Why is Jackson in on short and goal???

*CRAZYHORNS* · #1 (**permalink**) -16-09-2004

Faulk is the man that can find the end zone. I like Jackson's power but if the Rams need to score they need to go to the man who is the best at finding the end zone.........

I hope Martz noted that Jackson got 2 attempts nothing doing and Marshall got 1 chance and converted the 2 point play.......

Wake up Martz and leave Marshall in when it counts the most.....

I'm sure this subject has been discussed already but I had to put my 2 cents in...........

**Nick** · #2 (**permalink**) -16-09-2004

Good points. I'm sure fantasy players around the world would agree with you, but I think when you get toward the goal line and are more likely to have to pound your way into the endzone, you want Jackson in there. Still, you have to wonder if Marshall would have found a way into the paint. It's definitely worth a shot against the Falcons, IMO.

*Yodude* · #3 (**permalink**) -16-09-2004

I think Faulk's short-yardage skills are under-rated. The guy can flat-out find the endzone. Think back to when he was consistently healthy.

Does anyone else remember seeing this play on a regular basis in the past, I think it's the best goal-line play the Rams have.

Faulk lines up a few yards behind the QB, who then pitches him the ball. The guards pull, Faulk goes wide and then just looks for the cut-back lane. And if there is no cut-back lane, he would lower his head and just drive into the endzone with two or three defenders trying like hell to stop him. Yes, Faulk can make moves that amaze us, but in my opinion, he's also alot more powerful a runner than people believe.

*adarian_too* · #4 (**permalink**) -16-09-2004

This is not an either/or situation. Line them both up in the backfield. The options just expanded exponentially.

**Nick** · #5 (**permalink**) -16-09-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yodude

Faulk lines up a few yards behind the QB, who then pitches him the ball. The guards pull, Faulk goes wide and then just looks for the cut-back lane. And if there is no cut-back lane, he would lower his head and just drive into the endzone with two or three defenders trying like hell to stop him. Yes, Faulk can make moves that amaze us, but in my opinion, he's also alot more powerful a runner than people believe.

Perhaps, though, things of that nature are what have helped contribute to his decline in health over the past few seasons.

Quote:

Originally Posted by adarian_too

This is not an either/or situation. Line them both up in the backfield. The options just expanded exponentially.

This would mean you're losing a lead blocker, unless you want either of them to run block for the other.

*adarian_too* · #6 (**permalink**) -16-09-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by NickSeiler

This would mean you're losing a lead blocker, unless you want either of them to run block for the other.

Well we already know Faulk can block and supposedly blocking is one of Jackson's strong suits, so I see us losing nothing with a two back set. Rather, as I said, the options expand exponentially - stack them in an I, flank one out, motion either of them, line them up side-by-side - any way you turn it's better than running a TE at the 5 hole.

**Nick** · #7 (**permalink**) -16-09-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by adarian_too

Well we already know Faulk can block and supposedly blocking is one of Jackson's strong suits, so I see us losing nothing with a two back set.

Yes, we do know they can block... pass block. Big difference, IMO.

I think if you're going to put Faulk and Jackson in the backfield together in red zone plays, we're going to have to depend on a lot of misdirection and delays rather than just going off tackle or diving into the line to pound the ball in. I think while your options do expand, you're also limited in how you're able to move the ball. Don't make the same mistake Martz did and underestimate the importance of a lead blocking fullback.

*xfactor28* · #8 (**permalink**) -16-09-2004

Your right, his first 2 career chances is proof enough.

*Ramboy* · #9 (**permalink**) -16-09-2004

I dont understand why coaches do this. Give the ball to the back that got you to the goal line in the first place...Faulk. Jackson will get his chances and plenty of them in the future. I remember the Lions would do this to Barry Sanders he would get them down there and then the Lions would bring in a fullback or a bigger running back....almost never worked. They would have been better off giving the ball to Barry and letting him do his thing. Too small, not his heart, and niether is Marshalls. Give the man the ball and let him do what he does best....score.

**evil disco man** · #10 (**permalink**) -16-09-2004

I hate the idea of a goal-line back - nothing against Steven Jackson, but we have freakin' Marshall Faulk in the backfield, who I believe has a better "nose for the end-zone," if you will. Yeah, Steven Jackson is bigger and stronger, but you can't measure desire.

*sprtsmac* · #11 (**permalink**) -16-09-2004

Why don't we go with a full house backfield. Marshall, Jackson, and Goodspeed or Manu. Now you have a lead blocker and the defense doesn't know who is getting the ball. Then you can really screw with the defense and send one of them into motion.

**RamDez** · #12 (**permalink**) -16-09-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramboy

I dont understand why coaches do this. Give the ball to the back that got you to the goal line in the first place...Faulk. Jackson will get his chances and plenty of them in the future. I remember the Lions would do this to Barry Sanders he would get them down there and then the Lions would bring in a fullback or a bigger running back....almost never worked. They would have been better off giving the ball to Barry and letting him do his thing. Too small, not his heart, and niether is Marshalls. Give the man the ball and let him do what he does best....score.

I would just like to say, if no one has already, what a cool avatar

*Shale* · #13 (**permalink**) -16-09-2004

Handing the ball to Jackson on goalline attemps is simply a way to extend the life of Faulk and protect him. You take quite a pounding when you get that close and the defense is compressed and with Faulks recent injury history it just makes sense to let the younger back take the pounding.

While I hate it from a fantasy football perspective (Faulk is one of my backs), I think Martz is doing the right thing and I am hoping we see Faulk for the full season instead of just 9-10 games of it.

*moklerman* · #14 (**permalink**) -17-09-2004

While I'm somewhat hesitant to get too excited over Faulk having a good game against Arizona, I think he showed good speed and cutting ability. He performed well against a team that he SHOULD perform well against.

That being said, if he's truly healthy again (finally) then there's no good reason to take him out in goal line situations. I'll leave out the expletives but taking Marshall out near the goal line is the dumbest thing I've ever heard of. Behind Priest Holmes, no one in the league can cross the goal line better than Faulk.

If protecting him is the main concern then run Jackson between the 20's more, but dear God, don't take Marshall out when it's time to score! I like Wilkins but I'm sick of watching him kick field goals and the Rams struggle to score points.

*adarian_too* · #15 (**permalink**) -17-09-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by NickSeiler

Yes, we do know they can block... pass block. Big difference, IMO.

I'm not going to discount either of their abilities to run block also.