How was he not? Faulk was better catching the ball, But as far as just running Faulk is nowhere near LT. Faulk is easily top 15, not sure if I would have him in my top 10 though
Marshall Faulk's Standing Amongst the All Time Great RBs
- Thread starter PHamm
- Start date
How was he not? Faulk was better catching the ball, But as far as just running Faulk is nowhere near LT. Faulk is easily top 15, not sure if I would have him in my top 10 though
That's why I hit homeboy with the
Jim Brown is the GOAT and if he's not at least in somebody's top 5 I can't take 'em all that serious
i'm guessing dude meant backs he's watched over the yrs and if thats the case thenhis list is accurate.
mvp_status
Superstar
I feel like you're just asking this for the sake of arguing but
- better runner
- was almost a guaranteed six in the redzone
- was putting up 1500+ yd rushing/2000+ yd total seasons with 8 in the box before the Chargers became more pass oriented
- had more dominant seasons than Faulk
mastermind
Rest In Power Kobe
Emmitt was better and Thurman Thomas was doing what Faulk was doing 10 years before.
NYC Rebel
...on the otherside of the pond
Thurman Thomas was NOT the runner Marshall was.
NOPE...he wasn't.
Marshal was a better FINISHER than Thurman and a better route runner as a receiver than Thurman.
Thurman wasn't being split out as a receiver. He was catching passed out of the backfield.
mastermind
Rest In Power Kobe
I didnt say Thurman was better (altho it was kind of implied, I get it), but Thurman was used as a complete RB like Faulk was.Thurman Thomas was NOT the runner Marshall was.
NOPE...he wasn't.
Marshal was a better FINISHER than Thurman and a better route runner as a receiver than Thurman.
Thurman wasn't being split out as a receiver. He was catching passed out of the backfield.
But yeah, Marshall was better no doubt.
Carlos Huerta
Just keep my rep red
Faulk had 4 STRAIGHT SEASONS with over 2,000 yards from scrimmage and FIVE straight seasons with over 80 receptions. Still ended his career with over 12,000 yards rushing. MORE yards from scrimmage in his career than LT with 300 less carries.
He and Roger Craig are the ONLY 2 RBs in NFL history to have over 1,000 yards rushing and receiving in the same season.
NO one is seeing that.
Carlos Huerta
Just keep my rep red
Carlos Huerta
Just keep my rep red
He has more rushing yards because Faulk was busy with more receptions, but you already know that. Unless you discredit running backs for having more receptions, I don't see your logic. Yards from scrimmage is what it's all about.
mvp_status
Superstar
he had more dominant seasons?
his first 8 seasons in the league he avg'd 1500+ yards from scrimmage, double digit TD totals, and only missed one game. A large portion of those numbers coming when he was the only legit threat on offense
Yes. More dominant seasons.
You need me to post it on these for you?
TD's dont count for anything?
As far as Yards from scrimmage, LT averaged 108ypg from scrimmage, while Faulk was one yard better at 109 ypg
I'm taking LT. They averaged almost the same exact amount of yardage, but LT had 26 more total TD's.
Not discrediting Faulk in any way, they're both great backs, but in my opinion LT was better
Carlos Huerta
Just keep my rep red
his first 8 seasons in the league he avg'd 1500+ yards from scrimmage, double digit TD totals, and only missed one game. A large portion of those numbers coming when he was the only legit threat on offense
Yes. More dominant seasons.
You need me to post it on these for you?
fukk is this corny post-it stuff about? You haven't refuted a damn thing about my post. Faulk has more yards from scrimmage. There's nothing LT did better than Marshall.
Carlos Huerta
Just keep my rep red
Not really. Faulk played in a very pass happy offense where they spread it around a lot more than SD did.
I really don't look at any RBs TD totals as an indication of their effectiveness. People used to talk about how Bettis was great -- this dude stayed barreling in from the 1
mvp_status
Superstar
Except run the ball