Jump to content

In their prime, who was better?

My Friends Call Me Tebucky
 Share

Who was better, La'Dainian Tomlinson now, or Marshall Faulk with the Super Bowl era Rams?  

54 members have voted

  1. 1. Who was better, La'Dainian Tomlinson now, or Marshall Faulk with the Super Bowl era Rams?

    • Faulk
      9
    • Tomlinson
      37
    • Sammy Morris
      8

Recommended Posts

My Friends Call Me Tebucky Rookie

My Friends Call Me Tebucky

Posted
Posted

I say Faulk, only because he was the "engine" for Super Bowl teams...but Tomlinson is as special a talent as I think I've ever seen- and he does it all behind a garbage offensive line.

 

Honestly, please try not to include Barry Sanders, Emmitt Smith, or Thurman Thomas in your responses, I'm trying to compare backs from this particular era.

 

Oh, and, yeah, I think has become the prototype for the ultimate modern day running back (Faulk, Holmes, Barber, Tomlinson), moreso than Smith (Shaun Alexander or Corey Dillon, maybe?) or Sanders (can't really compare any modern day guys to his talents)...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MDH All Pro

MDH

Posted
Posted

Faulk was a great back but LT might just be the best RB I've ever seen play. He can just do it all. He's Barry Sanders with the ability to pick up short yards and catch the ball out of the backfield. There's nothing LT doesn't do and do really f'in well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Simon Hall of Famer

Simon

Posted
Posted
Faulk was a great back but LT might just be the best RB I've ever seen play.  He can just do it all.  He's Barry Sanders with the ability to pick up short yards and catch the ball out of the backfield.  There's nothing LT doesn't do and do really f'in well.

842859[/snapback]

 

Did you see him throw that TD from the 2 a couple weeks ago?

With all due respect to Walter's time at QB, I've never seen a back handle the ball like that in my life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
daquixers_is_back Veteran

daquixers_is_back

Posted
Posted
And he averaged 5+ypc in a horrible offense with a terrible OL in 2003.  I'm not so sure the current OL is "one of the best" either.

842868[/snapback]

 

What is your method of determining a bad offensive line? In 2003 they gave up only 29 sacks (10-11th best in league) ... and their RB had 1600 yards and 13 TD's. So im not sure how you can determine that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MDH All Pro

MDH

Posted
Posted
What is your method of determining a bad offensive line? In 2003 they gave up only 29 sacks (10-11th best in league) ... and their RB had 1600 yards and 13 TD's. So im not sure how you can determine that.

842880[/snapback]

 

I had LT in a keeper league from 2003-2005 (sadly I could only keep him 3 years) and watched all of SD's games when they weren't playing opposite of the Bills. That OL in 2003 was not a good line, despite LT's numbers. He made many of those yards on his own kind of like Sanders had to do for much of his career.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
daquixers_is_back Veteran

daquixers_is_back

Posted
Posted
I had LT in a keeper league from 2003-2005 (sadly I could only keep him 3 years) and watched all of SD's games when they weren't playing opposite of the Bills.  That OL in 2003 was not a good line, despite LT's numbers.  He made many of those yards on his own kind of like Sanders had to do for much of his career.

842886[/snapback]

 

Even if he did do a lot on his own, the line still only gave up 29 sacks ... which IMO, is stellar. To put that into perspective, so far this year Oakland, Cleveland, Seattle, Buffalo, Detroit, St. Louis, Pittsburgh, Miami are already at 28 or higher with SIX games to go!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
2020 Our Year For Sure Veteran

2020 Our Year For Sure

Posted
Posted
Even if he did do a lot on his own, the line still only gave up 29 sacks ... which IMO, is stellar. To put that into perspective, so far this year Oakland, Cleveland, Seattle, Buffalo, Detroit, St. Louis, Pittsburgh, Miami are already at 28 or higher with SIX games to go!

842910[/snapback]

But thats pass blocking, and those are two different animals. Prior to today I would have said our O-line is bottom 5 in pass protection, but around the middle of the pack in the running game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MDH All Pro

MDH

Posted
Posted
I voted for Thurman Thomas because he was the best all around back the league has ever seen.

842974[/snapback]

 

Thurman might just be my favorite Bill of all time but he wasn't as good as either Faulk or LT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BuffOrange Veteran

BuffOrange

Posted
Posted
Thurman might just be my favorite Bill of all time but he wasn't as good as either Faulk or LT.

842991[/snapback]

 

He was a damn good receiver though. A few weeks ago I was trying to think of good RB's (ie not Centers or Harmon who were exclusively receivers) who actually ran routes as a receiving weapon rather than just being the outlet guy. As great as LT2 & Barber are they're pretty much safety valves. Faulk is the only guy I can think of since Thurman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
daquixers_is_back Veteran

daquixers_is_back

Posted
Posted
He was a damn good receiver though.  A few weeks ago I was trying to think of good RB's (ie not Centers or Harmon who were exclusively receivers) who actually ran routes as a receiving weapon rather than just being the outlet guy.  As great as LT2 & Barber are they're pretty much safety valves.  Faulk is the only guy I can think of since Thurman.

842998[/snapback]

 

Tomlinson averages about 70 receptions per season ... Faulk averaged about 64 receptions per season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...