No announcement yet.

Dissapointment with steven jackson

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Dissapointment with steven jackson

    I am disappointed with steven jackson, especially the mental errors. I recognize that he is very young and that the blocking has been spotty. I am not suggesting he has been lousy, only that he has not lived up to my hopes and expectations for this year.

    I dont see him breaking tackles at the line of scrimmage. I dont see him cutting back effectively in the hole. I see a guy who when he gets the first block and can get past the line with some space does some major damage in the secondary and who certainly runs hard, but i dont see a guy that looks like he can carry a team on his back or even close to it.

    I see passes hit him in the hands in the flat that he drops. I see fumbles. I see a horrible flip to mcdonald on the play at the goal line.

    I see faulk cutting back through the holes MUCH faster than jackson and running almost as hard. I am not saying that faulk should be the starter, but am suggesting that jackson has a LONG LONG way to go before someone compares him to marshall faulk.

    I realize jackson and faulk are different kinds of backs, but i just dont see jacksons speed until he gets into space. I see a LOT of running sideways and not cutting up the field quickly enough. Watch faulk dart in and out of space, and that is at age 32!

    any thoughts from the group?

    Ramming speed to all

    general counsel

  • #2
    Re: Dissapointment with steven jackson

    I agree with your assessment on Jackson and Faulk. I am seeing the same things you are seeing.

    I thought Faulk was done last year, but he looks refreshed and healthy this year. He still has that great vision. He anticipates the blocking and his cut backs are as good as ever.

    From what I have seen of the two RB's this season I prefer Faulk.

    Marshall Faulk....At one time I considered him the greatest football player on God's Green Earth.

    And maybe, just maybe, he still is.

    Curly ~ Horns


    • #3
      Re: Dissapointment with steven jackson

      I'm disappointed also but like you GC, I'm not willing to give up on the kid either.

      I wish he would run lower to the ground, but I also had that wish with ED also and it didn't matter to him so it may not matter to SJ. You know, with Barron in the mix now, you may see a better SJ.


      • #4
        Re: Dissapointment with steven jackson

        I have to disagree with you on this one. Last week he caught a TD for a score made a nice grab and took it in. Had a running TD, nice blocking up front on that one. I have heard Holt and Marc said Jackson has great hands, I have seen him at times on swing passes look at the defender and drop it, I’m not denying that.

        I see a horrible flip to mcdonald on the play at the goal line
        He took the blame but that was the wrong personnel in the game he does not run that Marshal does, he said he should have just kept it. That was just a bad call period, if get the ball a couple of times down there he scores, he needs to get his number called.

        I see faulk cutting back through the holes MUCH faster than jackson and running almost as hard. I am not saying that faulk should be the starter, but am suggesting that jackson has a LONG LONG way to go before someone compares him to marshall faulk.
        I don’t think we will ever compare him to Marshal they are too different runner altogether. Jackson is a power back and Marshal is well Marshal.

        I realize jackson and faulk are different kinds of backs, but i just dont see jacksons speed until he gets into space. I see a LOT of running sideways and not cutting up the field quickly enough. Watch faulk dart in and out of space, and that is at age 32!
        That last few years Marshal was going nowhere with the ball, he would make the first guy miss and get tackled, much like Jackson looked Sunday. If there is no hole and they are string it out, you look bad if you don’t just run into the pile.

        Our run blocking schemes look weak to me, you never see a replace where the blocking is done to perfection and the hole is Hugh, not lately anyway.

        Let face it we really have not had a game this year where he has had a lot of touches due to slow starts and failing behind. Now that Alex is in lets see if the O-line can help jump start him. I believe he was avg. close to 5 yards a carry until last week, just needs to get the ball more, for the amount of touches he done ok, not great ok.


        • #5
          Re: Dissapointment with steven jackson

          I'm not giving up on Jackson because he's still learning and has not had the benefit of a solid, cohesive OL. He's started a total of 4 games and deserves a chance to develop. He's looked incredible at times and if I'm not mistaken, made a nice cutback on his touchdown run. That being said, he's banged up and has not been effective in those 4 games. He's got 218 yards on 59 attempts for a 3.7 yard average. At this point in time, under the circumstances, Faulk is the better option IMO.


          • #6
            Re: Dissapointment with steven jackson

            I am going to wait and see what happens. I am hoping that with Alex in the game and Blain Saipaia suiting up as a blocking TE, we should see some better production. I keeping everything crossed for that one.
            sigpicThis is for Randy! GO BRM!


            • #7
              Re: Dissapointment with steven jackson

              I anticipate seeing better running from Jackson when the run blocking gets better. What I saw to start the Giants game left a lot to be desired. But look at the fourth down play later in the game. Jackson got the ball, got a good block, and took it for a good gain.


              • #8
                Re: Dissapointment with steven jackson

                I really love Faulk, he is one of the best back ever.
                As I can't see the game this year, I have no idea about Jackson, but from what I read, he is doing quite well at this time.
                We should give him a little chance to take the starter job, and developp witin this year. With good blocks and a little bit more experience, he could do a very great job.

                at least, that's what I hope !


                • #9
                  Re: Dissapointment with steven jackson

                  I'm not disappointed at all. Of course, I was expecting pretty much what has happened. Jackson's dinged up and isn't as Earl Campbell-like as everyone thought. Faulk looks pretty darned good and none of it really matters because the Rams aren't going to be running the ball very much.

                  The Rams are a passing team. That's just how it is.


                  • #10
                    Re: Dissapointment with steven jackson

                    I think Jackson is the kind of ball carrier that needs to get 25 touches during the game. I don't think he has been able to get into a rhythm yet. Remember when Emmit smith first came into the league and told his coach how am I suppose to produce when I don't get the ball? Then they started giving him the ball 30+ times a gain and now he is the all time leading rusher. I think Jackson may be experiencing the same type of thing.


                    • #11
                      Re: Dissapointment with steven jackson

                      Avg. yards per carry
                      Steven Jackson STLOUIS 3.7
                      Marshall Faulk STLOUIS 6.2

                      Lets not let potential get in the way of who the better player is today for this team.

                      I have to agree with GC he has not given up but is disappointed with Jacksons start. Faulk looks better right now then Jackson and its not like Faulk is to old to start. I am all for Jackson being our future I liked him when we drafted him and I still like his potential. But at this point it’s still in the category of potential.

                      I think we are often to eager to label people based off assumptions as opposed to play. I think some people have done the same with Hargrove and Barron. I really like Barron and I am on the fence with Hargrove. As much as I like Barron I am not ready to label him as a good RT. I want to see consistency and see how other teams counter him after seeing him on tape. These young guys need to do it for a full year before we can label them one-way or the other. Any player can have a good game but the good players do it consistently even after other guys get a chance to scout them over several games and find out their tendencies.

                      I am for the better RB getting the majority of the carries because right now we are 2-2 and every game is meaningful. Right now in my mind the starting position would be opened up. With Faulk getting a chance this week and if he did superb then he starts the next week if not then it’s Jackson the next week. I don’t think there is one thing that anyone can honestly say Jackson is doing better at then Faulk. I think Faulk so far this year has been better at blocking, short passes, reading the defense, and side-to-side running. Jackson has so far this year seemed like he needs momentum in the North South direction to get yards. I have seen Faulk this year with a defender right there ready to tackle him do a hesitation dance to the right one step back and get around the defender twisting and turning that turned a two yard loss into a 5 yard gain. I don’t see Jackson with that twist and turn he is a hard-nosed runner more like a Bettis only quicker. I hope he don’t turn into one of those players that is injured a lot. It happened to Bettis and a lot of power runners especially up right power runners. The other guys like Faulk rarely take bone-crushing hits they are always twisting and turning around defenders, which causes glancing shots instead.

                      I think Jackson is our future I think he will be good but I am not ready to say he is good yet and I am not sure he is the best RB we have today.
                      Last edited by ; -10-07-2005, 05:40 PM.


                      • #12
                        Re: Dissapointment with steven jackson

                        This reminds me of the discussion about starting Corey Ivy because of how good he's done in the nickel role, as if playing a team's third receiver well means you're going to play their starting receiver just as well. What some didn't think about - or apparently didn't think was important - was that it's probably because he's in that role that he's done well, just as Faulk has probably done well statistically because he's fresher, not having to carry the load, and can come in during certain situations.

                        Let's take a look at what Faulk has done this season:

                        Week 4 vs. Giants: Three carries, all in the second half. Two of them were for five yards total, and the third was a busted play in the fourth when no one expected a run, where Marshall fumbled it, recovered, and then managed to go for 11 yards.

                        Week 3 vs. Titans: Faulk looked outstanding on one drive in third quarter to help take the Rams' lead from 7 to 14. I just want to emphasize that we were running and running well while we had a seven-point lead against a defense that ranks 18th in average rushing yards allowed per game, and 23rd in average rushing yards allowed per carry. Faulk also fumbled in this game.

                        Week 2 vs. Arizona: Faulk had three carries for 15 yards. Two of those carries combined to total three yards, and his big 12-yard gain was on 3rd and 20 when the defense obviously looked for us to convert through the air rather than play it safe with a draw.

                        Week 1 vs. *****: Again, three carries in this game. This time, resulted in 12 yards. One of those rushes was a big gain on first down for 14. The other two resulted in no gain, then a loss of two. Faulk also was penalized for a false start.
                        So maybe someone can point me where in there Faulk has shown to anyone that he should be starting for this team again. He's functioned very well in a more limited role, but hasn't exactly blown up as much as his stats would suggest. Jackson has been criticized by some as being either boom or bust - either he runs for a big gain, or he gets stopped with minimal yardage. Judging from what I see of Faulk's carries, it's about the same story, which leads me to believe it's a blocking issue and not so much an issue of the running back.

                        It was Faulk himself that thought it would be better if he went to a secondary role, a role that would allow Steven Jackson to see the bulk of the carries and Faulk himself to come in and be effective in certain situations. That's exactly what's going on - Faulk has been fairly effective when he's called upon, though I think the perception is he's been better than he's actually been. How does that mean we should go back to the formula that wasn't working for us last year, where we asked Marshall to be the lead guy, a role he himself went to Martz and wanted to get out of?

                        Give Jackson some time and a better blocking offensive line, and you'll see the results. Heck, we've already seen Jackson do well when he's got people blocking in front of him and he's not forced to make defenders miss 2-3 yards behind the line of scrimmage. Make a kneejerk reaction to four games and I suspect you'll see exactly what you saw last year, when people were clammoring for Jackson to take more of the load.


                        • #13
                          Re: Dissapointment with steven jackson

                          the thing that bothers me is that I thought when Jackson was named the starter and Faulk was going to take a secondary role, that we would still see a lot of Marshall Faulk, like on 3rd downs, and many passing downs. And a number of plays where Faulk and Jackson were in the backfield together.

                          I was exited. I was thinking, this is perfect, use Jackson for the pound 'em first and second down type plays, and third and short, etc..., but keep defenses guessing by having Faulk in alot, and starting in the backfield with Jackson, but then swinging out to the line as a receiver (mostly to force a LB to come out of the box to cover him so Jackson can run, but also because Faulk can get open in and is dangerous with the ball in open field).

                          But, once again Martz has dissapointed me in his play calling. Instead we have Steven Jackson as the starting running back for all plays, and Marshall to spell him when he's winded.

                          Not what I was looking for from the genius.

                          Definitely Jackson looked tentative vs. the Giants so Martz should have switched their roles in that game. I thought that was the plan, but these guys ego's gets in the way, and Jackson said he was better on thursday or whenever and got the start, but he wasn't thing Jackson has proven to me so far is that he's not the team player and class act that Marshall Faulk is. I hope Faulk doesn't get tired of his ego and not want to be around him next year.


                          • #14
                            Re: Dissapointment with steven jackson

                            I respect the GENERAL, but I disagree.

                            How long ago was it when Faulk was getting a sorry average per carry? When Faulk was not producing?

                            I think the disparity in the avg per carry is due to the fact that Martz cherry picks his plays with Faulk. He picks plays that Faulk runs particularly well and inserts him in favorable situations - then Faulk goes back to the sidelines.

                            If Faulk has to hit it up in there on first, second, and third down - his average is going down quick.

                            I think it's the O-line plain and simple.

                            Some of Jackson's production can be attributed to his chest/ribs. That's not anything difficult to understand.

                            Stats can be very misleading and I think that's exactly the case here.

                            If Faulk plays an entire game against like competition - then the stats are appropriate. It's not uncommon for 3rd down backs to have good averages. If it's 3rd and 15 (we do lead the league in Sacks given up, I guess we still do) and we run a draw and Marshall gets 9 yards... You can see how his average will be very high.

                            How about Marshall's stats the last time he was the full-time back (or starter), his average was very bad. Again, I say look to the O-line..



                            • #15
                              Re: Dissapointment with steven jackson

                              Originally posted by sbramfan
                     thing Jackson has proven to me so far is that he's not the team player and class act that Marshall Faulk is. I hope Faulk doesn't get tired of his ego and not want to be around him next year.
                              Now, I wouldn't go all that far. Not a team player? Let's give him a few more than just four starts before we brand him a Moss-like player. 1-1/4 seasons do not a Faulk make.
                              Yes, I am disappointed with his production, but not the man. Which one of us really knows what goes on behind the scenes, eh? Who wouldn't want to hang on to a starting position? And try to prove himself worthy?

