Cripes Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 Tonight on NFL Live, he just canonized Marshall Faulk into the Jerry Rice-Lawrence Taylor-Joe Montana circle of Olympic Gridiron Gods: "There was nothing Marshall Faulk couldn't do on the football field from the running back position...He was the guy to me who was the catalyst for this multiple position back, who could run it inside, outside and catch the football...He was one of those guys that changed the game, who redefined the position...Marshall Faulk, much like those guys [Rice-Taylor-Montana] changed the way we look at the running back position." Good grief, there's saluting a guy for a great career, and then there's servicing him like a yellow pages escort. Roger Craig was running AND receiving 1,000 yards in each column 20 years ago. Emmitt Smith, Thurman Thomas...and before that, Willis Montgomery, Lawrence McCutcheon, Joe Cribbs, etc. I loved watching Marshall Faulk on Sundays, and he may have been the best, but he was never anything I hadn't seen before.
Booster4324 Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 Tonight on NFL Live, he just canonized Marshall Faulk into the Jerry Rice-Lawrence Taylor-Joe Montana circle of Olympic Gridiron Gods: "There was nothing Marshall Faulk couldn't do on the football field from the running back position...He was the guy to me who was the catalyst for this multiple position back, who could run it inside, outside and catch the football...He was one of those guys that changed the game, who redefined the position...Marshall Faulk, much like those guys [Rice-Taylor-Montana] changed the way we look at the running back position." Good grief, there's saluting a guy for a great career, and then there's servicing him like a yellow pages escort. Roger Craig was running AND receiving 1,000 yards in each column 20 years ago. Emmitt Smith, Thurman Thomas...and before that, Willis Montgomery, Lawrence McCutcheon, Joe Cribbs, etc. I loved watching Marshall Faulk on Sundays, and he may have been the best, but he was never anything I hadn't seen before. In my very biased opinion TT was the prototype back. Roger Craig was the first back to do 1000/1000 but TT was better. Mind you I am basing this observation on stuff like, the early 80's were the start of the modern NFL and I really dont know about earlier players.
stinky finger Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 In my very biased opinion TT was the prototype back. Roger Craig was the first back to do 1000/1000 but TT was better. Mind you I am basing this observation on stuff like, the early 80's were the start of the modern NFL and I really dont know about earlier players. All terriffic backs for sure. I like Marcus Allen.
BUFFALOTONE Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 Isn't Faulk on the ESPN staff? No. NFL Network I believe. And Faulk was a game changer and a catalyst for all RB's. Schlereth wasnt blowing him, its the truth. Just because they didnt blow TT some of you act like we was the only RB to ever play. Take a step back, Faulk gave TT all the respect in the world last week. Take a deep breath.
GG Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 No. NFL Network I believe. And Faulk was a game changer and a catalyst for all RB's. Schlereth wasnt blowing him, its the truth. Just because they didnt blow TT some of you act like we was the only RB to ever play. Take a step back, Faulk gave TT all the respect in the world last week. Take a deep breath. I think he argued Schelreth's point that Faulk redefined the position, when Faulk himself admitted that he used Thurman's tapes to learn his craft.
BUFFALOTONE Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 I think he argued Schelreth's point that Faulk redefined the position, when Faulk himself admitted that he used Thurman's tapes to learn his craft. Its not like its not true. Faulk was an unbelievable RB. A 5 tool player and his stats are comparable to TT's. Faulk will be a first ballot HOFer. No doubt.
GG Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 Its not like its not true. Faulk was an unbelievable RB. A 5 tool player and his stats are comparable to TT's. Faulk will be a first ballot HOFer. No doubt. No one is arguing that. The argument is whether Faulk revolutionized the position. That one is hard to defend, especially considering his coach gave us Thurman and before that, Lydell Mitchell and Joe Washington.
RuntheDamnBall Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 No one is arguing that. The argument is whether Faulk revolutionized the position. That one is hard to defend, especially considering his coach gave us Thurman and before that, Lydell Mitchell and Joe Washington. Exactly. And putting him up there with Lawrence Taylor is unreal. LT changed the game in so many ways. Faulk is 'just' (to downplay it too much) the 'Version 2.0' of what other backs did very well before him. He is a certifiable HOFer, but game-changing? Not sure. I think he just fit in the game very well because he was very talented. Schlereth then said that MF's legacy was guys like Brian Westbrook and Reggie Bush and two-back sets, which was to the detriment of his argument. Right now those guys are much better pass-catching backs than they are bust-through-the-line runners. And two backs means you have complementary talents, not one guy who is the whole package, so I'm not sure what MF had to do with that revolution in the game.
Recommended Posts