|
Post by Snohomie-Aztec on Dec 16, 2014 9:40:57 GMT -8
Gotta say its special every time I watch him shank those 32 year old Borg players! Agreed, it is fun to watch the Zoobs chasing Faulk around. Having said that, I must admit that even now highlights of the 51-51 game still tends to totally piss me off...
|
|
|
Post by jeffreylw on Dec 16, 2014 9:54:51 GMT -8
That last run tells it all. Marshall could run past people. No one could run him down from behind. Pumphrey is a great running back but he can't pull away like Faulk could. That being said, Pumphrey +15 pounds will be a good NFL running back.
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Dec 16, 2014 10:13:38 GMT -8
I watched those highlights. That guy kinda reminds me of Pumphrey.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2014 12:42:47 GMT -8
There are dozens of college running backs who had better statistical seasons than Faulk.
Faulk was far superior to them all. Pumphrey is a fantastic running back, we are incredibly lucky to have him.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2014 13:49:55 GMT -8
cute thread. Laughable, but cute.
|
|
|
Post by TheSanDiegan on Dec 16, 2014 14:15:01 GMT -8
That's like saying Tellitubbies is better than Gumby. Blasphemy You might want to be careful where you express those sentiments:
|
|
|
Post by mySTRAS on Dec 16, 2014 18:04:09 GMT -8
That last run tells it all. Marshall could run past people. No one could run him down from behind. Pumphrey is a great running back but he can't pull away like Faulk could. That being said, Pumphrey +15 pounds will be a good NFL running back. At a buck seventy... DP is gonna need 30+ pounds to make a good NFL running back. But how's that gonna affect his speed?
|
|
|
Post by tonatiuh on Dec 16, 2014 20:30:26 GMT -8
The eye test showed Faulk was better. Bigger than Pump and was shifty... could plant his foot and cut on you (like Pump does), but could also dance around you and even run through you sometimes. Pump is awesome but I don't think he's Faulk good They are two completely different types of runners. Faulk had more downfield speed. Pumps gets out of traffic a little more often. Faulk was also a good pass receiver, and blocker for the QB. Pumps doesn't do that much, or as well. Both great players, and I wouldn't mind having both in the same backfield. Would that be awesome???
|
|
|
Post by La Mesa Aztec on Dec 16, 2014 20:59:04 GMT -8
We lucked into getting Faulk, with the so called "powers" wanting him only as a DB. Revis may have been another Faulk had Faulk not wanted to play running back.
|
|
|
Post by Kiss My Aztec on Dec 16, 2014 21:03:42 GMT -8
cute thread. Laughable, but cute. +1 Did these people see Faulk in person?
|
|
|
Post by aztecphotos on Dec 16, 2014 21:44:52 GMT -8
Very similar except Marshall was much faster.
ERNIE
|
|
|
Post by Aztec Law on Dec 16, 2014 21:57:47 GMT -8
No.
|
|
|
Post by hoystory on Dec 17, 2014 10:50:56 GMT -8
Maybe he means today? Faulk is 41 years old. He had all that time in the NFL that put a lot of wear and tear on his body. So, yes, 20 year old Pumps is probably a little better (just a little) than 41 Faulk.
Barely.
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Dec 17, 2014 10:55:48 GMT -8
The eye test showed Faulk was better. Bigger than Pump and was shifty... could plant his foot and cut on you (like Pump does), but could also dance around you and even run through you sometimes. Pump is awesome but I don't think he's Faulk good They are two completely different types of runners. Faulk had more downfield speed. Pumps gets out of traffic a little more often. Faulk was also a good pass receiver, and blocker for the QB. Pumps doesn't do that much, or as well. Both great players, and I wouldn't mind having both in the same backfield. Would that be awesome??? Faulk wasn't used much in the passing game until his 3rd season. It will be interesting seeing how the new OC will use Pumphrey.
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on Dec 17, 2014 11:29:31 GMT -8
That last run tells it all. Marshall could run past people. No one could run him down from behind. Pumphrey is a great running back but he can't pull away like Faulk could. That being said, Pumphrey +15 pounds will be a good NFL running back. Curious, does anyone know their actual 40 times? (& don't quote the fan pages 4.2 - that's not his real time). You can't compare someone to a legend IMO, but Pumphrey sure looks plenty fast to me. The quickest stop/start on a dime I've seen in a while, especially for a guy the size of my Jr. High nephew. : )
|
|
|
Post by uncledougy on Dec 17, 2014 12:16:58 GMT -8
Faulk = class all by himself (and not even close) I will say that Pump has me excited for the running game, love watching him run. If he was a tad bigger....Watch out! Next year could be huge for him. Give him some space to run with the defenses more spread out, we could see Marshall-esque excitement. The one main difference is the crowds #28 brought in. 40k/50k per game. It was thrilling to be an Aztec fan in the early 90s.
