB than Thurman was. Does anyone agree with him?

Thurman could pound out the tough yards, had enough speed to break some long runs (including an 80-yarder for a TD against New England in 1990, that I recall off the top of my head), and was a sure-handed receiving threat.

What can Travis do that Thurman couldn't?

Does Henry measure up in any way at all to Thurman as an RB? I don't see it. Sure he had some nice numbers last year, but I can't see putting Henry in that caliber company.

[LtBillsFan66]

Not even close. From years of watching and playing football I can tell you that Thurman was much better. I can not quantify that claim however.

[Ð]

It's too early to tell. Givee him another season of starts and we'll see the true TH.

[WG]

Originally posted by Judge
Wys posted on another thread that he considers Travis Henry to be a better RB than Thurman was. Does anyone agree with him?

Thurman could pound out the tough yards, had enough speed to break some long runs (including an 80-yarder for a TD against New England in 1990, that I recall off the top of my head), and was a sure-handed receiving threat.

What can Travis do that Thurman couldn't?

Does Henry measure up in any way at all to Thurman as an RB? I don't see it. Sure he had some nice numbers last year, but I can't see putting Henry in that caliber company.

You just can't get anything right, can ya there Judge!

I believe what I said WAS:

That Henry was likely the better rusher (that means a RB who "runs" the ball Judge! just so you know) at this point in his brief career.

I also said that as an all-around RB, (that's a RB ("running back") who does ALL things that RBs do) Thurman was likely better, at least until we see how good Henry can be as a consistent and regular pass-catcher out of the backfield!

See the difference there Judge!

As support, I cited the following evidence drawn from the following sites:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/ThomTh00.htm
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/HenrTr00.htm

I pointed out that, (NOT made up facts) in his first two seasons, Thurman ran for a total of:

2,125 yards but only 8 TDs and that:

Henry ran for, again, in his first two seasons:

2,167 yards and 17 TDs, once w/ a far worse situation than Thurman ever faced last season w/ a crap OL, no QB, etc.

Also, agree that Thurman, at least as it now stands, had a better OL more than marginally, than Henry has. MW and Jennings may match, but the interior line was clearly stronger back then.

If you notice as well, my comments on the "all around RB" are supported by the notion that Thurman had 6 receiving TDs in his first two seasons to Henry's 1.

Henry's high for the first two seasons best Thurman's best in his first two seasons by nearly 200 yards. Rushing that is Judge! NOT receiving or total yards. Is that clear?

Just checking...

Now, your question was:

"What can Travis do that Thurman couldn't?

Does Henry measure up in any way at all to Thurman as an RB?"

As I see it, based on the games that I've watched which is just about every one of them w/ Henry, Henry bursts UTM better. Thurman had better moves IMO however.

Does Henry measure up in any way?

Don't the stats support that he may in fact be a better rusher?

And no, catching passes is not rushing there Judge!

I think he is. In only his second season, he's already bested all of Thomas' best seasons except for one, which I'm sure he'll best this season.

He bested Thurman's best total and rushing season TD marks!!!

Doesn't that "measure up" in your eyes?

It's no wonder you challenge me on the things I say about Bledsoe! :rolleyes:

[LtBillsFan66]

Originally posted by Ð
It's too early to tell. Givee him another season of starts and we'll see the true TH.

I agree. Maybe Henry has yet to fully develop. Although from what I see, Henry will never be the receiving threat Thomas was.

[NC-BILLS44]

Not even close. TH has to prove himself for at least 3 more seasons. If he can stay at a high level for that amount of time, while learning to catch better and pick up blitzes, then we can talk about Henry being in same universe as Thurman. Let's not forget how many years Thurman performed at a Pro Bowl level, including an MVP season. TH had one good year. A very good year at that, but consistency is the key. IMHO, TH has the talent, but let's see if he can keep doing it before we judge if he's better than Thurman.

[Judge]

Stats don't tell everything. That's where Wys and I disagree. I reject on a fundamental level the notion that objective statistics can explain all of football.

Henry's stats through 2 years are better than Thurman's. Henry has far less speed than Thurman, who wasn't very fast.

