I'm not sure where the "myth" part of the title enters into play. Bob and I have debated this in the past, so I think some of this is indirectly pointed at me.
To be sure, yes, Jackson had 20 touches a game on average. While that may be more than some people think or remember, that is still a fair amount less than some of the big boys.
In the past, I pointed out that S-Jax would need a lot more touches and a lot more TD to enter the top tier of RB. I still think he needs both of those to happen to reach the next level, and that's where the debate starts for me . . . how likely is he to get up to the 375-400 touches that the uber studs get and can he approach 15-20 TD?
I'm not sure Faulk retiring automatically would get Jackson more carries, as Fisher IMO is probably a better backup at this point than Faulk is (no offense to the living legend).
hey david,i honestly wasn't thinking of you when i posted this (not that i'm not glad you weighed in)... i was actually prompted by a Q & A session with local rams insider & nationally known journalist howard balzer (used to be with usa today... maybe still is?) posted on a rams homer board (see below)...
i like balzer... he is often a contrarian, but i think he brings good sense and usually sharpens a debate... i think it is safe to say he is more pessimistic on jackson than i am... though i follow the team closely, even i am a little divided on his prospects, near & long term...
if we differed on him i don't recall (i do remember some nice exchanges about daunte culpepper & kerry collins last off-season
)... i guess i sound pretty high on him with crazy talk like 16 TDs being possible... if i understand you right, we may be in agreement that if he doesn't get a big uptick in carries/touches that it would seem difficult for him to penetrate to elite rushing yardage producing RBs...
i do have some questions about whether he has elite skills... he used to be very fast (reportedly 10.6 100 m as prep) but he doesn't play that fast now... & he may have more build up speed than great burst, suddenness & initial acceleration... still, at 230+, an impressive size/speed combo... maybe a slower ronnie brown is comp, defenitely not as elusive as cadillac... i have questions about his instincts (runs into people, including own blockers too often) & his short yardage ability... he would imo have to improve in that department over what i have seen in first two years to get to the level of increase of TD numbers that i suggested... some of his problems may have had to do with blocking...
if there is some confusion & disconnect in that i paradoxically seem critical of some of his running attributes but nonetheless am bullish on TD numbers in 2006... i suppose that speaks to me being upbeat about linehan, liklihood bulger stays healthier (sounds important to HC), upgrade at OL by more mature barron & feisty ingognito, the infusion of talent at TE position... ie- more to do with situation he is embedded in than intrinsic talent...
the Q & A session...
http://www.ramsrule.com/theoriginalherd/dc...id=152263&page=
Smith40: Jackson should get 20-24 touches a game either through the pass or runs. 16 runs a game isn't going to cut it, and is not a true indicator of Jackson's talents. He is a moose and he seemingly gets stronger with the more carries he gets.
Howard: He averaged 19.8 touches per game.
Smith40: Most notable was 6 carries in that loss in St. Louis to Arizona. I don't diminish the accomplishment of 1000 yard seasons. It still takes a lot of skill to accomplish such a feat.
Howard: Jackson had 12 carries against Arizona, not 6. Now, 12 isn't a lot, obviously. Jackson totaled 6 yards on those carries with a long run of 6. That, of course, means he totaled 0 yards on his other 11 attempts.
Jackson fails to take responsibility for his poor running and reads on many occasions (yes, some of it was blocking). As I've noted before, if you're getting stuffed for losses on first down, it's tough to keep running.
And, yes, he exceeded that 62.5 average with an average of 69.7. Not much of a difference. The issue with Jackson is average per attempt. His was 4.1. Of the 15 other runners that had at least 1,000 yards, 11 had better averages than him.
Smith40: When Jackson gets over 20 carries, he gets 100 yards. Anyone remember the Jacksonville game last season? Jackson was knocking people on their rumps in the 4th quarter when they needed to kill the clock.
Howard: These are typical stats that don't look at the big picture. Why did Jackson get the ball so much in the fourth quarter? Because the Rams had the lead.
In most of the games the Rams lost, they fell behind, and often by a lot, which meant they weren't going to run the ball. In those games, Jackson was often stuffed consistently and that led to more passing. When he would get minus 2 yards on first down, passes followed. When he was stopped on 3rd and 1, that turned the ball over to the defense, which kept the chains from moving and fewer offensive plays.
It's interesting to note that Jackson is constantly yapping about running plays not being called, yet he had 254 carries last season. In 1999, Marshall Faulk had 253. In 2000, he also had 253 and in 2001, he had 260. In those years, Faulk averaged 5.5, 5.4 and 5.3 per attempt. Jackson averaged 4.1 last season. If he had Faulk's average, he would have gained another 330 yards.
Smith40: The run blocking, and play calling on this team was horrid in the Cardinals game. They couldn't figure out a simple safety blitz?
Howard: Well, it's interesting you bring up the safety blitz. As I recall, Bulger was injured on a play where Jackson didn't pick up a blitz. On another play, he got bowled over by Wilson. What is forgotten in this entire discussion about Jackson is that there's more to being a running back than running. You are often responsible for blitzers. And Jackson has had consistent problems doing that. It's not a matter of figuring it out, it's a matter of doing it and taking on the blitzer. Faulk was once very good at it, but not as much anymore. In that Arizona game, Arlen Harris came in the game late, because he was the only back capable of stopping Wilson on the blitz.