|
|
|
Post by longtimebooster on Dec 17, 2014 13:56:11 GMT -8
Curious, does anyone know their actual 40 times? 40 times don't mean squat. They're all highly suspect and prone to huge swings due to error. But both Faulk and Pumphrey ran h.s. track. And, again, Pumphrey was a fast runner, but Faulk was world-class. And as I've psotted before, there's a huge difference between being fast and being world-class fast. The first time I saw Faulk I could tell that the U.S. Olympic team was missing one of its stars to the Aztecs. Seriously. Faulk's best h.s. track times vs. Pumphrey's: 100m Marshall: 10.3 Donnel: 10.74 200m Marshall: 21.74 Donnel: 22.07 (non-wind-aided) 400m Marshall: 49.4 Donnel: 50.64 Interestingly, Marshall's 200m and 400m times are very fast, but not eye-popping. He was a much better short sprinter. And, of course, guys who excel in the 200m and especially the 400m tend to be taller with longer strides. But to put a 10.3 h.s. time in perspective, check out the all-time list of top 100m times for the California CIF. The all-time record is 10.25, which is blazing. The third-best time ever, and the all-time best for the State Championship Track Meet, is 10.3. And trust me, the top portion of that list is lousy with Olympians and blazing-fast NFL guys. California traditionally has the best boys track runners in the country, year-in and year-out. Just for comparison, Bo Jackson's best 100m time in h.s. was 10.44. His fastest time in college was 10.39. Oh, and that guy on the list who ran 10.3 is Quincy Watts, who won two gold medals in the 1992 Olympics. I'm pretty sure Faulk could've given him a run for the gold. espn.go.com/high-school/track-and-xc/california/story/_/id/7810657/all-time-california-track-field-recordswww.athletic.net/TrackAndField/Athlete.aspx?AID=2340121From Wikipedia: Also a standout track sprinter, Faulk was timed at 10.3 seconds in the 100 meters, 21.74 over 200 meters and 49.4 in the 400 meters. www.stltoday.com/sports/football/professional/marshall-faulk-s-run-to-daylight/article_0e4a1849-de09-5288-8697-74545c2eedee.html
|
|
|
Post by uwphoto on Dec 17, 2014 14:45:50 GMT -8
Curious, does anyone know their actual 40 times? 40 times don't mean squat. They're all highly suspect and prone to huge swings due to error. But both Faulk and Pumphrey ran h.s. track. And, again, Pumphrey was a fast runner, but Faulk was world-class. And as I've psotted before, there's a huge difference between being fast and being world-class fast. The first time I saw Faulk I could tell that the U.S. Olympic team was missing one of its stars to the Aztecs. Seriously. Faulk's best h.s. track times vs. Pumphrey's: 100m Marshall: 10.3 Donnel: 10.74 200m Marshall: 21.74 Donnel: 22.07 (non-wind-aided) 400m Marshall: 49.4 Donnel: 50.64 Interestingly, Marshall's 200m and 400m times are very fast, but not eye-popping. He was a much better short sprinter. And, of course, guys who excel in the 200m and especially the 400m tend to be taller with longer strides. But to put a 10.3 h.s. time in perspective, check out the all-time list of top 100m times for the California CIF. The all-time record is 10.25, which is blazing. The third-best time ever, and the all-time best for the State Championship Track Meet, is 10.3. And trust me, the top portion of that list is lousy with Olympians and blazing-fast NFL guys. California traditionally has the best boys track runners in the country, year-in and year-out. Just for comparison, Bo Jackson's best 100m time in h.s. was 10.44. His fastest time in college was 10.39. Oh, and that guy on the list who ran 10.3 is Quincy Watts, who won two gold medals in the 1992 Olympics. I'm pretty sure Faulk could've given him a run for the gold. espn.go.com/high-school/track-and-xc/california/story/_/id/7810657/all-time-california-track-field-recordswww.athletic.net/TrackAndField/Athlete.aspx?AID=2340121From Wikipedia: Also a standout track sprinter, Faulk was timed at 10.3 seconds in the 100 meters, 21.74 over 200 meters and 49.4 in the 400 meters. www.stltoday.com/sports/football/professional/marshall-faulk-s-run-to-daylight/article_0e4a1849-de09-5288-8697-74545c2eedee.htmlThanks LTB, was also a track guy in HS, so love the detailed track info. When Marshall ran around the corner on SC and blew away guys who had angles on him, it was shocking speed. Like you said World class.
|
|
|
Post by sportnlyf on Dec 17, 2014 15:16:56 GMT -8
Do not let the praise of Marshall (yes, I saw him live for every home game and have the first football and game tickets he ever signed as an Aztec) in any way diminish the accomplishments of DP or our appreciation of him. Marshall was simply one of those athletes at running back who comes along every decade or two. Plus, he had an extra gear he shifted to when he needed it most, is hard to explain and impossible to teach or duplicate.
They both share a similar ability to plant and move laterally more quickly than many outstanding, but more mortal running backs.
I hope that we have DP for two more injury-free years and that he breaks every record for Aztec running backs.
|
|
|
Post by Xolotl on Dec 17, 2014 15:35:22 GMT -8
That's like saying Kobi is better than Jordan. It took Kobi 4 more years to pass J
I know I spelled Kobe wrong OOOOOps
|
|