Henry's OK, has fumbilitis. Thurman by year #3 was the entrenched starter for years to come. Henry has to show it this year or face the McGahee bump.

[WG]

It's funny;

Some of you challenge me on the way I respond to some posters, but I find it disturbing yet hilarious that Judge continually misrepresents my statements and bills what I didn't say exactly, usually to try and denigrate me.

In this particular case, Judge would have gotten a much more cordial response from me if he had actually said what I really did say, or simply quote me.

Instead, in order to prevent mob-mentality misperceptions, I have to counter post in order to set the record straight.

I'm much more agreeable when people answer questions when asked if they opt to engage in debate, deal in facts and not untruths or errant perceptions, and when they don't attempt to make me out to be some sort of loser.

:)

[WG]

Originally posted by Judge
Stats don't tell everything. That's where Wys and I disagree. I reject on a fundamental level the notion that objective statistics can explain all of football.

Henry's stats through 2 years are better than Thurman's. Henry has far less speed than Thurman, who wasn't very fast.

Henry's OK, has fumbilitis. Thurman by year #3 was the entrenched starter for years to come. Henry has to show it this year or face the McGahee bump.

Oh, I understand Judge!

Now, on to Drew where yardage and attempts are the "end-all-to-be-all" in stats...

:rolleyes:

[Jan Reimers]

We'll have to see more of Henry. Thurman was a great pass catcher and blocker besides being a fine runner. Henry will have to become a more rounded player to match Thurm - which he may never have a chance to do in Buffalo with McGahee waiting in the wings.

[Judge]

Originally posted by Wys Guy


Oh, I understand Judge!

Now, on to Drew where yardage and attempts are the "end-all-to-be-all" in stats...

:rolleyes:

Talk about misquoting and making false claims- you're the king! You've constantly misquoted me with things I never said. Sorry, but you've been exposed for what you are.

[Rude American]

As of rightnow, Travis is better. Thurman is far too old to play football.

[TypicalBill]

:lol:

[WG]

BTW, it appears to me that you're using some "very seasoned" seasons of Thurman's behind one of the best OLs to ever play in the NFL to contrast to Henry.


Again, and factually, Henry's season last year was better by far than either of Thurman's first two years!

Henry had almost 200 more yards on only 27 more carries, he had over twice the rushing TDs, and a better YPC average, all, with a lesser OL than Thurman had.

What does that mean to you?

Just asking, but I don't see how it means that Thurman was better.

BTW, in terms of total touches in his second season, Henry had 368 total touches for 1,768 total yards, and 13 total TDs.

Thurman, in his second season had 358 touches, 1,913 total yards, and 12 TDs.

When you consider that much more of Henry's yards were rushing, I think they're very comparable at worst.

I'd personally rather have a strong rusher since rushing can help you control the game better. A dual type Thurman/Priest Holmes type is best, but they aren't always readily obtainable.

Besides, I don't think Thurman was as good overall as Holmes is.

But I'll take a stronger rusher any day as long as he has some receiving capability at all, which Henry clearly has.

[WG]

Originally posted by Judge


Talk about misquoting and making false claims- you're the king! You've constantly misquoted me with things I never said. Sorry, but you've been exposed for what you are.

QUICK!!!

Where's my violin...

:D

Besides, is there a whole lot of factual information that you've given me to misrepresent...?

:huh:

[eyedog]

Until Henry can put up at least 3 or 4 more very good years you can't even put it up for debate who is better.
Comparing off TH first two years, Thurman is a much better receiver, better at picking up the blitz, a little quicker with better moves. Henry is a more powerful runner who is tougher to tackle.
At this point Thurman is the better running back, down the rode it may be up for debate.

[TypicalBill]

Henry had an outstanding year last season But it was one season, he needs to prove that he can consistently have similar years for 3 or 4 seasons in a row barring any injuries and cut on those loose balls. Then we'll be able to compare the two players but until then, its not wise to do so.

[LtBillsFan66]

Henry needs to prove he can run between the tackles and break long runs. He's solid around the outside and solid picking up a few extra yards after contact.

