Is Marc Bulger a Rams legend?

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
Bulger was a solid QB who had a few really epic games. His 20 yard out was a thing a beauty.

But legendary? Naw.

It was torture watching his last two years when the oline was obliterated.
 
Solid QB. Seemingly good guy. Had some quality games. Legend? Hell to the Naw!
I guess Jim Everett, Pat Haden and Vince Ferragamo should be expecting their legend articles next.
 
  • Like
Reactions: drasconis
Solid QB. Seemingly good guy. Did Mark do that? Legend? Hell to the Naw!
I guess Jim Everett, Pat Haden and Vince Ferragamo should be expecting their legend articles next.
 
Solid QB. Seemingly good guy. Did Mark do that? Legend? Hell to the Naw!
I guess Jim Everett, Pat Haden and Vince Ferragamo should be expecting their legend articles next.
 
Solid QB. Seemingly good guy. Did Mark do that? Legend? Hell to the Naw!
I guess Jim Everett, Pat Haden and Vince Ferragamo should be expecting their legend articles next.
 
Good pro QB. Not a legend in most franchises, but with a pretty poor showing over most of the last 20 seasons all the GSOT era Rams and the 12-4 era Rams maybe are legends. I would say Jackson is the only non GSOT St Louis Rams legend.
 
image.jpg

Bought this off of Amazon for my Rams shrine. It has Pace, Warner, Faulk, Jackson, Bruce, Holt, Bulger and Wistrom. Personally I'm a big fan of Bulger (and Wistrom) and I figured they were sticking with players from the GSOT run but I'm wondering why they were considered all time greats when there is better options to choose from if it's all time greats.
 
Rams Until I Die said:
View attachment 6935
Bought this off of Amazon for my Rams shrine. It has Pace, Warner, Faulk, Jackson, Bruce, Holt, Bulger and Wistrom. Personally I'm a big fan of Bulger (and Wistrom) and I figured they were sticking with players from the GSOT run but I'm wondering why they were considered all time greats when there is better options to choose from if it's all time greats.
Click to expand...
Easy enough to fix.
DQLYJGp.jpg
 
  • 4Like
Reactions: kurtfaulk, Ramrasta, LesBaker and 1 other person
Ozoneranger said:
Bulger was a solid QB who had a few really epic games. His 20 yard out was a thing a beauty.

But legendary? Naw.

It was torture watching his last two years when the oline was obliterated.
Click to expand...
I say he is a legendary Ram. Remember that's the barometer of this, not a legendary NFL player, just a legendary Ram.

He's on a very short list of good Rams QB, and is the last good QB we had in a decade.
 
  • Like
Reactions: blue4
Couple of things. It's MarC, not MarK. The dude was only our starting QB, let's at least get his name right.

I have always wondered what would have happened if Bulger had come first. Always felt he got a bit of a raw deal to be honest. To my mind he was a symptom of the issues at that time rather than the cause of them. He was a tough SOB, he took plenty shots, got up time and again and apart from the 'eye roll' he was a model pro.

Whether you want to call him a Ram legend or not, he gets nothing but respect from me.
 
  • 5Like
Reactions: blue4, JonRam99, ramfan46 and 2 others
My problem with Bulger, is that it seemed like every time there was a big third down, or a game on the line, he'd come up empty. After the game, you'd look at the stats, and they were pretty good, usually.

After a while, our whole team, just progressively got worse. He didn't bring the magic that Kurt did, and I never understood him losing his job for good. I didn't blame Marc, I disliked Martz for it.

Good stats guy, but as a team, we didn't deliver when we needed to. Not a legend, but a tough guy, who took a lot of hits, and eventually just lost it, as all QB's do in that situation. Our team was badly mismanaged at that time, and I hope we find sustainability with our current group.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kurtfaulk
Wasn't a big fan until his last couple of years. As someone else stated he took some shots. And kept getting up and trying to lead the team such as it was. He has my respect. Didn't he play a half of football with a fractured leg? Yeah he will do to ride the river with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: blue4 and JonRam99
blue4 said:
Wasn't his best year in 06? With none of the legendary cast or even competent coaching. If we discount Bulger's stats because of his teammates before 04, then we have to inflate them after that. To account for the awful teammates. It's only fair. After all, Warners best years he had hall of fame talent actually in their prime. Do we discount those years? Just doesn’t make sense to me.
Click to expand...

He did good in 2006 but nothing close to legendary. He lost Faulk in the backfield but still had a young Steven Jackson to carry the weight. However, Holt and Bruce were still on the team and more than compenent WRs, each having more than 1,000 yards receiving. As far as coaching, I believe Mike Marx was a brilliant offensive mind. The legendary cast was in still in tact in my opinion. Bruce might not have been in his prime at that point but Holt was.

As far as discounting Warner's years, he was obviously more successful with the team he had when you consider deep playoff runs and a Super Bowl ring. What more can you expect from the guy? The best Bulger did was have a couple mediocre 8-8 seasons and win a couple wild card games. The rest of his time here was plagued by terrible losing seasons.
 