Smith40: The Vikings were in the top 5 in rushing when Linehan was the offensive coordinator in Minnesota
Howard: They were 18th in 2004 and 4th in 2003. Not very consistent. And, their top 2 running backs in 2003 had 281 total carries. The difference was that Culpepper had 422 rushing yards, which elevated their total rushing numbers. I don't think anyone would argue that Culpepper's rushing totals should be credited to the grounbd game, when most of them surely came on pass plays.
The Vikings threw the ball virtually as much as Martz did under Linehan. So, where is the evidence that anything will change? Maybe it will. Maybe it won't. But I can assure you, Linehan is going to throw plenty, and that's why he has added tight ends that can catch.
SMITH40: In 2005, like it or not, that was Martz team. For a man who was so sick and suffering such a serious illness, he sure did a lot of string pulling behind the scenes. Those theatrics cost him his job.
Howard: Wrong. In reality, the thing that hurt Martz the most was when Mortensen reported what Martz had told him concerning statements Shaw made about the team losing money if it got to the Super Bowl.
Smith40: There appears to be calm at Rams Park, and a consensus on both draft picks and free agency. This bodes well for the team now and in the future.
Howard: Actually, there wasn't consensus in the first round. There were strong feelings by some to take Greenway
Smith40: My feelings are that the Rams had a productive offseason and did some good things that they haven't done the past several seasons. My belief is that the same individuals still in our front office who were lambasted over the Martz situation are the same ones who are pulling the triggers apparently on these good signings and draft picks.
No, there are no guarantees that any of these picks or free agent signings will work out. There are no guarantees in professional sports. What I can say with certainty is that the team was proactive, apparently did their homework and signed some players and drafted individuals that appear ready to make an immediate impact for this team, and supplied a badly needed injection of talent.
I was listening to Balzer this morning on his radio show, and he had a subject on who is a draft expert, who gave the Rams an "A" in their draft. I am curious to read commentary on this issue from others here.
Howard: That person, Rob Rang, also spoke highly of last year's draft, which was run by Martz. As for free agency, some perspective is in order. Yes, the Rams were proactive and got some players quickly. However, every year is different for different reasons. Last year, the best linebackers in free agency were Antonio Pierce and Ed Hartwell, but the Rams didn't have the salary-cap room to go for a big signing. This year, different than last, the cap went up mor than $17 million, thus the move on Witherspoon. Had Witherspoon been available last year, I'm quire certain they wouldn't have been able to sign him.
So, last year, they hoped cheaper guys like Claiborne and Coakley would help a bad linebacking corps. There was little else available.
Smith 40: The Rams have had more then adequate CAP room throughout the Martz years to sign free agents and draft properly despite the ramifications of Warner and Turley. By the way, I believe that Martz was the man behind the resigning of Warner to that hefty bonus before the 2004 season, and I thought Martz engineered the Turley trade.
Howard: They had little cap room in several years. That's a fact. Having the cap go up $5M compared to $17M is huge. Anyone can figure out that if the cap had gone up only $5M this year, many of the moves the Rams made would not have happened. Once again, you ascribe every decision to Martz. In case you didn't realize it, he didn't negotiate contracts. Actually, it was Zygmunt that decided to pay Warner the bonus. Martz, and everyone, was in favor of the Turley deal, as far as I can tell, but it was Zygmunt that negotiated the contract. No one was to blame for that. No one could predict Turley would hurt his back. BTW, in case you forgot, the Rams were 12-4 the one year Turley played.
The bottom line is this: The Rams have made moves this year that look good now, and they might turn out very good. But they were able to be aggressive because of the cap going up so much.
This is like a spinning top, because you see everything black and white, when that is not the way it is. If Martz wanted Zygmunt to sign a player, and Zygmunt doesn't get it done (like Conwell or Wistrom), was that Martz's responsibility?
How does anyone know that Martz might recommended moving on without Warner, but that Zygmunt said it was too dangerous and would create too big of a cap hit the following year?
The reality is, that the relationship between the two turned sour, and one of the reasons is that Zygmunt didn't get players signed or added that Martz wanted. The truth is they all had responsibility for the roster, not one person. We all realize you have to believe it was that way so you can blame everything on Martz. But it's simply not the way it worked (or didn't work). Martz was responsible for mistakes, but so was Zygmunt, Lovie Smith, Armey and others. Most realize that, but you have never been able to acknowledge that others also contributed.
nitwitdog: How do you think Bulger felt about the Cutler rumors? I know, it's just a business and all that, but stuff like this has got to make guys wonder how/where they stand with the team.
Howard: Bogus rumors. Just like the ones that had the Rams trading for Culpepper.
nickseiler: Howard, when you say bogus rumors, are you referring to the Rams actually being interested in Cutler at all, or simply the Rams trading up for him? Just trying to get some clarification.
Howard: The trade up rumors.
) Nice insurance considering what happend in the 2nd half of the season last year. Glad to hear the O Line and D should be improved as well.
