S. Jackson would not mind sharing the workload

**RamWraith** · #1 (**permalink**) -19-02-2007

Rams | S. Jackson would not mind sharing the workload
Sun, 18 Feb 2007 11:58:10 -0800

Jim Thomas, of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, reports St. Louis Rams RB Steven Jackson had 436 touches during the 2006 season, six shy of the team's record. Jackson said it took his body a full month to recover from the workload, and he would not mind sharing the workload next year. "Hopefully, we get someone ... to shoulder some of the burden with me. I just don't want to burn myself out too fast. At the same time, I'm glad that I was durable, that I was able to carry the workload," Jackson said.

*tomahawk247* · #2 (**permalink**) -19-02-2007

I think he just means to get a better spread of carries between Davis (if he returns) and the third down back. It was pretty much just Jackson last year

**laram0** · #3 (**permalink**) -19-02-2007

I'm happy to read Jackson's comment about sharing the load. I was concernd that he was all about the personal stats. This tells me he's about Winning first and the stats are secondary? I think?

*81~BIG-GAME* · #4 (**permalink**) -19-02-2007

I think it is important that we don't put to much weight on SJ's shoulders.RB is a physical position and RB's in the NFL tend to slow down earlier than players at other positions especially guy's who are carrying most of the load themselves.And guys with higher amount of carries tend to pick up more injuries (C.Martin,E.George)Last year Jackson looked to be stronger in the 4th Quarter and seemed to get even more pro-ductive at the end of the season, but I still think it is imperative to keep him as fresh as possible.IMO it's interesting that SJ said this as maybe it's his way of saying that he needs more help to maintain and improve on his high standards,and that he doesn't want to be worn out relatively early in his career..:l

*Dominator* · #5 (**permalink**) -19-02-2007

Curtis Martin is a strange guy to use as an example of not lasting with too many carries. Sure the guy is done now, but he went ages getting tons of carries and hardly missed a game. It's Herm's MO. Agree completely about backs getting hurt/burned out though. That's one reason why Tiki retired - he said he could never get healthy with all the carries and Coughlin making him practice 100% all the time.

*81~BIG-GAME* · #6 (**permalink**) -19-02-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dominator

Curtis Martin is a strange guy to use as an example of not lasting with too many carries. Sure the guy is done now, but he went ages getting tons of carries and hardly missed a game. It's Herm's MO. Agree completely about backs getting hurt/burned out though. That's one reason why Tiki retired - he said he could never get healthy with all the carries and Coughlin making him practice 100% all the time.

Suppose C.Martin was a poor example,he didn't miss many games and is now turning 34.I was just pointing out that many good backs are nearly done by 30 because there is to much of a load on them(which is much earlier than any other position).If I was a Chiefs fan I would have a big worry that if L.Johnson keeps getting as many carries that soon his production could drop off.Thats why I would like to see the Rams maximize SJ'S contribution for as long as possible..:l

*Keenum* · #7 (**permalink**) -20-02-2007

Perhaps he means sharing it with someone he once shared it with... Marshall Faulk, anyone?

Not as much as a few years ago, but mostly third down and long stuff.

Hey, it's possible. Jackson himself said that Faulk was still in shape when he last saw him.

*Varg6* · #8 (**permalink**) -20-02-2007

I'd rather draft a Lorenzo Booker than get Faulk back. I love Faulk, and I'll always have fond memories of him, its just I think we really need to move on with the Faulk situation. Either Free-Agency or the draft, I don't think Faulk is the answer. It's one thing to have a second back to get some of the workload, and its another when you have a SUCCESSFUL secondary back with some of the workload. I think Faulk would fail, and more than likely put more pressure on Jackson and the rest of the offense to gain back yards he lost! I'm just saying I think he's getting too old for this, and yeah he may have a few good runs or whatever, but it won't ever be the same again. This team already has way too many older players, we don't need another one when we can simply look forward to the draft and get a fresh new face in there.

*bruce4life* · #9 (**permalink**) -21-02-2007

Please Bring In Faulk For One More Year....

*itsguud* · #10 (**permalink**) -23-02-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Varg6

I'd rather draft a Lorenzo Booker than get Faulk back. I love Faulk, and I'll always have fond memories of him, its just I think we really need to move on with the Faulk situation. Either Free-Agency or the draft, I don't think Faulk is the answer. It's one thing to have a second back to get some of the workload, and its another when you have a SUCCESSFUL secondary back with some of the workload. I think Faulk would fail, and more than likely put more pressure on Jackson and the rest of the offense to gain back yards he lost! I'm just saying I think he's getting too old for this, and yeah he may have a few good runs or whatever, but it won't ever be the same again. This team already has way too many older players, we don't need another one when we can simply look forward to the draft and get a fresh new face in there.

Whoa... Whoa, thats five yards for jumping the snap! Faulk... done? No way! He definitly has a year if not two left in him. I was worried about him in 05 and he impressed the hell out of me (low-expectations, all the same) I still think that a Faulk/ Jackson combo would do great. Both can run the ball anywhere, and both can recieve. The only issue would be SJ and his seemingly discomfort about Faulk being around. Other then that I think this combo would tear it up. Definitly would be better then Jackson/Davis! I mean... c'mon.