Dickerson versus Faulk

[CGI_Ram]

For the era of football they each played in they were IMO the best

This is the simplest way to say it and sums up my opinion on this topic nicely.

We've seen some amazing RB's as fans of this team.

 

[Prime Time]

This is like the Rams to LA thread and topic.... always comes back!

It's like playing whack-a-mole. :seizure:

 

[Ram Quixote]

Georgia had Nothing to do with running the team then, It was Carroll Rosenbloom that ran the team. And I'm not sure if shaw was with the team at that point in time.

Rosenbloom died before the '79 season. Georgia took control of the team over Carroll's son Steve prior to that season. Georgia made Shaw President of the Rams football operations after GM Klosterman resigned in protest. They also allowed Ferragamo to walk after the '80 season, hence the down years in '81 & '82. Robinson was hired as HC in '83.

 

[DaveFan'51]

Rosenbloom died before the '79 season. Georgia took control of the team over Carroll's son Steve prior to that season. Georgia made Shaw President of the Rams football operations after GM Klosterman resigned in protest. They also allowed Ferragamo to walk after the '80 season, hence the down years in '81 & '82. Robinson was hired as HC in '83.

Sorry, Old age I guess. Didn't remember the correct years. That will teach me to answer an op, off the top of my head, with checking!

 

[fearsomefour]

I made a poll on this topic some months back... it ended up more than a little vitriolic.

Fan is short for fanatic after all...

With that atmosphere on the board now this could be code for a regional argument....blue-ish font.

 

[fearsomefour]

Both obvious first ballot HOF caliber guys. Very different. If I had to choose one it would be Faulk. He executed every element of the position so well. That said, every team knew going in Dickerson was getting the ball and he still dominated.

 

[rdlkgliders]

I can not vote, it is like who do you like more mom v dad. Dickerson was the prettiest runner in open field I have ever seen, Much faster than credited and also ran tougher than he is given credit for. Marshall had incredible quickness, vision, Hands and pass blocking abilities

 

[dieterbrock]

To me it's like choosing between Salma Hayek and Sofia Vergara

 

[DaveFan'51]

To me it's like choosing between Salma Hayek and Sofia Vergara

OH! With out-a-doubt 'Salma Hayek' Wins that competition hands down!!

 

[LesBaker]

Marshall is the epitome of an all around back. Was ED better as a pure runner? Maybe. But even that is debatable. Speed is the only aspect of ED's game where he may have a clear advantage. Marshall had just as much power as well as having better vision and agility. Lets not forget ball security too, ED fumbled 78 times in his 12 year career; in comparison Marshall only put the ball on the ground 36 times. Marshall also offered much more as a receiver and pass blocker. Marshall was an all around talent who could have been a Pro Bowl caliber receiver if he wanted to. ED was more of the pure runner.

I'll take Marshall any day of the week. Hell (I know I'm biased as a kid growing up in the 2000s) I'd take Steven over ED just slightly. This isn't a knock on ED, its more of a testament to how truly complete Marshall & Steven were as FEATURE backs. Lets also not forget that the two of them were great leaders on the Rams and had an incredible knowledge of the game (I wasn't alive when ED was playing so I can't speak for him).

Jackson over Dickerson? What?

 

[drasconis]

Jackson over Dickerson? What?

+1

It is one thing to compare to HOF guys....but this one ain't close....don't go there.

 

[Boffo97]

Jackson over Dickerson? What?

Wow I missed that.

Yeah, I like SJ, but I've got 2,105 reasons Dickerson is better. Both played on some bad Rams teams, but Dickerson did a much better job of putting them on his back. Jim Everett once joked the playbook was handoff right and handoff left.

You can argue there was a better OL for Dickerson, but there's a reason Dickerson is in the HoF and Jackson could go either way.

 

[OC--LeftCoast]

Dickerson had way, way, WAY more speed than Faulk could ever dream of having, had the vision of where to run, anyone here think #29 woulda been ran down in SB 34 like Marshall was? I think not.

I like Faulk but IMO to compare these 2 is ridiculous, no way #28 is even in a conversation of top 10 NFL backs ever if you remove bias from the conversation.

