PDA

View Full Version : Priest Holmes Vs. Marshall Faulk in PRIME?


CM4
12-05-2006, 03:09 PM
Who would you take in there PRIME out of Faulk and Holmes...

i dont think its fair to compare stats between these two since Faulk played longer and was more productive, but who do you feel was more of a threat during there prime...

I say Faulk and i also wanted to say that Maurice Drew reminds me of Faulk a lot...watching him run into peopel lowering his shoulder and keeping his feet moving at all times, catching the ball out of the backfield as well.

bigbluedefense
12-05-2006, 03:15 PM
I go with Faulk. Faulk in his prime was not only one of the best RBs in the game, but he was also top 3 WR in the game. He was amazing. Theres no one in the history of the game that I would want in a spread offense in the backfield ahead of him. He's the best WCO/Spread offense RB ever.

To note, before someone rips on me, Im not saying he's the best RB ever, Im saying he's the best WCO/spread offense RB ever. I think Walter Payton and Gale Sayers couldve worked in that set too, but Faulk has more experience in it, so he gets the nod.

Priest was great for that 2/3 year stint, but thats just not enough to put him in an elite category. And even then, he wasn't as good as Faulk.

Basileus777
12-05-2006, 03:30 PM
Priest and Marshall were both great dual threat rbs with a nose for the endzone (and played in the same Coryell offense), but Faulk was better, even ignoring the longevity issue.

It would have been interesting to see Marshall play in a WCO offense, but I don't think you can say he is the best WCO rb when he never played in the WCO.

bigbluedefense
12-05-2006, 03:39 PM
Priest and Marshall were both great dual threat rbs with a nose for the endzone (and played in the same Coryell offense), but Faulk was better, even ignoring the longevity issue.

It would have been interesting to see Marshall play in a WCO offense, but I don't think you can say he is the best WCO rb when he never played in the WCO.

I know, but you just know he'd tear it up in that too. What makes us think he wouldn't you know?

Komp
12-05-2006, 04:56 PM
Not really that close. An interesting one would have been Holmes vs LJ...

JT Jag
12-05-2006, 06:34 PM
This is about as much of a no-brainer as it gets.

Priest Holmes was a product of his system.

Marshall Faulk was a special, special player who, I think, could have put up Walter Peyton-like numbers if he had been given more opportunities.

CM4
12-05-2006, 06:48 PM
so than LJ is a product of his system than too right...

draftguru151
12-05-2006, 07:02 PM
so than LJ is a product of his system than too right...

That was pretty much the argument in the offseason, but no one said anything about Holmes, just Johnson, oddly enough.

I'm going with Marshall though. Always liked him more, he was amazing with the ball in his hand.

TiTaNsFAN 1014
12-05-2006, 07:58 PM
both were great, but it's gotta be marshall.

Paranoidmoonduck
12-05-2006, 08:17 PM
Priest Holmes was really good in his prime, Marshall was, without a shadow of a doubt, the most dangerous player in the NFL. It has to be Faulk.

TitleTown088
12-05-2006, 08:22 PM
so than LJ is a product of his system than too right...
well i think maybe he was implying that it didn't hurt to run behind that line. Either was he was still an amazing RB.

Moses
12-05-2006, 08:28 PM
Faulk by a relatively wide margin. Holmes was good but not in the same class as Faulk. Faulk can be mentioned as one of the greatest to ever play the position where as Holmes cannot.

Staubach12
12-05-2006, 08:49 PM
Faulk by a mile.

jkpigskin
12-05-2006, 09:26 PM
too bad priest's prime came so late in his career and didnt have as many superb years....

i would take priest, but both were blue-collar workers with incredible skills

Komp
12-05-2006, 09:35 PM
This is about as much of a no-brainer as it gets.

Priest Holmes was a product of his system.

Marshall Faulk was a special, special player who, I think, could have put up Walter Peyton-like numbers if he had been given more opportunities.

Yah I agree with you somewhat on Priest. I think he was a good RB playing behind an all-pro OL. LJ is an all-pro RB running behind a good OL. I know Chiefs fans will rip me a new one, but that is what I think. If it makes them feel better Priest is still better than any RB the Raiders have had in a long time.... :wink:

Nitschke-Hawk
12-05-2006, 09:40 PM
to quote that blurbing blubbering never-finish-a-sentence-fool Chris Berman


MARSHALL! MARSHALL! MARSHALL!

HawkeyeFan
12-05-2006, 09:46 PM
http://espndeportes-att.espn.go.com/2003/photos2006/0609/g_faulk_v.jpg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a4m9yQAs_5U