Tomlinson vs Faulk

[UK Cowboy]

Ladanian vs Marshall in their prime, who would you rather have?

As just a runner, MAYBE LT, all around, it's Faulk, all day. So underrated

 

[Clayton]

Obviously you can't go wrong with either player...At the end of the day I think it starts to boil down to how the team performed when it counted the most...the playoffs...I think the Rams were more complete on OFC making it difficult to defend Faulk, whereas the OFC began and ended with LT in SD.

Faulk was surrounded by talent but Tomlinson did get to play against the Chiefs during their swiss cheese defense days. They are both great but probably in that 2nd tier of uber great all time running backs with Tomlinson being a bit further down

 

[Mondio]

Faulk by a lot.

 

[Schmoopy1000]

Tomlinson was great, no doubt. But he was "Marshall Faulk Lite".

Faulk is the greatest dual-threat RB in NFL history.

might not want to forget about Roger Craig an original Dual threat.

But to answer the question. Faulk by a mile.

 

[Southieinnc]

WTF? Are you serious? Faulk is one of the greatest, LT is a pussy!
(I remember him best for him crying about the Patriots celebrating after AFCCG win over the chargers)

 

[Jims_Doors]

Obviously you can't go wrong with either player...At the end of the day I think it starts to boil down to how the team performed when it counted the most...the playoffs...I think the Rams were more complete on OFC making it difficult to defend Faulk, whereas the OFC began and ended with LT in SD.

This.

Chargers didn't have nearly the offensive weapons or QB that the Rams and Colts had to keep the D from stacking the box.

Both Gates and LT came in the same year, 2003.
WR's SD had in 2003 - David Boston
2004 - Kasseem Osgood and Eric Parker
2005 - Keenan McCardell and Parker
2006 - Same as above but with 0 TD catches combined. Plus that was Rivers 1st season as a starter.
2007 - Vincent Jackson
2008 - Jackson and Chris Chambers.

 

[SonnyCID]

LT

 

[RoboticDreams]

^^^ Not even close.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

I was always more impressed with Faulk, but to be fair I watched him a lot more then LT.

 

[SicarioCruz]

It's Friday man, stop with these tough questions, lol.

Man....I'm gonna have to go with LT. Nothing against Faulk. but LT I think had a more power on the run than Faulk did. I need to do my research on who has more 'YAC' and 'yards after first hit' on this one.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

Faulk was surrounded by talent but Tomlinson did get to play against the Chiefs during their swiss cheese defense days. They are both great but probably in that 2nd tier of uber great all time running backs with Tomlinson being a bit further down

KC was bad...lol.

I can buy that but the rings help the argument a bit.

imo Faulk was a great talent that would succeed in any system, but he played under conditions perfect for his skillset in both IND and especially STL...turf, team style of play.

 

[erckm510]

Faulk fit that Rams team better then LT could have. But for every other team I'm going LT.

I don't understand how it's not close. Faulk had an amazing 4 year run and he was just ok or pretty good his other years.

 

[Brasky]

What's this? A thread about my favorite RB of all time? I personally think LT is the GOAT, but that's just my opinion. It's because of the way he ran... He had a unique running style that no one can replicate. His field vision and balance were insane. When he was in his prime, every time he touched the ball, it was a work of art. I don't have a single poster left over from back in the day aside from my Ladanian Tomlinson poster. It's still up in the man cave.

 

[Nosferatu]

Funny everyone acts as if LT didn't catch the ball out of the backfield, he had 100 receptions in 2003 and had more than 50 nine times in 11 years. Faulk never had 100 and he went over 50 nine times in 12 years. Although he did go over 80 five times which is crazy good. But he had a much better team around him most of his career than LT did. Faulk went over 300 carries twice in his career, LT did it for seven straight seasons to start his career. Even though Faulk played on teams with much better weapons thus taking the spotlight off him they both ended up with a 4.3 yards per carry for their careers.


I would normally have come here and picked Faulk but the way some have acted as if it's not close is ridiculous, it is very close and depending on what type of team you have and where you played LT could be the pick.

 

[Brasky]

LT and the Chargers were the only ones who ever gave the Colts and Pats a run for their money when it mattered back when the Colts and Pats were TRULY world beaters. They usually fell short, and the one time it looked like they had the Pats in the playoffs, LT gets hurt and they had more coverage of him in a parka with his helmet on staring at his feet on the bench than they had coverage of the rest of the playoff game. It was like everyone knew it was over without LT and they were right. That was his last shot at a Superbowl and he had to watch it slip away from the bench.

 

[Jims_Doors]

KC was bad...lol.

I can buy that but the rings help the argument a bit.

imo Faulk was a great talent that would succeed in any system, but he played under conditions perfect for his skillset in both IND and especially STL...turf, team style of play.

Exactly.....Faulk got to play no less than 8 games in a dome, on turf, his entire career.

No such luck for LT.

 

[Nosferatu]

If you look at Faulks career aside from that 3 year explosion in 1999, 2000 & 2001 he was pretty average as a runner.

 

[Brasky]

So fun to watch. He ended so many defenders careers.

 

[Brasky]

Off topic, but I cry every day thinking about the fact that we let Drew Brees go because we were comfortable with Rivers.

 

[ram29jackson]

Ladanian vs Marshall in their prime, who would you rather have?

weirdest topic lately. Not really comparable