 

[SierraRam]

To me it's like choosing between Salma Hayek and Sofia Vergara

I gotta go Salma. Even if she can't pass protect

 

[Boffo97]

I gotta go Salma. Even if she can't pass protect

Any woman looking like that is going to get passes made at her....

...I'm sorry, what were we talking about?

 

[RamFan503]

2 things to remember about the Rams during Dickerson's 4-1/2 seasons prior to the trade. They didn't have a QB, unless old Ferragamo, Kemp, Dieter Brock and Steve Dils works for you. Then they traded for Everett, who was a rookie in '86, and injured in '87. Faulk had Warner. If you thought Faulk was all-world with the GSOT, I rather doubt he'd have the same success with Dickerson's Rams.

Secondly, Dickerson was the Rams' offense. (On a side note, he should have been the highest paid RB in the NFL, but Georgia and Shaw were one of the cheapest owners in the NFL.) Faulk was one of many weapons.

Btw, that superior Oline got stuffed more times than you'd think.

All true. And I would add that if anyone thought it was all the O-line creating giant holes, they're not giving ED credit for blowing up the first tackler on SO many occasions. It was actually a big part of his game and how he was able to run free so many times. He ran straight at the defender many times to make his own hole. The two are completely different type players that played in completely different eras with completely different schemes and team strengths.

It's a tough call. Dickerson could probably run on any team in any era. Marshall could probably be that Swiss Army Knife on any team. Of course having Kurt deliver the ball to you makes a big difference in the passing game. Dickerson never really had that and the type offenses they ran would not take advantage of it if he did.

In any case, they were both great and I'm just not sure you can honestly compare them.

 

[RamFan503]

This was one of my All Time Fav games. Lots of history and characters are shown in this short vid,,, and of course there is DICKERSON....

LIKELIKELIKELIKELIKELIKELIKE

 

[rams24/7]

+1

It is one thing to compare to HOF guys....but this one ain't close....don't go there.

Growing up watching COMPLETE runners like Marshall & Steven has spoiled me. If I'm picking a pure runner, I'd probably go 1a) Faulk 1b) ED 2) SJ. But if you're talking complete backs I'm going 1) Faulk 2) SJ 3) ED without question. Marshall and SJ brought a pass catching element to their game, that ED never showed (whether it was the offense he played in or not). How about the fact that Dickerson fumbled once every 42 times he touched the rock in his career? Again I'm not trying to take away from his incredible big play ability w/his breakaway speed, but to me COMPLETE backs have good/great:

-Vision
-Speed
-Power
-Elusiveness
-Durability
-Receiving Ability
-Pass Blocking Ability
-Ball Security
-Intangibles

You can check off the first 4 or 5 for ED, but imo Marshall & SJ were more complete. Maybe SJ didn't have the big play ability that ED had, but he certainly was a more complete back. Its just my preference.

 

[Pancake]

Dickerson had way, way, WAY more speed than Faulk could ever dream of having, had the vision of where to run, anyone here think #29 woulda been ran down in SB 34 like Marshall was? I think not.

I like Faulk but IMO to compare these 2 is ridiculous, no way #28 is even in a conversation of top 10 NFL backs ever if you remove bias from the conversation.

The fastest ED was ever clocked was a 4.3 - 40.

MF ran the 40 in 4.35.

It's a myth that Dickerson was much faster than MF.

Other than that I don't know what to say to a Rams fan who doesn't even put MF in the top 10.

I guess we all see what we want to see. Personally I felt like I was watching one of the very best players of all time when I watched either.

 

[OC--LeftCoast]

The fastest ED was ever clocked was a 4.3 - 40.

MF ran the 40 in 4.35.

It's a myth that Dickerson was much faster than MF.

Other than that I don't know what to say to a Rams fan who doesn't even put MF in the top 10.

I guess we all see what we want to see. Personally I felt like I was watching one of the very best players of all time when I watched either.

A myth?

Interesting, I'm just going to have to disagree with you on this one, Dickerson would have NEVER been caught from behind as many time as Faulk was.

Answer this, you think ED would have been caught from behind like Marshall was in SB 34? (it was almost laughable he got caught, speed wasn't Marshalls thing, when he was a Ram)

I did ONCE see Darrell Green run down Dick, once... and that was it, if you're comparing game speed of these two backs as equal...we'll just have to agree to disagree.