Best of the best: RB edition

[Battlelyon]

To start Kurt Warner walked away with the victory, this is going to a lot harder decision with it coming down most likely to Faulk and Dickerson.

QB: Kurt Warner
RB:











*Charles White only started one season

 

[Clayton]

I have Dickerson just very slightly ahead of Faulk. Both are top 10 all time RBs.
Steven Jackson third. He never had a chance, though. Lots of terrible teams.

 

[Nosferatu]

Eric Dickerson is the 2nd best running back of all time... Faulk easily top 10.

 

[tnerb57]

Faulk gets the edge based on pass-catching ability. I did love me some Eric, though.

 

[Sam Sportboy]

I went with Eric but I've always wondered how tBus would have done if he had stayed with tRams.........had some damn good years with Steelers

 

[Clayton]

I went with Eric but I've always wondered how tBus would have done if he had stayed with tRams.........had some damn good years with Steelers

Probably 4th still. Maybe just maybe 3rd.

 

[Retroram52]

Faulk gets the edge based on pass-catching ability. I did love me some Eric, though.

 

[zeke2829]

Marshall Faulk was an all purpose back, Eric Dickerson was a pure RB! There is a difference there! Don't get me wrong, an all purpose back is sometimes more effective than a pure rb. But ED...IMO was the best pure rb in RAMS history. Lights out! He shattered records as a rookie!

I love Marshall Faulk don't get me wrong, we were lucky to get him when we did, AKA Dick Vermeil

I chose ED because he was just plain fun to watch. He never won any big titles mind you but he really took it to the 49ers back in the day. "Eric may be nimble, Eric may be quick, Eric will get burnt at the Candlestick!"..... So the saying goes! Eric always shined when playing the whiners! ....my pick is Eric Dickerson, ...2105 is still his #!!

 

[Battlelyon]

Marshall Faulk was an inferior running back in the sense of what we consider a running back to be. But Faulk was the better football player, hands down. He could run with the ball, catch the ball, block, run a pattern, knew his assignment on every play as well as his teammates. He was so hard to scheme for, he could line up anywhere on the field and be a threat, Dickerson couldn't. Faulk changed the atmosphere on this team, didn't accept the losing ways and showed the way to winning, Super Bowl winning. He was a great player and do what legends do, makes teammates better and win. The only person Dickerson made better was himself, but he was a great running back no doubt.

Dickerson loses in stats too, if you want to use that.

 

[Battlelyon]

Charles White lead the NFL in rushing after Dickerson left, just saying.

 

[LongtimeRamsFan42]

Didn't see Lawrence Phillips or Gaston Green so had to go with Dickerson...

 

[Battlelyon]

Didn't see Lawrence Phillips or Gaston Green so had to go with Dickerson...

You're killing me,

 

[Battlelyon]

I would say Lawrence Phillips wasn't a complete bust, he did end Steve Young's career.

 

[shopson67]

Dickerson for me. Faulk is a relatively close second, but Dickerson didn't have the luxury of an elite passing game to keep the defense honest. Faulk was all-pro, but Dickerson was elite, at least to me.

 

[Smed55]

Faulk was the total package, but you can't go wrong with picking ED or Faulk.

L. McCutcheon was way underrated in his time also, Just happened to play the same time period as guys named OJ and Payton.

 

[tnerb57]

Faulk was the total package, but you can't go wrong with picking ED or Faulk.

L. McCutcheon was way underrated in his time also, Just happened to play the same time period as guys named OJ and Payton.

And he is still with the Rams!

 

[Vitamike]

Marshall Faulk was an inferior running back in the sense of what we consider a running back to be. But Faulk was the better football player, hands down. He could run with the ball, catch the ball, block, run a pattern, knew his assignment on every play as well as his teammates. He was so hard to scheme for, he could line up anywhere on the field and be a threat, Dickerson couldn't. Faulk changed the atmosphere on this team, didn't accept the losing ways and showed the way to winning, Super Bowl winning. He was a great player and do what legends do, makes teammates better and win. The only person Dickerson made better was himself, but he was a great running back no doubt.

Dickerson loses in stats too, if you want to use that.

Three points Snake Eyes...

• First, as running backs go, there is no way Eric loses in stats to Marshall!
  
• Second, it's not that Dickerson couldn't line up anywhere and be a threat, it's more the NFL didn't use running backs like that back then. I would have loved to see Eric under Mike Martz, can you imagine? E.D. was no slouch catching the ball. Even with all of Marshall's extra attempts, E.D's receiving yards per reception average was just 1.4 yards below M.F.
• Last, while Marshall does get credit for the Super Bowl win, Eric was more effective in the post season. Mainly because Dickerson WAS the offense and teams would scheme to stop him, I mean his QB as a Ram, for the most part was Kemp/Brock for goodness sakes, not some QB's by the name of Harbaugh/Manning or Warner/Bulger! Even then, Eric nearly doubles Faulk's rushing yards per game in the post season & per game Dickerson had 23 more yards yards from scrimmage than Marshall, wasn't that stat of yards from scrimmage Marshall's game? . As a matter of fact, in post season play, Dickerson had more rushing yards per game than Faulk had from scrimmage per game!

 

[Retroram52]

Vita, do I detect a hint of negativity in your third bullet point?

 

[Vitamike]

Vita, do I detect a hint of negativity in your third bullet point?

In what possible way?

 

[Battlelyon]

Three points Snake Eyes...

• First, as running backs go, there is no way Eric loses in stats to Marshall!
  
• Second, it's not that Dickerson couldn't line up anywhere and be a threat, it's more the NFL didn't use running backs like that back then. I would have loved to see Eric under Mike Martz, can you imagine? E.D. was no slouch catching the ball. Even with all of Marshall's extra attempts, E.D's receiving yards per reception average was just 1.4 yards below M.F.
• Last, while Marshall does get credit for the Super Bowl win, Eric was more effective in the post season. Mainly because Dickerson WAS the offense and teams would scheme to stop him, I mean his QB as a Ram, for the most part was Kemp/Brock for goodness sakes, not some QB's by the name of Harbaugh/Manning or Warner/Bulger! Even then, Eric nearly doubles Faulk's rushing yards per game in the post season & per game Dickerson had 23 more yards yards from scrimmage than Marshall, wasn't that stat of yards from scrimmage Marshall's game? . As a matter of fact, in post season play, Dickerson had more rushing yards per game than Faulk had from scrimmage per game!

You make a good point about the different systems, they both worked effectively in their both respective systems.

Again, Charles White led the NFL in rushing the season ED left. You are talking about a journeyman backup leading the NFL in rushing. It validates the superior play of the offensive line and the system.

Faulk had 40 more TDs, don't blame Faulk for his post season rushing yards. That is on Martz! Let's also not ignore Faulk has more postseason tds, doubling ED's. Not to mention receiving stats he averaged 10 a catch and over 500 receiving yards in the postseason, more then five times as much as ED

ED also had 78 fumbles to Faulk's 36.