Was Bulger a legend? No. Warner, Faulk, Youngblood, Deacon and others were. He ran TGSOT pretty well though. That being said, he's a legend as a once very good and very promising QB, who got pummeled into oblivion by a combination of bad O lines and bad offensive play calling. He coulda been a legend had he won that double OT game vs. Carolina.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JonRam99
Ramrasta said:
He did good in 2006 but nothing close to legendary. He lost Faulk in the backfield but still had a young Steven Jackson to carry the weight. However, Holt and Bruce were still on the team and more than compenent WRs, each having more than 1,000 yards receiving. As far as coaching, I believe Mike Marx was a brilliant offensive mind. The legendary cast was in still in tact in my opinion. Bruce might not have been in his prime at that point but Holt was.

As far as discounting Warner's years, he was obviously more successful with the team he had when you consider deep playoff runs and a Super Bowl ring. What more can you expect from the guy? The best Bulger did was have a couple mediocre 8-8 seasons and win a couple wild card games. The rest of his time here was plagued by terrible losing seasons.
Click to expand...

Mike Martz was in Detroit after 2005.

So he had Holt in his prime and a good RB in Jackson. This is what I've never understood when debating Bulger. Why is it that Warner and every other Rams QB gets to have his stats looked at on their face value? It's only Bulger's stats that have to run thru a filter process of teammates, coaches, victories, and what else. His best teammates were all teammates of Kurt Warner so to me this argument of having good stats because of good teammates is invalid.
 
blue4 said:
Mike Martz was in Detroit after 2005.

So he had Holt in his prime and a good RB in Jackson. This is what I've never understood when debating Bulger. Why is it that Warner and every other Rams QB gets to have his stats looked at on their face value? It's only Bulger's stats that have to run thru a filter process of teammates, coaches, victories, and what else. His best teammates were all teammates of Kurt Warner so to me this argument of having good stats because of good teammates is invalid.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I don't understand either. Everyone always seems to rush to invalidate Bulger more so than they do for anyone else. I feel like people harbor a little resentment for him for the lean years, even if they don't realize it.

This guy is one of our better QBs. The guy is right behind Everett with total yards, 3rd in TDs all while taking 68 more sacks than the closest second Everett again. Sacked 254 times and yet still amassed
1969317162.122814122
With a Rams team rapidly falling apart around him, yet everybody wants so badly to crap all over him. The guy may not be a future Hall of Famer, but to deny that he's a Rams legend when he's pretty much in the top 5 of every QB stat for the Rams shows that he's one of the most criminally under appreciated Rams of this decade.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JonRam99 and blue4
1. at Seattle, 10/10/2004. Bulger overcomes a mistake-filled start with what is likely the greatest comeback in team history. The Rams are down 27-10 in the 4th when he hits Brandon Manumaleuna with an 8-yard TD bullet between 3 defenders. In the 4th, he hit Curtis with a perfect 41-yard bomb to make it 27-24. With 1:14 left, clutch completions to Bruce for 26 and Dane Looker for 16 are keys in a game-tying FG drive. Then in overtime, Bulger, who finished 24-42-325, beats the Seahawk blitz and hits Shaun McDonald with a perfect pass for a 52-yard TD and one of the St. Louis Rams' most memorable wins.


View: https://youtu.be/DLvPx3UD_m4
 
Last edited:
HometownBoy said:
Yeah, I don't understand either. Everyone always seems to rush to invalidate Bulger more so than they do for anyone else. I feel like people harbor a little resentment for him for the lean years, even if they don't realize it.
Click to expand...

Well, pointing out the circumstances that led to his success isn't invalidating him. It's needed context. But it's not restricted to just him. Warner should spend about 15 minutes of his Canton speech thanking his supporting cast. Knowing Kurt, he will.

Rams problems on offense from '04-'06 were mostly attributable to key players missing time to injuries, not a lack of talent. He still had Pace watching his back, steady grinders McCollum and Timmerman, one of the league's better 1-2 RB combos in Faulk and Jackson, and probably the best receiving corps in the NFC, if not the NFL. It was the defense and special teams coverage units that consistently let us down.

Bulger was a rhythm passer who could pick apart a defense and seemed tailor made for a Martz offense. But the guy was frequently banged up, including repeated injuries to his throwing shoulder, and only played a full 16 game schedule once. He took a lot of sacks, but that was the risk-reward aspect of the Rams offense. The offensive line didn't really go to pot until after Linehan got there.

I don't mind saying Bulger was a good QB. He was. Outplayed Warner from 2002-2006. People might look back on him fondly, but his play wasn't distinctive enough to pass off as legend.

A good player who came to a favorable environment, one which most QBs would love to play in(2002-06). But eventually got worn down by a declining supporting cast(2007-09), and succumbed to Battered QB Syndrome.
 
Marc Bulger had some success but I wouldn't call him a legend.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back