                              Cut him some slack. Let him start behind some decent blocking before we bag on him.


                              Related Topics


                              • theodus69
                                Jackson or Faulk
                                by theodus69
                                Now I have took a beating on my remarks about Jackson. I have said I'm not sold on him and of course, the Line thing is the sticking point, But if the Rams are gonna get back to the High flying offense, Where does Jackson fit in? Isn't he a 30-40 carry a game guy? And if so, where does that fit a high flying offense? I think Faulk would be the better choice even at his present age! Jackson to me doesn't fit this offense. Which actually wouldn't surprise me if the Rams don't go after a R-back in the draft early. Jackson could be some good trade bait also. That's my thought so let yours fly!
                                -03-04-2006, 01:51 AM
                              • RamWraith
                                Jackson saw extensive time
                                by RamWraith
                                I re-watched the game yesterday and noticed how many snaps Jackson got, especially in the second half. Although he was not used the entire time, due to us being in passing mode, he was the back.

                                This brings ups a couple of questions. Is Marshall a little more dinged than we all know about? Marshall dropped some EASY passes last week, why? Is Martz gaining confidence in the young buck?

                                This next weekend will be an interesting tale, and should answer a lot of questions. I believe the key to this weeks game is running the ball down the throats of the Bucs to set up the pass. If Jackson see as many snaps as he did last week I expect a huge week from the kid.
                                -10-15-2004, 06:44 AM
                              • RamWraith
                                Jackson is all the rage!
                                by RamWraith
                                By Bryan Burwell
                                ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH

                                What do you do when you're on the verge of something you've been craving all of your life? What do you do when the dream is so close, you can feel its inevitability and maybe its uncertainty too lurking on the horizon like some rumbling summer storm?

                                Steven Jackson considers this daunting circumstance for just a moment and flashes that familiar disarming smile. "I've been groomed for this," he said. "This is what I've wanted since I started playing football when I was 7 years old."

                                Considering the crash-and-burn mess that so many of his peers have made of their star turns lately, you might expect that Jackson might approach this newest phase of his life with some sort of healthy trepidation. Celebrity is a scary business these days, as unpredictable as the weather. You're never quite sure whether the gathering storm will bring a soothing shower of fame and fortune or an angry torrent of disaster and shame.

                                Yet Steven Jackson is running toward the gathering storm of fame like it's a slash of daylight. After impatiently biding his time behind Marshall Faulk for two seasons, the former first-round draft pick out of Oregon State had a breakout 2006 season that thrust him into the NFL's ultra-talented upper crust. And now that Faulk has retired, there are no more uneasy conflicts about playing time, or debates about who is the heart and soul of this football team, or who is one of the NFL's most dangerous offensive weapons.

                                "He's right there. He's right on the verge of blowing up (and becoming a major NFL star) and he knows it," said teammate and Pro Bowl receiver Torry Holt. "He is ready to just explode and I can't wait to see it."

                                There are talks to give the powerfully built Pro Bowl running back his own weekly segment on ESPNEWS. You can't walk by a newsstand anywhere in America without seeing his face on the cover of at least three fantasy football magazines. He was featured recently in Sports Illustrated. ESPN has him on speed dial. There are those soon-to-be-released nationally televised Nike commercials, a locker stall full of custom-made Nike cleats, and 40-foot-high "I Believe" billboards all over St. Louis, which are supposed to be touting the Rams' upcoming season. But they could just as easily be tantalizing movie trailers for the upcoming Steven Jackson blockbuster, too.

                                "I was groomed for this; I always believed I would be a star, and I didn't see anything wrong with that," Jackson said. "I know that probably didn't play too well with the humble Midwestern mentality. But I was just speaking out and saying what I believed I was capable of doing. I never understood what was wrong with saying what was on my mind as long as I believed it and it was true. What's wrong with being a positive influence...
                                -08-27-2007, 05:46 AM
                              • sbramfan
                                Jackson should not have replaced Faulk this year
                                by sbramfan
                                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?

                                @#%[email protected]%J%$#%)"(#$U%
                                -12-11-2005, 11:58 AM
                              • r8rh8rmike
                                Temporary Role Reversal?
                                by r8rh8rmike
                                I'm not sure if Jackson will play on Sunday, but this may be a good time to let Faulk start, and have Jackson in the supporting role. Faulk has had some pop lately and may be able to jump start the running game and get the almost non-existent short passing game going. Jackson seemed to struggle at times with the chest injury, and the lighter duty may be beneficial to his recovery.
                                -10-05-2005, 11:20 PM