Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Who was the best running back?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Who was the best running back?

    Name......Years..rushes...yards...catches..cyards....tyards...TotalTD's
    Eric Dickerson 5....1525....7245........123......912......8157...56
    Marshall Faulk 7....1447....6959........470....4071....10030...85
    Steven Jackson 6...1548....6707........281....2287.....8994...48

    There are the numbers, but numbers don't always tell the tale. Who do you think was the best and why?

  • #2
    Re: Who was the best running back?

    When ED was on the field, it just looked easy for him.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Who was the best running back?

      it really does depend on what you looking for in a RB..

      i personally think Faulk is the best all purpose RB to ever play the game,let alone just the Rams...but for straight out running ED.
      if you want someone to gain every possible yard after the first contact has been made,then you pick Jax out of the three.

      ED had a pretty damn awesome line to play behind..certainly far better than Jax has had,atleast in the past..and better than the line Faulk played behind (for Rushing anyway..he played behind a better pass blocking line than ED)

      That`s not to say that ED or Faulk couldn`t have had great careers behind Jackson`s lines..but they certainly would have had to prove something that during their careers with the Rams wasn`t proved due to them not having to.

      i think the current O-line has the potential to be very similar to the great rush blocking line we had in the 80`s....so it will be interesting to see how Jax will do in the next couple of years.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Who was the best running back?

        I will go with Marshall. Think though, Jackson does not have a talented team around him and still gets those yards. Faulk had an unbelieveable team, but also contributed to it. Then Dickerson was just a beast with a good team.

        Its also really hard to compare because they all played a different amount of years, and played many years ahead of each other, in which the NFL was different.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Who was the best running back?

          If you're asking for an all-around back, Marshall is the clear choice. Nobody touches him in that respect, past or present. (in my opinion anyway)

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Who was the best running back?

            I think that Marshall is a legend, but for some reason I love SJax more than any RB ever. His skill set is just unbelievable. At 6-2 236 lbs he is able to run over any opponent and fight for every yard, but he is also pretty quick for his size and is able to out run opponents. Not only that but he is also a recieving threat. He in my mind is the prototype for the perfect RB.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Who was the best running back?

              Originally posted by Judaxi View Post
              I think that Marshall is a legend, but for some reason I love SJax more than any RB ever. His skill set is just unbelievable. At 6-2 236 lbs he is able to run over any opponent and fight for every yard, but he is also pretty quick for his size and is able to out run opponents. Not only that but he is also a recieving threat. He in my mind is the prototype for the perfect RB.
              I agree. He is underrated aswell. He can do everything from blocking, to running and even catching. He is overshadowed by overrated players like Chris Johnson.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Who was the best running back?

                His best play ever as a Ram was a block. The TD to Holt in the Super Bowl against the Titans, he picks up the defender that came free and just stopped him cold before he could get to Warner.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Who was the best running back?

                  Unfortunately for SJAX he is only in this conversation in St. Louis. Looking back he will just be a footnote do to the abysmal state of the team during his prime years.

                  It's not fair, but Dickerson and Faulk far surpass Stephen

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Who was the best running back?

                    Can't really judge who's the best since they've all played in different states of the Rams. Lets put Faulk and Dickerson in these dark times or S-Jax in the GSOT days.


                    ♪ R.I.P. Nujabes ♫

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Who was the best running back?

                      Eric the Great is the best RB in Ram history; in NFL history maybe. Faulk ranks with the best in history too - and Jackson may, before he's done , but Eric is my hoice if I'm building the best in NFL history. That - was what running games were meant to be.

                      Comment

                      Related Topics

                      Collapse

                      • RamWraith
                        Faulk still a concern for me
                        by RamWraith
                        I know there is a lot of Faulk supporters out there, but to me the guy still looks a lot like last year and I think it was a problem. He seems to lacking the initial explosion, taking forever to get moving in the backfield. When he hits the line he seems hesitant and does a lot of dancing. He is still a great receiver and a great blocke,r but I think he has lost a step or two as far as running with the football.

                        Jut my honest opinion.
                        -08-24-2004, 06:54 AM
                      • HUbison
                        Faulk re-defined the role of a RB
                        by HUbison
                        I was perusing through a few statistics and noticed something. The league leader in yards from scrimmage (YFS) this year was our own Steven Jackson. On the last day of the season he managed to edge out LT by 11 yards. As well, this performance by Jackson ranks 5th all-time for the best season YFS.

                        When looking at the all-time list of top YFS season's, I couldn't help but notice that 10 of the top 11 were notched in the past decade. Marcus Allen's '85 season (7th all-time) stood alone as the only pre-'97 effort in the top 11.

                        So what has happened in the past decade that has blown up the YFS of RBs into astronomical performances? I believe it can be narrowed down to Marshall Faulk. This was the time period when Faulk changed the definition of a RB. No longer did the RB run, and the WR receive. Now, the RB had to do both. Once Faulk came into his own in Indy, and then exploded in the GSOT, it was no longer adequate for a top tier RB to notch 20, 30, or 40 catches per year. That was now obsolete, and too one-dimensional. Faulk introduced the era of RBs with 60, 70, and 80 catch seasons.

                        Now, all the top RBs have to reach to numbers close to Faulk to be considered at the top of their game. If you look at this year's top 6 YFS efforts, only Larry Johnson had fewer than 55 receptions, and he had to set the Rushing Attempt record to do it!

