Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 19
  1. #1
    sbramfan is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    los angeles
    Age
    42
    Posts
    894
    Rep Power
    10

    Jackson should not have replaced Faulk this year

    This guy is a rebel. He thinks he can do everything on his own. Marshall is smarter and better than Steven Jackson.

    On the 4th and 2 play, all the blockers went to the left. The play was designed to go to the left. FOR SOME REASON, Jackson decides to give up on that, and "stop", and cut back to the middle. If he just keeps going behind the blockers, he get's the first down.

    Give him the ball? Why?

    He needs to shut his big mouth and learn how to be a running back in this league. There have been numerous mistakes this guy has made at critical times.

    HE SHOULD NOT HAVE REPLACED MARSHALL FAULK. He should have been the situtational guy to come in and get more experience. I hope he learns, but I'm starting to think he will just be a frustrating dissapointment.

    We can't even trust him to follow the play call. We can't trust him to get 1 freeking yard because he will abort the play, and try to "cut back". Sure if there's a wide open hole, he looks like he could be great, but who doesn't when there's a hole?

    @#%O@I%J%$#%)"(#$U%


  2. #2
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,023
    Rep Power
    164

    Re: Jackson should not have replaced Faulk this year

    Oh, please.

    The switch to Jackson was about age and the fact that Faulk has had multiple knee injuries. He's not perfect, but he's the Rams' top back right now.

  3. #3
    RamsFanSam's Avatar
    RamsFanSam is online now Pro Bowl Ram
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Springfield, Missouri, United States
    Age
    51
    Posts
    2,602
    Rep Power
    67

    Re: Jackson should not have replaced Faulk this year

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam
    Oh, please.

    The switch to Jackson was about age and the fact that Faulk has had multiple knee injuries. He's not perfect, but he's the Rams' top back right now.
    Well Said.

  4. #4
    evil disco man's Avatar
    evil disco man is offline Pro Bowl Ram
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Lincoln, Nebraska
    Age
    29
    Posts
    2,018
    Rep Power
    54

    Re: Jackson should not have replaced Faulk this year

    Marshall was the one who told MM he thought Steven Jackson should start. If Faulk was the one who started the season, he would probably be on injured reserve right now.

  5. #5
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is online now Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    18,925
    Rep Power
    147

    Re: Jackson should not have replaced Faulk this year

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam
    The switch to Jackson was about age and the fact that Faulk has had multiple knee injuries.
    Not to mention it was initiated by Faulk, who I trust knows more about our running game and personnel than internet message board fans, including myself.

    This is Jackson's 16th start as a pro. He's still going to make mistakes, and the cut back on fourth down was clearly a big one. But I wonder where these sentiments were late in October when Jackson gained 316 yards on 49 touches with three touchdowns?

    Marshall Faulk, had he been the feature back this season, probably would not be playing right now. He'd be talking to Roland Williams and Jerametrius Butler on the sidelines, and contemplating how much football he'll be able to play in 2006. There's a reason this switch was made, and it baffles me when people say things like "I hope he learns" but at the same time don't want him to see the kind of experience that will facilitate that learning.

  6. #6
    SFCRamFan's Avatar
    SFCRamFan is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Ft Walton Beach, Florida
    Age
    49
    Posts
    1,005
    Rep Power
    17

    Re: Jackson should not have replaced Faulk this year

    I agree that he makes some bonehead decisions concerning cutting backs. I wish that he would just follow his blocks (or lack thereof). He could make 3 yards per carry if he just fell forward with his size and speed. However, as stated, Faulk just can't do it on a week to week basis anymore with his knee problems. I guess that this is his time to learn and get better. With a season like this one, it is a perfect time to get Jackson and Fitz some much needed experience when the team's record is of no concern...
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    SJax, a developing quarterbacks best friend...

  7. #7
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is online now Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    18,925
    Rep Power
    147

    Re: Jackson should not have replaced Faulk this year

    Quote Originally Posted by SFCRamFan
    I guess that this is his time to learn and get better. With a season like this one, it is a perfect time to get Jackson and Fitz some much needed experience when the team's record is of no concern...
    Good point in that it's certainly one of the few positives you can take away from a season like this - you have to believe some of our young players are getting valuable experience this year that will make them better in the years to come.

  8. #8
    RamJackson39's Avatar
    RamJackson39 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    990
    Rep Power
    11

    Re: Jackson should not have replaced Faulk this year

    Come on. Yeah he makes his mistakes. The O-line makes a lot more. The guy is still going to go over 1,000 yards this season, and he's ran hard today. Lay off and give him time to learn
    The Roman and The Prince. Playmakers until the end.


  9. #9
    NY RAMFAN's Avatar
    NY RAMFAN is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    NY
    Age
    42
    Posts
    381
    Rep Power
    9

    Re: Jackson should not have replaced Faulk this year

    He made stupid mistakes, and he heep doing it, this is his second year, but... did he earnt the right to argue with the HC about his role on the offensive team. I believe he has talent and the switch was right (I would have liked to see more marshall this year) but he has to keep his mouth shut and try to gain some more yards

  10. #10
    RamJackson39's Avatar
    RamJackson39 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    990
    Rep Power
    11

    Re: Jackson should not have replaced Faulk this year

    I see nothing wrong with him asking for the ball. If the team wont give it to him, why not ask for it. Receivers do it all the time.
    The Roman and The Prince. Playmakers until the end.


  11. #11
    talkstoangels61's Avatar
    talkstoangels61 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Illinois
    Age
    52
    Posts
    954
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: Jackson should not have replaced Faulk this year

    faulk is far from being washed up.........He might of seen the Oline play still being as bad as it has been!..I've seen the disgust on Marshalls face on more than 1 running play!.......MM has his faults for suring up the Oline!

  12. #12
    bruce_wannabe Guest

    Re: Jackson should not have replaced Faulk this year

    i dont want to say this, but i believe faulk will head elsewhere next year!!!!!!!! he still has some juice left in him and i beilieve he wants to play still

  13. #13
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is online now Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    18,925
    Rep Power
    147

    Re: Jackson should not have replaced Faulk this year

    Quote Originally Posted by bruce_wannabe
    i dont want to say this, but i believe faulk will head elsewhere next year!!!!!!!! he still has some juice left in him and i beilieve he wants to play still
    I'm really not buying into this speculation. One, Faulk agreed to an extension here in the offseason, which he probably wouldn't have done if he didn't want to be here. And two, if Faulk still wanted to play, why take himself out of the starting role? I would find it hard to believe that the coaching staff would refuse to play Faulk if Marshall went to them and said he wanted to be in the game more.

  14. #14
    sbramfan is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    los angeles
    Age
    42
    Posts
    894
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: Jackson should not have replaced Faulk this year

    I think Marshall wanted a more secondary role as the Running Back. Not a non-existent one. I think he pictured he would get his HOF numbers and records over these next two years and ride off into the sunset, but he's only had like 3 touches per game.

    What a waste. I guarantee you he thought he'd play more than he is playing. And I bet he thought SJ would play better than he is playing. But when Marshall comes in it looks like we have a running game again. When Jackson is it, it's like there's a wall.

    and who cares if he would be on injured reserve right now...I bet the Rams would have more wins.

  15. #15
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is online now Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    18,925
    Rep Power
    147

    Re: Jackson should not have replaced Faulk this year

    Quote Originally Posted by sbramfan
    and who cares if he would be on injured reserve right now...I bet the Rams would have more wins.
    Great attitude. Who cares if Marshall Faulk gets injured to the point where it ends his season, so long as the Rams win! :up: :tut

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •