Jackson starter in 2005

**RamWraith** · #1 (**permalink**) -16-02-2005

Posted by a fellow fan in the St Lou area...

On KSDK-TV, Martz announced that Steven Jackson would be the starting Running Back in 2005. No comment from Faulk as of now.

*ZigZagRam* · #2 (**permalink**) -16-02-2005

I doubt Marshall will stick around as backup. Look for him elsewhere in 2005.

*Daspeerman* · #3 (**permalink**) -16-02-2005

Marshal is still under contract ..... he either backs-up .... or retires .... I dont see the Rams trading him at this point ..... what team would give us much for him ??? :disappoin . that said .... I dont want anyone to think im a Faulk basher .... Im not ! .... I just dont see him leaving . :ramlogo:

*ZigZagRam* · #4 (**permalink**) -16-02-2005

What I'm saying is he might be cut if he doesn't restructure his contract.

**Nick** · #5 (**permalink**) -16-02-2005

Wow, can anyone confirm this?

*r8rh8rmike* · #6 (**permalink**) -16-02-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by NickSeiler

Wow, can anyone confirm this?

This is as close to comfirmation as I could find:

http://www.ksdk.com/sports/sports_ar...?storyid=75111

It will be very interesting to see how this all shakes out, especially from Faulk's perspective. The last thing we need is another soap opera situation going into the 2005 season.

*ZigZagRam* · #7 (**permalink**) -16-02-2005

KSDK just reported that Marshall is moving to linebacker. :redface:

#8 (**permalink**) -16-02-2005

Well zigzag, i will bet my last dollar that if he does move to linebacker, he will at least learn his assignments and be in the place he is supposed to be on the field more often than tommy polley was this year.

general counsel

*r8rh8rmike* · #9 (**permalink**) -16-02-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by general counsel

Well zigzag, i will bet my last dollar that if he does move to linebacker, he will at least learn his assignments and be in the place he is supposed to be on the field more often than tommy polley was this year.

general counsel

Yeah, but can he tackle? I guess at this point, anything would be an improvement.

**Nick** · #10 (**permalink**) -16-02-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by r8rh8rmike

This is as close to comfirmation as I could find:

http://www.ksdk.com/sports/sports_ar...?storyid=75111

It will be very interesting to see how this all shakes out, especially from Faulk's perspective. The last thing we need is another soap opera situation going into the 2005 season.

Thanks for the link. Interestingly enough, toward the bottom of the piece, it reveils that...

Quote:

Martz also announced that former Rams linebacker Mike Jones won't be joining the Rams coaching staff after all.

Coach Martz tells us they have already filled the position.

*theodus69* · #11 (**permalink**) -16-02-2005

Faulk Probably won't go anywhere. He'll still play alot and after Jackson drops a few passes in pre season and a few fumbles, Faulk ends up the starter by week #1. :tongue:

*r8rh8rmike* · #12 (**permalink**) -16-02-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by theodus69

Faulk Probably won't go anywhere. He'll still play alot and after Jackson drops a few passes in pre season and a few fumbles, Faulk ends up the starter by week #1. :tongue:

If 2004 was any indication, Jackson's durability could also put Faulk back in the starting role. The Rams need to think long and hard about Faulk's value to the team.

**Nick** · #13 (**permalink**) -16-02-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by r8rh8rmike

If 2004 was any indication, Jackson's durability could also put Faulk back in the starting role.

Especially if they don't change that turf.

*moklerman* · #14 (**permalink**) -16-02-2005

Well, I can't say that I'm surprised but I just don't see the benefit to announcing something like this. Jackson has potential but has far from showed that he can handle the load for an entire 16 game season. Hell, I don't think he's gone more than one game without getting some kind of injury at this point.

But, just like with other players who felt that they would rather play than waste away on the sidelines, Faulk might be best served to move on to a team that will actually give him the ball a little bit. I can't imagine Faulk being happy about getting the ball 15 or fewer times 10 out of 14 games that he played in 2004. Especially considering that 3 out of the 4 games he got the ball more than 15 times he rushed for over 120+ yards.

I understand that he's had knee problems and has slowed down a bit but at the same time he averaged 4.0 yards per carry for the year and given a chance, showed that he can still put up the yards, get the crucial first down in short yardage situations and pound it into the end zone if there's any kind of daylight at all.

I think this is in poor taste by Martz and that he should be focusing on improving the piss-poor line and gameplans rather than annointing Jackson before Faulk's contract status is even addressed. It seems to me that they're choosing to back Faulk into a corner on this and I will be very interested to see how it pan's out.

*r8rh8rmike* · #15 (**permalink**) -16-02-2005

Quote:

I think this is in poor taste by Martz and that he should be focusing on improving the piss-poor line and gameplans rather than annointing Jackson before Faulk's contract status is even addressed. It seems to me that they're choosing to back Faulk into a corner on this and I will be very interested to see how it pan's out.

This is what concerns me. If there has been no discussion on making this move, things could get ugly. Sending a message to Faulk this way just doesn't seem right, if that's the case. The Rams don't seem to be very tactful or adept at communication but I'll hope for the best because I think the team still needs Marshall.