                        Whether Faulk is done or not, I don't know. But either way, in his time, he changed what it meant to be a Running Back.
                        -01-04-2007, 06:21 AM
                      • ramstough39
                        At the end of Jackon's career...
                        by ramstough39
                        Will he be known as "better" than Marshall Faulk?

                        No, I don't think he will be, in my opinion. I think nobody can truly be like Faulk -- a back that could run the ball helping you out on the tough yardage; 'caught the ball; blocked and really made some nice ones for Kurt Warner back in the hayday; and last but not least, he motivated our St. Louis Rams' offense for years, becoming a true team leader, and I just don't see Jackson doing ALL of those. Then again, that's just my opinion.

                        I apologize if this has been asked before, but I'm just trying to spark ClanRam from all of the "Why Linehan why?"-type threads, and all the sadness that has been going around. No, I don't get online often (don't have the time, realistically. However, I do visit alot, just it's the fact I don't have the time and chance to post.)

                        I'm just looking to read some opinions, and etc. from other fellow Rams fans.

                        Thanks.

                        GO RAMS!
                        -11-15-2006, 02:39 PM
                      • RamWraith
                        Faulk steps back to keep going
                        by RamWraith
                        By Larry Weisman, USA TODAY

                        ST. LOUIS Every picture tells a story, and sometimes it's a sad one. There is Emmitt Smith, wearing the red jersey of the Arizona Cardinals. Franco Harris squeezing out a few last carries with the Seattle Seahawks. O.J. Simpson, forlorn in a San Francisco ***** uniform. They forged their reputations in one place and diminished them in another.
                        There will be no such portrait of Marshall Faulk. He understands the limits of the body, the stresses of the game and the value of an exit strategy. That is why he no longer is starting for the St. Louis Rams yet is prolonging his career in order to end it with the club.

                        At 32, and beginning his 12th NFL season, Faulk will back up Steven Jackson, the Rams' No. 1 pick a year ago. Maybe St. Louis, which plays its third preseason game tonight against the Detroit Lions, would have made this change anyway, but the impetus came from Faulk, who has failed to start in only five of 160 career games with the Rams and the Indianapolis Colts.

                        "I think that in a sense you just have to be honest with yourself and what you can and can't do and understand what you want to get out of this game and what you want to do," Faulk says. "And I want to win. My personal accomplishments aren't as important to me; winning is. I think the combination of myself and Steven gives us, as a team, a better opportunity to win. With the work that he's going to put in, he deserves to be the starter."

                        Faulk led the Rams in rushing for a sixth consecutive season in 2004, with a modest 774 yards. It was the third consecutive year he finished below 1,000 and his fewest rushing yards since 1995 with the Colts, when he gained 587. Jackson, playing through a knee injury, showed toughness and an ability to break tackles in rushing for 673 yards and averaging 5.0 yards a carry. Faulk suddenly understood what so many players do not, will not or cannot. So he approached coach Mike Martz to talk about himself and Jackson.

                        "Marshall said to me privately, 'It's time, I think.' I said, 'Time for what?' And he said, 'He needs to be the featured guy. And whatever role you want me to do, I'd be happy to do it. It's going to be tough, but I think I can really help him and still have some value for this team.' I couldn't believe it," Martz says. "But that's Marshall. So I got to thinking about it more and more, and I said, 'We're going to do this.' "

                        The 5-10, 211-pound Faulk ranks 12th on the NFL's all-time rushing list with 11,987 yards, leads all running backs in career receiving yardage (6,894), is second among backs in receptions (773) and is tied for fourth in touchdowns with 135. The Rams are 27-0 since 1999 when he rushes for 100 yards in a game.

                        "A long time ago I made a pact with myself that if you can't do it, you can't do it anymore and you have to leave the game. And...
                        -08-29-2005, 04:51 AM
                      • Guest's Avatar
                        I think everyone should stop with their BS story about Faulk not wantin to play more.
                        by Guest
                        Faulk may have went to management and told them it was time to make a change because he is good hearted and they chose a RB with their first over all pick.
                        How many players anywhere in the NFL would go to management and tell them to play some one else ahead of them none is the answer because they are all after the dollar but not Faulk he wants to see the kid get a chance and succeed. But Faulk still has a lot of game left in him and if Jackson ever went down with an injury and they had to play Faulk you would see that I can honestly say Jackson has helped contribute to our losing season with his no gain runs and getting two QB's blown up by bad blocking both Bulger and Martin were the victims of his poor blocking.

                        Faulk has a lot of game left and this was the first off-season in a long time he did not have to have surgery. He is as healthy and as good as he has been in a long time. I guarantee you if I had to win a game I would take Faulk over Jackson as my running back. Once Faulk saw they drafted a RB he knew he did not have a lot of years left and he knew they had to play the #1 RB in the draft pretty quickly and that is why I believe he said they should play him. Because how would people feel if Faulk played good and we did not start Jackson for another 4 years they would all be wondering why we spent such a high pick on someone that sets on the bench.


                        Nick Faulk did it for the team and Jackson no one else in the NFL would have done what he did. Faulk may have thought at the time that Jackson might be able to handle the starting job and knowing that they selected him so high they would have to play him soon. Faulk is today better then Jackson. He is as healthy as he has ever been.
                        -12-11-2005, 09:25 PM
                      Working...
                      X