[justasportsfan]

Henry picked up a minor. Something Thurman has yet do do. So my vote goes to...... Bryson :chuckle:

[WG]

B-R-Y-S-O-N!!!

How could I forget!

:D

[Ð]

Who ? :huh:

[TedMock]

Too hard to compare this early in Henry's career. Also, as Wys mentioned, totally different circumstances. I think it's obvious that Henry's stronger but I also think Thurm ran with a lot more power than given credit for. Thurm was more of a patient "smart" runner than Henry. Henry hits the hole hard and fast and "bulls" his way to space. Thurm ran a ton of mis-directions and counters which required him to wait for the OL and patiently follow their lead. He then picked his openings. Thurm's obviously the better receiver......one of the best ever. Also, don't forget that Thomas was taken out of the ballgame in goal line situations quite a bit early in his career. There was the power package which he wasn't part of and then the old Butch Rolle TE pop pass. Henry's more of a pounder and could quite possibly end up better than Thurm but for now I'll give the edge to Thomas who has HOF career #'s over the 2 years of experience guy. They run 2 totally different styles. In the early 90's, IMO, there were 3 elite backs; Thurman Thomas, Emmitt Smith and Barry Sanders. Henry's more like Emmitt in style, he could work on getting some of Thomas' skills but will never have the particular skill that Sanders had. That's not something that's teachable. Mike Vick has it.....whatever you want to call it.

[LtBillsFan66]

Great post Ted!

[R. Rich]

Originally posted by Wys Guy


In only his second season, he's already bested all of Thomas' best seasons except for one, which I'm sure he'll best this season.

He bested Thurman's best total and rushing season TD marks!!!

Doesn't that "measure up" in your eyes?


I think it's far too early to tell whether he is on Thurman's level. You can point to the stats to say he did better with this or that, but stats do not tell the entire story. How were the yards gained (was he unstoppable that day, or was it a blowout and he padded his stats)? What does he do "in the crunch"? Can he take over a game? Let's just say Travis had a very good second season and leave it at that? Time will tell where he belongs, in terms of his greatness or lack thereof.

[ryven]

It is way to eaarly but if henry can put up a few more 1000 + seasons he will be on the right track.

[TigerJ]

I think it's premature to compare Thurman and TH. If you look at the first couple years of TT's career amd the first couple years of TH's career, I think you can make the case that TH is a better pure runner over that time. TT's brilliance came from the fact that he started as an outstanding runner and became a complete RB. It would be hard to beat his overall ability and lack of a weakness. TT could run inside or outside. He was good enough at receiving that he could have played WR. He blocked like a back considerably larger than he was. He was a student of the game and worked hard to get better. He was never known as a fumbler.

I'm not ready to hang the label of career fumbler on TH. I'm hopeful that he'll make people forget that aspect of his game ever happened last year. He does work on his blocking and has improved. And he's also worked on his receiving,and has become a pretty competent pass catcher, though to this point he's clearly behind where TT was late in his career. TH is good, has upside, and wants to get better. Whether that upside is realized, or whether it's realized in Buffalo is a big question. The investment that Buffalo has made in McGahee throws that into considerable doubt.

[R. Rich]

There's another thing that needs to be addressed: what the heck is so great about 62.5 yards per game rushing?? It doesen't make any sense that the media 'congratulates' players for rushing for 100 yards in a game and then does the same thing for a 1,000 yard season. I know it's a nice round figure, but so what? It's 62.5 yards per game!!! If a 100 yard game is so great, shouldn't a 1,600 yard season be considered great and anything less be considered 'okay'?

[THATHURMANATOR]

At this point it is not even a close comparison. If Henry has 7 or 8 similar seasons then we could compare. Even then I don't see Henry having the receiving ability and or developing it.

[WG]

Originally posted by NC-BILLS44
Not even close. TH has to prove himself for at least 3 more seasons. If he can stay at a high level for that amount of time, while learning to catch better and pick up blitzes, then we can talk about Henry being in same universe as Thurman. Let's not forget how many years Thurman performed at a Pro Bowl level, including an MVP season. TH had one good year. A very good year at that, but consistency is the key. IMHO, TH has the talent, but let's see if he can keep doing it before we judge if he's better than Thurman.

At the same time, it's unfair to compare TT's later seasons to Henry's 1st two, especially when TT had a far superior OL.

[TedMock]

that's true. That OL we had was awesome.

[ryven]

I agree wys like I said he will have to play his a$$ off to be compared to TT

[WG]

Of course. You gotta remember, when compared to Emmitt in terms of pure rushing, anyone would have taken Emmitt. But I happen to also think that TT was a better all-purpose back than Emmitt was. Plus, w/ that Dallas OL, it's difficult to assess how good Emmitt would have been elsewhere.

I'd stay away from him this year in AZ however. I think he's gonna not do a thing there. 6 or 700 yards.

As well, a RB like Terrell Davis didn't have the longetivity that Thurman had either, and therefore not the career numbers, but heck, I'd take TD any day of the week over TT.

[TedMock]

That Dallas line that Emmitt had may have been the best ever. I really liked TD as well. The OL in Denver was great too, they "quietly" helped produce 3 different - 1,000 yard rushers in 3 consecutive years. I think that's an unbelievable accomplishment for an OL.

[The_Philster]

Way too early to say. Thurman was one of the best all around backs in NFL history. Travis has only played a few years. Get back to me in 2-3 years.

[casdhf]

I will give Wys credit, at least he admitted he was wrong about Shawn Bryson...I think?

;)

[casdhf]

we need the blue wink, that yellow one is gay.

[Turf]

Thurman belongs in the Hall of Fame. Thurman, easily.

[eyedog]

He will be in the HOF. Just waiting until he's eligible. Should be a definite first ballot.

[Captain gameboy]

Come on. Somebody's got to be kidding here.
Thurman Thomas is a legitimate HOF candidate.
Total awarness. Total back. Great runner (more-so in his younger years), great receiver-throughout his entire career, and maybe the best blitz pick up back in history.
Travis is a guy who is very hard to tackle one on one.
No contest.

[Dozerdog]

I think it's a silly comparison to use stats.

Rookie Season- TT ran for 40% of Bills rushing plays, 60% in year 2, all the while he shared time with Byrum, Mueller, Kinnebrew, Harmon, Riddick, and Ken Davis.


TH- 50% of rushing plays in Rookie season, 90% in second season.



Let'ssee TH threaten Thurm's total yards from scrimmage record (something like 4 consecutive seasons give or take)

[SABURZFAN]

if henry can reduce the fumbling and continues to improve his numbers in receptions,we can make the comparisons in a year or two.

[Stewie]

Originally posted by Judge
Stats don't tell everything. That's where Wys and I disagree. I reject on a fundamental level the notion that objective statistics can explain all of football.



That's because you actually understand the game of football.

Wys, on the other hand, thinks the box score tells the whole story about the game. What a joke!

[Ebenezer]

Zt this point in the careers TH is the better back (purely by stats)...let's judge their careers as a whole..TT is HOF material...TH was the beneficiary of a team that never got a turnover last year and had the move the length of the field on every drive.

[NC-BILLS44]

Originally posted by Wys Guy


At the same time, it's unfair to compare TT's later seasons to Henry's 1st two, especially when TT had a far superior OL.


Let's wait and see what kind of line TH will have this year. Also, can TH sustain this level of play for several more years. Consistency will be the key. Regardless, how do you really compare a talent 3rd year (1 solid year) player to a future HOFer? Only time will tell if TH even stays with the Bills (Willis M), if he can hold on to the ball, if he can pick up blitzes (ala TT), and if he can catch (ala TT). It's too early to tell if this promising talent will continue to perform. I hope, for the Bills' sake, he does.

[Throne Logic]

TH does seem to wind up on the up-field end of the tackling pile, just like TT always did. But TH needs to learn how to get those backwards yards. Until he amasses at least 500 yards running backwards at the end of each carry, he won't be in the same league as TT. . .